What's available at Chicago vs. colleges in general

newmassdad
Mon, 08 Sep 2008 13:39:57 +0000

idad, it is no doubt true that a Rhodes may not be the best for someone who is fully committed to a research career, especially in a discipline where Oxford is not the best. I’ve heard of other potentially strong candidates that did not enter the fray for similar reasons.

Of course, the problem is that, even at 21, a lot of grads who think they know what they want to do in research are wrong - the rate of career switching from one research field to another, from research to something else, and so forth is very high. A Rhodes offers a way to think and learn for two years.

Regarding the student you are helping, perhaps she can diffuse some of the resistance by talking more about the Marshall. Surely some U in the UK is good enough in the field? Then, once she gains their support for the Marshall, the same recs are used for the Rhodes…

One final point to think about is that these days the Rhodes is clearly looking for something more than academic excellence, as you know. For example, most winners this year (although there are interesting exceptions such as a grad from Caltech), at least according to the Rhodes bios, have significant international experience, mostly in developing country settings or issues that relate to them, or they have significant US NGO or poverty oriented non-profit experience. This is consistent with the Rhodes charter.

But I agree that all too frequently, local faculty, especially in the sciences, can be pretty narrow minded. It is too bad.