<p>From post #8:</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Nope. The big error that jumps out at me here is BYU. It’s a fine school, but it has produced a grand total of 9 Rhodes scholars in its entire history. No way that works out to 0.40 per year.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Alexandre, over the years, there have been VERY few times when you seem to lose your objectivity. And I respect for you tremendously for this. </p>
<p>However, this is not one of your finer moments, as it would have easier for you to acknowledge that the University of Michigan did not lend any support to the student throughout the application process, and only seized callously on an opportunity to glorify itself when had NOTHING to do with this successful Rhodes applications. </p>
<p>And, fwiw, you should use the google features to read more about the reasons why Michigan is neither more active nor … successful in recruiting and helping candidates for the Rhodes award. </p>
<p>If they were, they might not have to steal the thunder of others schools.</p>
<p>PS I also thought you knew Joe a bit better. </p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/california-institute-technology/305729-back-next-year.html#post3668972[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/california-institute-technology/305729-back-next-year.html#post3668972</a></p>
<p>xiggi, you sometimes have a flair for the dramatic. I did not commit a crime, lie or do anything wrong for me to feel shame. </p>
<p>I am well aware of Michigan’s (and other major universities’) reluctance to invest in a department to help Rhodes scholars. I do not think Michigan tried to steal the thunder of others. But now that I look at it, I agree that Michigan should not claim Joseph Jewell as one of its Rhodes scholars.</p>
<p>Regardless, I still think that looking at the number of Rhodes scholars produced by a school is a poor measure of academic quality. Many excellent universities and colleges have underperfomed in this domain, including Boston College (2), Cal (22), CMU (3), Claremont McKenna (2), Columbia (27), Cornell (27), Michigan (25), NYU (5), Northwestern (15), Notre Dame (14), Penn (19), Tufts, (4), UCLA (11) and Vassar (2).</p>
<p>“Shame on you, Blue and Gold bleeding heart!”</p>
<p>It’s maize and blue. xiggi, I expect more from you…</p>
<p>
Haha! Alex, did xiggi get a hold of your PA survey? :D</p>
<p>“It’s maize and blue. xiggi, I expect more from you…”</p>
<p>Ah, so sorry, I must have confused one Big Ten/Twenty team for another. You know, Notre Dame and Michigan look so similar. ;)</p>
<p>^ Or, you could have confused Michigan’s Maize and Blue with another top public’s Yale Blue and Gold. :)</p>
<p>Hi all. I’m fine with Michigan claiming me. (Michigan is listed along with Caltech on the Rhodes site anyway: [The</a> Rhodes Scholarships - Past Scholars](<a href=“Office of the American Secretary | The Rhodes Scholarships”>Office of the American Secretary | The Rhodes Scholarships) and go to 2005.) Caltech nominated me, but I was at Michigan when I won. Michigan was aware that I was applying and supportive of me.</p>
<p>It seems to be standard practice for universities to claim their grad students as well as undergraduates, even though most (but certainly not all) are nominated by the college or university where they received their bachelor’s degree.</p>
<p>I think it’s an absolutely excellent institution, I enjoyed Ann Arbor, and I very much value the master’s degree I received there. My younger sister just finished her U-M master’s degree this May, in fact, and I was proud to go back to see her graduate.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How do you know to what extent Michigan did or did not support me, or “seized callously” on anything? What a silly thing to say!</p>
<p>In point of fact, Michigan set up a practice interview with several Rhodes Scholars on the faculty for me (which Caltech certainly could not do, since I was of course physically in Ann Arbor). That turned out to be the only practice I had in the whole process.</p>
<p>What’s more, before I even entered the MS+PhD program at Michigan I was upfront with my advisor that I planned to go to England after a year if I won one of the UK fellowships. He and the university accepted this and made it possible for me to finish my masters in one year, although it normally takes three semesters. The ability to do this (which wasn’t possible at some other graduate schools I considered) was a large factor in my choosing to go to Ann Arbor in the first place.</p>
<p>Finally, far from any kind of “callous seizure” on Michigan’s part, I actually told President Coleman that I was happy to have Michigan take credit for me. I am certainly a proud alumnus and supporter of U-M and it’s not as if it diminishes Caltech at all.</p>
<p>Hehe. The last comments by Joe to xiggi remind me of one of my favorite scenes in the movie, “Annie Hall.” It’s the part where a Columbia professor is giving a loud and annoying lecture in line at a movie theater to an impressionable student. The discussion involves a famous professor…</p>
<p>[YouTube</a> - Annie Hall Marshall McLuhan Scene (short edit) Woody Allen](<a href=“- YouTube”>- YouTube)</p>
<p>Michigan’s UNDERGRAD still has only produced one Rhodes Scholar in the past dozen years. Joe was a finished product when he arrived at Michigan and merely had to go through the formalities of the application process while he was a grad student there. The intellectual development, research experiences, mentorship and extracurricular involvement that provided the impetus for Joe’s Rhodes application took place at Caltech.</p>
<p>In this case, Michigan was the player that was cherry picking under the basket when the amazing play that lead to the scoring opportunity were the ball handling skills/vision of the point guard (Caltech). The box score doesn’t tell the whole story hehe!</p>
<p>Two, not one; Fiona Rose and Abdulrahman El Sayed.</p>
<p>Not that it matters. Rhodes scholarships do not mean much. Most universities produce less than 1 winner annually, including Brown, Cal, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, MIT, Penn, UNC and UVa. The University of Georgia has produced as many Rhodes scholars as Cornell, Dartmouth or Penn in the last dozen years. UNC has produced twice as many as each. Some universities enphasize the award far more than others. Michigan simply does not place much importance on it. This year, it is nominating just one candidate for the award. Some universities nominate a dozen or more candidates annually.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To whom, exactly? I think they mean, potentially, a great deal to the students at Michigan who are missing out on an incredible opportunity. It disappoints me that only one student from the university has the chance to try.</p>
<p>They also seem to matter to whoever has been in charge of the Michigan Daily for the past several years, given that recent articles have called the numbers “dismal” and recommended (only slightly facetiously) “If you have your heart set on becoming a Rhodes Scholar, the first thing you should do is transfer to Yale.”</p>
<p>It shouldn’t be like that. Michigan has the student body to be able to do much, much better.</p>
<p>I meant to say is that the quality of a university cannot be determined by the number of Rhodes scholars it has produced. Cal, Michigan, Northwestern and Penn are four universities that have done relatively poorly.</p>
<p>But I agree with you. Michigan should devote more resources to help students with the Rhodes scholarship. Most years, Michigan nominates between 0 and 2 students for the award. That is ridiculously low considering the size and quality of the student body. Schools like Dartmouth, Duke, UNC and UVa nominate between 10 and 20. There is no reason why Michigan is not nominating over 20 strong candidates annually. For some reason, Michigan has not devoted the resources to create an office for helping students with the scholarship as have other universities.</p>
<p>
The Rhodes and other fellowships are one of many, many markers that can be used to evaluate the caliber of a university as an undergraduate institution. I hope you realize that IT IS A KNOCK against Cal, Northwestern, Michigan and Penn that they’ve done so poorly for the Rhodes competition. The Fellowship and Scholarship governing bodies at these schools are not giving their undergrads the proper resources/guidance/support they need to pursue their invaluable opportunities and this should be a cause for concern. It does NEGATIVELY affect the quality of these institutions when we are talking about UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION. Penn and Northwestern have many other redeeming factors though to compensate in this regard like low class sizes, large financial resources, a strong student body, low student to faculty ratios, etc. which Michigan and Cal lag behind in.</p>
<p>How do you know Dartmouth, Duke, UNC and UVA nominate over 20 candidates anually? Where’s the proof?</p>