<p>Have there been people who apply for Marshall and Rhodes Scholarships, get selected, but never use them? Like have there ever been recipients who have had second thoughts about going to England and instead stay in the US? Or is going to England required? I'm just wondering. Thanks.</p>
<p>The POINT of those is to study in the United Kingdom or specifically Oxford in the case of the Rhodes.</p>
<p>I’m sure there are some people who have turned them down for personal reasons. But really, those are pretty much the most prestigious scholarships on the planet; other than a serious illness, I can’t imagine turning one down especially after the amount of work involved in applying and getting to the interview stage.</p>
<p>There is a heirarchy: the Marshall winners are selected before the Rhodes, but allowed to compete in the Rhodes finals before accepting or rejecting the Marshall. If a Marshall selectee turns down the Marshall for a Rhodes, then the Marshall committee gives the award to an alternate that was pre-selected. </p>
<p>Given the work that goes into the application, and given that one’s college puts its reputation on the line in its recommendations and ranking of the candidates (yes, they do that!), the process is pretty good at weeding out those that are not serious. </p>
<p>Another point: Interviews of finalists count a lot, so if one hesitates at that time, they may sense it and reject.</p>
<p>so that leaves stuff happening between scholar selection and enrollment some months later. Stuff happens, I suppose, but I never heard of it.</p>
<p>American citizens are perfectly free to reject any scholarship or fellowship that comes their way. In fact, just look around at the CVs of prestigious professors around the country. Bunches of great awards are listed as (declined).</p>
<p>
Well yes, back around 1918 John Joseph Matthews seems to have declined a Rhodes. But since then?</p>
<p>dobby, surely you can do better than this quote? we’re not talking about “bunches of great awards”. We’re talking about the Marshall, which we agree folks decline for the Rhodes and the Rhodes itself, which people don’t decline.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Excuse me? I’m not trying to pick a fight here so stop calling me out. Your response itself states that it may well be possible for someone to reject the Rhodes. The question is not “do people reject the Rhodes?” the question is CAN they. I see nothing on the website that says they HAVE to accept the award or else they may face serious consequences. That would probably be illegal. No institution force is going to openly force a young American citizen go to Oxford for two years if they don’t want to.</p>
<p>Thanks for the responses, guys. Newmassdad, why would people decline the Marshall for the Rhodes? Doesn’t the Marshall allow you free study at Oxford as well?</p>
<p>dobby, it is you who miss the point. The op did not ask “can” but never mind. I have better ways to waste time than arguing over such things.</p>
<p>To the OP, The Rhodes has one big limitation that the Marshall does not, and that is its limitation to Oxford study. The Marshall allows study at a long list of UK universities. BUT<</p>
<ul>
<li><p>The Rhodes living stipend (“maintenance allowance”) is higher. This year, the Marshall is paying about 700 pounds/month, but the Rhodes is about 200 higher, if my numbers are correct.</p></li>
<li><p>Oxford has a global health program that is quite popular, quite expensive, and not covered by the Marshall.</p></li>
<li><p>Everyone has heard of the Rhodes; only academics have heard of the Marshall. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>In truth, although a lot of the same folks are finalists for both, not that many Marshall winners are also selected as Rhodes winners, as they look for somewhat different things. The Marshall is thought to want more academic types, the Rhodes more well rounded leaders. Yet a Rhodes winner I know fit the Marshall profile much better than the Rhodes profile!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Here’s a scenario for declining both: you want to get started with grad school in the U.S., in which case you will be competing for things like the National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship and not wasting your time getting a second bachelors or a masters from some underfunded UK university.</p>
<p>Dobby, </p>
<p>Of course what you say is correct, EXCEPT that what you articulated is one reason why folks don’t even bother to apply to begin with. If someone already knows their best path would be to begin grad school immediately in the US, then the logical thing to do would be not bothering to apply, especially given the work that goes into an application. Many seniors focusing on science careers don’t bother to apply. Of course most of them are not competitive anyway.</p>
<p>You are also overlooking the importance of getting an institutional endorsement. Your putative NSF GF candidate would probably not get an institutional endorsement anyway.</p>
<p>dobby, have you ever applied? Have you ever even looked at the application instructions? Or is this a speculative argument on your part?</p>
<p>No I have never applied for either the Rhodes or the Marshall and I do not intend to even try simply because I see no point to me personally going to the UK and getting a degree that is worthless for what I want to do. </p>
<p>But if I if, like many, desired the kind of “prestige” associated with the Rhodes and filled out the application and managed to secure the institutional endorsement and get though all the interviews successfully simply so I could join the ranks of Bill Clinton or study at fancy Oxford, there is nothing stopping me or anyone else from rejecting the offer and walking away with a nice line for CV/resume: Rhodes Scholarship (declined).</p>
<p>/silly discussion</p>
<p>dobby,</p>
<p>yea, you do that! Pretty funny, and pretty clueless. So let me guess, your goal is i-banking?</p>