We can’t forget where we came from, but we can forget how to relate.
(Yes, I know, lyrics, but fuck this bitch.)
another dumb take. they just hire actual smart people to analyze the situation and data.
anyone with $$$$$ to throw around can do that.
I think you missed the joke there buddy.
Yes, of course she was advised by some pretty smart people. But at the end of the day, she had the product they needed to sell.
They value education and prioritize it.
No, they value the idea of education, and the image of them that it projects.
art is full of nepo babies at the moment and none of them create anything that’s going to be as enduring as the worst michael jackson song.
really dumb take, no offense.
if they were ‘intelligent’ they’d be able to do something besides grift. even a homeless bum could grift in the capitalist system if you gave them a few mil and a 10 minute lecture.
But it’s also just because wealthy people tend to be more educated because that’s how they got wealthy
Gr8 b8 m8
It’s a flex. In a society that fools itself into thinking it is a meritocracy, people who buy privilege still think that means they are intrinsically worthy and amazing. Scholarship is thought to portray that the individual is so intelligent (or good at sports) that the university is ready to give up thousands in income to have that candidate.
Scholarships are not meant for the filthy peasants who need them, that would be like giving feebies to the undeserving freeloaders. Instead it should be given to those gifted and capable individuals who could afford an expensive private education.
I think it’s important to distinguish need-based financial aid from merit-based scholarships here, as well as exclude 3rd party scholarships. Need-based financial aid does exist, but only at top universities that don’t need the money and basically pay for everyone to go if their parents make less than $200k a year. Merit-based scholarships are exactly what you’re talking about and very very often go to upper-middle class students as an incentive to attend. I had a rich friend who didn’t want to apply to selective universities so they went to a random state university that offered them this type of scholarship, and I believe didn’t end up having to pay anything for college. At least that was the brag.
That being said, I want to say I’m shocked and appalled JLo would be so out of touch to think this would land, but that’s pretty par for the course for her.
Mom, put your belly away…
It’s mixed here. Awards and scholarships are important for other applications. Her kids should be proud of their academic accomplishments - they can’t choose their mother. That said, hopefully they turn down the funds so another candidate can be funded with it next year.
That said, hopefully they turn down the funds so another candidate can be funded with it next year.
So fuck this year I guess. Two less recipients who actually need it.
That’s because they are awarded based on academic performance, not by financial need, for anyone else wondering. Honoring academic performance is the whole point of them.
The fact that the world’s initial reaction is “they don’t deserve it because they don’t need the money” is more of an indictment of the cost of higher education than it is of how scholarships are awarded.
Also, they have “scholarships” based on financial need, they are called Bursaries.
I wouldn’t say honour is the whole point. I think its a way to ensure young people are able to afford the opportunity, and to convince talented students to attend that particular school.
But, yeah, they’re for academic achievement, not academic achievement _and_having poor parents.
Better to fight for free education than against young people getting awarded for doing well in school.
The J-Lo Scholarship of Excellence.
Criteria: Be J-Los kids. Go to college.
There are loads of kids from lower income backgrounds with top academic performance. There are also loads of kids from wealthy backgrounds with terrible academic performance (I worked with some of them while interning at a private school).
You’re definitely right when it comes to demographic averages but you can’t make a definitive determination on an individual basis without knowing someone’s background.
Depends on the scholarship and the university I think. At my university a donor would give the money to the school and specify the conditions of who it would go to, and the school would assign it accordingly.
That said, the school sometimes really stretched the conditions to ensure it went to a favoured student (typically the top students). I benefited from one award that was aimed at students who didn’t originally grow up in <big city where main campus is located>. Donor grew up in a rural area and wanted to support students who had to move away from home to study. The problem though was that I was living with my parents, studying at <newer campus in smaller city>. I was technically eligible but it was completely against the spirit of the award. In addition, I was being given plenty of other scholarships and this one could have gone to literally anyone else at this campus.
Scholarships still generally have a subjective aspect, often in the form of a short essay.
As long as there are subjective measures, there is the opportunity for abuse.
Like, hypothetically if you were an institution you might want wealthy students who’s parents will be inclined to donate large sums of money… and you might recognize that if the parents are in the public eye it would be attractive to them to be able to say thier kids made it on a full ride scholarship (even though thier donations would vastly eclipse any tuition costs). You suddenly have an incentive to use the subjective component of a scholarship as justification to award the scholarship to wealthy donors to ultimately profit.
Not saying that’s necessarily what happened here… Just that the argument of “that’s not what they’re used for” is a little hollow when they’re already not being used for what they’re for.