Introduction to Enquiry Level
Eligiblity Criteria
Frequently Asked Questions
Contact Us
Succcesses & News

Celebrate how Smith
students and alumnae
have fared in fellowships.

World Peace Through Global Engagement
               Fulbright Enquiry Level

Outstanding Achievements

Updated 7/1/15

SMITH College has the strongest U.S. Student Fulbright Program in the country.

• Over the past 11 years, Smith has won more Fulbright Fellowships than any other liberal arts college in the country
-- reaching 164.

• Smith's Fulbright success rate (winners to applicants) has over the past decade been the highest in the nation among the topmost-producing institutions.

• Since the 2001-02 establishment of its Fellowships Program, Smith has garnered well over 200 Fulbright Fellowship offers.

• With 23 offers out of 42 applicants in the 2012-13 competition year, Smith's success rate was 55% which is more than three times the national average of 17% for the competition.

• Compared to all U.S. institutions, including the Ivy Leagues, Smith ranked 9th nationally for its total number of Fulbright Fellows in 2012-13, frequently producing as many Fulbright Fellows as leading universities with far greater student populations and up to triple the number of applicants.

• In 2013, Clarke Knight '13 was named Smith College's first American Rhodes Scholar. This was after 35 years when in 1977 women were first allowed to enter the Rhodes competition following a campaign by Smith Professor Peter de Villiers, himself a former Rhodes Scholar and then at Harvard, to have the British Parliament change Rhodes's will that had used the word "men".

• Among the numerous fellowships awarded to Smith students and alumnae since 2001 are:

Austria Teaching, Beckman, Beinecke, Boren, Carnegie International Peace, Clinton Global Initiative, Critical Language Scholars, DAAD, Davis Peace, France Teaching, Freeman-Asia, Fulbright, Fulbright-Hayes Grant, Gilman, Goldman Sachs Global Leaders, Goldwater, HAEF, Howard Hughes, Humanity in Action, Insight Collaborative, Jack Kent Cook, Killam, Luce, Mellon, NATO Fellow, NOAA Hollings, NSF, Rhodes, Rotary Ambassadorial, Rotary World Peace, Soros, Truman, Udall, UNESCO-Fulbright, Woodrow Wilson

For more detail on winners and awards, please see Past Year Achievements and Smith Fulbright Roll of Honor.


In some cases the above statistics do not correspond to those published in the Chronicle of Higher Education (CHE) because their statistics are not comprehensively accurate since they are only a snapshot of numbers at a particular time shortly before CHE goes to press early fall. Hence CHE figures do not necessarily reflect the final total in any one competition or fellowships year.

Additionally, statistics are reported differently by institutions, including the Institute of International Education (I.I.E.) who are the U.S. Student Fulbright administrators, because the Fulbright has a competition year preceding a subsequent fellowships year, and some institutions quote the competition year while others reference the fellowships year.

Some institutions included the French Government Teaching Assistantship (FGTA) in their Fulbright counts because I.I.E. used to also run a competition for 50 FGTA awards in tandem with the Fulbright competition. Smith College does not include FGTA awards among its Fulbright numbers because the FGTA is not a Fulbright.

Some Fulbright grants begin up to a year after being offered (about 17 months after the application deadline) with the result that not all grants are ultimately taken up and, in some cases, not all fellowships are completed. Also, sometimes a grant is offered after the CHE figures are published and set in stone so to speak (because I.I.E. simply reproduces the CHE figures on their own website) as if they are the final statement of fact when in truth they can give a false reading of numbers.

For these numerous reasons that can lead to factual errors, Smith sticks to the fixed number of awards offered to ensure accuracy and consistency in reporting its numbers. Comparisons could therefore be calculated differently by other institutions, producing different results, and still be correct based on the criteria each institution uses.