(12-01-2012 02:04 PM)Ranger Wrote:  

(12-01-2012 01:57 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(11-30-2012 04:35 PM)Ranger Wrote:  We just heard one side, but if there is any merit to her argument, this is pathetic and some thing is out of whack and, as with the athletic department, must be fixed immediately. And not refunding the tuition (if there is merit to the complaint) borders on criminally greedy.

The registrar has a calendar with dates corresponding to tuition reimbursement percentages.

http://registrar.rice.edu/calendars/spring13/

For example, March 15th 2013 is the last day for a 10% reimbursement. Past this date, none is given.

She is alleging that she was kicked out of the school despite no wrong doing on her part. If that is correct, she should have been given her tuition back.

This is real simple. People seem to miss this all the time. The appropriate test is: What would you think if it had happened to you or one of your loved ones.

If I kick you out of school for no wrongdoing on your part, common decency demands that I not keep your money, regardless of what bureaucratic deadlines I have set.

I'm not sure what to think of most of this story, and I suspect it's being tried in the court of public opinion in a very one-sided fashion, if for no other reason that to properly address the complaint I suspect Rice would have to reveal information they can't, or possibly take steps that would be unfair to an individual. In short, they're probably between a rock and a hard place here.

But regardless, I feel Ranger's logic is spot on here. Absent any wrongdoing on the part of the student, I can't imagine why Rice would feel justified in not reimbursing tuition if she was required to leave the school against her will (even if for some reason that was the best decision for everyone concerned).