Rethinking The Scholar

I shouldn't be writing this post. Maybe, I'm just pretentious, assuming even. I'm not a scholar. My parents were and my friends shared a bit about their lives as scholars for the country. But that in no way make me an expert in these things.

So, now that I've let that out, let me talk about scholarship grants. The process itself is first an objective then a subjective one. After the preliminary tests to gauge academic ability, the selection process then involves real people, this time, through the form of interviews and/or essay writing marathons. Candidates are assessed by how they conduct themselves during the interview, by their answers obviously, and by the values that they presumably hold. 

For me, I feel uncomfortable with the subjective side of the process. All of us, even expert interviewers, are not exempt from biases and even veteran school administrators hold a certain preference for those candidates who embody the qualities of what they think the ideal scholar should have. The concern here would be the introduction of scholars into the student body who, although brilliant, are quite homogeneous with each other.

I would rather prefer that psychological tests determine the right candidates for the scholarship and that interviews and essays be a mere formality, a method of confirming what the tests have revealed about the candidate. It may seem robotic and straightforward (yes, it is) but this way, I believe, provides a clearer picture of the candidates that a one-on-one or even a panel interview might distort. 

Tests can measure an individual's self-motivation, his or her will to succeed. Tests can measure what values do each one hold and if one has the moral ascendancy to merit a scholarship grant. Interviews on the other hand may be skewed by a candidate's eloquence and charisma, qualities that, although important, should be secondary to a person's attitude towards life and his internal environment (Besides, eloquence and charisma can always be taught. Attitude is another matter altogether).

I may be wrong though. Like I've said, I'm not a scholar. But I hope some would consider my view as something worthy of merit.