The headline Upset education minister slams critics of merit system gave the impression that the critics are against meritocracy.

Anybody following the issue knows that the debate is not so much against meritocracy, but against the possible unfairness that may arise when two entirely different systems are used to determine entrance. More so when one system (matriculation) is mainly taken by a particular ethnic group.

My questions are:

  • Why should the minister be so upset? This would not have arisen if everything is transparent. He should disclose the formula used to 'equate' the two examinations when announcing the varsity admissions. The delay in disclosure led justifiably to the doubts and suspicions raised and that he had something to hide.

  • If both the entrance exams are equal, why have two exams?

    • Why slam the critics when the minister himself cannot be transparent enough for all to see? The credibility of the authorities is at stake if the questions are not answered.