When determining who gets a spot in residence during your first year of undergrad, your high school grades should not be the deciding factor of your eligibility.
Despite being overjoyed at being accepted to McMaster University in 2021, as someone who does not live within commuting distance from the school, I was also heavily concerned about living in residence during my first year.
While attending one of the onboarding information sessions McMaster offers to its incoming students about living in residence, I learned that I needed to have at least a 90 percent average to secure a spot in residence if I wanted to live on campus.
I learned that I needed to have at least a 90 percent average to secure a spot in residence if I wanted to live on campus.
Although I was fortunate enough to have an average that guaranteed me a spot in residence, I quickly realized that other students were not as fortunate.
McMaster is regarded as a highly competitive university. With limited program choices and spots for high school students to fill, it's no surprise that the incoming student averages are significantly high, though acceptance averages vary across faculties and can lead to certain majors being disproportionately represented within residence.
For example, a potential Health and Society student would need a high school average between the low to high 80s while a Life Sciences student would need a high school average of the high 80s to low 90s to be considered for acceptance.
The discrepancy in high school admission averages alone seems to favour certain types of programs. It is important to note that your program does not place you at a disadvantage for a spot within residency as only your high school average is considered. Yet, it can mislead you if you don’t meet the guaranteed residence cut-off while you meet your program cut-off.
Once students are conditionally accepted into their program, they may want to maintain their current average rather than continuously work to obtain a higher average.
Although there is nothing wrong with this, it may have put you at a disadvantage for residency as your program cut off differs from the residency cut off. This is only one circumstance why an incoming student may not make the residency cut-off.
Many more can be due to extenuating circumstances that a student had no control over such as family and personal challenges, the pandemic, and much more that cannot be explained by a simple average.
Guaranteeing residency based on a student's grade limits student potential.
Rewarding students a spot to live on campus rather than assessing them on a needs basis places students who require a place on residency but who don't meet the cut-off at a large disadvantage.
On average there are around 8,044 first-year students incoming each year. However, there are only 4,186 rooms for these students to fill. This means that about 48 per cent of the first-year population will need to find a place off campus to live or commute. There are simply not enough residence spots to accommodate everyone.
On average there are around 8,044 first-year students incoming each year. However, there are only 4,186 rooms for these students to fill.
Students should be assessed on their urgency for residency rather than it being handed out for doing well in high school as their averages do not tell a complete story of who a student may be. Additionally, many students meet the guaranteed admission but do not need a residence spot and live on campus anyway for the experience.
It may be more time-consuming for the university to read through all of the applications and assess who may deserve a spot in residence. However, this also weeds out the students who are not interested in residency as this process encourages students to reflect if residency is right for them.
The transition between high school and university is difficult as it is. Students who truly need to live in residence should not be placed at a disadvantage because their high school average was below the guaranteed average of 90 percent.
McMaster University should transition from guaranteeing students with a minimum of a 90 per cent average a spot on residence to allotting first-year students residency spots based on needs. This change will benefit incoming students more than the current system and it will truly help those students who need a spot in residence.
It’s scholarship season. If you’re like me, you probably spent a few days scouring Mosaic to find a list of awards to apply to, in hopes of receiving a subsidization of your degree, no matter how small. Many of McMaster University’s largest scholarships are merit-based, which strike me as odd; would it not be more beneficial to assist students demonstrating financial need?
A good example of such a merit-based scholarship is the Wilson Leadership Scholar Award, awarded annually to three undergraduate students and three graduate students. Recipients of this award, known as Wilson leaders, receive up to $25,000 and gain access to an incredibly exclusive leadership program, meant to connect them with other leaders.
If you are a Wilson leader, you are probably a bright and capable person and there is no denying that. But it is important that we interrogate what being a person of merit typically means and how other factors may affect someone’s ability to achieve that image of success.
A high grade point average and involvement in extracurricular activities often help someone win merit-based awards. But there are very obvious roadblocks that can hinder someone’s ability to achieve both, especially if they do not have financial support.
More often than not, lower-income students take on part-time jobs in order to pay for school, taking away valuable time that may otherwise be used to study or be involved in the community.
These students are still incredibly impressive; it is no small feat to finish a degree while also supporting yourself. Many students are also still engaged within their community, but in ways that cannot be put on a resume; running a babysitting ring in your neighbourhood, for example, does not have the same ring as volunteering for a daycare centre despite it being similar work. It just seems a little unfair to pit students who may not have the time nor resources to be involved with multiple clubs, maintain their GPA and live comfortably against those who do.
No matter how successful these students are, it can feel daunting to apply to major merit-based scholarships with the knowledge that someone without any financial barriers is also applying and was able to dedicate more time into resume-building activities.
This is not to say that wealthier students do not work hard and should not be offered any sort of award—we should just reconsider what that award should look like. This also is not meant to deride merit-based awards as a whole; people should absolutely be recognized for their hard work, no matter their financial situation. But it is worth considering how students would benefit if scholarships were restructured.
What if, for example, the Wilson Leader Scholarship offered their cash prize on a needs-based system, but offered the mentorship program to all those who receive it? A simple change would not only incentivize lower-income students to apply, but it would still preserve the program’s goal of recognizing student leaders.
Offering the title and its other benefits still recognize a student’s accomplishments but providing the monetary award on a need-be basis allows McMaster to support students with financial need. Imagine how much more a student leader could do if they were able to quit their shitty part-time job?
While it is important to recognize student merit in whatever shape it takes, McMaster should take a more formalized approach to support students who demonstrate financial need. Offering large scholarships on pure merit alone does not ensure that funds are being distributed equitably, and efforts should be made to mitigate that.
[spacer height="20px"][thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
