Discouraging youthful talent
A front page report published in a local English daily on July 21 was simply unbelievable! How can we consider more age as a qualifying criterion and lower age in passing SSC examination as a disqualifying criterion for admission; where college seats are scarce, particularly in good and established colleges? This is a sad reflection where age is preferred when scholastic performance is identical! It is one of the absurd decisions that we have in Bangladesh governance and the military backed CTG is no better.
In fact, this decision is the worst ever taken in the education sector, one can imagine for whose benefit!
It reflects the short-sighted attitude that discourages the young and talented students.
All things being equal, the younger the applicant, the more preference he or she should get for being admitted. If SSC marks are identical, then the school history should be the logical selection criterion. For example, how many years has the applicant taken to cover classVI to classX. Naturally, it should be five years. Anyone taking more than that should automatically get lower marking for admission.
Do we imply that given the same SSC marking, someone doing it at, say, 25 years of age is preferred over someone who did it at fifteen?
If that be so, then by the time the person finishes Master's examination he or she will be aged at least thirty-one years, if not more, given our usual delays and session jams!
How sad and sorry a state of affairs it is for the talented youngsters, receiving unfair treatment and getting discouraged for finishing SSC at a younger age! It should be the other way around; encouraging them to do better and earlier. Nothing could be worse than this.
We are becoming a quixotic nation that prefers mediocrity to talent and youthful intelligence!
We are opening the path to incompetence; wasting national educational resources. Meanwhile, all our bigwigs in the government desire capable and talented persons to lead the nation. What an example of absurd and transparent double standards!
Comments