Of Grants, Scholarships and Sponsorships

Very often, I feel like writing. Especially on days like today where I get back from a long day of classes; to digress and destress...
My brain is so conked out, yet I still have to prepare for Wills & Probate tomorrow.

Nose went havoc AGAIN this morning, popped the pill to keep it under control. Result: Palpitations, plus endless talking during class. *hic* Pity those who have to bear with me...

China just won the Uber Cup: 3-0
___

SPM results are out, STPM results are out. It's the time of the year again, where people jump with joy, or drown in tears of sorrow over their success or failure.

Scholarship offers aplenty, applications are submitted.

I can't help but wonder, what exactly is the selection criteria for scholarship offers?

Pure academic excellence? 10As?
(Oh, pardon me! 10As is so passe, it's 20As now... *rolls eyes*)
An all-rounder with say, 9As but who is a state athlete, head prefect, debator, active in community service, sports?
That bloke with 7As who walks in, gives you a confident handshake, and talks eloquently and convincingly?

But then, the burgeoning number of students who have 20As, 19As and 18As further poses problems to the selection criteria. Is a 20As student (who is a pure bookworm) better than a 10As student (Cos he/she only took 10 subjects and not 20 unlike our Kiasu friend) who is an all-rounder?

How do we assess?

Academic Excellence?
Undoubtedly, putting a cap on the number of subjects a student is allowed to sit for in the SPM would provide for a more equal/level playing field for all parties. Therefore, I feel in that the STPM with its maximum of 5 subjects per candidate ruling, provides with a fairer basis of assessment of the credentials of a candidate. The interviewer's eyes would not be blinded by the surmountable number of bling (Sorry, I mean As) on an applicant's certificate. Rather, in cases of scholarship applications, it would provide for a more careful and stringent selection and filtering method. Only the cream of the crop would be given what they deserve.

An All-Rounder?
I feel strongly against awarding scholarships to applicants purely based on academic qualifications. A student with 20As who is a pure bookworm (and probably a librarian. Well, yeah, that would be the only "KK" he has on his school leaving cert.) is in NO WAY better than an all-rounder who scores 10As and is a District level debator, Head Prefect, Rotary Club member, state athlete and active in social and community services.

The former only knows how to study, memorise and probably make short notes. Whilst the latter knows how to lead, communicate, play, study and socialise. Needless to say, the all-rounder would have a better education, and would certainly stand a better chance of 'surviving' in the working world. He/She has acquired the necessary communication skills, is able to work as a team and has the core values needed in the real wide world out there. I'm not saying that the bookworm is doomed to fail in working life. But, the all-rounder, by virtue of his/her acquired skills and experiences would fare better than the former.

Therefore, please award the grants and scholarships to these deserving individuals. They ought not be marginalised by virtue of scoring 10As lesser than their peers.

Financial Standing?
Academic qualifications aside, those from the middle-income class are often caught in a quandary. They are 'neither here nor there'; i.e. not rich enough to support themselves for education at a top-notch university (their parents would probably have to dig up their financial reserves to fund their studies overseas and the student would most likely have to work part-time) BUT at the same time, are not poor enough to be deserving of a scholarship based purely based on financial needs.

Do think about it, 10As oil tycoon's bookworm son vs 10As tauke balak's son vs 10As teacher's daughter (Middle-class income) vs 10As Insurance Agent's bookworm son (Again, middle class income) vs 10As rubbertapper's daughter.

Who deserves it more? And why?

If you choose the rubbertapper's daughter, how would you justify the non-selection of the teacher's daughter?
If the tauke balak's son win, why not the Insurance Agent's bookworm son?
If the oil tycoon's bookworm son is selected, why?
Would his non-selection be based SOLELY on his dad's wealth - richer thus can afford self-funded education?
Would you assess him based on a stricter criteria, as he is born with a silverspoon in his mouth, and therefore if he were to be deserving of a sponsored education, he must perform doubly well to impress you?

____

But then, the SPM, STPM and scholarship application days are far behind me!
PG and UG (Postgrad and Undergrad for the uninitiated) are also long gone!
I'm at the final leg of my long journey now.
So why should I even bother?

The Old Quadrangle, University of Manchester; June 2006

- Can you recognise me? Oh yes, I so love those shoes of mine!

-LV-
*apathetic

*1130pm now, forget bout Probate, I'm going to bed (no pun intended)