Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goldwater Scholars count over last 5 years:

Amherst 11
Williams 5
Harvard 21
Hopkins 20
MIT 19
Columbia 23

A school can only nominate 4 applicants per year so again size does not matter.

Of course size matters. A larger institution will have a larger pool of potential applicants to choose from.

It is a little bit like saying Moldova competes on an even footing with Brazil in soccer because each team can only have 11 players on the field.

the irony because LACs are moldova and do not get the top stem students regardless compared to ivies

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goldwater Scholars count over last 5 years:

Amherst 11
Williams 5
Harvard 21
Hopkins 20
MIT 19
Columbia 23

A school can only nominate 4 applicants per year so again size does not matter.

Of course size matters. A larger institution will have a larger pool of potential applicants to choose from.

and engineering students.

it's very true that engineering awards favor engineering students!

majority of the awardees were non eng. in most cases they were all non eng each year. keep trying though.

as for size of pool: if you dont have the good stem programs and students, it doesnt matter. case in point the Williams amherst numbers above. Keep coping however

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goldwater Scholars count over last 5 years:

Amherst 11
Williams 5
Harvard 21
Hopkins 20
MIT 19
Columbia 23

A school can only nominate 4 applicants per year so again size does not matter.

Of course size matters. A larger institution will have a larger pool of potential applicants to choose from.

and engineering students.

it's very true that engineering awards favor engineering students!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the esteemed history of DCUM's many ridiculous discussions, this is the most dumb, in the weeds, moving goalposts discussions I have seen. Good Lord.

It is just one troll who needs (badly) writing practice and has nothing better to do.

And which troll is that perchance?

Anonymous wrote:In the esteemed history of DCUM's many ridiculous discussions, this is the most dumb, in the weeds, moving goalposts discussions I have seen. Good Lord.

It is just one troll who needs (badly) writing practice and has nothing better to do.

Anonymous wrote:In the esteemed history of DCUM's many ridiculous discussions, this is the most dumb, in the weeds, moving goalposts discussions I have seen. Good Lord.

Indeed, this one is a winner.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goldwater Scholars count over last 5 years:

Amherst 11
Williams 5
Harvard 21
Hopkins 20
MIT 19
Columbia 23

A school can only nominate 4 applicants per year so again size does not matter.

How, exactly, does Columbia have 23 Goldwater scholars in 5 years if the limit is 4 per year? Last I checked, 4*5=20

The 4 per school limit has exceptions for transfers & veterans.

Anonymous wrote:Goldwater Scholars count over last 5 years:

Amherst 11
Williams 5
Harvard 21
Hopkins 20
MIT 19
Columbia 23

A school can only nominate 4 applicants per year so again size does not matter.

How, exactly, does Columbia have 23 Goldwater scholars in 5 years if the limit is 4 per year? Last I checked, 4*5=20

In the esteemed history of DCUM's many ridiculous discussions, this is the most dumb, in the weeds, moving goalposts discussions I have seen. Good Lord.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Goldwater Scholars count over last 5 years:

Amherst 11
Williams 5
Harvard 21
Hopkins 20
MIT 19
Columbia 23

A school can only nominate 4 applicants per year so again size does not matter.

Of course size matters. A larger institution will have a larger pool of potential applicants to choose from.

It is a little bit like saying Moldova competes on an even footing with Brazil in soccer because each team can only have 11 players on the field.

Anonymous wrote:Goldwater Scholars count over last 5 years:

Amherst 11
Williams 5
Harvard 21
Hopkins 20
MIT 19
Columbia 23

A school can only nominate 4 applicants per year so again size does not matter.

Of course size matters. A larger institution will have a larger pool of potential applicants to choose from.

"For the 2024 competition, over 1,350 students were nominated by 446 U.S. colleges for the Barry Goldwater Scholarship, with around 437 ultimately selected as Scholars from this pool of STEM-focused sophomores and juniors, with most institutions allowed to nominate up to four students, with exceptions for transfer students or veterans. The number of nominees typically falls between 1,200 and 1,400 annually, with a selection of about 400-450 scholars."

https://goldwaterscholarship.gov/2024-scholars-press-release/#:~:text=From%20an%20estimated%20pool%20of,in%20engineering%20and%20materials%20research.

and some schools occasionally have more than 4 a year because of transfers but they are the exception

Goldwater Scholars count over last 5 years:

Amherst 11
Williams 5
Harvard 21
Hopkins 20
MIT 19
Columbia 23

A school can only nominate 4 applicants per year so again size does not matter.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here have a weird idea of what STEM means. LACs have ST and M. Williams College has a strong physics program, for example. They have won more Apker awards than any other undergraduate physics program in the US, regardless of size..

Goldwater is actually known and a better barometer.

Go see for yourself how many Goldwaters have been produced over last 5 years by Williams/Amherst vs Ivies, JHU, CMU, MIT etc. The difference is stark. Keep in mind an institution can have a max of 4 so size is not a determining factor.

https://goldwaterscholarship.gov/2025-scholars/

Why don't you quantify what the "stark" difference is? You link to the 2025 results. Amherst had 2 which is the same number as Duke, which has 3.5X more undergraduates and the same number as UVA, which has 9X as many undergraduates.

goldwater is limited to 4 regardless of school size. how many did Williams have? bow down Harvard, MIT, Ivies, Hopkins, and other top privates over last 5 years. Such idiotic analysis