I am a National Merit Finalist. The University of Alabama gave me the laptop I’m writing this article on, pays for my tuition, room and board, and will pay me $6,000 over four years in additional stipends.

But I really don’t think they should.

National Merit Finalist status – the sole requirement for all of the above rewards, minus the laptop – is bestowed to 1,700 students who receive the highest scores on the PSAT in their state. The PSAT is nothing more than a practice test taken in the third year of high school.

As glad as I am to receive the benefits UA bestows on National Merit Scholars, I feel that excellence on a single standardized test is not sufficient achievement to warrant them. The accomplishments of incoming students, as well as their potential to positively contribute to a University campus, cannot be measured by a multiple choice reasoning test.

Over half of the UA freshmen this year will eventually owe the University over $100,000 in tuition, room and board, meal plan costs and textbooks. The cost of attending this university is quickly becoming prohibitive, state school or no.

I understand that Robert Witt’s policy of aggressive expansion required funding in the form of higher tuition rates, but the desire to grow must be coupled with some level of sensitivity to the financial needs of the student body. One aspect of this responsibility is the obligation to allocate scholarship funding wisely and generously.

To that end, I honestly don’t believe that National Merit Scholars are categorically more deserving of financial aid than other students. Judging from our average financial background, I’m quite certain that we don’t need the money more than a typical UA undergrad. In fact, students who score very highly on standardized tests are statistically more likely to be privileged.

So why do National Merit Scholars receive such special treatment? I find it highly unlikely that University administrators felt that we were a crucial addition to the student body. We tend to be indistinguishable from other high-performing high school students.

What I suspect is this: We were given scholarships because having lots of students with impressive titles is good for recruitment.

The University is currently scaling back scholarships for National Merit Scholars, and while I hope this is because they have decided to allocate scholarship funds more judiciously, my suspicion is that they no longer need additional National Merit Scholars for their recruitment efforts. If it’s the latter, administrators need to seriously reconsider how and why they distribute scholarships.

Money matters. It’s a barrier between the disadvantaged and the attainment of higher education, and scholarships are one of the best ways for schools to circumvent it. So when schools – UA included – allocate scholarships for the wrong reasons, they’re contributing in a small way to significant social problems.

In summation, I’m glad that my education is paid for. But I can’t help but wish the University would work a little harder at getting money to those who need it, and not those who’ll make UA look better on recruitment pamphlets.

Nathan James is a sophomore majoring in public relations. His column runs weekly on Thursdays.

Also in today’s Crimson White:

[Opinion] Law-abiding students should be able to bear arms

[Opinion] Respecting the shifting gender roles, bringing women into combat

Facebook friends leave real life requests pending