twinkletoes16 wrote:Lavitz wrote:twinkletoes16 wrote:How many Hamiltons and Butlers are there and do you apply separately or they're just like SURPRIIISSSSEEEEE HERE's MONEY

Not sure how many there are; I can try researching it later when I'm not on my phone. Right now, I can tell you that they are indeed "just like SURPRIIISSSSEEEEE HERE's MONEY."

Thanks lavitz! I think the only school with my numbers that would give me a named scholarship like that is probably USC which would be awesome regardless. Definitely not going to assume ill get any money at all from CCN.

So, it's later, and here's my research.

I figure we can get a rough estimate of how many Hamiltons / Butlers are offered by looking at LSN and counting how many people reported receiving the offers and then comparing that to the number of people at another school reporting scholarships where we know the exact number of scholarships in question being offered. We know that Chicago has been offering exactly 20 Rubenstein scholarships per year for the past two years (well, offering repeatedly until all 20 are accepted.) Now, as we can see from

kappycaft1's chart, the percentage of total admits reporting on LSN is roughly the same for both Columbia and Chicago (18.13% vs. 20.31% in the 2010-2011 cycle for example). So I'd imagine the number of people reporting scholarships as a percentage of total scholarships being offered would also be comparable.

So next we would just compare how many people reported Rubies at Chicago to how many people reported Hamiltons at Columbia--let's say in the last cycle. I'm counting 21 Rubies at Chicago (assuming that one $160K was a Ruby along with all the $170K+ reports). Obviously a lot of people turned down the Ruby lol. If we only count the people who confirmed attending, the number drops to 4. As for Columbia, I only count 10 Hamiltons (assuming these guys know to list the three-year total) and actually don't see anyone who confirmed accepting it. Anyway, if we plug these numbers into the equation 21/20 = 10/

x where

x equals the (rough estimate of the) total number of Hamiltons offered, we get something like 9.5, so let's just say it's 10.

Now, another thing that could skew the data is that while I know Chicago has to keep offering the Rubies until all 20 are accepted, I'm not sure the same holds true for Columbia with the Hamilton. I'm not sure if they have a set number that have to be accepted or if they just offer them, then give up and return the money to their coffers if they all get declined. I doubt it, but then again, I can't find anything on how it works, so if someone else knows, I'd greatly appreciate the info. If Columbia doesn't need to keep re-offering the Hamilton, that would explain its lower appearance on LSN. So there could be 20 Rubies and 20 Hamiltons initially offered for all I know, and twice as many people eventually get offered the Rubies only because people keep rejecting them. But assuming Columbia acts the same as Chicago, we can assume that roughly only 10 Hamiltons get accepted.

As for the Butlers (apparently only the $84K and $84.5K offers are Butlers, the $75K offers are just regular awards), I count 11. So again, 21/20 = 11/

x which comes out to about the same thing: 10.48, so let's just say 10 again.

Needless to say, I'm now officially concerned that I won't be getting as much money as I thought I would (well, assuming I get in first). In fact, I just saw multiple people with great stats only get offered $25K over three years. Troubling.

It's also worth mentioning

this thread, where the OP posts charts of scholarship offers in the 2008-2009 cycle, as well as indexes ("indices" if you like) to show what type of numbers it took to earn the various offers. Now, the link he posted as the source of the indexes no longer works, and I'm sure the schools have changed their indexes or don't use set indexes anymore, or they only applied to splitters, etc., etc., but it's interesting to look at.

The index he uses is located on the bottom of the splitter chart here:

You're still above both medians, so I suppose for fun we can always apply that index to our numbers to determine our place in the regular chart here:

Judging by that, my index would be 235.8, so I thought I'd have a decent shot at a Butler, and even an outside shot at a Hamilton. After roaming through LSN tonight, now I'm just hoping for a Butler. Of course, these charts also leave out all the people who have similar numbers but failed to get any money. It's also probably terribly outdated. I just think it's nice to look at.

Disclaimer: I'm no statistics expert, so if anyone would like to point out any errors I've made, feel free to do so.