On the issue of single parents and whether there is lying about the true relationship between the parents – I get that the FAFSA does not really capture these details particularly well, but the CSS profile DOES. And many schools require, in addition to the CSS profile, specific information about the noncustodial parent for ANY family claiming to have a single parent. The information can be obtained.
Fraud can NEVER be reduced to zero. But what we deserve is an HONEST assessment of actual data - actual estimates of true fraud rates, then a clear discussion of the costs of focusing policy revisions on those fraud cases in terms of the downsides.
Yes, and the policy decision is the choice between:
a. Stopping sham separated parent fraud, but shutting out students from uncooperative divorced parents, by requiring non-custodial parent finances for financial aid.
b. Allowing students from uncooperative divorced parents get financial aid, but allowing some sham separated parent fraud to happen, by not requiring non-custodial parent finances for financial aid.
@ucbalumnus There is a third option, the one that is followed by many schools that use the CSS profile - for families reporting a single parent with no other parent: requiring some sort of documentation (from clergy, pediatrician, etc) to support the claim that the noncustodial parent is long gone, still kinda around but NOT providing support, or actually non-existent (in the case of single parenthood via donor or adoption).
But you are right - EVERY policy has consequences, some unintended, with winners and losers. That is why it is critically important that the claims on which the policies are based be inspected very carefully for accuracy, which will NOT happen for at least four years.
Let’s move away from the single-parent and how it affects FAFSA discussion … it has nothing to do with this thread, which is about reining in student loan programs.
@hebegebe Yes, I have learned only recently that CC won’t permit politics. Or religion. And presumably, won’t permit a discussion of the pros/cons of that policy even on the parents forum! What it will permit and will not permit is, in itself, illuminating.
@profdad2021 : you can discuss politics in terms of policy and how it affects college costs, college students, college access, perception by HIgh school students, textbook wars, etc. You cannot say 'I wish Gary Johnson had been elected president ’ or any variation thereof. College confidential is bipartisan and people are allowed to have a political opinion, but the forum isn’t designed to be a general debating society, it’s designed for college -related matters. The forums do 'jail’or ‘ban’ posters who express hate speech, which makes cc a very civil corner or cyberspace.
When you post a link that shows US professors making less than professors in India, it is hard to take it seriously.
For those who haven`t read the article, it uses a PPP basis. But the flaw with that approach is that few US professors would want to permanently move to India, whereas many Indian professors would happily move to the US.
Well, cost of living is very important. Faculty’s rarely paid well, seriously. Remember those are people who ran through the gauntlet and had 5-8 years of studies after college, like MD’s.
In PASSHE schools the new contracts made faculty salary public and they have instructors paid anywhere from 24K a year (roughy 30% instructors) to 115K for the highest paid (very few).
Basically, in the US, you make more as a nurse than as a professor.
One big reason for tuition hikes is recouping lost revenue from state cuts. But this can be debated for ever and it doesn’t change the fact college is too expensive yet the US economy’s as well as individual’s well-being rests on students going to college.
What this means is that, for most students (i.e. not the academically top-end ones collecting huge merit scholarships or admission offers to the colleges with the best financial aid) have college options (if any) mainly determined by their parents’ income and wealth, rather than their academic abilities. I.e. there is a significant dose of inherited wealth aristocracy in the nominal meritocracy of college attendance.
^ I find that detrimental to the country 's ultimate well-being since we all benefit when top students can reach their potential (and lower income students are those who benefit most from attending a top school commensurate with their ability, whereas upper middle-class students have resources/social&cultural capital that allow them to “bloom where they’re planted”.)
Do not overspend on your son or daughter’s college because it is their dream school. Pick an affordable school that is a good fit for them academically.