Editor’s Note: This post by KU staff has been lightly edited.
The first University of Kansas Global Scholars cohort presented their research at the Global Scholars Symposium on April 20. The daylong symposium, coordinated by the Office of International Programs, showcased the seniors’ research on topics ranging from developmental disabilities in Kansas and Peru to herbal remedies in 20th century Slavic folklore.
The 12 students served on panels including a final roundtable panel with the entire group discussing their Global Scholars experiences.
“This symposium is a perfect example of the scholarly enterprise that Global Scholars was organized around. The scholars represent the first cohort, whose interests are as innovative as they are creative and intellectually stimulating. This is a perfect way to showcase and share the undergraduates’ talents and promote KU’s mission as an international research university,” said Brent Steele, director for faculty programs.
Global Scholars recognizes and encourages undergraduate students who have an interest in global studies and a strong academic record. The students come from a wide range of disciplines across the university. They were selected for their demonstrated interest in global and international studies, plans for studying abroad, and potential for continued high academic achievement and leadership. Each student participated in a three-hour seminar taught during the spring semester and was paired with a faculty mentor with similar interests during their undergraduate studies. Three cohorts are currently participating in the program.
The Global Scholar presenters:
Alexandra Chase, Wichita, senior in psychology and international studies
Joshua Dean, Overland Park, senior in economics
Katie Fankhauser, Topeka, senior in environmental studies
Ryan House, Salina, senior in biology
Sarah McCabe, Berryton, senior in journalism
Jeff Miller, Lawrence, senior in anthropology
Shenji Pan, Jiangsu, China, senior in mathematics and economics
Jay Patel, Ottawa, senior in psychology
Taylor Patterson, Manhattan, senior in ecology and evolutionary biology
Amy Sinclair, Wichita, senior in microbiology
Sarah Stern, Lawrence, senior in journalism and Latin American studies
Matthew Werner, Wichita, senior in electrical engineering and computer science.
The following excerpt of a story by Rachel Severin of UM:
Natasha Luppov (B.A. with Honors, U-M, 2008), former Captain of the Michigan Varsity Cross Country team, has plenty of experience thinking strategically. Natasha currently manages Commercial Operations strategy for Levi Strauss & Company in San Francisco, guiding decisions to drive profitable growth. “I’ve been fortunate for the opportunity to work in strategy for a variety of inspiring companies,” says Natasha.
She began her career as a Business Analyst with McKinsey, working with Fortune 100 clients, as well as the Department of Education, on issues ranging from growth and innovation strategies to operational excellence. Despite an enriching two years with McKinsey, Natasha moved on to work in strategy for Nike. “Essentially, this was my dream job after competing for the Varsity Cross Country & Track teams in Nike products during my four years at Michigan,” says Natasha.
“The Nike experience was nothing short of amazing, complete with the opportunity to lead a variety of strategic initiatives including work for the London Olympics, the Global Running business, and Nike’s new NFL partnership.” It was a difficult decision to leave Nike, but Natasha followed a life-long desire to live in San Francisco, and is delighted to be a member of the Levi’s team.
Natasha credits the LSA Honors Program with providing a collaborative environment where she could challenge her own beliefs. “The LSA Honors experience created an instant small-knit community at Michigan, fostered by inspiring and supportive professors, and a diverse group of talented students. I still remember how humbling it was every single day to be surrounded by classmates who were so smart and accomplished,” recalls Natasha.
At the University of Michigan, Natasha pursued a range of interests, with a double major in Political Science & Russian Language and Literature, and a minor in Art History. In addition to being Captain and 4-year letter winner on the Cross Country and Track & Field teams, Natasha served as the NCAA student representative for the Student-Athlete Advisory Council, an editor for the Michigan Journal of Political Science (recognized by UNESCO as one of fifty top political science journals worldwide).
Natasha was appointed Associate Chief Justice for the Central Student Judiciary – University of Michigan’s highest student court, adjudicating all manner of disputes that arise among members of the approximately 1,000 recognized student groups.
In five years, Natasha hopes to be running her own business. “I’m constantly flirting with the idea of pursuing my entrepreneurial goals,” she adds. A lover of travel, she hopes to continue exploring different cultures and surroundings (up next: Brazil!). Still an avid competitive runner, Natasha’s current training goal is to qualify for the 2016 Marathon Olympic Trials.
A proud Wolverine and Ann Arbor native, Natasha encourages Honors students to explore the world beyond the classroom during their time at Michigan. “Ann Arbor is an incredible city that offers so many different opportunities, and ones that you’ll remember forever. Attend world-renowned concerts at Hill Auditorium, cheer on the countless number of nationally-ranked athletic teams, visit the many inspiring museums, go for a run in the Arboretum, you can never eat too many sandwiches at Zingerman’s, and don’t forget to frequent The Brown Jug!”
Beginning in the fall of 2013, an overhaul to the requirements for students in the College of Engineering honors program will be enacted.
Current prerequisites will remain the same to gain admission into the program, but requirements for graduation will change to provide a more diverse experience for students.
University-wide honors requirements of maintaining a 3.5 GPA and completing an honors research project will remain in place.
“What’s really new, and what hopefully will be more appealing to students is that we ask that students in the program illustrate excellence in three categories,” said Amy Kaleita-Forbes, chairwoman of the engineering honors committee and associate professor in agriculture and biosystems engineering.
The three categories include breadth, depth, and community and professional development.
“Breadth means we want them to take some other courses outside of engineering; depth involves really digging into your chosen area of study. Community and professional development can include outreach programs or working on non-technical skills to develop yourself as a professional,” Kaleita-Forbes said.
Within each category, a student is required to either achieve one intense expression, or two moderate expressions.
An example of an intense expression could be the addition of a second minor or major in a science or engineering field.
A moderate expression includes working as a supplemental instruction tutor.
The new system will replace the current points-based system, one that Kaleita-Forbes described as confusing, and limiting students’ ability to branch out without sacrificing honors credits.
“When we talked to alums, a lot of what we heard was they would say they studied abroad and that was amazing, or they took a 400-level psychology class and it was fascinating. The old system didn’t prevent you from doing any of this stuff, it just didn’t credit you for doing it,” Kaleita-Forbes said.
Under the new system, a student can now progress in meeting their requirements by participating in study-abroad opportunities or becoming a learning community peer mentor, among other options.
“What we would like is for the plan of study requirements to credit them and value all the things they already want to be doing,” Kaleita-Forbes said.
While making the changes, which will be officially set this summer, the College of Engineering honors committee reached out to past and current students.
“We talked to students, we talked to alums, we looked at requirements at other universities’ honors programs and decided to rework the requirements to hopefully be more aligned with the things that students are already doing that make them so excellent,” Kaleita-Forbes said.
Some engineering honors students find the current requirements to be confusing and overly rigorous as well.
“The current engineering honors requirements to me do seem more challenging, especially compared to other majors,” said Sam Eastman, freshman in mechanical engineering.
After reviewing the proposed revisions, sent to current honors students earlier this spring, the new requirements “seem doable,” Eastman said.
Students who favored the current points system have the ability to complete their honors degree using the system, but must have their plans of study approved by semester’s end.
Most who have begun under the current system will be accommodated so as not to be at a disadvantage.
“I don’t know that there are a whole lot of students for whom this is definitely harder to accomplish. In fact, I’ve seen numerous students who are clearly meeting these requirements who would’ve really been challenged to squeeze in everything under the old system,” Kaleita-Forbes said.
Students interested in joining the program or who want to receive more information are urged to contact their adviser or their department’s honors adviser, as the website is currently under revision to reflect the new changes and will be fully reflective of the new requirements by this summer.
Editor’s note: This list is now updated effective June 28, 2017,to include data for 2016 compared to 2015. This is the most recent data available.
Below we list enrolled merit scholars, by university, for both years so that readers can gauge any trends in university support for the scholarships. Please know that “sponsorship” by a university of one or more National Merit Scholarships often means that the actual funding is $2,000 or less, although there remain a few universities that tie very generous awards to National Merit Finalist status.
Nowadays, winners of merit scholarships whose families fall into that broad range of being moderately well off but not comfortably well to do need to know which universities still place a premium on National Merit Scholars. The universities that continue to recruit NM scholars typically do so because (1) they want to compete with the Ivies for the best students and/or (2) they want to raise the profile of their undergrads so that national rankings will show a higher degree of selectivity.
Most of the highly-ranked private universities that continue their relationship with the National Merit Scholarship Corporation fall into category (1) above. Foremost among these in 2016 are the University of Chicago with 277 merit scholars (185 of them with university sponsorship); USC with 230 merit scholars (189 with USC support);Vanderbilt with 220 scholars (166 with university support); and Northwestern with 168 scholars (125 with school support).
It is noteworthy that some of the above private elites have reduced the total number of NMS scholars enrolled and the number of scholars receiving university sponsorship. Indeed, Washington University in St. Louis had 212 merit scholars enrolled in 2014, 159 with university sponsorship. In 2016, this number fell to 33 scholars enrolled, none with university sponsorship.
This is also a trend for most, but not all, public universities listed below.Of the 23 public universities listed, only 8 have increased their sponsorship of national merit scholars year over year. One can sense a university’s receptiveness and willingness to buck the trend against awarding merit scholarships by view the year over year list below.
A longer list of public universities appears below.
The excellent private universities still awarding merit aid are willing to take the heat for sponsoring non- need-based students based on merit alone at a time when the inequities of scholarship funding have led to a greater emphasis on allocating funds mostly or entirely on a need-based scale.
Again, for many families, that trend is a good one; but for families with incomes in the mid six figures, for example, the ability to qualify for need-based aid may be negligible while the pinch on the family budget is still significant.
Many public elites have joined the Ivies in not providing their own funds to match or pay entirely for merit scholarships. Among these schools are all the UC campuses, Virginia, Michigan, UT Austin, Washington, and more recently North Carolina, Ohio State, Illinois, and Georgia Tech. At these universities, merit scholars may still receive non-need-based assistance, but it will not be in the form of university-sponsored merit funds. These and other universities may also have some scholarships for valedictorians and other highly qualified scholars.
Of these leading public universities that do not sponsor merit scholars, UC Berkeley had the most enrolled merit scholars, 161, followed by UT Austin with 74. Among private universities, Harvard enrolled 233 merit scholars, Stanford 179, MIT 154, Yale 147, and Princeton 117.
The University of Wisconsin only sponsored 5 merit scholars in 2016, out of 17 enrolled at the university.
The University of Oklahoma returned in 2016 to the number 1 position in enrollment of national merit scholars among all universities public or private (279) and the number receiving university sponsorship (236).
Below is a list of public universities that still match or fund National Merit Scholars, regardless of need, and that had 25 or more university-sponsored merit scholars in 2016. We will list the university, followed by the total number of merit scholars in the 2015 report, followed again by the number of those scholars that also received school support based on the merit scholarship. Then we do the same for merit scholars in the same universities in 2016.
As a general rule, the higher the number of school-supported merit scholars, the greater the recruitment is for merit scholars. Colleges with a year over year increase in sponsored scholarships are in bold. All colleges are listed in order of their total merit scholar enrollment in 2016. A total of 16 of the 23 universities are in the South or Southwest.
Oklahoma (2015): 288 total, 240 with university sponsorship, (2016): 279 total, 236 with university sponsorship (still most in the nation).
Alabama (2015): 148 total, 120 with university sponsorship; (2016): 155 total, 135 with university sponsorship.
Florida (2015): 146 total, 113 with university sponsorship; (2016): 158 total, 119 with university sponsorship.
Minnesota (2015): 147 total, 115 with university sponsorship; (2016): 150 total, 113 with university sponsorship.
Purdue (2015): 94 total, 68 with university sponsorship; (2016): 125 total, 98 with university sponsorship.
Texas A&M (2015): 142 total, and 120 with university sponsorship; (2016): 122 total, 90 with university sponsorship.
UT Dallas (2015): 101 total, 78 with university sponsorship; (2016): 119 total, 94 with university sponsorship.
Arizona State (2015): 112 total, 94 with university sponsorship; (2016): 109 total, and 89 with university sponsorship.
Kentucky (2015): 111 total, 93 with university sponsorship; (2016): 99 total, 88 with university sponsorship.
Univ of Central Florida (2015): 69 total, 59 with university sponsorship; (2016): 77 total, 68 with university sponsorship.
Auburn (2015): 64 total, 51 with university sponsorship; (2016): 60 total, 52 with university sponsorship.
Maryland (2015): 61 total, 48 with university sponsorship; (2016): 52 total, 42 with university sponsorship.
Indiana (2015): 68 total, 50 with university sponsorship; (2016): 52 total, 38 with university sponsorship.
Cincinnati (2015): 44 total, 38 with university sponsorship; (2016): 50 total, 36 with university sponsorship.
Arkansas (2015): 37 total, 31 with university sponsorship; 2016: 45 total, 38 with university sponsorship.
Arizona (2015): 65 total, 57 with university sponsorship; (2016): 43 total, 37 with university sponsorship.
Clemson (2015): 55 total, 41 with university sponsorship; (2016): 43 total, 36 with university sponsorship.
Ole Miss (2015): 40 total, 34 with university sponsorship; (2016): 43 total, 30 with university sponsorship.
Georgia (2015): 42 total, 28 with university sponsorship; (2016): 39 total, 31 with university sponsorship.
Mississippi St (2015): 37 total, 33 with university sponsorship; (2016): 37 total, 29 with university sponsorship.
Nebraska (2015): 47 total, 41 with university sponsorship; (2016): 36 total, 31 with university sponsorship.
South Carolina (2015): 46 total, 33 with university sponsorship; (2016): 36 total, 31 with university sponsorship.
Michigan State (2015): 43 total, 36 with university sponsorship; (2016): 34 total, 30 with university sponsorship.
This year’s Truman Scholars have been announced, and LSU leads all public universities with two Truman awards in 2013. Only 62 awards were granted this year, out of more than 629 applicants, so winning even one award is a high achievement.
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill leads all public universities in the total number of Truman Scholarships. The University of Texas at Austin is next. Students from each of these institutions won a Truman scholarships in 2013.
The scholarship provides up to $30,000 to students pursuing graduate degrees, as well as leadership training, career and graduate school counseling, special internship opportunities and priority admission at many graduate institutions.
Well-known winners of the award include ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, Jeffrey Toobin of CNN and the New Yorker, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, and The New Republic senior editor Noam Scheiber.
Iowa, Maryland, Montana, Rutgers, and Vermont have each had a Truman scholar in both 2012 and 2013. The University of Washington had two Truman scholars in 2012.
Other public universities with Truman scholarship winners in 2013 are as follows: Auburn, Arkansas, Delaware, New College of Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Louisville, Southern Mississippi, Montana, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Angelo State, UC Berkeley, and Utah State.
Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, and Minnesota also have an especially notable history of winning Truman awards.
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 three years.
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 $30,000 along with a $10,500 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.”
From our review, definite university leaders have emerged among both public and private institutions, foremost among them the University of California Berkeley, the overall leader by a large margin in the number of NSF grants during the past three years among all universities in the nation. Other public university leaders are UT Austin, Washington, Michigan, Georgia Tech, and Wisconsin.
Below is a listing of all universities, public and private, with at least 40 NSF research grant winners the past three years:
Each year we recognize public universities that have the most winners of the two most prestigious undergraduate awards: Goldwater and Udall Scholarships. The former is valued at $7,500 and goes to STEM students in their sophomore and junior years, and the later, valued at $5,000, is primarily for undergrad environmental research.
We consider the awards to be especially noteworthy because they are indicators of undergraduate research opportunities and mentoring, so important for postgraduate awards and careers.
In 2013, the University of Arizona, Montana State University, and the University of Minnesota each had five students who won either Goldwater or Udall awards.
North Carolina State, Pitt, and Wisconsin each had four students who earned one of the awards. North Carolina State has been especially strong in this area for two years running.
Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Oregon State, South Carolina, UT Austin, and Washington State all had students who earned three prestigious awards. Georgia, like North Carolina State, is building a strong record of achievement in this area.
The year 2013 yielded a smaller list of Udall Scholars than in the past, only 50 nationwide, versus 80 awarded in previous years. The University of New Mexico led all universities, public and private, by winning three scholarships this year.
Udall scholarships valued at up to $5,000 are awarded to sophomore and junior level college students committed to careers related to the environment, tribal public policy, or Native American health care. Many of the awards are for environmental research.
The universities of Arizona, California Berkeley, Georgia, and Minnesota each had two student Udall winners in 2013.
During the past two years, the University of Arizona and the University of Georgia have seen five students earn Udall awards, leading all public universities.
Below is a list of public universities with two or more total Udall winners in the last two years:
The most prestigious undergraduate scholarship is awarded annually by the Barry M. Goldwater Foundation to outstanding students majoring in mathematics, science, engineering, or computer science, and this year eight of the major universities we follow on this site won three awards each.
Public universities with three Goldwater scholars for 2013 are Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina State, Oregon State, Pitt, UT Austin, Washington State, and Wisconsin. The leader among all public universities is Montana State University, with the maximum number of scholarships allowed–four. North Carolina State is the overall leader the past two years, with a total of seven Goldwater scholars.
The Goldwater awards are important indicators of the value of undergraduate research and the attention young scholars receive. Out of 271 of the $7,500 scholarships awarded in 2013, a total of 159 went to science majors; 71 to engineering majors; 27 to math majors; and 14 to computer science majors.
Goldwater scholars are also highly represented among winners of graduate awards such as Rhodes, Marshall, and Churchill scholarships. In recent years, 80 Goldwater winners have also won Rhodes scholarships; 118 have earned Marshall scholarships; and an extremely high number of 110 Goldwater scholars have gone on to win Churchill scholarships.
Below is a list of the universities we follow that have at least four Goldwater awards in the last two years.
The annual Bloomberg Business Week Best Undergraduate Business Schools report is out, and the business schools at the universities of Virginia, Michigan, Texas, and North Carolina are all in the top ten, based on student satisfaction, employer opinion, placement rates, and salary.
Bloomberg/Business Week survey 145 schools and 519 leading employers, along with 85,000 graduating seniors. The response rates exceeded 32 percent in all categories.
The metrics also included the percentage of graduates pursuing MBA degrees, SAT scores, and class size.
The public university business schools ranked in the top 50 are listed below, with their national ranking among all schools public and private preceding the name of the university:
