The Adventures of Andrew Lee

Scholarship Advice for the Ambitious College Student

Andrew — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 06:13:39 +0000

I wrote this in November of 2006, someone asked for it, so I wrote it.

Andrew Lee- 2006 Truman Scholar, 2006 Udall Scholar, and District XIII Rhodes Scholarship Finalist

My audience is going to be the young, interested, or ambitious freshman/sophomore, or the seasoned junior who has had some substantive internship/research/work/advocacy experience behind them.

Do not be overwhelmed. All of these scholarships may seem out of reach right now, but you need not be afraid, you can get them if you put in the time and energy.

Remember how you got into college? Well, it never stops.

So, you’re thinking about applying for Rhodes/Truman/Marshall/Gates-Cambridge/Udall because you want to:

be the next President of the United States or advise someone in a high position,
be the guy/gal who colonizes Mars,
save millions of people from pain and suffering, i.e. starvation, war, etc.,
stop global warming,
rid the world of detrimental agricultural subsidies, or
just be a professor.

Getting these scholarships would greatly help, but you need to remember that many great people out there do not receive these scholarships. In no way does getting these scholarships make you Presidential material, you either have it or you don’t. Contrary to popular fact, you will succeed in the future no matter what scholarships you win.

NEVERTHELESS, DON’T DESPAIR. You can be a Rhodes/Truman/Udall/Marshall/Goldwater/Pickering/Boren/Academy of Achievement/USA Today All-Academic/Glamour Top Ten/(AND THE LIST GOES ON) Scholar. I cannot guarantee you a win with my advice, but I can however tell you the necessary conditions you must meet to become a scholarship winner.

Maintain a minimum GPA above an 11.0, an 11.2 to 11.4 GPA to be competitive, and a 11.4 GPA (so a 3.6 or above for those on the 4.0 scale) or higher for it to be a real asset in competitions (and in other things in life). Below is studying advice. Ignore the advice if you are a genius and you can always get good grades, but if you are like me and must work hard, then here’s some tips that will help you study:

Mastery Through Discipline- Try these out, they may work differently for each person, but you should try out each one:

Visit your professors. You should at least visit your professors once a month to check up on your progress or to ask them questions on topics/issues that you do not understand. It’s about communication. As long as your professor knows you’re serious about your studies, you will always be in a positive light when you’re riding the difference between a B+ or A-, etc. NOTE: If you complain about Professors, it is probably because you don’t understand them. Some professors need to be brought down to the ground so that you can understand what they want (sometime they don’t even know, so reminding them helps). Many professors want to keep up their reps as the moderately difficult professor that still has popular classes, so you need to work hard.
Do not listen to music that will distract you from work. Although you may have listened to music throughout your teen years, you need to focus on the quality and depth of your work. When reading, eliminate all distractions. It is fine to use music that promotes reflection, but vocal music is mostly distracting. Studies have shown that listening to Mozart before taking tests may improve your test score, but listening to music during the test will distract you. The same is applicable to your studying habits.
Be disciplined. The mark of a great person is to be disciplined in their work and in their play. It’s important for students to work efficiently and effectively. Think of the time when you were able to achieve something great in a short amount of time. That incident doesn’t happen by accident. If you’re working to the best of your ability, you can definitely get a lot done, and still have time to party on the weekends.
Actively study. Be engaged in the material that you are studying. To retain information, you have to relate somehow to it. Ever read a passage and then not know what you just read? It’s important to actively study and be focused on the topic at hand.
Sleep is important. The younger you are in development, the more REM (Rapid Eye Movement) sleep you will need. As you grow older, you can sleep less and will have less REM sleep. Studies have shown that REM sleep is critical for memory retention, bodily health, and rejuvenation of metabolic processes. Although you can function on four hours of sleep, it doesn’t mean that you’re functioning to your full capacity. It’s important that you make sure to get enough sleep to allow your body enough rest for the next day. PULL ALL-NIGHTERS FOR TESTS AT YOUR OWN RISK! For many students, pulling all-nighters may give you the answer to question 12 at the expense of losing the answer to question 5 on your exam. It’s comparatively better to sleep the nights before a test, and review in the morning.

Reading-Based Classes

In most of your classes, you will write essays. Visit the Writing Center. No matter if you are working on Senior thesis or a freshman writing your first Li10 or Civ10 paper, they are always a great guide to writing. You can go over your writing with the writing center staff and, in doing so, understand your weaknesses and your strengths.
Create study guides. Many of the study guides found on this website did not come from third-party sources. Most of them originated from the classes themselves and from the students who took those classes. The process of making study guides is both educational and very useful. You can do it in a group or by yourself. The only problem is that when you work in a group, you have varying levels of experience with making study guides. The best way to prepare is to make a study guide for the reading assigned for your class, e.g. you will come prepared with a study guide for next Tuesday’s reading on Plato or the next biology class and with questions about the reading. When the midterm or finals rolls around, you only need to cut and paste relevant information for the test.

Math and Science Topics

Practice, practice, practice. Math is mainly procedural. Practice the procedure and your chances of success will increase.
Always show your work. You don’t need me to explain this do you? Alright, if you miss a question, the instructor will look to see if you had the right process and might award you half credit. There is no cost to showing your work, but there is if you don’t.
Use the silly acronyms to remember how math works. It’s okay. You don’t learn how to drive a car by knowing exactly how a car works. You test it out and remember the tricks of how to drive. You can learn its intricacies later.

Language Related Topics

Use mnemonic devices. I know you probably used them as a kid and you think that you are far above the use of mnemonic devices, but they work. Make notecards with translations on them or write out vocabulary words/phrases repeatedly. Remember to review almost daily.
Make quick study sheets. Take a sheet of paper and fold it into fours lengthwise (you should have four columns). Fold it so that the first column is on the left side and the fourth column is facing the first on the right side. Write your English translation on one side, and the second language translation on the other. Once you open the paper, you can proceed to fill in the translation for both in the blank center two columns.

SO, I HAVE GOOD GRADES, NOW WHAT? Now that you know how to get good grades, it’s up to you to seek out opportunities and construct a narrative about yourself. Most scholarships want displays of leadership, intellectual ability, and commitment to fellow man.

Take advantage of every opportunity and continue to advance your goals (a thematic recommendation). First, take advantage of opportunities. I understand that many of the scholarship winners come from an upper class background and are able to travel around the world building huts because they are self-funded. I do also understand that most of us in this world need to have a job while in school. It does not mean that you cannot take advantage of the opportunities that present themselves and where you can have substantive leadership in a particular issue. If you really want to do something, you can make it happen (yes, so give up playing video games). Don’t stop trying to fight the good fight. Whatever it is you believe in (short of human sacrifice), keep believing and making the world a better place. If you care about scientific research, pursue it. One of the times when my mother required me to watch Oprah, Oprah sad that success is when preparation meets luck. You can win these scholarships if you prepare yourself well and continue to push yourself. Don’t settle for less than you deserve and if you really want it, then you should understand that it isn’t easy to get what you want.

NOTE: An easy thing to do here is to look at the bios of previous winners and try to copy them. They were able to successfully achieve their goals, you should to.

THAT’S IT. Obviously there are more facets to the question of displays of leadership etc., but it’s all about constructing the narrative about yourself and making sure that narrative is genuine.

IMPORTANT ENDING NOTE

Many successful people in the world do not win these scholarships. In fact, some who win these scholarships do not amount to much, e.g. according to a weird research book on the Rhodes Scholarship, many Rhodes scholars have committed suicide because they couldn’t match up to their peers and were constantly caught in the rat race. Before you apply for these scholarships, you need to be strong in body, mind, and soul. The scholarship process will help you know yourself and help you ask the big questions about your ambition. The larger questions though about truth, God, and why you are on this Earth can only be answered when you dig deep into yourself.

At the end of your college career, I don’t want to have you regret that you didn’t have time to date someone, establish wonderful friendships, call your mother and have her remind you of your flu shot, not have gone to see a speaker because you didn’t think you had time, or not take classes because you were too afraid to learn something new. If you don’t choose this path, I will still respect you because your college education is what you make of it. From myself in the past to you in the future, good luck.

Advice on the Rhodes Scholarship

Andrew — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 05:48:05 +0000

A friend asked recently for advice on the Rhodes scholarship and I have an old document I’ve kept around that I hope will help people who are interested in the scholarship. I did not win the scholarship, so take my advice with a grain of salt. I wrote this paper in November 2006 (before I plunged headfirst into the murky waters of startups), and the advice is broken into three parts:

Notes from talking with Mary Dwyer, President of IES about her lengthy experience as a member of the Rhodes panel;
Advice on the application process
Interview advice and a rough transcript of my interview

Looking back almost two years since I wrote this advice, I can clearly remember the words of both Mary Dwyer and my Rhodes panel: “This scholarship helps, but it doesn’t change you who you are. Many great people haven’t won.” I know for those students hell-bent on this scholarship, you cannot see anything beyond this tunnel. I know from personal experience. Trust me though, if you don’t get the scholarship, it may be the best thing to happen to you. As Randy Pausch said in his last lecture, “Experience is what you get when you didn’t get what you wanted.”

PART I: Advice from Mary Dwyer, President of IES Abroad and Andrew Lee, 2006 District XIII Rhodes Finalist

Ex-Chair of Midwest Regional Rhodes Panel (7-8 years experience)

November 10, 2006, Call from CMC to Andrew Lee ’07 and Elizabeth Schultz ’07; Compiled by Andrew Lee for CMC posterity

Before you take the advice of this sheet, Mary warned that at the interview stage, the committee makes subjective decisions. Each committee may have a different composition, different from her public university. The Midwest Regional Panel, according to Mary, was the more progressive of panels being one of the first to allow minorities and also public university students. I’ve added some of my own comments from research into the Rhodes scholarship process, and they should be beneficial for future CMC students.

Mary Dwyer has the following points of advice, in no particular order:

Be yourself. Try not to find the angle with the panel, find the correct answer, or play the system.
Be succinct/direct. The biggest problem in interviews is that interviewees do not answer the question asked.
Be relaxed and at ease. It kills interviews if you are too nervous.
Show each of the areas/criteria for winning.
1. In leadership, they are looking for someone with moral character and will fight the good fight. Depending on the panel, they may focus on one criterion above another.
2. EXAMPLES: May ask you about the world’s fight? How will you contribute to the world?
3. EXAMPLES: May ask ethical questions? One potential guy couldn’t answer an ethical question and as a result didn’t get the scholarship.
Don’t talk about how the Rhodes will help you become famous or rich. Don’t be self-serving. They may ask you the question : Why do you want the Rhodes Scholarship? Have an honest but thoughtful answer.
Be clear about what you want to become. They know that you may change your mind, but they like people with clear goals and interests.
Know your current events. Because this interview was in 2006, you should know your opinion on the war, stem cell research, and the election.
Prepare the beginning and end of your interview.
1. 1^st question= softball. It will be in an area of expertise.
2. Last question (depends on the panel)- anything you’d like to tell the panel?
Do at least two mock interview. Your mock panels should have the following characteristics:
1. Have an aggressive interview and one that is passive. It is important to get used to interviewing in different settings.
2. You will probably have a scientist on one of your panels, a lawyer, a literature/humanities/well-read professor, someone from the business/finance sector, and possibly someone from the field of medicine. Every panel generally looks like this with slight variation with the number of professors. Be prepared to address people from each of these areas.
3. NOTE: Sometimes in panels, there is a tendency for panelists to inflate their own egos in front of other panelists, it’s okay. Let that person run on, but try to steer the conversation back if the interview goes badly.
Be prepared for the following questions:
1. Who is your hero?
2. What is your biggest regret?
3. Tell me about x class, y endeavor, or book/literary work from z project?
4. Expect a second question, a deeper probing question. Many committees will follow-up with a second question and will probe into your rationale. They may press you, to see if you change your mind under pressure or in the face of new arguments or caveats. They want to see if you can stick up for your point of view while under pressure. It is okay to change your answer, but if you do, do it for a reason, not because you think they want you to change. For example, say, “Well, given that situation/argument, I think ________.”
5. Be prepared for a situational question- They may test you on whether you can apply what you have learned. For example, If you were President, with $5 billion dollars, and you had to allocate it between education or defense, how would you allocate it? Why?
6. May ask about leadership and leadership strategies…
Highlight themes (have three goals you have in mind, the things that you want the committee to be thinking when you leave the room), but also push past the application. Although you should not completely depart from your application. Don’t overfocus on this aspect, it’s better for you to hit a triple with your already developed themes, rather than strike out aiming for a home run.

INTERVIEW

After your interview, go ahead and take a break. (Mary)
If you’re given the opportunity for a second interview, do not be afraid. It means that you are being strongly considered for the Rhodes, and there is something that wanted to ask you about that they need the extra time to discuss.

OTHER ISSUES

Prior to the call, I (Andrew) had sent her some questions before-hand

Is the panel the same as those who select us as finalists? Will we have advocates and enemies on the panel?

A: Because the Rhodes interviews are one-stage (district only), I can only describe what it is like from the regional perspective when it was a two-stage process. I do not know if the panel selects the finalists, but the way it has worked before is that the panelists will arrive and will all be locked in a room for a whole day to review dossiers in silence. They are not supposed to discuss the applicants until all of them have interviewed.

How much ambition should be shown to the panel (e.g. I want to do X, Y, Z)? or should we show a level of flexibility?
A: Have ambition without pretentiousness. Don’t plan everything out in your life, but the panel wants to see drive and focus. You can do it, but show some flexibility in your demeanor.

DINNER/RECEPTION- At the dinner- how much of a factor is the dinner/lunch/social gathering? What topics are generally discussed (cocktail conversation, like the latest book, etc.?)

A: The dinner/reception/lunch is extremely important. It is the first time to make a first impression and meeting every single panel member is an imperative. Some advice for this is:

dress professionally
treat questions as if you’re on the interview panel, but don’t clam up as if you were on the interview panel
don’t oversell yourself
be calm

At the end of the reception, the committee will stay behind and a person will volunteer to be the lead interviewer or to throw out the first question.

What is the diversity of the panel (is everyone a lawyer)?

A: Diverse panel, but everyone is smart, don’t try to pull a fast one on anybody. They won’t beat up on you, but they are all looking for good composition and a good interviewer.

Should we emphasize a sports component if we have one?

A: Some people do. If you feel that it is one of your strengths, then please highlight that component. Depending on the panel, some emphasize having at least one person with a sports background (because it is a life learning methodology), while others care more about the academic component.

Are there usually questions left at the end of the interview? Is that a bad thing?

A: Generally, panels feel that they get a good feel within the 20 minutes. If they have follow-up questions that are most pressing, they will call you in for a second interview. They will usually stick to the time limit. Don’t ramble or try to sound knowledgable.

What do panels generally like (i.e. philosophical musings? interdisciplinary observations? humorous statements? or interesting esoteric facts?)

A: Whatever your strengths are. Shine through with those. Don’t spend all of your time learning interesting cocktail conversation.

PART II: Notes from Andrew

Preparing for the Rhodes was a great way to further refine my understanding of who I am and what I want in life. My apologies for any grammatical mistakes, spelling faux pas, or any other areas of generally unintelligible writing. None of our previous applicants have made this information available for popular consumption, so I’m going to try to tell as much as I can about my Rhodes experience and how you can prepare for it and stop (as of this writing) the 13-year drought on Rhodes-Marshall-Gates scholarships.

The Application

Unlike the Truman Scholarship, I was not responding to prompts, but rather given 1000 words and the task of condensing a theme and my life thus far. I will always cherish my Rhodes essay and the people that I met at the District XIII Interview. Here’s my advice on the application (remember that if you don’t get this right, you’re dead in the water).

The purpose is to show sides of you not apparent in the activities list, to show why you care about the things you care about, to put your accomplishments in context, to show what your future goals are (and how they are a natural outgrowth of your previous accomplishments), to show how Oxford will help you achieve your goals, and most importantly, to introduce you as a person to the selection committee.

I feel that the best approach (and it says this on the Rhodes website) is to use direct language and speak plainly about yourself. Don’t be overly creative (SEE MINE AND OTHERS PERSONAL STATEMENTS), but don’t kill your voice.

Also, remember that the focus should be 99.9% about YOU. Read other people’s personal statements (see your advisors, if they don’t have samples, then this school really doesn’t care about your future success). Although samples have flaws, it is clear when you read them why they were chosen for an interview. While it is good to be unique, there is a certain structure that seems to be working.

Here’s what one Rhodes and Truman scholar wrote to me:

That being said, there is a general format to follow in writing the essay. Your personal statement should tell a story about both your background and your future. As you will see in the essay that I attached, which I think is my absolute final draft but am not completely sure, there are a number of logical steps. First, start with an compelling story about your background. Second, tie that into your academic and professional experience, while simultaneously explaining why you have chosen the path/field you are on. Next, explain the program you would like to pursue at Oxford, and why that makes sense based on your background. Finally, explain your goal in life and how a Rhodes Scholarship and study at Oxford helps you achieve that.”

The Famed Interview

Probably the best resource, I found was this simple essay from a Yale Professor who has served as an interviewer many times:

Advice about Rhodes Interviews <http://www.yale.edu/iefp/fellowships/other/rhodes_interviews.html>

A faculty member who has been both a state and district selector for the Rhodes competition offers the following characterizations of the Rhodes interviews and advice:

After twelve years on two state committees and one district (all in the NE) I see a certain consistency of questioning in the 20 minutes allotted to each candidate. The first question, or short set of questions, is typically directed toward the candidate’s perceived strengths, as inferred from the academic major and accomplishments (rather than the “proposal”, although that may come into it). The first question may simply ask for an explanation of, say, what the experiment or senior essay is about and why it matters, where it might lead (not just at Oxford), and that usually opens up some critical issues including potential flaws, which is where committees hone in and test the candidate’s powers of response and think-through. This is often the heart of the interview. The Rhodes Trust stresses the prime importance of academic and intellectual ability measured in the fullest way.

But other things get in there, if not sequentially: no mere description of the athletic or leadership activities (obvious enough from the resume), but questions about their “interface” aspects. Should something be done to curb the commercialization of sports? If so, what? How can your work against AIDS in Southern Africa be effective given the attitude of the Mbeki government?

And finally, some questions try to assess the candidate’s honesty, unselfishness, and general personality. They can come through just about any topic, and are not always obvious.

The interview is the heart of the process. Not that other things don’t count, but that at this level they are not always enough to distinguish one strong candidate from another. To be sure, you will be done in by a transcript that is missing too much (a breadth, say, or achieved excellence in the major), or by a recommendation couched with too many caveats, or by a personal statement that is formulaic or self-congratulatory. Try to seal off those potential flaws ahead of time.

There are two keys to the interview itself. The first is to answer the question put, not the one you want to hear, or are best prepared for, or have been advised by your Yale coaches to expect. It may be a question in more than one part, with the sequent question(s) at least partly hidden. Make sure you hear the whole question, and answer it all.

Second: once you’ve grasped and briefly pondered the question(s), don’t tell the committee what you surmise they are looking to be told. If you are an economist, and there’s a professor of economics at the table, you can surely count on his or her expertise, to which you should defer without kowtowing. But committees are harder to read than you might imagine: members may have knowledge of subjects, and views on them, that would surprise you. Don’t assume that every northeastern selector, for example, has predictably liberal views on military tribunals or the death penalty.

What matters is that you answer in your own voice, not that of your Yale coaches, or the one you attribute to your interlocutor(s). Answer clearly, thoughtfully, reasonably, concisely yet in enough detail to overcome vagueness and build an argument, and you will be persuasive. And it never hurts to smile.

PART III: MY INTERVIEW

OKAY, that being said, I have the following debrief to give on my Rhodes experience. It is tough writing about my interview especially when I feel that it was a bad interview (I didn’t even talk about Fantasy Congress!), but here was my experience:

Get a good night’s rest. So if an early morning flight will deprive you of sleep, DO NOT TAKE IT. You need sleep.

I arrived at the Hyatt Regency in Denver for a nice reception (no alcohol served, so I wasn’t able to exercise my already planned decision to not drink alcohol) and I met the rest of the scholars and interviewers. I was at ease with a number of the finalists, but at the same time, I let my guard down and didn’t establish a strong enough relationship with one of the panelists.

My panel consisted of the following:

Gail Klapper, Klapper Law Firm- not Rhodes Scholar, ran for AG of CO in 1984
Susan D. Campbell, HRO Law- Rhodes Scholar who read for history, graduate of Grinnell College
Terry Velazquez- has a tattoo of the Zimbabwe bird (the Rhodes symbol of cultural transfer) somewhere and was a Rhodes Scholar, currently in emergency medicine in Arizona
George Barisas- Baliol ’63, Rhodes Scholar, professor at CSU in lasers and biology (helps run their NSF program there)
George Butte (CO)- AZ New ’68, Professor of English Literature and Narrative in Film, very into themes in literature
Jessica Mellinger ’00 (WY)- currently Northwestern Med student
Paul Carrese (Air Force Academy)- read for PPE, but didn’t finish the Economics, professor of government at Air Force

Generally, I handled everything well, but I really didn’t hit home any of my great stories. So, my first bit of advice for this part is that the reception should be treated like the interview, don’t let the opportunity to tell your important story go by. It’s better that you get in your story earlier than not get it in at all. Thus, my main weakness was over questions such as “Why the interest in psychology? (I talked about Piaget and his theories of intellectual development),” “What will be happening with you in the future?” and if you have other scholarships (like the Truman) be prepared for a “But you have the Truman Scholarship, right?” Here you want to be like you’re at the Ath before the dinner speaker…

At the actual interview, my advice is the following:

1) Be prepared for a passive interview, thus you might need to drive the interview. If they don’t ask about something, you need to work it into your closing. I could have worked in my childhood, my family, Fantasy Congress in the last statement, but I didn’t, so I was only a lukewarm candidate in their eyes.

2) Hammer home what you think makes you the best of the types of candidates that you see around you. In my panel, we had a distinctive split between scientists and policy wonks, state university and private school, athlete vs. non-athlete, and Colorado and Arizona/New Mexico. No surprise that they chose the Duke athletic scientist from Colorado and the Yale glee club political scientist (who doesn’t do sports).

3) Try to have mock interviews the same length as the actual interview so you get an idea of how quickly the interview will go by. If I had had a better feel for the time, I would have known that I was late on driving the interview and would have formulated better responses that linked my themes.

4) You need differences in opinion in your interviews. Liberal government professors, conservative scientists, anybody you can find will help. You need the wide range of opinions or you’re gonna get hit with oddities (like the literature professor who talked for five minutes on myth/legend and such).

5) Be prepared for a technical question related to your area of expertise. If you are say, a physics major, and one of the interviewers knows something about physics, they may ask you about it, even if it isn’t exactly the topic you have worked on. Elizabeth, who did an internship at the Federal Reserve, was asked a technical question about monetary and fiscal policy in a financial crisis.

The play-by-play is the following:

1) Jessica: I’m gonna start… How do we balance the problems of water and increased growth?

2) Terry: How does a market work in water?

3) Gail: These markets already occur, aren’t you worried about agricultural land?

4) George Barisas: Well, generally, they don’t conserve, but sell off their ag land, so what do we do then?

5) Susan: I was driving to Iowa and I saw these great cornfields and I thought that it must take a lot of water to make them along with great amounts of CO2, how do we deal with global climate change in addition to these problems?

6) Carrese: I’m sorry, what is cap & trade?

6) George Butte: I’m gonna switch things around a little bit. Who was the greatest 20^th century American philosopher?

I said Levinas, and somehow missed the American part.

7) Butte: I’m sorry, you may not have heard me. I said 20^th century American philosopher.

Paul Carrese: Since we’re on the topic of Rawls, what do you think of his Theory of Justice?

9) Butte: Let’s backtrack to Levinas… why?

10) Mellinger: I’m gonna challenge you on that, is it possible to have Levinas as a working political philosophy contrary to Rawls?

11) Butte: Doesn’t that seem impractical? You need to understand people to make public policies right?

Right, but as Terry and I discussed before we are human and our first reactions are to know, thus I think that Levinas is a personal philosophy while Rawls is a governmental one.

Somehow there seems to be a discussion of Ronald Coase and the Law and Economics framework (around the middle of this interview, happens before this though)

11) Carrese: Okay, so we’ve talked about markets, public policy and philosophy. I might have heard you wrong, but is economics what controls the three?

12) Butte: Interesting points about Levinas and Other. It ties into a larger question of myth in which a fundamental American phenomenon of how we treat the Other occurs. The way that treat natural resources has a certain myth about it… (more about Myth)

I think it is a fundamentally American concept of myth. In the West, we have this notion of independence that couldn’t occur without much help from the government. It’s interesting because it shows that we have a need to be independent, but at the same time an other- a community.

13) Butte: See, you’re using myth as the veil of falsity, but I’m seeing it as the greater theme.

I guess it depends on our intersubjectivity.

14) Butte: continues to talk about myth

(PAUSE)

15) Klapper: Andrew, anything you’d like to add…

(BAD CLOSER, didn’t mention fantasy congress, the need to go to Oxford for its unique program, nor mentioned my family background story, I mentioned only a thanks for the opportunity)

I’ve incorporated the advice from Mary Dwyer from above and she laid it out perfectly along with the advice from the Yale interviewer. You should be ready for the interview, most of the time, the people who win are shocked because they think the guy next to them should have won, so at this level you need to go in thinking that you have nothing to lose. You don’t. Hope this helped and good luck.

It’s Ralph Lor-en (Lauren)

Andrew — Sun, 13 Jul 2008 19:17:31 +0000

Well, according to the WSJ, it’s pronounced phonetically (and not with some exotic em-phasis on the last syllable):

Most of the first French names to appear in the U.S. were a cinch, like Dior and Chanel. But a lot of the names in play today need to be spoken with a real lilt , like Jean Paul Gaultier (zhan paul GO-tee-AY), Alber Elbaz for Lanvin (al-BEAR el-BAHZ for lon-VAN), and Nicolas Ghesquière (NEE-ko-la guess-KYAIR).

Mamma mia! The Italian names can play tricks on you, too — such as Bulgari (BOOL-ga-ree), Ungaro (OON-ga-ro), Versace (ver-SAH-chay) and Zegna (ZANE-ya). And from Spain comes the tricky Loewe (LO-ee-VAY). (To hear every last nuance of pronunciation, check out the audio tutorial at WSJ.com/Fashion.)

….

Don’t worry that you’ll sound affected. Why not try to get it right? The more syllables, the more delicious it sounds: I just love to say the name of Swiss watch maker Vacheron Constantin (va-sha-RON con-ston-TAN).

But don’t force a fashion-y flourish on American designers whose names sound just like they look: It’s Ralph Lauren (rhymes with “foreign”) and Donna Karan (sounds like “Karen”).

On a separate note, the only other thing I know about fashion is that I think that outside of looking great, comfort should be key. Tim Gunn disagrees with me in this week’s Time talking about Crocs:

I know it’s comfortable; I understand that. But if you want to dress to feel as though you never got out of bed, don’t get out of bed.

Well Tim, tell that to every startup entrepreneur in the Silicon Valley (although I guess some of us really don’t get out of our place of work and play, so point taken).

Scribd Find: They Didn’t Study

Andrew — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 14:49:16 +0000

I’m sure I have some test answers hanging around that mirror he hilarity of this document.

They didn’t study - Upload a Document to Scribd

How to Get An Op-Ed Published

Andrew — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 05:23:43 +0000

I’ve received a couple e-mails about how to get an op-ed published. While I am not an expert as some of my friends, fellow Truman Scholar Yosem received some great advice that I can pass on. The source is a family member of another Truman Scholar who works at Kensington PR, she wrote:

Each paper has an editor specifically for this section and really it just takes a little bit of searching on their website to find where to send it to. Each paper has their own editorial guidelines (word count, etc) that the writer should be aware of before submitting. Most email addresses are similar to the ones below, but each paper is different. It’s really not too hard at all!

Here are a few tips–

Be bold. Use clear, powerful, direct language. Emphasize active verbs; limit the adjectives and adverbs. Short sentences work best, and paragraphs should usually contain no more than two or three sentences.

Localize it. Adopt a local angle in your op-ed, even on a national issue. You are competing for space with nationally syndicated columnists, and a local angle can make your article more appealing. Know what your target publication published recently about your topic, especially on the op-ed page, and don’t repeat those arguments.

Make a unique point. You need to take a stand and come down hard on that side of the issue. Any time an op-ed goes against the conventional wisdom, editors will be more interested. Op-ed editors also prefer submissions that are strong in their viewpoint.

Be timely. The news cycle is quick. If you want to comment on the news of the day, you will need to submit your essay ideally that day, and definitely within two days. Most newspapers now accept submissions by e-mail, which makes for a quick transmittal.

Provide examples. Educate your reader without giving a sermon. Make your piece human and memorable. Are there similar matters that support your point that you can refer to?

Provide solutions. Editorials that criticize current practices and policies, but offer no solutions or new ideas are much less likely to get published.

Make a single point. In an op-ed article of only about 700 words, you will have a hard time successfully covering more than one topic.

A great resource that I sent to Yosem was the CCMC Resource on Letters to the Editor and Op-Eds, which helped me when I wrote my first op-ed back when I was young and impetuous. Hope this helps folks interested in using op-eds to convince folks about products, issues, or other opinions. For those in industry who don’t think that op-eds matter, check out this LA Times op-ed on Facebook. As they say, being a thought leader matters, so take some time out to blog and if you want to write an op-ed, go ahead.

Why I Switched Comments to Disqus

Andrew — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 05:13:39 +0000

You may have noticed the commenting system has changed. I took the plunge and switched comments over to a hosted service- Disqus, run by Daniel Ha and Jason Yan (two SoCal brothas who went through Y-Combinator). So far, it’s been rather nice. The first day I installed and sent in a request for help, Daniel responded that day to tell me how to solve my problem.

I was choosing between Disqus and Intense Debate because the others weren’t hosted solutions (no contest there). It was a tough decision, not just because I was choosing between ethnicity versus homeland :p. My literature review yielded a lot of different posts concerning which one to choose, including:

this Wordpress Support post (one of the biggest hits on Google- and not flattering to Disqus),
Reverend Jim’s posts on experimenting with Disqus and ultimately choosing them,
and Webware’s amazing review of all the services (they chose Disqus at the end).

It seemed my cursory look found mainly pro-Disqus articles (although Disqus always squeezed out the win) and no pro-Intense Debate articles that weren’t from investors. A literature review is never enough though, so researched and came up wih the following reasons why I chose Disqus:

OpenID and Clickpass- Disqus has Clickpass. OpenID hasn’t really worked out that well. I tried to register for Mixx with my Yahoo OpenID and the system just didn’t work. I found a great solution through Clickpass (even receiving ‘Andrew’ username!) which became a simple tool for OpenID access on Disqus. Oddly enough, having Clickpass made me feel better about their OpenID support.
Big blog names- Although Intense Debate had the whole TechStars contingent and Disqus had the YCombinator crowd, I was most impressed by the number of non-YC people who adopted the comment system: Scripting.com, the Harvard Crimson, a VC (to be fair, an investor) and last but absolutely not least… Fake Steve Jobs! I understand people don’t want to take sides in the blogosphere, but those who do without prejudice help a product. It also shows that these blogs are willing to grow with the system… which means a lot for timely features I’m hoping for in the future.
This graph below which shows the traffic (and adoption rates) for the commenting system. Using a system that a significant number of people use makes my blog easier to comment on.

For now, I’m using Disqus… but the commenting system may not be permanent if Disqus does not deliver on promises:

a reliable service [no more of slowdowns please],
a forum I can put on one of my pages, and
an import tool for my old posts (the one advantage that I gave up because Intense Debate had an import tool).

Aside from that, I’m pretty happy, so feel free to Disqus here!

Dreading My Birthday

Andrew — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 04:45:58 +0000

Some people dread Valentine’s Day, I dread my birthday.

Unlike holidays that celebrate achievement (getting your family together is an achievement) or the memory of a renowned individual, birthdays celebrate the passage of time (like New Year’s, but more personal). I think most people after a certain age generally dread their birthdays- think of all the cards that talk about being “over the hill,” “older than sand,” “almost old enough to reach diamond status.”

To be sure, I love gatherings of friends and family celebrating good health (especially mine) and receiving gifts, but a birthday is different because it is a particular celebration of your age.

A good friend of mine recently told me, “Most people after 22 years of age are drinking for altogether different reasons than the year before. I think most people know there isn’t much to celebrate after that.” I am not as pessimistic, but it brings the issue of another year of my life gone wondering what more I could have achieved or gotten done.

Perhaps I have been conditioned because I never had an extravagant party or perhaps I didn’t want people to spend money on gifts (”mom, don’t spend that money on a cake, I’m just happy that you remembered”)… No, I enjoyed my birthdays- getting older meant more freedom (and sometimes great cake).

As I became older though (sometimes much faster than my peers), I’ve become more aware of my mortality. I think Steve Jobs says it best:

(Please open the article to see the flash file or player.)

There comes a point in someone’s life when they become aware of the finite amount of time they have on Earth and it’s both empowering and disempowering. It’s a very strong motivator, as Steve Jobs says. At the same time, it’s dreadfully scary to know that year (or set of years) has gone by (and so quickly!). I think that’s why New Year’s has some of the same characteristics. I’m like most people who have a mix of emotions on their birthday- like the movie About Schmidt-, but I don’t think the courage/dread will ever go away when April 28 rolls around.

Obama Should Accept the Lincoln-Douglas Debate Challenge (with some provisos)

Andrew — Sun, 27 Apr 2008 05:43:59 +0000

CNN reported yesterday that Clinton has challenged Obama to a series of Lincoln-Douglas debates without the media. My debate friends and I have been giggling like school children over how cool it would be to have each candidate debate question the other (just like in our high school Lincoln Douglas Debates).

In general, a series of debates without media questions across Indiana and battleground states would allow a time to shine and to show the discussion about issues. Moreover, it allows the competition to become a constructive discussion about topics versus the usual guerrilla press leak warfare that has been taking place so far.

These debates won’t happen if three serious issues aren’t resolved, though: (A) When will these debates take place? (B) how will the format be useful and still entertaining? (B) Why would Obama accept?

WHEN

They need to know when before May 6th. That’s tough, but without dealing with media schedules, I think it’s doable. The two candidates would essentially be making time in their schedules to campaign/duke it out together.

HOW

The original LD debates had the following format (according to Wikipedia):

Each debate had this format: one candidate spoke for an hour, then the other candidate spoke for an hour and a half, and then the first candidate was allowed a half hour “rejoinder.” The candidates alternated speaking first. As the incumbent, Douglas spoke first in four of the debates.

Current LD formats have shorter oratory and questioning periods for speakers making for a more entertaining and debate-like approach. A combination where each candidate gives a long first speech and time to question each other on their policies would be very interesting. Each candidate should be allowed to receive notes, but since it is televised, it would just look back if they look to be too reliant on their handlers. Unfortunately, the HOW issues ties into the WHEN because details like this take a long time to smooth out.

WHY

If the WHEN and HOW can be resolved, Obama should accept for the following reasons:

He beats Hillary on her terms- The most effective way to take out the other heavyweight contender is to have him invite you to a match, and then you win the match. The Hillary troops will legitimately see a candidate that won because he was a better candidate on their own terms. If his polls are already sliding, then taking the opportunity to stop that slide and win over her own folks is a good idea.
He can set the context- As a result of her invitation, he has the upper hand in choosing the ring he fights in. The importance of this allows Obama to choose policy issues he wants to air, the format of the debate, and also choose a format he’s comfortable with.
Obama’s personal strengths is his oratorical skills- Enough said. He gets to flex and pound.
It sets the stage for John McCain- Obama versus McCain in LD debate style…. yeah, my bet is on Obama.
It’s Lincoln- For the man who began his campaign invoking Lincoln in Springfield, IL, it seems odd that he would turn away from such a defining feature of Lincoln’s initial candidacy. Forget that historians say that Douglas won most of the debates, but the chance to win for Lincoln adds more to the sense of place/history of Barack Obama.

Of course, there are a lot of reasons not to debate, including giving more recognition to the Clinton campaign. Nevertheless, Obama should accept because I think he could win and why would you turn away from an opportunity to stop the sliding poll numbers and make your opponent look bad in an unmoderated debate.

Today: Hosting the NWF Chill-Out Broadcast

Andrew — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:53:34 +0000

Last year, I was invited to host the National Wildlife Federation’s Chill Out Broadcast which recognized colleges and universities across the country that had innovative solutions to global warming. Being a former NWF Fellow, meeting these folks last year was a treat.

Seriously, when I met the guy responsible for using biomass algae to power a small university’s athletic facility, I was inspired. These innovative solutions to fight global warming showed a strong business case for universities and colleges to save money on energy costs, etc.

In addition to the college entries, NWF also solicits Chill-Out YouTube entries. They’re hilarious. Here’s Berea College with their hilarious video from last year:

(Please open the article to see the flash file or player.)

I’m the host again for this year’s webcast and you’ll see me doing my unique blend of broadcast anchoring (a combination of Brian Williams and Stephen Colbert) live today!

Omid Kordestani and the Value of “Ah Ha!”

Andrew — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:12:05 +0000

Omid Kordestani (Google’s SVP for Global Sales and Business Development) gave some advice on the value of “Ah Ha!” moments- essentially going with your gut. Probably one of the best commencement addresses I have heard that helps with the Quarter Life Crisis many of my friends experience.

I just arrived back from Austin, TX: the South by Southwest (SXSW-Interactive) to be exact. I’m catching up on e-mails and other business-related material. I had a great time (will blog more about it later) and met a lot of “ah ha” people.

Here’s Omid’s commencement address at San Jose State University on May 26, 2007:

(Please open the article to see the flash file or player.)

His “Ah Ha!” Moments:

He must think and act like an immigrant- discover, be optimistic, and have a sense of place. Don’t let anyone tell you that “you cannot.” Believe in your immigrant routes.
Follow your instincts, not the money. Don’t be an engineer just becaused you’re trained, don’t be in i-banking just because of your experience.
It’s all about the path. Work and family is still a tough balance- now it is a work-life blend. You’re the never done learning or understanding your ultimate path… don’t be defined or limited by the steps you have taken in life or the degree you have chosen. Don’t worry that you have no idea what you want to do next.