A Selfish View On The Award Of Scholarships

From the opinion section of today's The Star.

Unfair to discriminate against the rich in scholarships
The SPM results have just been released. Many students will be busy applying for various scholarships and loans to help finance them in their studies.

Here, I would like to voice my opinion on the criteria used for awarding scholarships. According to the Webster's Dictionary, scholarship is defined as “the position of a student, who because of merit, needs, etc. is granted money or other aid to pursue his studies. “

This means that if a student has worked hard and excelled in his studies, he deserves to be given a scholarship despite his financial background. This scholarship should be awarded to him as he has worked hard to earn it.

Thus, I feel that it is unfair to penalise a student and deprive him of a scholarship because he comes from a wealthy family.

If a student came from a poor background, he or she has to work extra hard to secure a scholarship as otherwise he can always apply for a loan.
A scholarship should be awarded according to the student's own merit. It should have nothing to do with the parents' income.

The fact that the student is making an application shows that he or she needs the money for further studies.

I have gone through a number of scholarship forms and am shocked at the particulars they want. For example, they want parents' details, race, religion, etc. The income of family is considered as an important criteria and this carries a certain percentage of marks.

What has that got to do with awarding the scholarships? It should be based entirely on student's own particulars, examination results, and the activities they have participated.

I hope the various bodies offering scholarships would reconsider the set of criteria and award scholarships based on merits.

P. SAROJINI, Port Dickson.

***** Apparently the above writer has absolutely no sympathy for the poor and deprived. She views everything through a rigid lens of 'merit'. The fact that she can say without qualms that the poor 'can always apply for a loan,' is testimony to her lopsided thinking.

The Webster's Dictionary definition is not an absolute and neither is merit. The selection criteria for scholarships must be tempered with justice, fair play and a realistic assessment of the prevailing situation in our country.

One must understand that the number of scholarships available at any one time is severely limited and often much less than the number of those qualifying with top marks. After making allowance for the disparity in income between the poor and the 'wealthy' as the writer prefers to describe them (and herself?) and all things being otherwise equal, scholarships should be given to those from the lower socio-economic groups.

Obtaining a scholarship on merit is not the inherent right of any citizen. These are meant as a financial helping hand for those from the poorer sections of society who would otherwise find it almost impossible to undertake tertiary studies. Scholarships should be considered as a social service by the government and charitable trusts and foundations. It is a way for them to redress the imbalance in the quality of life between the various class groups in the country where the rich pupils can afford the most expensive tuitions and other facilities while the poor have to make do with what little is available, if at all.

If the wealthy have a shortfall in funds to finance their children's education, it is THEY who can always apply for a loan.
Image - Source

Another letter to The Star: Give poor deserving students a chance at higher education