This year
7 Rhodes Scholars are from Harvard
6 are from MIT
4 from Yale…
and
Zero from Stanford…
Is Stanford good school ?
Nah. No Rhodes scholars. Just billionaires and global leaders in every field.
actually, two Rhodes from Stanford this year.
one for the US – a coterm senior who is a friend of my DD – and a second for Israel.
But fewer than usual, true.
Stanford doesn’t have many Rhodes Scholars because it’s not actually at the level of HYP and MIT. They are pretty much only good for CS, for everything else like economics, politics, physics, natural sciences, Ivy Leagues are much, much better. Stanford is just a shiny object because Silicon Valley/tech have become popular past few years.
OMG and they (Stanford alums) smell differently when they walk through the door too. :lol:
Stanford has almost twice as many Rhodes Scholars as MIT (102 vs 52).
Stanford has the lowest admission rate with no forced acceptance early admission system, one of highest yield rate, and is consistently ranked as top 3 in the world and voted as a dream school by both parents and students. But you are right, Stanford sucks. My kid didn’t even apply to HYP after he got into Stanford Early because it was the top choice for him. And he wasn’t even a STEM major but Humanities major.
Ummm,
Stanford is top 10 in Econ, just below Harvard
Stanford is top 3 in Poli Sci, tied with Harvard
Stanford takes a dip in Physics, I’ll give you that
Stanford is top 10 in Chem, tied with Columbia
…
(not even sure why I responding to this post…)
I am no big believer in any ranking system. However, by any totally objective measure of quality, Stanford is an amazing school, and in no way is inferior to any Ivy.
The one factor by which Stanford doesn’t match HYP (yet) is in thousands of politically powerful alumni, including among those who people the ranks of the committees which decide on Rhodes scholarships. The system of privilege in which organization like the Rhodes Trust works runs wide and deep in the USA, especially in academic circles.
If somebody here doesn’t think that class, prviledge, and old boys (and girls nowadays) networks don’t affect who is selected for prestigious scholarships, they really don’t know how these systems work. Ivies are very well established among the people who determine who gets awards like the Rhodes scholarships. In general, Ivies and other “prestigious” East Coast colleges will have an advantage over relative newcomers like UChicago or Stanford. Even within the Ivies, Cornell will be at a disadvantage because it doesn’t have the hundreds of years of history as being a go-to college for the political and economically powerful families of the USA, etc.
Given two nominees of the same quality, a Harvard student will be more likely to get the Rhodes Scholarship than a graduate of another school.
I have written before - academia is prestige-ridden.
http://www.rhodesscholar.org/applying-for-the-scholarship/districts/
Best candidates in each district, not nation.
Some districts may be more competitive than others.
Both in general, and in a given year.
,I think some schools have really great advisors who know how to push the applicants through. The Harvard students can apply to the Mass panel or in their home districts. This year one of the Harvard winners is from Nebraska so applied through that districts. U of Colorado has had winners two years in a row, so that tells me someone knows how to help the students with their applications.
Stanford may have had a year when its students were all from the same district (Western/Cal) or just didn’t have that ‘it’ factor.
yeah, I think it’s more telling about how much the school pushes it maybe (?)
Anyone who says stanford isnt at the level of HYP and MIT must be really delusional. We are good across the board.