Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2006 > December > 06 > Entry
Want to save tuition? Get hitched!
I got a laugh out of this story in the Chronicle of Higher Education, taken from Columbia’s student paper, about a student there who married a platonic friend in order to save, he says, $11,000 a year in tuition. His “wife” is dating another man.
The student’s full story of his financial hardships is an interesting read worth checking out. He is financially independent but faced frustrating barriers to receiving more college aid.
This is sort of a quirky story and I don’t think there is much chance this could become a widespread problem. But I’m interested in your thoughts on the ethics of his decision. What would you say to a friend who was thinking of getting married just to save tuition?
Permalink | Comments (6) | Categories: Colleges and Universities
Comments
By Dave
December 7, 2006 9:16 PM | Link to this
I believe Terri made a typo (INS vs. IRS), but she is right on. It’s clearly intentional fraud. I agree with the “perp” that the financial aid rules on being “independent” are screwy — you are not independent before 24 unless you are married, regardless of the facts, but that doesn’t excuse this criminal behavior. Scott, I am a little confused by the school name. Was this fellow actually paying over $1,000/hour for a degree in general studies?By Tom
December 7, 2006 4:36 PM | Link to this
As you say, it is likely fraud, but I don’t believe it has anything to do with the INS unless one of them is not a US Citizen.By Terri
December 7, 2006 1:47 PM | Link to this
Unethical? yes. Illegal? My guess is yes. Isn’t it fraud? The INS would certainly view it as such.By Oldprof
December 7, 2006 7:58 AM | Link to this
We would be better off if all financial aid was eliminated. Take the money that currently goes to pay interest to banks on those $25K loans and give it directly to colleges that agree to shrink tuition. Consequently, we’d see young people once again working their way through college, as they could back in the days before Staffords and Pells when a year’s full-time tuition was only a few hundred dollars. The graduates will not be ground under six figures of long-term debt before they’ve started their careers. The only losers in the equation would be SLMA and other investment groups that like the guaranteed returns (and then they’d have to turn to, say, home and auto financing, increasing supply and thus reducing costs in that sector). That said, I think young Leo here is a fool for wanting to attend a rich kids’ school when an equivalent education could be had from a lower-cost public. He could go to a nice Virginia college and not even have to get married.By jd bell
December 7, 2006 4:00 AM | Link to this
I remember people getting ‘Hitched’ in college to get into the married student housing…I also remember the ensuing divorces as being much more complicated than they thought it was going to be. JDBy Mary
December 7, 2006 2:35 AM | Link to this
I do not think we should question his ethics regarding marriage without also questioning the ethics of the education and financial aid system. USA Today has had a series of articles on the stupendous loans students are graduating with. Even with good salaries, some have to go back to live with their parents to pay off loans. USA Today has also pointed out athletic departments are greatly outpacing expenditures in other parts of universities. Does Columbia have an athletics department? I think universities in general have got away with jacking up costs much past inflation and have not had their feet held to the fire on controlling costs. That is also an ethical issue.