Villanova vs. UVA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First of all, I only count 32 from Reed, not 33 -- and 21 of them are from the 1910s to the 1950s. Not exactly relevant today. UVA has had 8 in the 2010s, compared to Reed's one. That's the modern reality.

It seems odd to me that you are so invested in burnishing the image of your public state university.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:First of all, I only count 32 from Reed, not 33 -- and 21 of them are from the 1910s to the 1950s. Not exactly relevant today. UVA has had 8 in the 2010s, compared to Reed's one. That's the modern reality.

UVA has 11 times as many students than Reed. That was the point. So when someone said Reed had only had 3 in the last 40 years (it has actually had 4), it would translate to 33 for a school the size of UVA. It was not saying Reed has had 33.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact, let me answer the question for you. Reed's 2016 winner was the first in the school since 2000, and Reed has only had three Rhodes Scholars in the last FORTY years.

https://www.reed.edu/ir/rhodesawards.html

But through the wonders of math (which UVA grads don't do), we understand, since UVA has 11X as many students, that that would translate to 33 Rhodes Scholarships in that time period for a school the size of UVA. That would mean averaging .825 per year for a school the size of UVA.

But through the wonders of basic statistical analysis (which wherever you come from doesn't do), we understand, since we have such small sample sizes, that that does not translate into any sort of meaningful conclusions about UVA vs. Reed.

[b]Well that is odd. The sample size seemed to be sufficient when you were slagging Reed for having 3 (actually 4 it appears) Rhodes Scholars in the last forty years.

/b]
No, it's not odd. It has to do with how Rhodes are selected. It's a two stage process involving districts. Both Montana and Reed are in District 16 which includes Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, so your chances of getting a Rhodes from Reed or any school in those states is much easier than say, District 1 (Massachusetts.)

I assume you chose District 1 because it has Harvard and MIT and other good schools. But applicants apply from their home district. Harvard hasn't produced 364 Rhodes Scholars because it got 157% of the spots from District 1 since 1902. It has had winners from all over the country because it draws from all over the country. Students in other districts are competing against Harvard, Yale, USMA, USNA, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact, let me answer the question for you. Reed's 2016 winner was the first in the school since 2000, and Reed has only had three Rhodes Scholars in the last FORTY years.

https://www.reed.edu/ir/rhodesawards.html

But through the wonders of math (which UVA grads don't do), we understand, since UVA has 11X as many students, that that would translate to 33 Rhodes Scholarships in that time period for a school the size of UVA. That would mean averaging .825 per year for a school the size of UVA.

But through the wonders of basic statistical analysis (which wherever you come from doesn't do), we understand, since we have such small sample sizes, that that does not translate into any sort of meaningful conclusions about UVA vs. Reed.

Well that is odd. The sample size seemed to be sufficient when you were slagging Reed for having 3 (actually 4 it appears) Rhodes Scholars in the last forty years.

/b]
No, it's not odd. It has to do with how Rhodes are selected. It's a two stage process involving districts. Both Montana and Reed are in District 16 which includes Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, so your chances of getting a Rhodes from Reed or any school in those states is much easier than say, District 1 (Massachusetts.)

I assume you chose District 1 because it has Harvard and MIT and other good schools. [b]But applicants apply from their home district. Harvard hasn't produced 364 Rhodes Scholars because it got 157% of the spots from District 1 since 1902. It has had winners from all over the country because it draws from all over the country. Students in other districts are competing against Harvard, Yale, USMA, USNA, etc.

No, they have a choice of applying from their home state or from their institution's state. Wise students pick the district with the fewest quality applicants. If you really want a Rhodes, get born in Bermuda. Tiny Bermuda gets one Rhodes a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact, let me answer the question for you. Reed's 2016 winner was the first in the school since 2000, and Reed has only had three Rhodes Scholars in the last FORTY years.

https://www.reed.edu/ir/rhodesawards.html

But through the wonders of math (which UVA grads don't do), we understand, since UVA has 11X as many students, that that would translate to 33 Rhodes Scholarships in that time period for a school the size of UVA. That would mean averaging .825 per year for a school the size of UVA.

But through the wonders of basic statistical analysis (which wherever you come from doesn't do), we understand, since we have such small sample sizes, that that does not translate into any sort of meaningful conclusions about UVA vs. Reed.

Well that is odd. The sample size seemed to be sufficient when you were slagging Reed for having 3 (actually 4 it appears) Rhodes Scholars in the last forty years.

/b]
No, it's not odd. It has to do with how Rhodes are selected. It's a two stage process involving districts. Both Montana and Reed are in District 16 which includes Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, so your chances of getting a Rhodes from Reed or any school in those states is much easier than say, District 1 (Massachusetts.)

I assume you chose District 1 because it has Harvard and MIT and other good schools. [b]But applicants apply from their home district. Harvard hasn't produced 364 Rhodes Scholars because it got 157% of the spots from District 1 since 1902. It has had winners from all over the country because it draws from all over the country. Students in other districts are competing against Harvard, Yale, USMA, USNA, etc.

No, they have a choice of applying from their home state or from their institution's state. Wise students pick the district with the fewest quality applicants. If you really want a Rhodes, get born in Bermuda. Tiny Bermuda gets one Rhodes a year.

I'm not disputing some may be easier than others. I was pointing out that they are not often applying based on where their institution is located. District 16 is southern California, BTW.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact, let me answer the question for you. Reed's 2016 winner was the first in the school since 2000, and Reed has only had three Rhodes Scholars in the last FORTY years.

https://www.reed.edu/ir/rhodesawards.html

But through the wonders of math (which UVA grads don't do), we understand, since UVA has 11X as many students, that that would translate to 33 Rhodes Scholarships in that time period for a school the size of UVA. That would mean averaging .825 per year for a school the size of UVA.

But through the wonders of basic statistical analysis (which wherever you come from doesn't do), we understand, since we have such small sample sizes, that that does not translate into any sort of meaningful conclusions about UVA vs. Reed.

Well that is odd. The sample size seemed to be sufficient when you were slagging Reed for having 3 (actually 4 it appears) Rhodes Scholars in the last forty years.

/b]
No, it's not odd. It has to do with how Rhodes are selected. It's a two stage process involving districts. Both Montana and Reed are in District 16 which includes Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, so your chances of getting a Rhodes from Reed or any school in those states is much easier than say, District 1 (Massachusetts.)

I assume you chose District 1 because it has Harvard and MIT and other good schools. [b]But applicants apply from their home district. Harvard hasn't produced 364 Rhodes Scholars because it got 157% of the spots from District 1 since 1902. It has had winners from all over the country because it draws from all over the country. Students in other districts are competing against Harvard, Yale, USMA, USNA, etc.

No, they have a choice of applying from their home state or from their institution's state. Wise students pick the district with the fewest quality applicants. If you really want a Rhodes, get born in Bermuda. Tiny Bermuda gets one Rhodes a year.

I'm not disputing some may be easier than others. I was pointing out that they are not often applying based on where their institution is located. District 16 is southern California, BTW.

No, District 16 is a much larger area. District 16 – Los Angeles, CA
(American Samoa, California–South, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact, let me answer the question for you. Reed's 2016 winner was the first in the school since 2000, and Reed has only had three Rhodes Scholars in the last FORTY years.

https://www.reed.edu/ir/rhodesawards.html

But through the wonders of math (which UVA grads don't do), we understand, since UVA has 11X as many students, that that would translate to 33 Rhodes Scholarships in that time period for a school the size of UVA. That would mean averaging .825 per year for a school the size of UVA.

But through the wonders of basic statistical analysis (which wherever you come from doesn't do), we understand, since we have such small sample sizes, that that does not translate into any sort of meaningful conclusions about UVA vs. Reed.

Well that is odd. The sample size seemed to be sufficient when you were slagging Reed for having 3 (actually 4 it appears) Rhodes Scholars in the last forty years.

/b]
No, it's not odd. It has to do with how Rhodes are selected. It's a two stage process involving districts. Both Montana and Reed are in District 16 which includes Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, so your chances of getting a Rhodes from Reed or any school in those states is much easier than say, District 1 (Massachusetts.)

I assume you chose District 1 because it has Harvard and MIT and other good schools. [b]But applicants apply from their home district. Harvard hasn't produced 364 Rhodes Scholars because it got 157% of the spots from District 1 since 1902. It has had winners from all over the country because it draws from all over the country. Students in other districts are competing against Harvard, Yale, USMA, USNA, etc.

No, they have a choice of applying from their home state or from their institution's state. Wise students pick the district with the fewest quality applicants. If you really want a Rhodes, get born in Bermuda. Tiny Bermuda gets one Rhodes a year.

I'm not disputing some may be easier than others. I was pointing out that they are not often applying based on where their institution is located. District 16 is southern California, BTW.

No, District 16 is a much larger area. District 16 – Los Angeles, CA
(American Samoa, California–South, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands)

The point was it doesn't include Montana.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact, let me answer the question for you. Reed's 2016 winner was the first in the school since 2000, and Reed has only had three Rhodes Scholars in the last FORTY years.

https://www.reed.edu/ir/rhodesawards.html

But through the wonders of math (which UVA grads don't do), we understand, since UVA has 11X as many students, that that would translate to 33 Rhodes Scholarships in that time period for a school the size of UVA. That would mean averaging .825 per year for a school the size of UVA.

But through the wonders of basic statistical analysis (which wherever you come from doesn't do), we understand, since we have such small sample sizes, that that does not translate into any sort of meaningful conclusions about UVA vs. Reed.

Well that is odd. The sample size seemed to be sufficient when you were slagging Reed for having 3 (actually 4 it appears) Rhodes Scholars in the last forty years.

/b]
No, it's not odd. It has to do with how Rhodes are selected. It's a two stage process involving districts. Both Montana and Reed are in District 16 which includes Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, so your chances of getting a Rhodes from Reed or any school in those states is much easier than say, District 1 (Massachusetts.)

I assume you chose District 1 because it has Harvard and MIT and other good schools. [b]But applicants apply from their home district. Harvard hasn't produced 364 Rhodes Scholars because it got 157% of the spots from District 1 since 1902. It has had winners from all over the country because it draws from all over the country. Students in other districts are competing against Harvard, Yale, USMA, USNA, etc.

No, they have a choice of applying from their home state or from their institution's state. Wise students pick the district with the fewest quality applicants. If you really want a Rhodes, get born in Bermuda. Tiny Bermuda gets one Rhodes a year.

I'm not disputing some may be easier than others. I was pointing out that they are not often applying based on where their institution is located. District 16 is southern California, BTW.

No, District 16 is a much larger area. District 16 – Los Angeles, CA
(American Samoa, California–South, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands)

The point was it doesn't include Montana.

No, the point is that Reed College, which is in Oregon, is in Rhodes District 14, which includes Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington. Historically, Reed has done well in the Rhodes competition because it has been slot into districts where there is less competition for the Rhodes. This was especially true under a different districting pattern but still true to this day. If Reed were in Massachusetts, it would have an entirely different Rhodes history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In fact, let me answer the question for you. Reed's 2016 winner was the first in the school since 2000, and Reed has only had three Rhodes Scholars in the last FORTY years.

https://www.reed.edu/ir/rhodesawards.html

But through the wonders of math (which UVA grads don't do), we understand, since UVA has 11X as many students, that that would translate to 33 Rhodes Scholarships in that time period for a school the size of UVA. That would mean averaging .825 per year for a school the size of UVA.

But through the wonders of basic statistical analysis (which wherever you come from doesn't do), we understand, since we have such small sample sizes, that that does not translate into any sort of meaningful conclusions about UVA vs. Reed.

Well that is odd. The sample size seemed to be sufficient when you were slagging Reed for having 3 (actually 4 it appears) Rhodes Scholars in the last forty years.

/b]
No, it's not odd. It has to do with how Rhodes are selected. It's a two stage process involving districts. Both Montana and Reed are in District 16 which includes Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, so your chances of getting a Rhodes from Reed or any school in those states is much easier than say, District 1 (Massachusetts.)

I assume you chose District 1 because it has Harvard and MIT and other good schools. [b]But applicants apply from their home district. Harvard hasn't produced 364 Rhodes Scholars because it got 157% of the spots from District 1 since 1902. It has had winners from all over the country because it draws from all over the country. Students in other districts are competing against Harvard, Yale, USMA, USNA, etc.

No, they have a choice of applying from their home state or from their institution's state. Wise students pick the district with the fewest quality applicants. If you really want a Rhodes, get born in Bermuda. Tiny Bermuda gets one Rhodes a year.

I'm not disputing some may be easier than others. I was pointing out that they are not often applying based on where their institution is located. District 16 is southern California, BTW.

No, District 16 is a much larger area. District 16 – Los Angeles, CA
(American Samoa, California–South, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands)

The point was it doesn't include Montana.

No, the point is that Reed College, which is in Oregon, is in Rhodes District 14, which includes Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington. Historically, Reed has done well in the Rhodes competition because it has been slot into districts where there is less competition for the Rhodes. This was especially true under a different districting pattern but still true to this day. If Reed were in Massachusetts, it would have an entirely different Rhodes history.

The comment was based on what was said above, which was that it is in District 16.