Here's some money for school . . . oh wait, scratch that.

It could be a stupid rule, or it could be a smart rule.

What else do we know about these grants?

If the grant program has a limited amount of funds, maybe the granting agency did a study and discovered that the nation would benefit most if these funds were granted to 3rd- and 4th-year students rather than 5th-year students.

As a federal taxpayer, I would consider such a rule to be very smart.

San Chonino, have you been able to find out anything more about the rules for these grants, and how they were determined?

---

On the other hand, it's definitely stupid to promise funding to people when you can't actually keep the promise. Somebody needed to study the grant rules a lot more before handing them out, that's for sure.

---

And on the gripping hand (and because I'm a cold-hearted bastard who isn't going to change anytime soon), am I the only one who thinks that maybe going to school full time while trying to support a family is a challenge none of these students should have signed up for in the first place, regardless of how much grant money they thought they'd be getting?

It could be a stupid rule, or it could be a smart rule.

Agreed. IN Europe, there are what they call "eternal students". People who simply refuse to graduate. When I went to college (Oh DAD!), we had Freshman, Sophmores, Juniors and Seniors. And we were expected to graduate in 4 years. Now my kids tell me that is so old testament! (their slang). Apparently, that no longer is generally accepted as even your article calls them 3rd, 4th and 5th year students.

I would have to see this "promise" before I agreed to say it was deception.

And for the record, while I did not marry until I graduated, I was working full time while going to college, so I do understand the pressure of full time school and a full time job. My "day" ended at 10pm (when I could start studying) and began at 8am. I LIVED on coffee for 4 years!

I married my Junior year, and finished in 3 years and 2 trimesters, with my beautiful son coming about a month before graduation. I worked a couple dead end jobs until I graduated, and then I went on to be a professional in my field.

Stute:

On the other hand, it's definitely stupid to promise funding to people when you can't actually keep the promise. Somebody needed to study the grant rules a lot more before handing them out, that's for sure.

I spoke with a girl I know whose husband was one of the students who was given the grant . . . luckily he's in his fourth year, so it's not being revoked. But the e-mail sent out said that they were given permission to give x amounts of grants to x amounts of people . . . and that's exactly what they did. So it wasn't changing the draw on the taxpayers - all that money is just going back into the federal government's coffers, even though they promised the school x dollars.

am I the only one who thinks that maybe going to school full time while trying to support a family is a challenge none of these students should have signed up for in the first place, regardless of how much grant money they thought they'd be getting?

Here in Utah, you are the only one who thinks this way. At my school, Weber State, almost half the student body is married. In my major-specific classes, I'm often the only single person. Weird compared to the rest of the nation, but it's just he quid pro quo around these parts.

Guy:

When I went to college (Oh DAD!), we had Freshman, Sophmores, Juniors and Seniors. And we were expected to graduate in 4 years. Now my kids tell me that is so old testament! (their slang). Apparently, that no longer is generally accepted as even your article calls them 3rd, 4th and 5th year students.

Like the original article mentioned, finishing your fourth year is considered 120 credit hours, but the student interviewed in the article was not even eligible for the engineering program he wanted until he had 126 credits - minimum. Sounds like the rules from the fed need to be reworked, with the constant revamping and growth of university programs . . .

I married my Junior year, and finished in 3 years and 2 trimesters

You are the exception, and not the rule, Jythier . . . it's gonna take me a bit longer than that to finish.

On the other hand, it's definitely stupid to promise funding to people when you can't actually keep the promise. Somebody needed to study the grant rules a lot more before handing them out, that's for sure.

This is true. How is it that they didn't know all this beforehand. It makes no sense!

am I the only one who thinks that maybe going to school full time while trying to support a family is a challenge none of these students should have signed up for in the first place

OK you cold-hearted bastard, I'll tell you why they may have to! Because everyone's life is not the same. Some people are able to go to college at the age they are supposed to and have a ball while doing it.

For some, they have no choice but to go to work and while doing that attend college part time. Thrown into that a family and the ability to do it all becomes a little more difficult. Not everyone has a silver spoon in their mouths or someone who can help them financially when they need it. So as Braedan mentioned, for some, it's the exception. They can finish early and on top, good for them, they can do it without help, even more power to them.

Not everyone has a silver spoon in their mouths or someone who can help them financially when they need it. So as Braedan mentioned, for some, it's the exception.

Amen. Not many of us have the opportunity to get done with school by the time we're twenty-two and out into the real world . . . look at me, almost twenty-three and I still have two years left! If I meet the right girl, I'm not going to put off marriage until I'm done, that's just foolish.

As far as I'm concerned, education should be free to any and all who want it. This includes higher education too. But then I'm a bloody lefty who'd rather see money spent on health, education and welfare than defence and the war machine.

As far as I'm concerned, education should be free to any and all who want it. This includes higher education too. But then I'm a bloody lefty who'd rather see money spent on health, education and welfare than defence and the war machine.

Here here! i'd love that situation. My pocketbook takes such a fat hit everytime the new semester rolls around . . . like yesterday, when I paid tuition. Ugh.

Not everyone has a silver spoon in their mouths or someone who can help them financially when they need it. So as Braedan mentioned, for some, it's the exception

Hate to argue with you here FS, because I usually think you are spot on. But not everyone who graduated on time or early had a silver spoon in their mouth or someone bankrolling them either. It's all about the choices you make. Far be it for me to criticize someone elses choice, but I also don't necessarily think that I (as a taxpayer) should have to foot the bill either.

look at me, almost twenty-three and I still have two years left! If I meet the right girl, I'm not going to put off marriage until I'm done, that's just foolish.

SanC--you've made choices that mean that you will graduate when you are older than your average student. If you decide to marry before you graduate, that will be your choice too. You are responsible for the choices you make.

I think that it is great that people are getting their educations while raising their families, but please, do not insult those of us who made different choices.

I also don't necessarily think that I (as a taxpayer) should have to foot the bill either.

You do, whether you like it or not, though . . . good luck changing that.

but please, do not insult those of us who made different choices.

No-one was insulting anyone else . . . we were simply pointing out to stute that maybe saying that it was foolish for anyone to make different decisions wasn't exactly thinking openly. My use of the word "foolish" was to say that I, specifically, would be a fool to pass up the opportunity to marry the right girl, not that anyone who waits until after graduation is foolish.

No-one was insulting anyone else

Claiming that someone (specifically someone who graduated "on time") is born with a silver spoon in their mouth isn't exactly a term of endearment.

Agreed. IN Europe, there are what they call "eternal students". People who simply refuse to graduate. When I went to college (Oh DAD!), we had Freshman, Sophmores, Juniors and Seniors. And we were expected to graduate in 4 years. Now my kids tell me that is so old testament! (their slang). Apparently, that no longer is generally accepted as even your article calls them 3rd, 4th and 5th year students.

Dr.

That happens in the US, as well. If Sallie Mae ever publishes a list of student loan deadbeats, I can almost assure you my brother and sis-in-law will be near the top of the list (this may be one reason they do not return to the US).

And on the gripping hand (and because I'm a cold-hearted bastard who isn't going to change anytime soon), am I the only one who thinks that maybe going to school full time while trying to support a family is a challenge none of these students should have signed up for in the first place, regardless of how much grant money they thought they'd be getting?

You hit the nail on the head, stute. What these people should be doing is expecting the government to take care of them rather than working to improve their lot in life. We should reward a welfare state, not economic improvement.

As one of those students who shouldn't have signed up for the challenge, as you believe, stute, I am HIGHLY offended.

As far as I'm concerned, education should be free to any and all who want it. This includes higher education too. But then I'm a bloody lefty who'd rather see money spent on health, education and welfare than defence and the war machine.

While I don't believe we should spend money on a welfare state, dynamaso, I DO agree that I'd RATHER see it spent on those things than military and the war machine. But I'd rather the government not spend most of it at all.

That being said, education is a wise investment for a government such as ours. Because the greater earning potential America's citizens have, the greater GDP we can expect for the future. But, rather than see it be "free", I'd rather see some sort of national service program to receive the funds.

WTF? You dont go promising someone 4000 dollars and then say "oh sorry actually you cant have it" and then take it back. It's their mistake not the students, they should give the grants away as promised on principle you know.

It's their mistake not the students, they should give the grants away as promised on principle you know.

My thoughts exactly. Good to see you back, Em. I've missed ya, hon.

While I don't believe we should spend money on a welfare state

Point taken, although I wasn't implying the support of a welfare state. I believe in welfare for those that really need it and that need should be established through careful selection criteria.

education is a wise investment for a government such as ours

Agreed. Just look at how well Ireland has done by providing quality education to it's population.