<p>As a rule, no. Schools try not to let this happen because it would make the attrition rate a lot higher and could cause a loss in reputation, and fewer students with other choices (the kids they may most want to attract) attending when such word gets out. </p>
<p>What is the definition of “dramatically reduced”? Important because nearly every single school says right up front that each year, a student is expected to take on a larger portion of the cost of college. Many times the contribution or school cost is broken down between the parents and student, and that student amount will usually go up each year. The Stafford maximums reflect this trend, giving the student more availability of loans each year. Also, costs tend to rise each year at colleges. On top of that upperclassmen housing often costs more than freshman double rooms. Both of my sons ended up in singles their sophomore year, just the way the housing lottery worked for them, which meant a hike in that line item. Also a lot of upperclassmen go into student apartments which also cost more than the freshman double room. By reducing the meal plan, some savings can be recouped, but you can see what is happening here.</p>
<p>For schools like Swarthmore, that guarantee to meet full need, unless there is a fundamental change in how need is determined, there should not be a dramatic increase in cost, unless the items listed above fall into what that definition of “dramatic” might be. </p>
<p>Any aid reduction should therefore be due to any change in family financial situations. Sometimes a bit of bump up in income or assets can knock a family into a whole other category that may mean a correspondingly larger reduction in aid if the school’s aid formulas are so designed. Remember some schools do define need as they please, not as FAFSA would define it.</p>