Are Merit-Based Scholarships Unfair To Lower-Income Students?

It is not uncommon for educational institutions to offer financial aid to students, disregarding the fact that students might still not be able to afford them. The purpose of these scholarships is clear – to make quality education (or simply, education) accessible to more talented individuals. While this paints quite a hopeful picture of our society, are such scholarships really the stepping stone needed for lower-income households to afford quality education?

Compare the requirements of two students to get into a renowned national college offering financial aid. A low-income student will probably need better marks (read: more effort in school/college) to be able to afford fees as compared to a more privileged student. In a broader sense this implies that the lesser economic or societal privilege one has, the better one has to perform to access the same level of education. This is strikingly similar to the rationale that the rich have to paying parking fines – when the monetary value of the fine doesn’t affect them, it just becomes the “cost” of parking. For one student, the prerequisites to getting admission is meeting the base academic qualifications and/or personality traits, and having access to wealth (often generational). On the other hand, another student must not only have those but also be exceptionally exceptional and jump over hurdles to qualify for aid, and maybe even have an inspirational story about their background to justify their desire to be educated.

Underprivileged members of society already have to put in more effort in general to gain access to educational institutions than their more privileged peers – whether it is the privilege of time, internet access, standards of living, or even better technology. This system of merit-based scholarships reinforces the class divide by telling lower-income students that they must be “special” to deserve education. It is not simply lectures attended and degrees that enrich a student’s life – it is the exposure to different kinds of people, the life experiences on campus, and so much more. 

Of course, there exists in India the reservation system to combat the issue of the class divide in education. There are many valid arguments on both sides of the issue, but all can agree that granting financial aid on the basis of a proper social and financial background check is not unfair. This line of thought is not far from the rationale behind need-based scholarships. If it is normal for quality education to be accessible to those with money, then it should be normal for those without financial privilege to access them too. For too long, the idea that the underprivileged should always get only the most basic level of things when provided for free has prevailed. It contributes to the selfish, gatekeeping mentality of the privileged. Why is it that moneyed people can be comfortably treated in clean, private hospitals while someone relying on a fundraiser for medical expenses is considered greedy for wanting such treatment?

There is the question, of course, of providing cheaper amenities to many as compared to providing better amenities for the few. The debate of merit- vs. need-based scholarships does not target any single institution or individual that benefits from such scholarships, rather this discourse should probe into the reasoning behind it all and the larger sociological and psychological ideas it perpetrates.