Yale is at a slight disadvantage because it's "home" pool includes NYC, which is the most competitive district & means a bunch of Yalies end up competing against each other. Harvard has kids use their home pool unless it's NYC, in which case they typically use the one Mass is in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, but Harvard is the oldest university in the USA and had a lot of time to build up a reputation (which it is now destroyed). The Rhodes starts in 1902. My college didn't even exist then, so it's clear why most of the awards go there. Plus, the younger colleges took years to catch up.

And, because the Rhodes Trust is biased towards Harvard. At least, that's what a personal contact on the Trust believes, and I tend to agree. Rhodes has a ridiculous gap in awards to Harvard versus any other institution. Harvard is great, but its students aren't THAT different from Yale, Stanford, Princeton, etc. students.

That's my impression just from looking at the numbers. In recent years, Harvard has had an astonishingly high number of scholars per year compared to its peer institutions.

Anonymous wrote:
Yes, but Harvard is the oldest university in the USA and had a lot of time to build up a reputation (which it is now destroyed). The Rhodes starts in 1902. My college didn't even exist then, so it's clear why most of the awards go there. Plus, the younger colleges took years to catch up.

And, because the Rhodes Trust is biased towards Harvard. At least, that's what a personal contact on the Trust believes, and I tend to agree. Rhodes has a ridiculous gap in awards to Harvard versus any other institution. Harvard is great, but its students aren't THAT different from Yale, Stanford, Princeton, etc. students.

FWIW there are new scholarships you should took at if your students wants to study at Oxford as a post grad. The Barry and The Fortescue. https://www.barryscholarship.org/. These scholarships provide room, board, tuition and spending allowance and 3 round trips to home each year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As far as only elite college students getting these, that's a correlation not causation, those colleges admit more go getters who would've gotten these from any school.

What about all those donut hole kids who only chose to go to a state school for financial reasons?

They lose out. At this and the top-law & top-med advice, and the personalized phD faculty recs, and everything else an elite school offers. Elite schools provide need to families with upwards of 200k HHI. Families who are so called "donut hole" make a ton of money compared to the average household in the US and many of them COULD afford elite if they wanted to. They chose not to. And that choice has consequences. Families with actual financial need are well provided for by elite schools who are very generous with meeting full need.

+1 In many cases, the outcomes of a state school are very good, particularly when considering in-state tuition. But not for prestigious jobs and fellowships like the ones referenced in this post. Ivies and other elite privates excel at these.

NOt true for the top flagships, like UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan and UVA. All four are big producers of elite scholars. UVA recently was commended again as top producers of Fulbrights, Rhodes and Marshalls. https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-cited-fulbright-scholarship-top-producer

This was quoted in the other thread but
UVA has 56 Rhodes Scholars; UNC has 54
Harvard has 359.

It's a different ball-park all together.

Considering UVA has 2.5X the enrollment of UVA, it means a Harvard grad is about 16X as likely to be awarded a Rhodes scholarship compared to a UVA grad. Rhodes tend to go to schools that have one them before since Rhodes alumni are so involved in the process.

The Fulbright is much more "democratic" in that it provides more awards, spreads the awards around more, and is less influenced by alumni grooming and influence. Harvard has had 416 Fulbright winners from 2010-2024 compared to 167 for UVA. This means a Harvard grad is about 6.2X as likely to win a Fulbright.

No school come close to Harvard in terms of numbers it comes to the Rhodes. Not Yale, Princeton or Stanford. No one. So you have to make your argument in context.

'

Yes, but Harvard is the oldest university in the USA and had a lot of time to build up a reputation (which it is now destroyed). The Rhodes starts in 1902. My college didn't even exist then, so it's clear why most of the awards go there. Plus, the younger colleges took years to catch up.

At West Point they start targeting cadets who would make good scholarship candidates by the end of their first year. These cadets are tapped to enroll in a 3 year course to prepare them for the interviews and essays. It’s impressive and effective. It also struck me as an unfair advantage when I first heard about this. Such is life.

Anonymous wrote:Does Fulbright ETA move the needle for law school applications, or only the research grants? DC is qualified and was planning to apply for an ETA, but happened to spend last semester at Oxford and did an interesting, somewhat law-related research project that they could dig into deeper in a masters program.

Should DC apply for the ETA, which has more slots, or shoot their shot for a research position? Ultimately law school is their goal.

The best Fulbright is the one you win, not the one you apply for. You have to target your application very carefully and get help from your school to decide.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As far as only elite college students getting these, that's a correlation not causation, those colleges admit more go getters who would've gotten these from any school.

What about all those donut hole kids who only chose to go to a state school for financial reasons?

They lose out. At this and the top-law & top-med advice, and the personalized phD faculty recs, and everything else an elite school offers. Elite schools provide need to families with upwards of 200k HHI. Families who are so called "donut hole" make a ton of money compared to the average household in the US and many of them COULD afford elite if they wanted to. They chose not to. And that choice has consequences. Families with actual financial need are well provided for by elite schools who are very generous with meeting full need.

+1 In many cases, the outcomes of a state school are very good, particularly when considering in-state tuition. But not for prestigious jobs and fellowships like the ones referenced in this post. Ivies and other elite privates excel at these.

NOt true for the top flagships, like UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan and UVA. All four are big producers of elite scholars. UVA recently was commended again as top producers of Fulbrights, Rhodes and Marshalls. https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-cited-fulbright-scholarship-top-producer

This was quoted in the other thread but
UVA has 56 Rhodes Scholars; UNC has 54
Harvard has 359.

It's a different ball-park all together.

Considering UVA has 2.5X the enrollment of UVA, it means a Harvard grad is about 16X as likely to be awarded a Rhodes scholarship compared to a UVA grad. Rhodes tend to go to schools that have one them before since Rhodes alumni are so involved in the process.

The Fulbright is much more "democratic" in that it provides more awards, spreads the awards around more, and is less influenced by alumni grooming and influence. Harvard has had 416 Fulbright winners from 2010-2024 compared to 167 for UVA. This means a Harvard grad is about 6.2X as likely to win a Fulbright.

No school come close to Harvard in terms of numbers it comes to the Rhodes. Not Yale, Princeton or Stanford. No one. So you have to make your argument in context.

My argument was about the Fulbright being more "democratic" than the Rhodes, with less of a delta between schools and much broader representation.

If you want to add Yale or Princeton to the discussion and focus on Rhodes, Princeton and Yale are much closer to Harvard than UVA. Yale has 252 recipients to 369 for Harvard. But Harvard is a bit bigger. Adjusting for that, Harvard has only about 1.36X as many recipients per capita (vs. 16X vs. UVA).

Anonymous wrote:My rising senior is thinking about applying for a post-graduate scholarship. She has been a stellar and well rounded student at her flagship university. My MIL says that these scholarships are mainly for the "elite" colleges and that I should just "pony up" and pay for grad school. Any truth to the assertion that these are only for "elite" colleges? Putting that aside, I know Rhodes is probably darn near impossible to get. What about all of these others?

I think that people here are being way too negative about the prospects of kids from big state schools.

My impression is that state flagships and non-Ivy T50s find ways to keep their Harvard-level students a lot of extra support.

They may end up knowing administrators, faculty members, trustees and even public officials in ways that ordinary good students.

So, one thing for your daughter to consider is who she knows at her university. If she’s pretty plugged in, she may be on a roughly even footing with students of a comparable level at Cornell, at least.

She may face a struggle between whether she wants a fancy fellowship or to go work as an aide in the statehouse or on Capitol Hill.

If she’s not that plugged in and has never met the head of her university or the chairman of the board of trustees in person, that might be a sign that she’s not quite as charismatic or socially aggressive as the people who tend to be Rhodes scholars.

If she is a super go-getter, one thing she could do is try to talking to the dean of her college at the university (e.g., the head of the College of Arts & Sciences or the equivalent) and ask that person about her odds.

If she’s not that ultra-plugged-in, maybe she could just apply to ordinary grad school programs, including even master’s programs, that offer study abroad opportunities and see what happens. They tend to offer less aid than undergraduate schools, but they have some. Example: I got free tuition at a master’s program without being all that special.

Still another option: She could apply for ordinary master’s programs in any language she speaks well in EU countries with cheap tuition. With a little luck, she could probably hold the cost to less than $15,000 per year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As far as only elite college students getting these, that's a correlation not causation, those colleges admit more go getters who would've gotten these from any school.

What about all those donut hole kids who only chose to go to a state school for financial reasons?

They lose out. At this and the top-law & top-med advice, and the personalized phD faculty recs, and everything else an elite school offers. Elite schools provide need to families with upwards of 200k HHI. Families who are so called "donut hole" make a ton of money compared to the average household in the US and many of them COULD afford elite if they wanted to. They chose not to. And that choice has consequences. Families with actual financial need are well provided for by elite schools who are very generous with meeting full need.

Objection, Your Honor. The witness is being non-responsive.

The need you think elite schools give to families with upwards of 200k HHI is minuscule if any. Ask me how I know.

I have odd finances and no house, but my family had AGI of $180,000 when my son was applying. Harvard and most other privates said we had an EFC of about $45,000 and would have given us about $40,000 in aid. Princeton said we had an EFC of about $23,000 and would have given us more than $60,000 in aid.

So, every family’s situation is different. People who don’t have a family office and think they need aid should try applying and see what happens.

Does Fulbright ETA move the needle for law school applications, or only the research grants? DC is qualified and was planning to apply for an ETA, but happened to spend last semester at Oxford and did an interesting, somewhat law-related research project that they could dig into deeper in a masters program.

Should DC apply for the ETA, which has more slots, or shoot their shot for a research position? Ultimately law school is their goal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As far as only elite college students getting these, that's a correlation not causation, those colleges admit more go getters who would've gotten these from any school.

What about all those donut hole kids who only chose to go to a state school for financial reasons?

They lose out. At this and the top-law & top-med advice, and the personalized phD faculty recs, and everything else an elite school offers. Elite schools provide need to families with upwards of 200k HHI. Families who are so called "donut hole" make a ton of money compared to the average household in the US and many of them COULD afford elite if they wanted to. They chose not to. And that choice has consequences. Families with actual financial need are well provided for by elite schools who are very generous with meeting full need.

+1 In many cases, the outcomes of a state school are very good, particularly when considering in-state tuition. But not for prestigious jobs and fellowships like the ones referenced in this post. Ivies and other elite privates excel at these.

NOt true for the top flagships, like UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan and UVA. All four are big producers of elite scholars. UVA recently was commended again as top producers of Fulbrights, Rhodes and Marshalls. https://news.virginia.edu/content/uva-cited-fulbright-scholarship-top-producer

This was quoted in the other thread but
UVA has 56 Rhodes Scholars; UNC has 54
Harvard has 359.

It's a different ball-park all together.

Considering UVA has 2.5X the enrollment of UVA, it means a Harvard grad is about 16X as likely to be awarded a Rhodes scholarship compared to a UVA grad. Rhodes tend to go to schools that have one them before since Rhodes alumni are so involved in the process.

The Fulbright is much more "democratic" in that it provides more awards, spreads the awards around more, and is less influenced by alumni grooming and influence. Harvard has had 416 Fulbright winners from 2010-2024 compared to 167 for UVA. This means a Harvard grad is about 6.2X as likely to win a Fulbright.

No school come close to Harvard in terms of numbers it comes to the Rhodes. Not Yale, Princeton or Stanford. No one. So you have to make your argument in context.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As far as only elite college students getting these, that's a correlation not causation, those colleges admit more go getters who would've gotten these from any school.

What about all those donut hole kids who only chose to go to a state school for financial reasons?

They lose out. At this and the top-law & top-med advice, and the personalized phD faculty recs, and everything else an elite school offers. Elite schools provide need to families with upwards of 200k HHI. Families who are so called "donut hole" make a ton of money compared to the average household in the US and many of them COULD afford elite if they wanted to. They chose not to. And that choice has consequences. Families with actual financial need are well provided for by elite schools who are very generous with meeting full need.

Objection, Your Honor. The witness is being non-responsive.

The need you think elite schools give to families with upwards of 200k HHI is minuscule if any. Ask me how I know.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As far as only elite college students getting these, that's a correlation not causation, those colleges admit more go getters who would've gotten these from any school.

What about all those donut hole kids who only chose to go to a state school for financial reasons?

They lose out. At this and the top-law & top-med advice, and the personalized phD faculty recs, and everything else an elite school offers. Elite schools provide need to families with upwards of 200k HHI. Families who are so called "donut hole" make a ton of money compared to the average household in the US and many of them COULD afford elite if they wanted to. They chose not to. And that choice has consequences. Families with actual financial need are well provided for by elite schools who are very generous with meeting full need.

Objection, Your Honor. The witness is being non-responsive.

*stipend is small for western countries, should be enough for underdeveloped countries with low cost of living.