In the spirit of William Georgetti: scrutiny of a prestigious national scholarship selection process

Abstract

Postgraduate scholarship programmes are increasingly important for supporting gifted students from diverse backgrounds. Systems and processes in the application, determination and delivery of scholarships must be robust, transparent, accountable and equitable. However, they are rarely evaluated. One of the most prestigious scholarships in New Zealand – the William Georgetti Scholarship – is investigated here for the impact of student’s grade point averages (GPAs) and sex on applicant’s progression, the level of agreement between Scholarship Board member rankings, and whether applicants or members’ sex is material to any outcomes. Data from 2007 to 2015 were extracted, and contained 301 applicants considered for shortlisting, 78 who were shortlisted and 60 successful recipients evaluated by 17 Scholarship Board members (5 female, 12 male). Mean GPAs significantly increased over time amongst applicants, those shortlisted, and those successful. While 60% of applicants were female, only 49% of those shortlisted were female; however, this was explained by GPA differences. Some 52% of successful applicants were female. Ranking discordance amongst members was relatively high, but no differential sex biases were noted. The empirical results suggest that current systems and processes are consistent with the scholarship’s deed, although the difference in GPA scores between female and male applicants is of concern.

Keywords:

• inter-assessor discordance
• scholarship assessment evaluation
• sex bias

Acknowledgements

We thank Jon Winnall and Ciara Zack from Universities New Zealand – Te Pōkai Tara for coordinating the data retrieval and transmission processes, Ben Schluter for computer programming expertise and Sarah Hamlin for permission to include text from her blog. We also wish to acknowledge and thank each of the Scholarship Board members for consenting to our use of their data, and for their invaluable efforts on these committees.

Disclosure statement

Both authors currently sit on the Scholarship Board for the William Georgetti Scholarship. No financial gains or honoraria form part of this role. Apart from the acquisition of the research data, this project was conducted independently of all governing or interested bodies. No other conflicts of interest are known to exist.