Debate: Minimum CGPA requirement of Scholars

[markwongsk]

All the years toiling for SPM in secondary school is to get an excellent result and, if possible, a scholarship. While there are a hefty amount of scholarships for the harvest, there are more harvesters than the harvests needs an basically it's a dog-eats-dog situation. Therefore, those who obtain a scholarship are generally esteemed to be the "cream of the cream", the best of the best, the future of the younger generation. While these may not always hold within our personal perspectives, it is a generally acceptable fact among, to say the least, our parents and/or teachers.

The question that arise is now this: What do you think are the acceptable minimum CGPA (QPA, GPA, whatever) of a sponsored scholar (eg, JPA, BNM, Petronas etc) under an undergraduate/graduate program in a university?

To shed some light: JPA's minimum requirement for scholars in America is 2.0/4.0, which pales in comparison to other scholarships (most notably Singapore). For example, A*star requires its scholars to score a crazy 3.8/4.0. While I believe that such a high standard is unnecessary, 2.0 is, to some extent, on a lower level. Not to mention that it is embarassing to tell others that you're a government-sponsored student, and then when questioned about your minimum CPGA - less so for yourself but more so for the country.

My personal opinion: While it is true that scholars need time adapting to changing situations. I believe that 3.0 should be the acceptable standard. In addition to that, I think scholars should have two semesters of "trump cards" where they can afford to drop below 3.0 (due to any reason, possibly the one stated before).

Perhaps I'm being too harsh? Anyone has other opinions?

[clep]

It's actually 2.0? All this while I was under the impression that it was 3.5! :O

I think 3.0 is a fair number, but I'd also like to suggest a slightly more idealistic way of looking at things. The type of courses taken for a grade should be taken into account - for example, it's not really fair to compare a student who takes easy electives just for the sake of bumping up his/her GPA with one who takes classes in areas he/she has never explored before out of curiosity, or with one who takes more classes than required. Also, not all universities weight their courses the same way (or at all) so comparing GPAs of students from different schools might be a little iffy. Though this is all very subjective, and I doubt the scholarship bodies would find it feasible to sift through each and every scholar's transcript holistically.

I like the trump card idea, though. And I don't think you're being too harsh. 3.0 gives a fair allowance for occasional Bs or Cs - and they should be the occasional, rather than the majority, of grades in a scholar's transcript.

All this is, of course, based on my limited experience with the American university system (and since I attend an institution which does not give out GPAs, I'm not really qualified to speak about this )

[orthopod]

Originally Posted by markwongsk

All the years toiling for SPM in secondary school is to get an excellent result and, if possible, a scholarship. While there are a hefty amount of scholarships for the harvest, there are more harvesters than the harvests needs an basically it's a dog-eats-dog situation. Therefore, those who obtain a scholarship are generally esteemed to be the "cream of the cream", the best of the best, the future of the younger generation. While these may not always hold within our personal perspectives, it is a generally acceptable fact among, to say the least, our parents and/or teachers.

The question that arise is now this: What do you think are the acceptable minimum CGPA (QPA, GPA, whatever) of a sponsored scholar (eg, JPA, BNM, Petronas etc) under an undergraduate/graduate program in a university?

To shed some light: JPA's minimum requirement for scholars in America is 2.0/4.0, which pales in comparison to other scholarships (most notably Singapore). For example, A*star requires its scholars to score a crazy 3.8/4.0. While I believe that such a high standard is unnecessary, 2.0 is, to some extent, on a lower level. Not to mention that it is embarassing to tell others that you're a government-sponsored student, and then when questioned about your minimum CPGA - less so for yourself but more so for the country.

My personal opinion: While it is true that scholars need time adapting to changing situations. I believe that 3.0 should be the acceptable standard. In addition to that, I think scholars should have two semesters of "trump cards" where they can afford to drop below 3.0 (due to any reason, possibly the one stated before).

Perhaps I'm being too harsh? Anyone has other opinions?

why dont you just direct your efforts towards getting the best possible grades yourself rather than imposing your ideals on others.I think its really up to individuals.Singapore a star scholars dont get scholarships as easy as malaysians do.they are..really the creme i guess..Singapore Gov doesnt give scholarships to places like ANu,even imperial etc they are very selective,and I believe in the US they are even more selective about the schools.

[markwongsk]

Originally Posted by orthopod

why dont you just direct your efforts towards getting the best possible grades yourself rather than imposing your ideals on others.I think its really up to individuals.Singapore a star scholars dont get scholarships as easy as malaysians do.they are..really the creme i guess..Singapore Gov doesnt give scholarships to places like ANu,even imperial etc they are very selective,and I believe in the US they are even more selective about the schools.

Well, firstly I think it's because the scholarship is really the tax-payers' money and should be used for the benefit of the country. If the students are not performing to standard it wouldn't be fair to those who got rejected for the scholarship. And saying that Malaysian scholars should be allowed a way lower standard just because they get scholarships easier than Singaporeans do isn't a valid excuse.

If Singapore is being selective of the school and still impose a strict academic requirement, all the more there is reason for us to ask ourselves whether our standards are practical. Although this may be viewed as kiasuism by some, it is the reality of life: be competitive or lose out in the food chain.

[clep]

orthopod: Being a scholar connotes a certain degree of academic excellence. I believe the point of the whole selection process was to make sure that the scholarships went to students who had the potential to make the most of it (let's ignore none-meritocratic factors for now). If you fail to set reasonable* academic standards after the students have gotten the scholarships, then what's the point of selecting only certain students to award it to in the first place?

*If we are to debate the numerical value of the CGPA itself, I'll take the example of the average GPA of students at top American universities, which is well above 2.00, if the data here is to be believed: http://gradeinflation.com/. So it doesn't make much sense to hold scholars to a lower than average standard.

[Miracle_seed]

It's interesting to see that for JPA, they do put a minimum CGPA for PIDN scholarship holders to continue their sponsorship, except for few courses (medicine, dentistry, pharmacy where pass is the sole criterion), which doesn't apply to overseas scholarships holders where they are even given an extra 3 years to finish their course (i.e. they can be retained for 3 academic years before their scholarship is terminated).

[XterNalz]

Originally Posted by Miracle_seed

It's interesting to see that for JPA, they do put a minimum CGPA for PIDN scholarship holders to continue their sponsorship, except for few course (medicine, dentistry, pharmacy where pass is the sole criterion), which doesn't apply to overseas scholarships holders where they are even given an extra 3 years to finish their course (i.e. they can be retained for 3 academic years before their scholarship is terminated).

Yea. For PIDN, the requirement is 3.4 CGPA. Life is so unfair.

[extreme]

Hmm actually for PIDN where can we find the requirement for the minimum CGPA?

[XterNalz]

Originally Posted by extreme

Hmm actually for PIDN where can we find the requirement for the minimum CGPA?

Ask from a PIDN scholar? I'm a PIDN scholar (SPM 2008 ) taking Foundation in IT at MMU. They require us to maintain our CGPA at 3.4 CGPA and above before we can continue with the scholarship for degree programmes.

[markwongsk]

Originally Posted by XterNalz

Ask from a PIDN scholar? I'm a PIDN scholar (SPM 2008 ) taking Foundation in IT at MMU. They require us to maintain our CGPA at 3.4 CGPA and above before we can continue with the scholarship for degree programmes.

Personally (no offense), I think 3.4 isn't asking for that much. Rather, it's the PILN which is on the lower side.