<p>"Smith has again beaten its own Fulbright record. We have a stunning 15 Fulbrights this year. To be at Smith is a truly amazing opportunity to have probably the highest chance in the country to win a Fulbright. But you have to apply! And there are other fellowships you can apply to as well. See all the winners on my website under Successes and News, although this list is not yet complete. We have more winners to add to it."</p>
<p>"According to this <a href="http://www.cies.org/us_scholars/%5B/url%5D">http://www.cies.org/us_scholars/</a> there are only about 800 'traditional' fulbrights awarded each year. From my limited experience (staying over jterm with a smith alum friend who's currently on a fulbright, and hanging out with other fulbrighters while there), most of them are grad students. So to have nearly 2% of the fulbrights this year coming from one place, which doesn't really have grad students applying (although Smith will help you apply if you're an alum, and I've been thinking about doing it after grad school), is pretty amazing. It's also cool that about 2.5% of the class of '06 will be doing a Fulbright next year!" (from Stacy)</p>
<p>It's a HUGE number. To put it in perspective, the University of Chicago, including all of its graduate students, had a a total of 14 Fulbrights. I expect, as per last year, that there were likely more Smith Fulbrights than female Fulbrights at Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, and Pomona combined. More than the female undergraduate Fulbrights from Harvard, Yale, Princeton, or Columbia - and perhaps more female Fulbrights than any of them, even INCLUDING the graduate students.</p>
<p>Now, no one can argue that Smithies going in are better "qualified" than students at any of these schools. (Most people would say they are distinctly less so.) Either way, something remarkable is happening once they get there! ;)</p>
<p>Amherst had 4 Fulbrights this year, only one woman (not doing research). Williams had 6 (its best year in awhile) including three women (don't know research status.) Wellesley had 8 (including 5 for research). Yale has 15 from what I can make out, including their graduate students; 7 are women. Wesleyan has 2 (1 woman).</p>
<p>How many people from each of those schools applied for Fulbrights? To be honest, I was under the impression that they're fairly easy to get if you apply to "non-industrialized" countries and have somewhat interesting proposals. </p>
<p>Many Fulbright recipients that I've known have been interesting people with neat research ideas, but I wouldn't classify any of them as academic superstars. I'm not knocking Smith's success, but there are many other fellowships that have much more of a wow-factor. What about Rhodes?? Marshall?? Truman??</p>
<p>And I also find it bizarre that you're insinuating that research fullbrights are more prestigious that teaching fullbrights (and you know you are... so don't bother trying to wordsmith your way out of this one) when you have repeatedly discussed the virtues of community service. I doubt that many research fullbrights have the same positive impact on society as their teaching counterparts.</p>
<p>P.S. You're almost at your 5,000th post.... Very impressive. You should I apply for a college confidential discussion forum fellowship. :-)</p>
<p>That's the whole point. They aren't academic superstars. Finding one or two academic superstars at a school is easy (I was one at at our common alma mater, and ended up with two years at Oxford as a result.) The school doesn't do a whole lot to make that happen - except accept exceptional students, thank you. ;)</p>
<p>What the Fulbrights, which reach far deeper into the student bodies, reflect is what happens once students are actually there.</p>
<p>Why do the research Fulbrights make a difference? They AREN'T more prestigious, nor more valuable. But they are notable, and for quite a specific and significant reason. Both your research abilities and your ability to carry out advanced research in your chosen country (and in your chosen language) is judged by three faculty members outside the college, and familiar with the area which you expect to pursue. In other words, what the college has equipped you with is being judged by the faculty at other, often-competing schools, and, more importantly, by graduate faculty. You won't get by simply on your brilliance - what is being judged is how well-prepared you are. </p>
<p>The students at Smith are NOT smarter than those at other schools. Statistically, it can be said they aren't as bright, though at least some of that is related to the fact that they are also statistically poorer. What the Fulbrights are an indication (and only one) of what the college did for the students once they were there.</p>
<p>(By the way, last year, almost 50% of the Smith applicants received Fulbrights - haven't seen the numbers for this year yet. Nationally, two years ago, it was one out of eight.)</p>
<p>Actually, many fullbrighters go to foreign countries equipped with virtually no knowledge of it's official or most commonly spoken language. Familiarity with the native tongue is not a requirement.</p>
<p>Again, fulbright acceptance rates can be very misleading. Some countries accept virtually all applicants, and others, most notably Anglo countries like England, Ireland, Australia, are quite difficult due to the high volume of applicants.</p>
<p>What are the acceptance rates for students applying to teaching fullbrights compared to research fullbrights (just out of curiosity).</p>
<p>"Actually, many fullbrighters go to foreign countries equipped with virtually no knowledge of it's official or most commonly spoken language. Familiarity with the native tongue is not a requirement."</p>
<p>Actually, that is a requirement that's up to the host country to decide. For example, Bolivia and many South American countries require Spanish. Finland does not require Finnish. Iceland requires Icelandic for most humanities, but English is sufficient for the sciences. </p>
<p>It's true that the acceptance rate varies among countries--it's about 3% to England, about 10% to India, between 1/3 and 1/2 for many former soviet republics...but it's not easy no matter where you apply. </p>
<p>I was a Truman finalist, and one of my friends who graduated in '05 was a finalist for the Rhodes AND the Marshall last year. I'd be glad to say more about Smith's support for applicants for those awards...Smith's been most successful in the Fulbright, but it's not the only thing the fellowships office works on.</p>
<p>and one of my friends who graduated in '05 was a finalist for the Rhodes AND the Marshall last year.]]</p>
<p>If they had been your roommate, they would have been awarded the Rhodes or Marshall. The Stacy Doll, patent pending, will do the trick next yr :)</p>
<p>Congrtulations on making it to the finals for Truman. You're just full of surprises. :)</p>
<p>Institution - Number of awards/Number of applicants</p>
<p>University of Michigan-Ann Arbor 26/100
Harvard University: 25/99
Yale University 24/99
Columbia University 23/90
University of California-Berkeley 23/75
Stanford University 19/71
University of Wisconsin-Madison 18/62
Johns Hopkins University 17/54
Brown University 16/45
Duke University 16/67</p>
<p>LACs</p>
<p>Institution - Number of awards/Number of applicants:</p>
<p>Smith College 14/31
Claremont McKenna College 9/18
Wellesley College 9/30
Hamilton College 8/22
Pitzer College 8/24
College of the Holy Cross 6/15
Grinnell College 6/12
Kenyon College 6/14
Mount Holyoke College 6/16
Pomona College 6/35</p>
<p>PS If Swarthmore had more than 4/26 awards, we probably would be reading a new listing of awards per matriculated students, similar to that most irrelevant PHD production listing that is so cherished by Interesteddad ... and a few others!</p>