<p>*“The program my D is in takes an average of 6 years to complete due to the intensity of the course work and the load.”
*</p>
<p>I think her D is in some kind of fashion design major/program. Or maybe something else?</p>
<p>It may just be me but I find using pell grants to fund 6 years of fashion school to not be the most judicious use of public tax dollars.</p>
<p>I understand the upside of funding “education” but what’s the upside of funding 6 years of education that may or may not benefit us as a whole? Not to denigrate fashion but if she qualifies for 6 years of fashion school then engineering, nursing and medical school (to name a few) should be fully funded…</p>
<p>xSlacker, many dual degree programs take more than 4 years…that may be the case for justamom’s D. I believe architecture and accounting are now 5 year programs at many schools. My daughter is in a 5 year OT program which includes 3 summer semesters, so it would technically be well over 6 years in standard academic calendars. I applaud your hard work and efforts but I don’t think you can judge everyone by a single standard because there are so many variables. Also, please consider that some schools, especially the budget strapped publics, have horrendous scheduling these days which can force students to stay for extra semesters as one of my kid’s roommates has found. There has been discussion of limiting Pell funding by major but it never gets far.</p>
<p>This is a follow up on the effect of the legislation for various students:</p>
<p>[143,000</a> Students to Lose Their Pell Grant Next Year - U.S. PIRG](<a href=“http://www.uspirg.org/news-releases/higher-education-project-news/affordable-higher-education-news/143000-students-to-lose-their-pell-grant-next-year]143,000”>http://www.uspirg.org/news-releases/higher-education-project-news/affordable-higher-education-news/143000-students-to-lose-their-pell-grant-next-year)</p>
<p>
That’s correct. Those that can’t cover their expenses through merit and working should have to take out loans for the rest (like middle-class kids do). There’s no reason to hand certain kids free money at the expense of taxpayers. </p>
<p>
I feel for you, bro. I always find it hilarious when people say things like “Pell grants are necessary, because merit-based scholarships and jobs are hard to get.” Yeah, so? No one said it was supposed to be easy. Having low-income parents is not an excuse: for all the money my parents give me (I’m guessing this applies to you too) I might as well not have any parents. People like you and I prove that self-sufficiency is possible. We may live in the age of participant medals and No Child Left Behind, but it’s time we started requiring a little more effort from American youth.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The link at #44 is the first time I noticed this detail</p>
<p>Pell grants do have a noble intent. However, as has been pointed out, when ever there is free money, there is misuse. When you are talking about billions, lobbyists get involved and there is no going back.</p>
<p>This money is generated from taxpayers (many of whom like me are not going to benefit from it) who work hard to. So if you take a Pell Grant, you have an obligation to the people who pay for it i.e. taxpayers. Unfortunately, there are people (I do not know if they are a majority or minority), who believe that Federal Aid is a right, not an obligation or privilege. Yes, there are these case studies of students who have benefited as result of Pell and other grants. On the other hand, there are students, who have taken the money with no intent of completing the work and in this they have be abetted by for profit corporations who have no responsibilities. That money has come from my sweat and the sweat of so many others. So, for the defenders of the Pell Grant, yes it has a purpose, but it has to come with strings, with accountability, with the recipient understanding they have obligations. </p>
<p>This change as far as I am concerned is smoke and mirrors. It does not bring about meaningful reform. It is a feel good move, real change will come when there are restrictions on how the grant can be used and obligation to return the money if the student does not complete the course.</p>
<p>@annasdad, If I could “+1” your comments, I would. Not everyone has the luxury of simply attending school and doing nothing else[url=<a href=“http://www.gpacollegecalculator.com%5D.%5B/url”>http://www.gpacollegecalculator.com].[/url</a>]</p>
<p>* Temporarily suspends the six month interest free grace period after leaving school on federal Stafford loans for academic year 2012-13 and 2013-14,
The link at #44 is the first time I noticed this detail*</p>
<p>So people graduating in 2012 will still have grace period but those who graduate later will not?
:p</p>
<p>I wonder is that for new loans only- i.e. those taken out for the 2012-2013 school year?</p>
<p>Ewww, I just read that EK. It looks to me like it is for loans taken for 2012-13, and 2013-14. That hurts!</p>
<p>I agree. That is a huge deal. I bet the students ( & parents) who blithely assume they are going to find loans for school, don’t know anything about it.</p>
<p>Really what choice do kids who need the Staffords have? They have little choice. It stinks. So much for helping the poor and the middle class especially at a time when new grads are struggling to find employment. Lets hope there are jobs for college grads in 2 years.</p>
<p>I think the loan info is really important for kids who are in school now, for example, a kid could max their 2011-12 loans and minimize the 2012-13 loans in order to minimize that issue, if they were finishing in 2013.</p>