Staff Editorial: Should anything be done about the large fee discrepancy between middle-income students and low-income students?

As the economy worsens every year and the middle and lower income classes start to suffer financially alike, questions arise about whether the financial aid system is considerate of all students as it should be. Currently, middle-income students pay full fees while low-income students qualify for fee reductions and waivers, whether they are for the AP tests, college preparatory standardized tests, college applications or even school lunches. As a result, low-income students experience exponentially lower fees than that of their middle-income peers. Yes, this system technically performs its obligations: helping those in need by allowing them to have the same opportunities as their low-income peers. However, it coddles those students in a way that those who qualify for financial aid, but don’t necessarily need it, are encouraged to take advantage of the “free money.”

By allowing low-income students such easy access to standardized tests, lunch and applications, this places an unfair balance of stress on middle-income students. Middle-income students must face the situation in which they consider the cost of heavy fees every time they take a test, submit an application or fork over $2.75 for lunch. Low-income students can take seventeen AP tests for the price of one full price student’s AP test, and they’d still have four dollars left over. For low-income students, these concerns may be dismissed as most of their own bills are dismissed for them by the government. The funds that support the government’s financial aid system are gained through taxes, which middle-income families pay a higher percentage of. Thus, middle-income families not only pay for themselves but also indirectly pay to allow low-income students to have such low fees.

The financial system’s requirements that decide whether student qualifies for financial aid are inefficient in determining whether the student truly needs financial aid. A paycheck does not include an invoice on the back that reports what bills the money will be used for. Families may experience a wide range of living expenses that can stretch any paycheck—no matter how large or how small—too thinly over the week. However, the system only has two categories determined by criteria: qualified and not qualified. A student, who receives financial aid but still struggles to make ends meet, has to compete with other students whose families make just low enough an income to receive fee reductions and cuts but doesn’t have as much living expenses. Middle-income students whose families earn too much to receive aid but have a large amount of living expenses may struggle unfairly as well. Not every student is guaranteed to experience these scenarios, but they show just how the nation’s financial aid system could possibly be less of a godsend as it seems.

A solution would be to create a median range of income in which students would receive an amount of financial aid that more thoroughly considers living expenses, as well as to conduct through investigations on whether the student really needs financial aid in order to succeed in their studies. Additionally, waivers and fee reductions should be given with more consideration of the student’s merit as well, guaranteeing that the student will really take advantage of such a blessing to its full potential. Such a change in criteria would allow funds to be directed more towards helping truly qualified students whilst avoiding giving opportunistic students an unfair advantage.