Editor’s note: This is the first in a series of posts on the value of Goldwater scholarships for undergraduates. Future posts will include profiles of honors students from many universities, all of whom earned Goldwater scholarships in 2014.
Our interest in Goldwater scholars “stems,” so to speak, from the conviction that public university honors students who win the awards affirm that their typically large institutions can nevertheless provide excellent, individualized instruction and research opportunities for undergraduates, while serving the national need for outstanding STEM graduates.
Goldwater scholars earn a $7,500 scholarship to help them complete their undergraduate education. The Goldwater award is undoubtedly the most prestigious undergraduate award. Public university students earned more than half of the 281 awards in 2014. Many Goldwater Scholars go on to earn Rhodes, Marshall, Gates Cambridge, Churchill, or Truman awards when they graduate. Those and others also compete strongly for National Science Foundation (NSF) Graduate Research fellowships to further their studies for advanced degrees.
Our view that public honors colleges and programs enjoy a significant relationship with Goldwater achievement is based on our analysis of Goldwater winners who attend one of the public universities we have reviewed, or will review in a new book to be published later this year.
A total of 90 students from these universities won Goldwater scholarships in 2014, and 71 of those students (79%) were in honors colleges or programs. What is remarkable about this is that some STEM students, especially those in engineering, might be tempted to shy away from honors programs because the basic requirements of their majors are so rigorous to begin with. But, increasingly, honors colleges and programs are emphasizing undergraduate research and mentoring that can give honors students more access to top researchers.
Notably, scholars from nineteen universities with multiple winners were all honors students: Alabama, ASU, Clemson, Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa State, LSU, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, South Carolina, U at Buffalo, and Vermont. Delaware, NC State, and Oklahoma each had two winners, with three total apiece.
With the national interest so focused on developing talent in the STEM disciplines and the “hard” social sciences (e.g., economics, behavioral sciences), we have been tracking the number of National Science Foundation Graduate Research Grants awarded to universities during the last four years.
Public university leaders in NSF grants are listed below.
NSF graduate research grants are among the most prestigious and valuable awards given to outstanding students. They also indicate the quality of faculty and facilities and the degree of attention and mentoring that may be available to high-achieving undergraduate researchers.
“Fellows share in the prestige and opportunities that become available when they are selected. Fellows benefit from a three-year annual stipend of $32,000 along with a $12,000 cost of education allowance for tuition and fees, opportunities for international research and professional development, and the freedom to conduct their own research at any accredited U.S. institution of graduate education they choose.
“NSF Fellows are anticipated to become knowledge experts who can contribute significantly to research, teaching, and innovations in science and engineering. These individuals are crucial to maintaining and advancing the nation’s technological infrastructure and national security as well as contributing to the economic well-being of society at large.”
You may know the name Allie LaForce, especially if you’re a sports fan. Current a co-host of “Lead Off,” the nightly talk show on the CBS Sports Network, LaForce, only 25, was only a very few years ago a point guard on the Ohio University basketball team.
But her basketball days at Ohio U came after she was Miss Teen USA…after she was the valedictorian of her high school class in Vermilion, Ohio… after she was a model in New York… and after she was a guest star on a soap opera.
And another big thing came along after all those accomplishments: LaForce studied broadcast journalism as a member of the highly selective Honors Tutorial College at Ohio University, an elite group of students with an average SAT score of 1380. Just another pretty face, hardly.
“LaForce graduated in 2011 from the Honors Tutorial College with a Bachelor of Science in Journalism,” according to Ohio U. “She then became a reporter and anchor for Fox 8 in Cleveland….LaForce had also worked as a sideline reporter for the NCAA Tournament and has also been the halftime host and sideline reporter for the Sun Bowl.
As a sideline reporter during a Colts-Patriot NFL game, “LaForce was reported to be ‘killing it in her pieces every time CBS shot down to the sidelines for a report’ by Fansided, an independent online sports network.”
Each year, we provide an update of Goldwater scholarships won by public university students, and 2014 was a banner year: 149 of the 283 scholarships awarded this year went to outstanding scholars from 84 public universities.
We provide this update because Goldwater scholars are all still undergraduates, and their selection is an indication of the undergraduate research opportunities at their universities.
Iowa State, Purdue, and UW Madison led all public institutions with four Goldwater scholars each. Another sixteen public universities had three scholars: Arizona State, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts Amherst, Montana State, New Hampshire, NC State, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Rutgers, South Florida, Western Kentucky, and West Virginia. Since 2008, Western Kentucky students have won 18 Goldwater scholarships.
“The Goldwater Scholars were selected on the basis of academic merit from a field of 1,166 mathematics, science, and engineering students who were nominated by the faculties of colleges and universities nationwide. One hundred seventy-two of the Scholars are men, 111 are women, and virtually all intend to obtain a Ph.D. as their degree objective. Twenty-two Scholars are mathematics majors, 191 are science and related majors, 63 are majoring in engineering, and 7 are computer science majors. Many of the Scholars have dual majors in a variety of mathematics, science, engineering, and computer disciplines.
“The one and two year scholarships will cover the cost of tuition, fees, books, and room and board up to a maximum of $7,500 per year.
“Goldwater Scholars have very impressive academic qualifications that have garnered the attention of prestigious post-graduate fellowship programs. Recent Goldwater Scholars have been awarded 80 Rhodes Scholarships, 117 Marshall Awards, 112 Churchill Scholarships, and numerous other distinguished fellowships such as the National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowships.”
The 2014 Bloomberg Business Week Top Undergrad Programs list is out, and 21 of the top 50 business schools are at public universities. For the second year in a row, Notre Dame was number 1 and UVA was number 2.
Student and recruiter surveys have a major impact on the Bloomberg rankings, while the U.S. News rankings of undergrad business schools depend heavily on feedback from deans. The Bloomberg rankings can vary significantly year to year, primarily because of the responses of employers and recruiters. About 250 employers responded this year, and about 28,000 students participated, a response rate of about 33 percent.
Bloomberg considers SAT scores, student/faculty ratio, class size, internships, and hours spent on classwork to determine the academic quality of a program.
The Bloomberg rankings include test scores and, more importantly to many, median starting salaries, teaching “grade,” and placement rates. All of the top 12 programs listed below have A+ placement rates except Washington U St. Louis (A). Miami OH, Penn State, Ohio State, Georgia Tech, Michigan State, Minnesota, and Georgia also have A+ placement rates.
All of the public programs in the top 50 have median starting salaries of $50k or more, with UVA’s McIntire School of Commerce leading the way with $70,000 (tied with Penn’s Wharton School).
The latest Lumosity ranking of the smartest universities is based on more than 70,000 student results on a battery of tests designed to measure cognitive ability in the following areas: attention, flexibility, memory, problem solving, and speed. Students from more than 450 institutions participated.
Attention and memory scores correlate to a lesser extent than the other areas to SAT performance, but the other area scores correlate more closely with the crystallized math and verbal knowledge measured by the SAT. Universities had to have at least 50 student participants to qualify for consideration; therefore, small schools such as Caltech were not included. All of the top 14 schools were highly selective private institutions. The rankings vary considerably from the previous year’s rankings.
The top ten schools were Washington U; MIT; Princeton; Northwestern; Carnegie Mellon; Chicago; Rice; Harvard; Yale; and Dartmouth. The rankings include liberal arts colleges (Oberlin, Wheaton, Colgate, etc.)
Below are the 25 public universities whose students had the best overall performance on the cognitive tests, in rank order, with the overall ranking in parentheses.
We have noticed that many students apply to prominent public universities and then, almost as an afterthought, begin to wonder if the honors program at University A makes that school a better choice than regular admission to the higher-ranked University B.
A far better way to look at honors is to evaluate programs in some depth at the earliest stages of the college application process. Otherwise, students realize too late that the honors application or scholarship deadlines have already passed, or find themselves searching for anecdotal evidence with little time to spare.
Honors colleges and programs differ greatly in size, quality, curricula, housing, overall philosophy, and financial aid opportunities. Working through the maze of differences can be a daunting prospect, especially when time is an issue. When it comes to honors programs, many of the most important questions can be answered only by consideration of those all-important “details.” Below are twenty steps that should be very useful in helping you make the best decision regardless of whether you want a public or private university honors program:
1. Match basic admission requirements with your test scores, GPA, and essays.
2. Request actual average admission statistics. These may vary greatly from basic (minimum) requirements. In general, honors students will have average test scores 6-10% higher than the 25th percentile of accepted students for the university as a whole. The 25th percentile scores are available from U.S. News and other sources. If there is a wide gap between the basic and average stats, and your stats are much closer to the basic stats, then you can probably find a better option. That said, if the admissions requirements are more holistic and less stats-driven, you may be fine.
3. Determine the size of the honors program (mean size in major public universities is ~1,700, but programs may be as small as 140 or as large as 6,000).
4. Ask the fish-to-pond question: Are honors students big fish in a small pond or is the pond full of sizable fish? The more selective the university as a whole, the bigger all the fish. Some parents and prospective students might prefer an honors program that stands apart on campus, while others might like a program that is more expansive. Perhaps if you are not sold on the overall quality of the university, you might choose the former; if you think the university as a whole has a strong student body or you simply prefer a non-elitist atmosphere, then you might like the latter.
5. Assess the quality of the city, surrounding area, and climate.
6. Determine the curriculum requirements as a percentage of graduation requirements. Generally, the number of honors hours should be at least 25% of the total required for graduation.
7. Determine the number of honors sections per semester/quarter.
8. Evaluate the reputation of university in preferred or likely areas of study.
9. Ask whether there are special research opportunities for undergrads and if an honors thesis is required.
10. Ask about staff size, the number of advisers, and availability to students, as well as special freshmen orientation programs.
If the above check out, then:
1. Ask about the number of honors sections, by discipline, per semester or quarter and try to verify; determine the average enrollment in honors seminars and sections. The average class size can vary greatly among honors programs, from fewer than 10 students per class to more than 35. Most seminars and all-honors sections should have around 25 students or fewer, although in almost every case you will find that there are a few large classes, notably in first-year sciences and economics. Some honors programs have few or no honors courses in certain disciplines.
2. Ask about the types of honors sections: all-honors seminars; all-honors sections offered by honors or a department; “mixed” sections of honors and non-honors students; and the percentage of honors contract/option/conversion courses per average student at time of graduation.
Mixed sections may be small or, more often, large sections that can have more than 100 total students in 3-4 credit hour courses. Of these students, maybe 10-20 could be honors students, who then meet for one hour a week (rarely, two hours a week) in separate “discussion” or “recitation” sections. These sections can be led by tenured professors but are typically led by adjunct faculty or graduate students. Ask how many sections are mixed, and of these, ask how many of the main section classes are large.
Contract courses are regular–and often larger–sections with both honors and non-honors students, mostly the latter, in which honors students do extra work or have their own discussion sections. While most programs have some contract courses, they are generally more prevalent in large honors colleges and programs. There are advantages and disadvantages associated with contract courses. They can speed graduation, offer more flexibility, expand the influence of honors in the university as a whole, and foster contacts with mentoring faculty. But their quality and size may vary greatly.
3. Ask about tuition discounts, scholarships, continuing financial aid, including special recruitment of national merit scholars.
4. Determine if there is priority registration for honors students and, if so, type of priority registration.
5. Research the types of special honors housing for freshmen and upperclassmen, if any, including basic floor plans, on-site laundry, suite or corridor-style rooms, air-conditioning, location of nearest dining hall, proximity of major classroom buildings (especially in preferred disciplines), and availability of shuttles and other transportation on campus. If there is no special honors housing, it is often a sign that the honors program does not want to foster the big fish in a small pond atmosphere. The absence of priority registration may be an additional sign.
6. Research the study-abroad opportunities; some universities have a separate division for study-abroad programs.
7. Ask about the presence and involvement of advisers for prestigious scholarships, such as Goldwater, Rhodes, Marshall, Truman, etc., and program success in achieving these awards.
8. Ask about additional fees for participation in honors and ask about the percentage of honors “completers.” These are honors students who actually complete all of the honors requirements and graduate with some form of honors. There are many programs that have completion rates as low as 25% and a few with completion rates higher than 80%. (This is different from the graduation rate, which, for freshmen honors entrants, is anywhere from 79%–99% after six years.)
9. Now, try to assess the quality of the honors program versus quality of university as a whole.
10. VISIT the college if you have not done so and try to question current honors students. Some of the information mentioned above can only come from a personal visit or be learned after a student has been accepted.
Editor’s note: The following post, written by Melissa Dittrich, appeared in The California Aggie on March 6, 2014.
The two bodies of the UC Davis University Honors Program (UHP) on campus have developed a plan to become one program in Fall Quarter 2014. The Davis Honors Challenge (DHC) and the Integrated Studies Honors Program (ISHP) will combine into one singular UHP.
Current students enrolled in UHP will have the option to remain in their respective program, but students admitted this fall will be accepted into the new UHP.
Ari Kelman, the University Honors Program Director, said that after becoming the director, he checked in with students and faculty of both DHC and ISHP to evaluate the status of the programs. Although both were running fairly effectively, Kelman said that those involved with the programs were concerned about the UHP being divided.
“Having two distinct honors programs includes a lot of inter-program rivalry,” Kelman said. “DHC students thought students in ISHP are getting more opportunities, and students in ISHP thought the DHC students had more flexibility.”
According to Kelman, students who were recruited into one honors program would question why they were not in the other, and he said the combination of the two programs will reduce confusion and create more interaction between all UHP students.
Janet Sandoval-Reynoso, a first year international relations and linguistics double major and DHC student, said students in their respective programs feel somewhat isolated from others in the program.
“We haven’t really had contact with the other students,” Sandoval-Reynoso said. “Anything that keeps students connected is a good idea.”
According to Gideon Cohn-Postar, a DHC Research Analyst and previous DHC student, students in each program had different access to academic opportunities. He said this issue was due to honors students from different programs not being able to take the same seminars.
“Great students aren’t interacting with each other,” Cohn-Postar said. “We want to make sure students have access to all faculty members.”
Another difference between the two programs is the admittance procedures. Students can join ISHP solely by invitation, while any freshman, second-year or transfer student who earns and maintains a 3.25 GPA can apply to DHC. With the new UHP, any first-year, second-year or transfer student can apply, and the same amount of incoming students will be admitted to the program as were let into both programs previously.
The curriculum for the honors program will also be changed. Kelman said that many students struggle with taking honors seminars because these classes do not count for general education (GE) credits and can be used to fulfill requirements for students’ majors.
“It was really challenging for students to be told that time they could normally be using for required classes had to be used for Honors requirements,” Kelman said. “Students would suggest to faculty members that the classes shouldn’t be as challenging for this reason.”
The new plan involves classes that will count towards honors students’ GE or major requirements, which will allow the classes to be challenging and also contribute to UHP students’ degrees. By the end of their second year, students are expected to complete a total of 26 units in required honors courses. By the end of their third year, students will complete a community service project that can include helping out a cause they believe in or become a peer advisor or tutor. By the end of their fourth year, students will have completed a Capstone project that can be lab research, an honors thesis or a community service project.
Kalvin Zee, a second-year neurobiology, physiology and behavior major and DHC student, said that the change in courses is a good idea.
“Right now, the classes are skewed towards hard sciences, which makes it difficult for students who want to take classes in the softer sciences,” Zee said.
The plan still needs approval from the academic senate, which is currently reviewing it. If approved, the plan will go into effect this fall, and incoming freshman will be accepted into the University Honors Program, rather than the DHC or ISHP specifically.
Editor’s Note: The story below is from the University of Missouri news service.
At the age of 18, Shakked Halperin spent a year volunteering with Ethiopian children teaching high school math, English, percussion and art. Through that experience he developed a focus on improving the lives of others. Next fall, he will take that focus to the University of Cambridge after being named a recipient of the prestigious Gates Cambridge Scholarship.
Halperin, who graduated from the University of Missouri in December with a degree in biological engineering, is one of 40 recipients of the Gates Cambridge Scholarship. He will pursue a Masters of Philosophy in Biological Sciences.It was during his time volunteering with the Ethiopian children that Halperin realized he wanted to make a difference. He began a pursuit for safe global water supplies while working on the reconstruction of a failing wastewater treatment system in Honduras. There, he led a group of engineering students through the assessment, design and implementation of the reconstruction of the failed treatment plant.
He has already planned a project with a professor in Cambridge’s department of pathology that will expose him to all aspects of developing an application of synthetic biology, including theoretical idea conception, wet lab work, field testing, regulatory compliance and implementation.
“The project is in perfect alignment with my pursuit to secure global water supplies,” Halperin says. “I hope to create a sensor using synthetic biology that can mitigate arsenic poisoning by identifying safe drinking water supplies in developing countries.”
His undergraduate research work at MU included a supervised independent study program and participating in the Honors Undergraduate Research Program.
“Researching biological engineering as an undergraduate gave me an appreciation for the mechanisms that sustained living systems for billions of years at a level of complexity unparalleled by human innovation,” Halperin says.
He spent the summer of 2012 at the University of California-Berkeley where he conducted research through a National Science Foundation Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) and last summer he participated in a research project through an REU at Tsinghua University in Beijing, China.
“Every so often, we are fortunate to meet exceptional students who perform beyond our expectations and Shakked is one such student,” says Shelia Grant, a professor of biological engineering who was Halperin’s faculty mentor at MU. “As an undergraduate student, Shakked independently performed graduate-level research. He was not hesitant about trying new experiments or learning new techniques.”
Halperin applied for the Gates Cambridge Scholarship because of its unique focus on building a community of future leaders committed to improving lives of others.
“The opportunity of this scholarship lies in the gathering of so many other passionate young leaders and so the responsibility that it brings is to use that opportunity to its full potential – that means forming bonds, discussions and collaborations with others in the community,” he says.
The Gates Cambridge Scholarship is one of the world’s most celebrated honors for post-baccalaureate study. The highly-competitive scholarships are full-cost awards given to applicants outside the United Kingdom to pursue a full-time postgraduate degree in any subject available at the University of Cambridge.
This marks the second-consecutive year that a Mizzou alumnus has been awarded the Gates Cambridge Scholarship. Lindsey Murray, BS’ 03, began her studies at Cambridge in the fall after earning the scholarship last year.
The National Academy of Engineering has announced the election of 67 new members, and public university engineering professors and researchers account for 27 of the new members; another 28 come from private industry, one from the U.S. Air Force, and 11 from private universities.
Michigan, UC Berkeley, UCLA, UT Austin, and UW Madison all had multiple inductees.
In addition, there are 11 associate members from foreign universities and private industry.
“Election to membership is one of the highest professional honors accorded an engineer,” according to the NAE. “Members have distinguished themselves in business and academic management, in technical positions, as university faculty, and as leaders in government and private engineering organizations. ”
The NAE operates under the same congressional act of incorporation that established the National Academy of Sciences, signed in 1863 by President Lincoln.
Below are the new members, with those from public universities in bold:
Abbott, Nicholas University of Wisconsin-Madison
Allcock, R. Harry Pennsylvania State University
Allebach, P. Jan Purdue University
Arvizu, E. Daniel National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Atkins, E. Daniel University of Michigan
Baker, Karl James Carnegie Mellon University
Balser, Martin Northrop Grumman Information Systems
Banks, Katherine Margaret Texas A&M University-College Station
Barrett, H. Harrison University of Arizona
Bernstein, Howard Seventh Sense Biosystems, Inc.
Bethell, J. Peter Arch Coal, Inc.
Bimberg, Dieter Technical University of Berlin
Board, P. Mark Hecla Mining Company
Boroyevich, Dushan VA Polytechnic Institute and State University
Boston, Terry PJM Interconnection, LLC
Boulos, F. Paul Innovyze
Boyd, P. Stephen Stanford University
Braun, D. Robert Georgia Institute of Technology
Briskman, D. Robert Sirius XM Radio
Carbonell, G. Ruben North Carolina State University
Chan, F. Tony The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
Ciminelli, Sampaio Teixeira Virginia Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
Cramb, William Alan Illinois Institute of Technology
Daganzo, F. Carlos University of California, Berkeley
Davari, Bijan IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
Dietrich, L. Brenda IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
Eden, Gary James University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Edgar, Flynn Thomas The University of Texas
Elghobashi, E. Said University of California, Irvine
Ershaghi, Iraj University of Southern California
Fagin, Ronald IBM Almaden Research Center
Fenves, Gregory The University of Texas
Ferrara, Whittaker Katherine University of California, Davis
Fleck, Andrew Norman University of Cambridge
Flytzani-Stephanopoulos, Maria Tufts University
Gany, Alon Technion-Israel Institute of Technology
Halas, J. Naomi Rice University
Harel, David Weizmann Institute of Science
Hedrick, Lupton James IBM Almaden Research Center
Hedrick, Karl J. University of California, Berkeley
Hopp, J. Wallace University of Michigan
Joshi, Janardan Chanrashekhar University of California, Los Angeles
Jouppi, P. Norman Google, Inc.
Joyce, L. David General Electric Aviation
Kish, A. Frederick Infinera Corportation
Knatz, Geraldine Port of Los Angeles, California
Krieger, B. Roger General Motors Research and Development Center
Luby, George Michael Qualcomm Incorporated
Mehlhorn, Kurt Max Planck Institute for Informatics
Michel, Keith R. Webb Institute of Naval Architecture
Mistretta, A. Charles University of Wisconsin-Madison
Moehle, P. Jack University of California, Berkeley
Mohan, Ned University of Minnesota
Mullen, G. Michael MGM Consulting
Novosel, Damir Quanta Technology, LLC
Patt, N. Yale The University of Texas
Pawlikowski, Marie Ellen U.S. Air Force
Pentland, Alex Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Pharr, M. George The University of Tennessee
Philip, E. Craig Ingram Barge Company
Poulos, George Harry Coffey Geotechnics Pty Ltd
Ramsey, Michael John University of North Carolina
Rexford, Jennifer Princeton University
Riley, J. James University of Washington
Romankiw, T. Lubomyr IBM Thomas J. Watson Research Center
Samarasekera, Vasanti Indira University of Alberta
Schapire, Elias Robert Princeton University
Schutz, E. Bob The University of Texas
Shoham, Moshe Technion-Israel Institute of Technology
Soled, L. Stuart ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company
Spencer, Bruce David wTe Corporation
Stafford, Patten Thomas Stafford, Burke, and Hecker
Stedinger, Russell Jery Cornell University
Tzeghai, E. Ghebre Procter and Gamble Company
Waitz, A. Ian Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Willson, N. Alan University of California, Los Angeles
Zhang, Xingdong Sichuan University
Zones, I. Stacey Chevron Energy Technology Company
