Official policy texts in England have long assumed that students make their Higher Education choices in an individualized, rational and context-free manner. Under the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition government (2010-2015), a greater emphasis was placed on accomplishing higher levels of widening participation in elite institutions. Those who do not progress to such institutions, or to HE at all, are presented as having 'low aspirations'. Using data from an ESRC funded narrative inquiry of socioeconomically underrepresented Further Education students' HE decision-making and choices, I demonstrate how they aspired highly while initially showing competitive and individualized choice strategies. However, financial constraints led to the renegotiation of their aspirations over time, leading them to compromise for 'reasonable' rather than 'preferred' HE options. Subsequently, this had negative impacts upon the participants' subjectivities. The article provides support for arguments against current individualized conceptualizations of 'aspiration' presented by policy, and proposes approaches to move away from this.