While discussing Mr Li ShengWu's topping his PPE class at Oxford, Snowylady mentioned he didn't go on government scholarship, and I said that's good since presumably, his parents could afford to sponsor him, and that leaves the slot available for others to compete for.
"So, you think priority for scholarship should be given to poorer students" asked Snowylady?
"No, I don't.", I said. "It's solely on the discretion of the students from wealthier families whether to apply for scholarship to sponsor their studies if their families could afford it."
"But when it comes to awarding it, it should strictly be by merits."
"Even a student from a rich family can benefit from scholarship - because it gives him independence."
Independence - that's something very real to a young person.
Having a scholarship will provide the sense of independence that is no less meaningful to someone from a rich family than to someone from a poor family..
One of the last thing I'd want from a public funded scholar to return to serve the public without learning independence himself.
There're still strings attached of course - the scholar has to account for his academic performance to the scholarship sponsor. I can't imagine papa or mama terminating the sponsorship just because junior is only getting Bs and Cs.
Coming to awarding scholarship - on the assumption it is to recruit talent for the country or the company, we'd want to take the best there is, not second best.
When we send out these folks on a task in the future, like winning a contract for the country, the contract awarder will not say "Hmm, both Singapore and USA offer the best deals, but I'll award to Singapore because their economy needs the contract more than USA."
The onus then is to ensure if I award the scholarship, I better get the selection criteria done properly - not judging on current and past achievements, but also whose potential in the future will better serve the company.
Also significant are fortitude, resilience etc., of the candidates rather than their CVs.
It's just terminology, but if priority is for less well-off, I don't consider it as scholarship but as a bursary.
Snowylady and I then talked about financial assistance in government schools, how families misused it, but that's another story, for maybe another day.
I agree with you on scholarships.
ReplyDeleteAs for students from less well-off families there is quite a bit more that can be done. It would be a good use of resources as well.
One of the reasons students from middle to upper class families tend to do better is because the family environment is conducive to learning and development of the attitude necessary to succeed in life.
From my experience in secondary school, career counseling or planning is not an important subject perhaps because they assumed it will be handled later, at JC level or even university level. However given the educational system here and the realities of the job market I think this is a crucial aspect of education at that age. Children from wealthier families tend to see themselves as having greater and wider opportunities. Too often students from poor families limit themselves in what jobs or professions they can or want to strive for.
I believe a meritocratic system is the right way, but we need to focus efforts on ensuring children from every strata of society get as much help as is realistic in achieving their full potential rather than a misguided emphasis on a ranking of schools and how many A students did a school produce.
Otherwise we will get into a situation that students from rich families get into the best jobs or professionals (and therefore keeping them in the rich category) leaving the rest for the rest. This will lead to further stratification of society and the widening of the social class/wealth gap. The Li Shengwus of the lower class would never be all they could be.
Oh wait, it is already happening.
Uhm, privilege is privilege is privilege. Would I prefer to have someone sponsor my Uni education? 5 years ago, I would say yes. Now, despite all the difficulties involved, I would want to be my own woman (and yes, total independence, including the responsibility of feeding myself).
ReplyDeleteWould I take a scholarship? Possibly, but I wouldn't want to be tied down either.
I feel scholarships should be awarded to those who meet the criteria, but students from poorer families are at a disadvantage. It's just a vicious cycle, really, the reinforces the ugliness of class stratification.
Not all scholarships require you to be bonded.
ReplyDeleteIf they are at a disadvantage simply because they're from poorer families, then the selection criteria may not be the best.
ReplyDeleteWRT http://www.asiaone.com/News/Education/Story/A1Story20090810-160142.html
I have reservations about AP Koo's optimism that his "quiet hero" would have the choice pick of scholarships simply because the criteria and the selectors may not be the best.
So what would I do for a boy who got no time for CCA but have to spend his time after classes selling "hum chiem peng"?
Devise a "hum chiem peng" test, of course.
Given that he's been selling it for years, a good test would be to talk about the hum chiem peng business, how much did cost of flour and salt etc., affect the business, what crisis did the business face, how they (he) dealt with the economic crisis that affect the prices of the ingredients, was he able to discern target market for the type of hum chiem peng his family makes, by dialect groups for instance, etc and etc.
The idea is to gain an insight whether he learned anything from the time he spent selling hum chiem peng, whether he is perceptive, whether he has an awareness of things beyond what is on the surface, within his own environment.
And of course, if he had came up with any idea how to improve his situation.
Some of these things come naturally to some people, and some of these things can be learned by some people.
Of course, each sponsoring organization might have differing needs, but in general, whether as acquired skills or an inborn talents, these qualities are far better indicators of the potential future contribution from candidates than their academic and CCA results alone.