financial aid

Scholarship initiatives support students by easing the financial burdens of their academic experiences and facilitating access to higher education. Literature on scholarship programs primarily emphasizes their benefits, including reduced stress and broader opportunities. Yet the results show contrasting findings. Some studies report greater persistence and better examination performance among recipients, while others show no statistically significant difference in overall achievement compared to non-recipients. This inconsistency underscores the need to further examine whether academic results consistently differ by scholarship status. Although scholarships are widely recognized to alleviate financial problems and expand access, evidence remains inconclusive about whether these benefits consistently translate into improved academic performance. Thus, this study examined whether accounting students’ final examination scores and General Weighted Average (GWA) differed by scholarship status. These questions were tested using the Jamovi software to determine whether a statistically significant difference exists between the two groups. Results showed a contrasting pattern: scholarship recipients performed better on the final examination, while non-recipients performed better in the GWA. These outcomes indicate that scholarship status was associated with different patterns across the two academic performance measures. Thus, the results provide empirical evidence to inform scholarship program refinement and support higher education policy decisions.

Rising living costs and expensive higher education place many students under financial pressure, yet the evidence from Southeast Asia has not been brought together. Following the Arksey and O’Malley framework and PRISMA-ScR reporting guidelines, a total of 239 records were screened, comprising 174 records retrieved from Scopus and 65 records from non-Scopus sources. Eleven studies from five countries (the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand) were charted and synthesised narratively. Six were quantitative surveys, and five of the eleven appeared in 2025 or 2026. Six themes emerged. First, costs extend beyond tuition: programme costs, rent, and other indirect expenses create hardship even where tuition is free. Second, access to family resources and financial aid is unequal. Third, financial strain is reported alongside psychological distress and academic strain, a pattern of co-occurrence rather than demonstrated cause. Fourth, students cope through income generation, saving and economising, building financial literacy, cognitive reappraisal, spiritual support, and selective use of social support. Fifth, financial literacy and behaviour appear to shape financial well-being, although findings on financial stress conflict. Sixth, authors call for support beyond tuition, but no study evaluated an intervention. The evidence is mostly cross-sectional, and no eligible study came from Vietnam, Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, Brunei, or Timor-Leste. Malaysia contributes one study, which examines financial well-being rather than coping strategies. Future work needs harmonised measures, longitudinal and intervention designs, and wider country coverage.

Conversations about student debt frequently target attendees of four-year and professional institutions, since higher-cost institutions are more likely to lead to high levels of debt. While some research has focused on financial aid and college funding at community colleges, we have comparatively limited scholarship regarding conceptualizations of student debt. Some scholars have studied financial aid staff at community colleges, but research has been primarily quantitative in nature.This study remedies that gap by offering a qualitative perspective about student debt, pairing student and staff views and analyzing them by investigating the social meaning of the money, or what student debt means to students. The study location is a large community college in Texas. Students reported fear regarding debt and some staff shared concerns about possible misuse of aid, through students failing to meet satisfactory academic requirements, taking more debt than needed for living expenses, or using financial aid for personal expenditures.

گفت‌وگوها درباره بدهی دانشجویی اغلب بر دانشجویان مؤسسات چهارساله و حرفه‌ای متمرکز است، زیرا مؤسسات با هزینه بالاتر احتمال بیشتری دارند که منجر به سطوح بالای بدهی شوند. در حالی که برخی پژوهش‌ها بر کمک‌هزینه‌های مالی و تأمین مالی دانشگاه در کالج‌های جامعه‌محور تمرکز داشته‌اند، پژوهش‌های ما درباره مفاهیم بدهی دانشجویی نسبتاً محدود است. برخی پژوهشگران کارکنان امور مالی کالج‌های جامعه‌محور را مطالعه کرده‌اند، اما پژوهش‌ها عمدتاً ماهیتی کمی داشته‌اند. این مطالعه این خلأ را با ارائه دیدگاهی کیفی درباره بدهی دانشجویی جبران می‌کند و دیدگاه‌های دانشجویان و کارکنان را با هم ترکیب کرده و آن‌ها را از طریق بررسی معنای اجتماعی پول، یا آنچه بدهی دانشجویی برای دانشجویان معنا می‌دهد، تحلیل می‌کند. محل انجام مطالعه یک کالج جامعه‌محور بزرگ در تگزاس است. دانشجویان ترس خود را نسبت به بدهی گزارش کردند و برخی کارکنان نگرانی‌هایی درباره احتمال سوءاستفاده از کمک‌هزینه‌ها، از جمله عدم تحقق الزامات تحصیلی رضایت‌بخش توسط دانشجویان، دریافت بدهی بیش از نیاز برای هزینه‌های زندگی یا استفاده از کمک‌هزینه مالی برای مخارج شخصی را بیان کردند.