Hypothetically speaking, where would you draw the line though? 1/4? 1/2? Or just abolish Indigenous scholarships altogether?I also love it how people who are 1/8 indigenous (has like 1 grandparent who is indigenous) claim the same benefits as indigenous Australians. Shithouse policy needs work.
Wut. Are you freaking serious?religious scholarships too. what a joke
Women still get a lot of sexist remarks in heavily male-dominated subjects which is why some women avoid studying these at uni. The scholarship encourages more women which is good. You wouldn't want a sausage fest.also female only scholarships, you got the vote, you got equal pay, what more do ya want?
Not that I disagree with you or anything - but your rationale doesn't necessarily work for certain fields (law). There are still Lucy Mentoring Programs, and women-only scholarships - however, women make up around 53% of lawyers, and around 54% of law grads.Women still get a lot of sexist remarks in heavily male-dominated subjects which is why some women avoid studying these at uni. The scholarship encourages more women which is good. You wouldn't want a sausage fest.
I'm sure they have male only scholarships for nursing or another heavily-female dominated area.
I don't really see a problem with a degree being dominated by a particular gender, why do we even need female engineers?Women still get a lot of sexist remarks in heavily male-dominated subjects which is why some women avoid studying these at uni. The scholarship encourages more women which is good. You wouldn't want a sausage fest.
I'm sure they have male only scholarships for nursing or another heavily-female dominated area.
I agree with that point. It's good to get women involved in male-dominated areas and vice-versa for men but when there's an even amount of each gender then each gender should receive the same amount of benefits.Not that I disagree with you or anything - but your rationale doesn't necessarily work for certain fields (law). There are still Lucy Mentoring Programs, and women-only scholarships - however, women make up around 53% of lawyers, and around 54% of law grads.
That would explain why it would make sense for there to be male scholarships for Nursing, and female scholarships for Engineering - but doesn't necessarily explain why there are women-only advantages for women in law.
[Not that I mind it or anything - just raising a point]
I actually don't think there are any women-only scholarships for law at usyd (not that i could find on their website in any case).Not that I disagree with you or anything - but your rationale doesn't necessarily work for certain fields (law). There are still Lucy Mentoring Programs, and women-only scholarships - however, women make up around 53% of lawyers, and around 54% of law grads.
That would explain why it would make sense for there to be male scholarships for Nursing, and female scholarships for Engineering - but doesn't necessarily explain why there are women-only advantages for women in law.
[Not that I mind it or anything - just raising a point]
I believe those scholarships are generally aimed at tempting bright students to a particular university through money. The universities want the brightest students, and they use money as an incentive (and it works).what about academic scholarships (i.e. 99.9+)?
I could make a sweeping generalisation that all those with 99.9+ are financially sound since they can afford to have tutors. Why give them $10k per year?
Aren't these sponsored by individuals mostly? In which case they can choose how to use their money, and set the criteria. For example, a rich old lady wanting to help a female whose situation she had been in many years before (hypothetical)That would explain why it would make sense for there to be male scholarships for Nursing, and female scholarships for Engineering - but doesn't necessarily explain why there are women-only advantages for women in law.
[Not that I mind it or anything - just raising a point]
Well considering that as ebony said, scholarships are traditionally a reward for academic excellence, if you are an excellent student, then unis will want to attract you in the hope that you will benefit them (post grad research etc)what about academic scholarships (i.e. 99.9+)?
I could make a sweeping generalisation that all those with 99.9+ are financially sound since they can afford to have tutors. Why give them $10k per year?
Why can't we have female engineers?I don't really see a problem with a degree being dominated by a particular gender, why do we even need female engineers?
The only problem I have with this though is that the huge mega-scholarships (eg. $10,000 for 99.9) are based purely on ATAR/UAI. And it takes a particular kind of intelligence to get that mark - it doesn't allow for any other kind of assessment. I guess my main problem is realistically with the HSC and calculation of ATAR - but the requirements to do well in the HSC are very different to the requirements to do well in uni. HSC is very much a memorisation game - university requires analysis and self-motivation. There are people who get 99.x and do a lot worse at uni than people with lower UAI's.Well considering that as ebony said, scholarships are traditionally a reward for academic excellence, if you are an excellent student, then unis will want to attract you in the hope that you will benefit them (post grad research etc)
So in this case, the scholarship is a direct result of a students academic superiority and hard work.
Yeah, i completely agree with this, but at the end of the day, there's really no perfect way to measure academic excellence.The only problem I have with this though is that the huge mega-scholarships (eg. $10,000 for 99.9) are based purely on ATAR/UAI. And it takes a particular kind of intelligence to get that mark - it doesn't allow for any other kind of assessment. I guess my main problem is realistically with the HSC and calculation of ATAR - but the requirements to do well in the HSC are very different to the requirements to do well in uni. HSC is very much a memorisation game - university requires analysis and self-motivation. There are people who get 99.x and do a lot worse at uni than people with lower UAI's.
I wish there was more of a system of scholarships that benefited not just incoming university students, but also those already at university who had done well in their university subjects. Rather than just one off small prizes, a scholarship would be much more beneficial for continuing students.
The debate about this topic isn't what's available elsewhere, it's about the legitimacy of ethnocentric scholarships provided from public funds. Why is it that "disadvantaged" indigenous students get entirely separate forms of funding compared to students who are disadvantaged in the exact same way? Why does it have to suddenly be about racial privilege?And no, of all the scholarship schemes I've looked at recently, there appear to be plenty of scholarships for ANY financial disadvantaged students, and they are hardly restricted to indigenous kids.
Mind you, I don't actually care about this that much because of such a small uptake of these scholarships due to poor participation. But you'll find that the "indigenous" students who actually receive these scholarships would have pursued tertiary education before hearing about them getting free cash monies for it.Statistically, the indigenous population has extremely low percentages which get post high school qualifications, unemployment rates are much higher and their average income is significantly less than non-indigenous conterparts, so yes, there is 'white guilt' which makes universities and the government obliged to attempt to rectify this, and I don't think this is wrong.
You know they choose to live there rightwhen the standards of education/living/health of indigenous communities are equal with the rest of australia, then I think that's the time to be complaining about the 'unfairness' of the scholarship system.
lol yep choosing your future based on not being treated like a princessWomen still get a lot of sexist remarks in heavily male-dominated subjects which is why some women avoid studying these at uni. The scholarship encourages more women which is good. You wouldn't want a sausage fest.
I'm sure they have male only scholarships for nursing or another heavily-female dominated area.
*This* I have no issue with. I have absolutely 0 issues with private companies and individuals giving students money to study. However, I do have issues with the fact that the same people would probably receive criticism if they offered a scholarship specific to a white male. This is mere hearsay howeverThere are heaps of different requirements for scholarships and bursaries - and it's because the money for the scholarships are donated by individuals or corporations to the university to fund a particular scholarship.
Generally that person who donates funds will want the scholarship to be awarded to someone from a particular background, or is interested in a particular thing - (eg. usyd bursaries http://sydney.edu.au/stuserv/financial_assistance_office/scholarships.shtml - these bursaries include one that is for the descendant of a WW1 serviceman, one for a son of a minister etc)
The university will generally have to go along with those requirements if they want that donation - one scholarship that is limited in scope is better than no scholarship at all.
quotas forI don't really see a problem with a degree being dominated by a particular gender, why do we even need female engineers?
you'd be superbly dumb for assuming that they have tutors for starterswhat about academic scholarships (i.e. 99.9+)?
I could make a sweeping generalisation that all those with 99.9+ are financially sound since they can afford to have tutors. Why give them $10k per year?
That's the price they pay for making their own decisionsWhy can't we have female engineers?
There are some female only communities and I'm pretty sure that they'd be more comfortable with a female engineer than a male engineer.