Modernizing Scholarship Programs
Schedule a Demo View Interactive Tour Modernizing Scholarship Programs Scholarship providers play a pivotal role in offering scholarship programs to support students
Creating a fair, non-biased scholarship program is crucial to ensuring that every applicant has an equal opportunity to succeed. There are a significant number of moving parts when managing and operating a scholarship program but we can ensure a fair non-bias selection process by incorporating three key components:
At its core, these three elements ensure that each candidate will be reviewed on the merits of their submission without any unintended personal bias by an evaluator or their own personal selection trends. Incorporating these elements not only enhances the integrity of the selection process but also help to eliminate unconscious biases, ensuring that the most deserving candidates are recognized and rewarded.
Creating a fair, non-biased framework is essential for any evaluation process, especially those involving diverse applicant pools such as scholarships. Reviewr employs several strategies to ensure fairness and objectivity:
These measures are designed to create an environment where all candidates have an equal opportunity to be evaluated fairly, based on their abilities and achievements without the influence of bias or favoritism.
Redacting personal information from scholarship applications during the review process offers several significant benefits, particularly in avoiding personal bias and preventing reviewers from being overwhelmed with irrelevant content. These benefits include:
To ensure fairness across different evaluators who may have varying standards of strictness, normalizing results is a critical process. This involves adjusting scores to a common scale and calibrating the assessments across different reviewers. This process reduces the impact of biases and ensures consistent evaluations, no matter who conducts them.
Let us tell you a story. An Ivy League university that we will not mention year after year would have evaluators question why particular candidates were not selected. Those who reviewed the applicant thought they were strong fits and actually one of the highest they evaluated. For the sake of privacy, let’s pretend this evaluator’s name was Bob. Bob, who never scores an applicant greater than 15 evaluated a particular candidate as a 14. Bob later was shocked to hear that this applicant was not selected as it was the highest-rated applicant Bob scored. Looking into the data, it was later identified that because not all applicants were evaluated by all reviewers, some evaluators were scoring people as 25s consistently. While that particular candidate was scored “highly” by Bob’s standards, it was quite low compared to the standards of other evaluators. Here lies the problem – how do we not only identify judging trends by particular evaluators but also take this into account when generating results?
This normalization is vital for maintaining the integrity of the evaluation process, ensuring that all candidates are judged fairly and equitably, irrespective of which reviewers assess their applications.
Schedule a Demo View Interactive Tour Modernizing Scholarship Programs Scholarship providers play a pivotal role in offering scholarship programs to support students
Schedule a Demo View Interactive Tour Modernizing Grant Management Organizations that distribute grants face a common challenge: balancing the modernization of their