There are two problems with the article.
First, the notion that college and university administrators are corrupt is way overstated. Most financial aid professionals are presented with little more than coffee and donuts, and hopefully good service, from lenders on the preferred lender list. Participation on pseudo-advisory boards is the exception, not the rule.
Second, students must be held responsible for their decisions. The student profiled in the essay decided to enroll at two private, urban institutions when the student could have pursued a comparable program at a rural or urban public institution.
The real issue is federal support of a program that should have been replaced by Direct Lending years ago.