IS, what's with the personal attacks? It takes two to tango, and if I take myself 'a little too seriously', well that's a pot calling the kettle black.
Frankly, I think this vitriol you use against people that disagree with you on a discussion forum is classless.
When I use the term 'holistic education' I'm pointing to the breadth of what one can learn from a private school. This is because others were pointing to tertiary admittance and enters being low amongst scholarshipees.
I've explained how I don't believe they get zero access to the community engagement, community/civil service activities, speakers, etc. that these schools offer because a lot of them are in school hours, the rugby season doesn't run all year, and the pastoral care and academic parts of the school simply wouldn't allow it.
Additionally, if these rugby programs ask a disgusting amount of students, and maybe they do, why is this a scholarship issue? Isn't this a school sporting issue? The rage should be channelled elsewhere.
You question what value a scholarship student receives, and I've said a better educational experience (both academically and 'holistically') and a better rugby experience. But let's not let you or I decide if the value is there, let's look to the students. If the value proposition wasn't there for scholarshipees, why do so many people take them? These students that take scholarships aren't anomalies.
TL ; DR - I've tried at length to empathise with particular points the anti-scholarship crew have made and explain myself thoroughly (as per the long posts). I've been met with strawman arguments and insults. Thanks.
