Paying a donation is usually considered a bribe (or is illegal) because the fees are not standardised. That is, if A's daddy can cough up 10 lakh rupees whereas B's daddy can cough up only 5 lakh rupees, A will get admission in the institute. This is obviously unfair in a sense and can lead to corruption. But in certain private colleges, the paid quota fees are standardised. Which means, everyone willing to enter through the paid quota has to pay the same fees. This is not illegal (as long as most seats are filled on the basis of merit). Heck, it is hardly even unethical. Also, the paid quota is something like 10%-15% in certain private colleges. These people are paying money out of their own pockets to fund their own education.
Surely, how you get INTO an institute is less important than how you get OUT of it.
Imagine a hypothetical college where there was no entrance exam but all the students just had to pay their fees to get enrolled. But this college had a strict system of evaluation in their college exams and strict administrative and academic protocols. This means irrespective of how the students got in (i.e. with or without an entrance exam) they would obtain their degree only if they met the evaluation standards of the institute and cleared all their college exams. In this case, how would it matter how the students got in? The ones who did not manage to clear their college exams would drop out anyway or be under-performers (which would reflect in their CGPA). Only the ones who performed well would make it through. So, irrespective of the input student quality the output student quality would be good. That is, entering the institute may not be merit based but getting out of it surely would be.
Heck, just take my own case. I'm a general category student whose entrance exam rank was the second highest in my class. But after getting through, my academic performance has been a lot poorer than some paid quota students who have quite high GPAs (and some of them have even gotten into good American universities on the basis of their subsequent achievements).
One entrance exam does not define your life. It may not necessarily reflect your intellect either. An averagely intelligent person may make it through an entrance exam through sheer hard work and preparation whereas someone of high intelligence may not if he didn't/couldn't prepare well enough. Some people succeed at some points in life whereas others succeed at other points. Some people succeed early in life whereas others succeed later. The world has all sorts of permutations and combinations of people and situations.
I think everyone must be given a chance to pursue a degree of their choice. If they don't perform well, they'll drop out. Big deal. Govt. colleges will obviously have merit based entry (this makes sense because they are public institutions which have to cater even to poor people and hence they have to distribute limited seats on the basis of meritorious entry) and some top tier private colleges will also have merit based entry for their own reasons (high student quality, enviroment etc.). But there's no reason why (lower tier) private colleges need to have merit based entry as long as they can strictly follow the hypothetical college model I talked about earlier where the entry may not be meritorious but the exit is (though this might be difficult for private colleges which don't have sufficient infrastructure and faculty). The fees should be standardised which is important otherwise it can lead to corruption where the administration becomes a bunch of money mongers.
Surely, how you get INTO an institute is less important than how you get OUT of it.
Imagine a hypothetical college where there was no entrance exam but all the students just had to pay their fees to get enrolled. But this college had a strict system of evaluation in their college exams and strict administrative and academic protocols. This means irrespective of how the students got in (i.e. with or without an entrance exam) they would obtain their degree only if they met the evaluation standards of the institute and cleared all their college exams. In this case, how would it matter how the students got in? The ones who did not manage to clear their college exams would drop out anyway or be under-performers (which would reflect in their CGPA). Only the ones who performed well would make it through. So, irrespective of the input student quality the output student quality would be good. That is, entering the institute may not be merit based but getting out of it surely would be.
Heck, just take my own case. I'm a general category student whose entrance exam rank was the second highest in my class. But after getting through, my academic performance has been a lot poorer than some paid quota students who have quite high GPAs (and some of them have even gotten into good American universities on the basis of their subsequent achievements).
One entrance exam does not define your life. It may not necessarily reflect your intellect either. An averagely intelligent person may make it through an entrance exam through sheer hard work and preparation whereas someone of high intelligence may not if he didn't/couldn't prepare well enough. Some people succeed at some points in life whereas others succeed at other points. Some people succeed early in life whereas others succeed later. The world has all sorts of permutations and combinations of people and situations.
I think everyone must be given a chance to pursue a degree of their choice. If they don't perform well, they'll drop out. Big deal. Govt. colleges will obviously have merit based entry (this makes sense because they are public institutions which have to cater even to poor people and hence they have to distribute limited seats on the basis of meritorious entry) and some top tier private colleges will also have merit based entry for their own reasons (high student quality, enviroment etc.). But there's no reason why (lower tier) private colleges need to have merit based entry as long as they can strictly follow the hypothetical college model I talked about earlier where the entry may not be meritorious but the exit is (though this might be difficult for private colleges which don't have sufficient infrastructure and faculty). The fees should be standardised which is important otherwise it can lead to corruption where the administration becomes a bunch of money mongers.
