Jeepers creepers math scholars get scholarships and nobody except their mothers care. Athletes are good at what they do so they should get a scholarship too. (The universities make a lot of it back anyway with admission to games and stuff, plus the more exposure, the more attendance and $$)
math scholars get scholarships and nobody except their mothers care. Athletes are good at what they do so they should get a scholarship too.
Well, the math people get the scholarships in general to continue doing math, whereas athletes haven't necessarily shown any academic smarts. I'm not saying that they shouldn't get any money, but I think that it shouldn't be coming from a university - I don't think that they belong in the athletic arena (although they are currently involved).
Hmm... I like how you chose the term "scholar" for someone who gets a scholarship. Although it is possible to be both an athlete and a scholar, not all athletes are scholars, so why should they get scholarships? (Bursary is probably a more correct term.)
Here's my gripe: the top scholars and top athletes get most of the money. The near-the-top scholars get a bit if anything is left over, but these days there are more and more near-the-top scholars and not enough cash to go around. I don't think that's particularly fair. The high school graduation last June was an excellent example of that, with one student in particular getting a ridiculous amount of awards.
Also consider that the top scholars and top athletes are likely to be more successful so they end up making more money post-graduation. It's the near-the-top scholars and the underachievers that need the money most. That's one of the things I like about Fraser Valley Scholarship Foundation: they check what applicants are already receiving in awards and toss them off the list if they are getting too much (unless that applicant meets the criteria for a special award in which case they don't have a choice).
The thing is, the best of the best only are such because they've put a LOT of work into doing what they do. There is an amount of straight-out ability on behalf of the person, but that ability needs to be complemented by training - and training generally costs money, whether univerisity or otherwise.
Comments
Anonymous (not verified)
Tue, 2005-10-04 17:31
Permalink
Why not?
Jeepers creepers math scholars get scholarships and nobody except their mothers care. Athletes are good at what they do so they should get a scholarship too. (The universities make a lot of it back anyway with admission to games and stuff, plus the more exposure, the more attendance and $$)
David
Wed, 2005-10-05 01:00
Permalink
math scholars get
math scholars get scholarships and nobody except their mothers care. Athletes are good at what they do so they should get a scholarship too.
Well, the math people get the scholarships in general to continue doing math, whereas athletes haven't necessarily shown any academic smarts. I'm not saying that they shouldn't get any money, but I think that it shouldn't be coming from a university - I don't think that they belong in the athletic arena (although they are currently involved).
Scott
Wed, 2005-10-05 12:19
Permalink
Hmm... I like how you chose
Hmm... I like how you chose the term "scholar" for someone who gets a scholarship. Although it is possible to be both an athlete and a scholar, not all athletes are scholars, so why should they get scholarships? (Bursary is probably a more correct term.)
Here's my gripe: the top scholars and top athletes get most of the money. The near-the-top scholars get a bit if anything is left over, but these days there are more and more near-the-top scholars and not enough cash to go around. I don't think that's particularly fair. The high school graduation last June was an excellent example of that, with one student in particular getting a ridiculous amount of awards.
Also consider that the top scholars and top athletes are likely to be more successful so they end up making more money post-graduation. It's the near-the-top scholars and the underachievers that need the money most. That's one of the things I like about Fraser Valley Scholarship Foundation: they check what applicants are already receiving in awards and toss them off the list if they are getting too much (unless that applicant meets the criteria for a special award in which case they don't have a choice).
Ryan
Fri, 2005-10-07 14:02
Permalink
The thing is, the best of
The thing is, the best of the best only are such because they've put a LOT of work into doing what they do. There is an amount of straight-out ability on behalf of the person, but that ability needs to be complemented by training - and training generally costs money, whether univerisity or otherwise.