Comments on: Rhodes rolling in

By: alum

alum — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 04:45:42 +0000

RESULTS ARE OUT
http://www.rhodesscholar.org/press

CU has one — Mr R. Jisung Park

By: Alum

Alum — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 19:59:34 +0000

That’s not true. Often one university will have more than four winners, which would not be possible if it could have only four finalists. Even if universities can nominate only four of their own students (I don’t know if this is true) there must be other ways someone can get nominated.

By: OldOxonian

OldOxonian — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 01:24:37 +0000

Re “state finalist”

Ah, I didn’t know that. Actually, it’s for the better. Streamlines the process and makes it much fairer, I think, rather than being disadvantaged by the accident of your state residence. Also makes it more comparable to how the scholars are selected in the other participating countries.

Good luck Columbia finalists!

By: Fairly certain that

Fairly certain that — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:08:10 +0000

none of the Rhodes Scholar judges are reading the BWOG. So I doubt it’s all that necessary to go out of your way to champion either Finalist.

By: actually

actually — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 18:38:41 +0000

there’s no such thing as a ‘state finalist’ anymore. they got rid of that a few years ago. there’s only one final round.

not sure whether marshall or rhodes is more coveted. they are equally difficult to get, and they almost never choose the same people.

By: Confused

Confused — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 18:18:20 +0000

Thanks for the clarification. It sounds like perhaps Columbia had about 10 state finalists, and then Geoff and Michelle were the only two “finalists” who’ll be in the regional selection.

By: hey coogan

hey coogan — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:42:35 +0000

get over yourself

By: OldOxonian

OldOxonian — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 16:02:20 +0000

I was a former Rhodes finalist for Columbia. Didn’t get the scholarship, but ended up going to Oxford on another source of funding anyway. Several things to say. First, it’s great that Columbia finally got it’s damn act together. I got absolutely no support from Kathleen McDermott’s office, which was a real shame. We can easily see that from the relatively low number of Rhodes/Marshalls compared to peer institutions.
The other thing to say is that, despite the continuing mystique of the Rhodes, it is really not a very good source of funding anymore. The Rhodes Trust has lost a lot of money over the past decade or so, which is probably one reason they’ve brought in Colin Lucas (former VC of the university) to manage the funds. People should definitely still apply, but if your purpose is to really study in Europe, there are better sources of funding out there.
Finally, just about the competition: there are multiple levels. You apply through your school, then do a state interview (by invitation), and then if you succeed here, you move onto the regional interview, which is where the scholars are finally selected. You all might be mixing up “finalists” with “state finalists.” Minor difference.

By: hmm

hmm — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 14:36:12 +0000

All of a sudden, now that we have a competent dean of fellowships, we’re actually well organized and in the hunt to win stuff? Nice.

By: the dan

the dan — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 07:20:24 +0000

you don’t know what you’re talking about.

how come harvard has had more than four rhodes scholars in a single year? there’s clearly not a limit of four applicants per school.

http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2006/11.23/99-rhodes.html

By: insider

insider — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 07:17:38 +0000

then how come i personally know seven of them, and have heard of four or five more? i would name names, but most of the rhodes nominees prefer to keep a low profile. and good for them for doing so.

By: Hang on a second

Hang on a second — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 04:15:35 +0000

There are most definitely not ten, 15, or any more Rhodes finalists at Columbia. Universities are allowed to nominate up to four students. Typically, everyone who wants to apply first applies within Columbia, and then the school picks the best four. *Then* those four are put into the actual competition, along with I think about a thousand other kids. The Rhodes committee picks finalists to call for interviews and then selects 32 winners.

In short, Columbia can have a maximum of four finalists, because it is allowed to enter a maximum of four students.

By: my two cents

my two cents — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 01:42:31 +0000

i really don’t think it’s appropriate to publicize rhodes finalists. although it is truly a great honor, there are reasons why finalists aren’t named publicly.

By: coogan

coogan — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 01:06:48 +0000

Geoff is disqualified from the Rhodes by impersonating an objective third-party poster.

BTW BWOG,

I don’t understand the tag “overachievement” for this post. Sure, I haven’t studied Michelle Diamond’s domestic policy as President of CCSC nor was I impressed by her response to the hunger strikes. But for Geoff to be a finalist in this contest, sponsored by The Oppressor Himself, for his work at a school for Burmese refugees speaks not for overachievement rather utmost humanist goals.

Okay, okay. I’m just sucking up so I can be Chief of Staff when Aung is Secretary-General of the U.N.

By: GRINDER?!

GRINDER?! — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 00:27:09 +0000

Coogan Brennan is way off the mark. I heard Geoff’s teeth at night approximate Machaut.