<p>When colleges give statistics regarding number of National Merit Scholars, what do they mean exactly? Only those kids who have gone on to win the scholarship, or kids acknowledged at points along the way?</p>
<p>I think it is a very misleading statistic. Any finalist who got money from anywhere as a result of NMF status becomes a scholar. So at schools that do not “participate” (most of the very top schools), the NM Scholars are the recipients of the $2,500 NM scholarship, and the recipients of the corporate scholarships. At slightly “lesser” schools that give some money to NMFs (usually $500-2000/year), every NMF attending that school counts as “NM Scholar”. These schools usually end up with more “scholars” than their more selective peers that do not give merit aid.</p>
<p>The number represent the NMFs who actually enrolled at that particular school.</p>
<p>Last year, I think Northwestern said that they have the most, if I remembered correctly.</p>
<p>Yes, I believe they are counting NMFs enrolled. Doesn’t matter what type of scholarship they got (from NM, from a corporation, or from the college.)</p>
<p>My son’s school, University of Cincinnati) aims through scholarships to enroll 50 NMFs every year, and they had 45 in this year’s freshman class. (So close to 200 in all 4 years.) A far cry from years ago when they didn’t pay any particular attention to NMFs, and it has certainly upped their average ACT/SAT scores, and improved the student body!</p>
<p>At schools that give any merit aid to NMFs, all NMFs enrolled = NM Scholars. At schools that do not give merit money to NMFs only NMFs who got money from NMC or other corporations are NM scholars (others are just finalists). Northwestern gives $500-2000 to NM finalists who enroll, so all their “finalists” become “scholars”, so they have more NM Scholars than, say, Stanford, where NMFs get nothing from the school, so only the NMFs who dot NMC scholarships or corporate scholarships count as NM Scholars.</p>
<p>^^Seems nit-picky to me. It’s not like Finalists who got more money did any better on the PSAT than Finalists who chose to go to a school that gives less money. </p>
<p>I believe it is entirely correct to count the total number of NMFs enrolled and not the number of “Scholars.”</p>
<p>I agree that counting NMFs WOULD make more sense for the reasons you stated. (I also think that NMC chooses its scholars pretty randomly), but the fact is that “scholars” are the ones counted, not the finalists. If the finalists were counted instead, schools like HYPSM would not “loose” to schools like Northwestern or WUSTL (which can count all finalists as scholars).</p>
<p>I think they are really counting NMFs…not the number of NMFs that get money.</p>
<p>The top schools with the most are usually ivies and they don’t give scholarships. </p>
<p>*If the finalists were counted instead, schools like HYPSM would not “loose” to schools like Northwestern or WUSTL (which can count all finalists as scholars). *</p>
<p>I hope they wouldn’t “loose,” and I hope they wouldn’t “lose”.</p>
<p>Schools are known to say whatever makes their school look better. If they’re going strictly by the word “scholar” then they might get a bump because they award NMF scholarships. However, another school that doesn’t award money can just state that it’s the #x school with NMFs.</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/454412-national-merit-scholars-2007-schools-have-most.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/454412-national-merit-scholars-2007-schools-have-most.html</a></p>
<p>this thread starts with a pretty comprehensive list (from a few years ago, but it probably does not change much)</p>
<p>If the school says “National Merit Scholars” then that’s what they are counting – and not Finalists; otherwise, the NMSC would be jumping all over them. So always read the wording carefully, because some schools do tout their count of all National Merit Finalists, as m2ck has suggested.</p>
<p>The Ivies do indeed have many National Merit Scholars enrolled even though they don’t give out National Merit Scholarships – or any merit scholarships, for that matter. It’s because: (1) the Ivies tend to have very generous financial aid policies for those whose families qualify, so not getting a specific “scholarship” is meaningless to these students since they received need-based aid instead, (2) many National Merit Scholars come from wealthy families, so money is not even an issue for them, and (3) the “prestige” factor of the Ivies often triumphs over pure economics – i.e., many families are willing to pay more for an Ivy League education, even though it would have cost less to go to another school that did offer a significant National Merit Scholarship.</p>
<p>The explanation of post #10 doesn’t make sense. To be a NMS means getting one of their scholarships, not just being a finalist. But- the scholarship does not need to be a school sponsored one, therefore getting NM money through other sources (eg private corporations) would count, hence the higher number of NMS students at some schools. Need based financial aid and being wealthy have nothing to do with the NMS designation although they are explanations for students not choosing a school where they could be a NMS. </p>
<p>I wish colleges would report NMF status- there are some who go to public/private schools but don’t list them as their number one choice and so are not in competition for those school awarded scholarships (our reason was not needing the money- if son was attending the public U there was no reason to possibly take that money from someone who needed it). Of my college friends, a nonNMS was Phi Beta Kappa, he studied more than both of us NMS “girls” did. NMS was something that paid a bit for college and was one of those ancient HS awards.</p>
<p>I looked at the 2008 thread that nngmm mentioned. Hawkette posted that Harvard and Caltech tied with 17% NMFs. I thought that number was low. I went searching through the Caltech website, and never found any listings of the profile of entering classes with with the NMF designation. I didn’t have time to see if other colleges included that data.</p>
<p>I was also surprised to learn that out of the 14,000 NMFs, 8400 receive the $2500.</p>
<p>nngmm is entirely correct. Here’s a link to the list of 2009 NM Scholars, and the schools at which they enrolled. Note that the total number of students listed is 8,511 – not the approx. 15,000 one would expect to see if all NMFs were included. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nationalmerit.org/annual_report.pdf[/url]”>www.nationalmerit.org/annual_report.pdf</a></p>
<p>^ Listing starts on the 35th page of the report – “pg. 33”</p>
<p>Wis75, my explanation in Post #10 does indeed make sense and you seem to have understood at least part of it – that there are many NMS that choose to go to the Ivies and other private schools that do not sponsor NM scholarships. The other part of my post was in reference to Posts #3 and #4 that stated NMS = NMF enrolled, which is NOT true at all schools. </p>
<p>Keep in mind that just over half of the NM Finalists ever become NM Scholars, because there are roughly 15,000 NMF and only 8,500 NMS. And out of the 8500 NM scholarships, over 4900 are sponsored by individual colleges and they can be used only at that college. There are roughly 1250 corporate-sponsored NM scholarships (most of which are restricted to children of employees) and the remaining 2350 are those one-time $2500 payments from NMSC; the money awarded in these two categories can usually be used at ANY school. </p>
<p>There are indeed schools that “buy” NMS by sponsoring such scholarships and those schools make up over half of the total NM scholarships awarded. You can easily tell which ones those are by looking at the MNSC Annual Report. For example, at Ball State University, 12 of the 13 NMS were sponsored by the school itself (which automatically elevated those 12 NMF to NMS) and only one NMS attending Ball State won the direct award from NMSC or a corporate scholarship. On the other hand, Harvard had 266 NMS and every one of them became a NMS without Harvard doing anything, because they had a direct award or a corporate award. </p>
<p>In my opinion, far too much weight is given to NM status. All it says is how a person did on one 2-hour test taken on one particular day. I personally know at least a dozen top students – including a valedictorian – who had an “off” day and did not score high enough to make the cut for semi-finalist in their state and therefore were not eligible for any kind of NM scholarship. I also know a few “slackers” with good but not great GPAs who become NM semifinalists just because they were great test takers.</p>
<p>I understand that one test doesn’t seem like a lot for so much hoopla, but that one test reflects natural intellect and a lot of learning over the years. I have yet to know a NMF who isn’t an extremely bright child, although I have known plenty of valedictorians who were hard workers and great students, but “didn’t test well”, as they weren’t as naturally sharp as the NMFs I know. Everyone of the NMFs that I know are analytically strong and learn well on their own. They are just just different. I realize that some are lazy and will not do well in college, but that will happen with any group of kids. Now, I do know some who truly did have a best test day, and as bad as I feel for them, every competition has an end. If you are not well one day and run a bad race at regional competition, you don’t go to the state competition. It happens, it is life and it is a fact in everything we do in life.</p>
<p>In some instances, there are no NMF’s eligible for a specific corporate award and the corporate NM scholarship ends up being awarded to a higher scoring student who was not a NMSF (or in one case I know of not even commended). Would that student be considered a National Merit Scholar?</p>
<p>No the student would not be a National Merit Scholar, as that would be a “special scholarship” under NMSC’s rules:</p>
<p>
</p>