Education is a great social leveller
– it can empower people who come from disadvantaged backgrounds, by giving them
the knowledge and skills that allow them to rise up the social ladder. To
equalise opportunities, governments, private institutions and educational
institutions provide scholarships, aimed at providing financial support or
employment opportunities to stellar students, so as to attract top talents to
work for them after they graduate. Examples of these include the Public Service
Commission Scholarship (PSCS) and the A* Star Research Scholarship in Singapore,
both of which fund students to attend tertiary institutions with heavily
subsidised fees, then bonds them to working in the company or institution for a
period of time, from five to ten years. However, it is not definitive that
those who deserve these scholarships the most are always the students that
boast the best results in their examinations. The alternative would thus be to pass
students through a selection process, including phases such as an interview and
character evaluation on top of academic evaluation. This would mean that
selected scholarship holds not only meet a certain academic criteria, but also
show possess other traits that would help them in the future, depending on the
nature of the scholarship they receive.
Scholarships, first and foremost,
should be handed to those who best fit the culture and requirements of the
organisation. Although some would argue that academic grades are a good
barometer by virtue of its universality, there is more to a job than just being
able to regurgitate information. The information we obtain through our
education serves to set the foundation for the future, but it quickly becomes
obsolete in this day and age where changes are frantic and unexpected. To
overcome this, companies seek talents that can adapt to changes, and meet the
industry’s future needs to keep it competitive. In order to decide the best man
for the job, it would be in the interest of the corporation to look at the
extra-curricular activities and achievements of the student, because they
potentially point at the personality of the person. For instance, the Monetary
Authority of Singapore (MAS) probably would not want to award its scholarship
to a student who excels at literature, even if he had won the Angus Ross. On
the other hand, the PSC committee would be looking out for students that have
shown to be involved in community work and leadership roles. Ultimately, the
future scholar not only has to excel academically, he must also be able to fit
the culture of his future workplace in terms of his character traits and his
individual interests.
Beyond finding the best fit for
the company’s culture and nature, scholars should also possess other traits
such as the awareness of the people around them and their interests. Judging by
academic grades would result in a pool of potentially arrogant, narcissistic
individuals who cannot be bothered about the interests of his employees, but
rather only seeks practical results. Recognising that many of these scholarship
holders are granted high positions in the corporations because they have
already been identified as individuals with potential, these high achievers
must be able to take responsibility for the people working under his
instruction. With great power, comes great responsibility – those who have
great power must also bear the responsibility of caring for the needs of those
who work for him. There must be an agreement between the employer and the
employee that the employee gives up some degree of his right over his own
actions in exchange for the trust that his or her employer will consider their
needs. For this to happen, scholarships should also look at the capability of
the candidates to become leaders that are aware of others’ needs beyond just
their personal desires. For instance, scholarships should look at the
willingness of students to be involved in the community and get to know the
needs of the community better, plausibly represented by the number of Community
Involvement Project (CIP) hours the student has obtained. By looking at a
multitude of factors other than just the student’s academic results, we are
better able to pinpoint students that are better-rounded and better suited to
make decisions for the organisation in the future.
Some would argue that it is more
effective to give the best examination performers a good position, so that they
can implement the best changes. Despite this seemingly intuitive argument, it
does not consider the question of who best makes use of that opportunity. Even
if we assume that those with greater potential do the best in examinations,
these people may not necessarily have the moral integrity to make decisions in
the best interests of the people if they were to be given the opportunity to do
so. Clearly, we need to consider the values of those that receive these opportunities
– as C. S. Lewis proclaimed, “education without values, as useful as it is,
seems, rather to make Man a more clever devil.” When systems like the Gifted
Education Programme (GEP) of Singapore singles out those with greater
intellect, it does nothing to change the personalities and the moral systems of
these intellectuals. If the people we funnel opportunities and top positions do
not have the sense of responsibility required to make decisions that do not
only bring personal benefit, then we would end up with industry leaders that
stand upon their ivory towers, making decisions that could potentially harm
others. For example, Jonathan Wong, a student with a stellar academic record,
was awarded a scholarship in education, despite his poor social track record.
In the end, he was even found to have illegally downloaded child pornography –
those who lack morals like him clearly do not deserve such a good opportunity.
On the contrary to this, scholarships can represent great opportunities if we
consider the fact that those who really have the conviction to improve others’
lives. When such morally upright individuals are given exposure, they are more
likely to use their understanding of the situation to implement positive
change. Therefore, scholarships given solely based on academic merit turn a
blind eye to arguably as important, if not more important criteria, such as the
individuals’ principles and values that can bring about better change.
The capability of a student is
multi-faceted – not only is it important for students to score decently well on
their tests, they must have the moral courage and social awareness to act
beyond their own interests. Scholarships today hold a whole new world of
opportunities for those who are more disadvantaged, and would never have had
the chance to let their ideals impact the rest of the world for the better. Giving
top scorers all of these scholarship opportunities would not achieve this, not
only because such high achievers may not necessarily be the best fit for the
organisation, but also because they may not have the needs of the people at
heart when they make certain decisions. Ultimately, scholarships must not only
consider one’s ability to score in a test, but also his passion for work, his
moral code by which he works, and also the potential he holds.
0 comments:
Post a Comment