You would not receive much pushback if you considered Princeton University synonymous with money. Its $36 billion endowment is no secret. While it tries to deflect further ire from the Trump administration, it has already successfully avoided an $180 million endowment tax by offering more financial assistance to students below a certain economic threshold. Dispersing its largesse, however, has not been adequate to protect its coffers. Although handing out assistance may be considered a form of “Noblesse oblige,” it has cut corners at the margins, and that’s where we can see that reduced spending may have a far higher cost. Of course, that is not to say some departments and programs have felt the pinch much harder than others, and I do not want to appear dismissive. But the price paid by the Transfer Scholar Institute, a program most have never heard of, is harder to quantify. The university’s spending pinch has created an opportunity cost for prospective TSI students who do not have reliable transportation.
During the grind of the semester, inside the “Orange Bubble,” it’s easy to forget that Princeton Tigers are fortunate to attend this special university. I am consistently aware of that, and it is why I believe in the promise the Princeton University brand represents. I am a transfer student who came from a community college. This gives me insight into how Princeton’s Transfer/Veteran program works (I am both) and what happens once it admits its small cohort each year (around 35 students). Many of us are first-generation, low-income students (termed FLI). For FLI students, we begin at Princeton in the summer through the Freshman Scholars Institute (FSI), where we orient ourselves on campus and take credit-bearing courses. We move onto campus early; I believe this helps prepare us for the years ahead. A more curious sight is the participants in the Transfer Scholars Initiative, also known as TSI.
TSI differs from FSI in a significant way. Unlike FSI students, TSI students have not been accepted to Princeton University; instead, the program brings current community college students to Princeton for coursework and guidance on transferring to selective universities. While participation is separate from admission to Princeton, students who have done well in TSI have entered Princeton as Transfers when the time comes. In 2024 and 2025, when I was doing FSI as both a student and a course fellow, TSI students could live on campus and earn credit for two courses. They were a welcome and valuable presence on campus. TSI students represent the community college population, typically first-generation and low-income, with many working adults and veterans who were provided an opportunity to get an education due to the GI Bill. These demographics are much needed at Princeton. Due to their unique background, they bring a different viewpoint from other, younger students to campus life, and contribute to the democratic character of the university, representing large swaths of the American citizenry that would otherwise not be represented. Being accepted to take a Princeton summer course provides Transfer Scholars with hope for the future, and TSI students bring energy, optimism, and a fire that reminds you why you wanted to be at Princeton in the first place. This year, as a course fellow again, I encountered a strange sight: no TSI students on move-in day. Instead of seeing these students celebrating together, listening to speakers at the weekly colloquium, and having the experience of enjoying Princeton, TSI students were absent. Their program was significantly downgraded.
The 2026 application advertised that “TSI will be a commuter program in 2026; unfortunately, we are not able to house students on campus. In addition to tuition costs being covered, all Transfer Scholars receive a stipend to cover expenses, including travel.” That decision deserves attention beyond the students immediately affected. As someone who dropped out of high school and ran off to join the military, I understand how secure housing plays a crucial role in education. Community college students already demonstrate that they are serious learners even if they have to commute. But community colleges tend to be close; removing housing therefore risks making participation depend more heavily on geography and home circumstances. This move also assumes students have a vehicle or access to transportation; without it, they lose access to the university completely. The longer commute resulting from the removal of housing has also meant that students can now earn only one credit instead of the traditional two, a 50 percent reduction in learning opportunities for those who can make it in the first place. The educational value should remain part of the calculation that pushes administrators towards restoring housing for TSI students.
The financial circumstances behind this change deserve scrutiny. TSI’s announcement does not identify a reason for eliminating housing, and the available information does not establish its cost/savings considerations; we were left with a fait accompli. With no other information provided, linking this particular decision directly to external pressure from the White House or other broader financial pressures, like the changing financial landscape and rising costs, is difficult. But the decisions taken towards TSI provide a lens for scrutinizing how Princeton treats its own stated mission and commitments to educational opportunity. It raises a question Princeton will confront repeatedly as money becomes tighter: how much of its commitment to educational opportunity will survive the process of deciding what is essential?
Princeton itself celebrated TSI’s residential option in 2024: “TSI participants also had the option to live on campus, allowing them to experience residential life and connect with other students staying in the Princeton Summer Research and Learning Village,” going so far as to add that residence helps the TSI students in “getting to have the full ‘college experience.’”
As TSI students commuted this summer, I remember families hugging their students as they left to embark on an 8-week adventure. The absence of those visuals, the lack of joy and excitement for this possibly once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, offered a look behind the curtain about the University’s fiscal priorities under pressure. I raise that awareness now because it is something the vast majority of students and alumni are unaware of. FSI and TSI operate outside the traditional norms of the University’s operations. In the summer, when most students are gone, and with students who do not fit the traditional Princeton mold, financial constraints make choices unavoidable. But TSI students, perhaps the most financially vulnerable among us, should not bear that burden.
Image Credit – TSI Website
Copyright © 2026 The Princeton Tory. All rights reserved.