It is a marketing tool. Universities don't invest in these kind of things unless there is some form of benefit for the institution. That said, it's not as though the KLD programme is a bad experience from the students. Yes, it is somewhat of a marketing tool, but that isn't having any detriment on the students who participate, in fact, it does the complete opposite. KLD was an overwhelming good experience for me, and I applied with full knowledge that it was "trying to get the smart ones early" (that's how the person who encouraged me to do it put it).
Yes but my issue with KLD is this:
If KLD was interested in taking the best students, and making them a
scholar, then UoM should have a blanket application process, where any student can apply and be selected out of one big pool. But instead, they only take 2 students per school, and is based almost entirely on the principal's recommendation (i didn't even know there was a student application process till a few days ago). So the aim
cannot be to attract the highest achieving students (how can the top 2 students at 'bad school X' and 'good school Y' be treated equally? How can you have 2 candidates, say that A is better than B, but let's take B because we already have 2 kids from A's school?). The aim has to be to expose UoM to as many schools as possible.
If UoM came out and said 'okay, we're gonna have a marketing program, and call it KLDYS', then i wouldnt mind at all. but to disguise marketing as benevolence, i think is very very wrong.
Totally agree, it is a good experience for the students who do it, but my problem isnt with the content of KLDYS, its with its.... whats the word.... philosophy (thats still the wrong word...)