Provisional loans at the Copperbelt University for the 2018/2019 academic year

Provisional loans at the Copperbelt University for the 2018/2019 academic year


I write this with sadness for the first years at the copperbelt University. The academic year started on the 29th October 2018. The students applied for the loans(Bursaries) of which by the time the academic year started the names of successful students had not yet been published, implying that alot had to travel from remote areas without fully knowing if the would be awarded, no relatives in kitwe or so to say proper accommodation for one can only acquire a room (if accommodated in campus) after registration.
Today, 5th November, 2018. The names have been published in the Zambia Daily Mail News paper but this time with an individuals grade twelve points appearing and from analysis only those with 5-9 points being the only ones awarded. According to previous years, the Bursaries were fully based on vulnerability. Does this mean that mean that a student from the remotest area of Zambia with 14 points has to travel back home because their dream of being an Economist has been killed? Surely how will those people who struggled to obtain obtain 12 points because they attended a secondary school with little or no teachers from maamba manage to pay k30 000 tuition? Didn’t they consider all those criterias? Moreover, some programmes are not appearing at all on the published names.
Zambian Watchdog, please help the general public understand why the selection criteria has changed. Parents are crying. Why has it changed all of a sudden?Isn’t the Higher Education loans and scholarship board aware that a university has a cut off point for each programme?

Share this post


  • comment-avatar

    It is unfortunate that vulnerable prospective undergraduate with outlier points have been declined a study loan. I know some vulnerable potential students with good marks who have also been declined. It seems that students from rural areas are beginning to perform extremely very well unlike in the past. The stakes were high this time around: 40% merit, 30% female gender affirmative action and 30% rural affirmative action. They should reapply for the next selection process. May be they will be cut some slack.