Home
Smith College Deadlines
Design Your Project
ETA Easiest Countries
Fulbright Registrations
Reference Guidelines
Campus Evaluation Input
Winning Proposal Abstracts
Fulbright I.I.E. Website
Bookmark Navigation
Successes & News

Celebrate how Smith
students and alumnae
have fared in fellowships.

             Fast Track to Fulbright Candidacy

Campus Evaluation Input

Updated 6/20/14

CONTENTS
1. Introduction
2. Broad Guidelines
3. Guidance Resources
4. Seven Evaluation Items
5. Counter-Productive Feedback
6. Constructive Evaluation Input
7. How to Use the CCE with CCE Blank link

1. INTRODUCTION

THANK you for participating in our official college evaluation, called the Campus Committee Evaluation (CCE), of a Smith candidate in this year’s U.S. Student Fulbright competition.
The CCE is submitted electronically, unseen by the candidate, with her application by Smith's FPA (Fulbright Program Advisor) when the college submits her online application to the Fulbright administrators.

If you have landed on this page seeking the Foreign Language Evaluation, please go to
Reference Guidelines
http://www.smith.edu/fulbright/reference.php
where Recommendations written for the applicant are also covered.

As you know, you are being asked to contribute a few comments on the candidate to assist our Campus Committee Evaluation (CCE) compiler (the candidate's Smith Faculty Fulbright Mentor) in assembling a collective college evaluation of the applicant for forwarding to Fulbright's selectors.
Because you are one of several contributors, and space is limited, all that is asked of you is a few brief, though thoughtful and meaningful, remarks.

How these observations are presented will either serve the candidate or be of little use, perhaps even a distraction, to the selectors.
We have therefore provided below a few guidelines which you are respectfully asked please to peruse before noting your impressions for “feeding a few lines” to the CCE compiler.

Although brief, your insights and perceptions are highly valued in arriving at a balanced evaluation, and are thus keenly sought and much appreciated.
Time is unfortunately extremely short, as already explained, and perforce must we regrettably appeal that you submit your comments within 36 hours to your designated compiler, the candidate's mentor, if at all possible.

This should put the date at which the mentor would ideally receive your brief comments at October 7.
We appreciate that this urgent request for a few words is huge and are grateful for whatever you can quickly contribute given the time constraint.

Please feel free to contact your faculty colleague the compiler with any questions or delay inquiries as CCE contributions after 36 hours could perhaps be accommodated by prior arrangement.
The compilation does however take in views from several quarters, so is itself no quick and easy task.

2. BROAD GUIDELINES

The CCE seeks information beyond what is in the application and thus excludes what the Fulbright selectors will read elsewhere in the application.
In other words, they do not want information repeated that is stated in the application: the judges seek new information, fresh views, perspectives or takes on the application and or the applicant.

For opinions to be meaningful and carry any weight, they must be substantiated with evidence: if it is held in your view that the candidate displays a noteworthy attribute, then what has she demonstrated that has led to your conclusion about this characteristic?

May we suggest you download the CCE sent to you onto your desktop, enter your brief comments, and then attach the form on an email to your designated compiler whose contact information you already have.
No need for a message as the compiler is expecting this from you.

In the subject line, just type:
Fulb Eval YR Applicantfirstname Lastname

It is suggested that, in answer to each question, you might wish to respond with your most noteworthy observation, one highlight that perhaps captures the spirit of the candidate or distills an essence of her make-up.
Your own lively, fresh word choice will help enliven the candidate and bring her to life for the selectors. 
 
If you cannot comment or don’t have any impressions to share for a particular question, just type in NA.
The example that follows under Constructive Evaluation Input is a complete evaluation whereas from each contributor we are seeking only partial answers.

Positive statements about the candidate are of course the most helpful to her but Smith College must at the same time uphold its credibility in whom it recommends and with what level of accolade.
Should you have information that you rather not record but feel should be shared, please contact Smith Fellowships Adviser Donald Andrew in the Class Deans’ Office, or the applicant’s Faculty Mentor.

While obviously we don’t want a Smith graduate disregarding the Fulbright mission abroad, we should equally remember that this is a Student fellowship and thus the highest or most polished and sophisticated standards in everything except ethical questions are not expected. 
Thank you again so very much for your contribution as your support is truly appreciated and immensely helpful to the candidate.

3. GUIDANCE RESOURCES

The Fulbright administrators recommend that evaluators check the candidate’s country summary via
http://us.fulbrightonline.org/countries/regions
to familiarize themselves with the requirements of that country, which are so pertinent to the candidate’s qualifications and suitability.

Is the applicant equipped to cope with living and other conditions in the host country and is she adequately prepared to carry out the proposed project?

Graduating seniors ought to be compared with their peers and not measured against more advanced graduate students although our students are probably not competing against other Smith students for the same country, especially not on the same topics, but rather with top students at other institutions across the country.

Most of the information herein comes directly from the U.S. Student Fulbright administrators, the Institute of International Education, U.N. Plaza, New York City.

Impressions as substantive and explicit as possible are most helpful.
Since the items on the Evaluation Form are general in nature, some specific questions related to each consideration are found at
Evaluation Questions
http://www.smith.edu/fulbright/input_eval.php

4. SEVEN EVALUATION ITEMS

The following seven points comprise the CCE.
Because each consideration has factors that circumscribe it, and because it is upon these criteria that an application will ultimately be rated and ranked, they are discussed on their own page.

You are respectfully requested to be so kind to review
Selection Criteria
http://www.smith.edu/fulbright/input_select.php
in order that Smith College does the best job possible in presenting its candidates.

• Academic or professional qualifications (especially in relation to proposed project). ETA relative to ETA responsibilities.

• Research: Validity and feasibility of proposed project. ETA: Communication skills/expression in English language.

• Language qualifications
(with special reference to proposed project and to the requirements of the host country).

• Evidence of maturity, motivation, and adaptability to a different cultural environment
(personal suitability).

[Candidate's Community Engagement plans must be evaluated in one of the three following answer boxes.]

• Knowledge of host country.

• Evaluation of impression candidate will make abroad as a citizen representing the United States.

• General comments.

5. COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE FEEDBACK

[Poorly Completed CCE Example]

Name of student Tommy Atkins Country United Kingdom Field Art

Academic or professional qualifications (especially in relation to proposed project) ETA relative to ETA responsibilities:
Excellent

Research: Validity and feasibility of proposed project. ETA: Communication skills/expression in English language.
Since he is so beautifully prepared, Atkin’s project is valid and feasible.
He also knows precisely what he wants to study in the UK and with whom he wants to study.

Language qualifications (with special reference to proposed project and host country requirements):
Not applicable

Evidence of maturity, motivation, and adaptability to a different cultural environment (personal suitability):
Excellent

Knowledge of host country:
Slight

Evaluation of impression candidate will make abroad as a citizen representing the United States:
He will make an excellent impression abroad since he exudes brilliance.

General comments:
His exciting plans for after-hours will surely make him popular among the people abroad.
The committee was impressed by the brilliance displayed in his interview.
He is clearly going to have a distinguished career.

6. CONSTRUCTIVE EVALUATION INPUT
 
[Well-Completed CCE Example]

Name of student Jane Doe Country Italy Field Anthropology

Academic or professional qualifications (especially in relation to proposed project) ETA relative to ETA responsibilities:
The candidate is admirably prepared for the proposed study. Her intellectual abilities are exceptional, her background solid, her training excellent, her command of the discipline and its literature, impressive. She is not only well read, well organized and well informed, but she is experienced in fieldwork both in the US and in Europe. She is clearly intellectually and academically equipped to do a first-rate job.

Research: Validity and feasibility of proposed project. ETA: Communication skills/expression in English language.
The proposal, both in scope and timetable, is feasible and academically valid. She has focused and defined her research with precision; she knows exactly the type of community she seeks and has carefully chosen the particular questions for her investigation. The criteria she used in reaching her decisions are academically sound and are based on her impressive knowledge of the field and her good judgment in recognizing both questions of anthropological importance and sound avenues by which to investigate them.

Language qualifications (with special reference to proposed project and host country requirements):
The applicant is herself of Italian extraction and is studying the language formally now. She plans an additional intensive study with a member of the faculty during the spring semester.

Evidence of maturity, motivation, and adaptability to a different cultural environment (personal suitability):
The committee was enormously impressed with her intellectual competence and her remarkable organization. It should be noted that she is, as she states, a stutterer, and yet her speech difficulties have not deterred her from pursuing her academic interests, even though oral interviews play a large role in her research. She is poised and in command of herself at all times, and possesses a sensitivity and charm that should make her well received abroad. Her fieldwork in rural Spain, though brief, was extremely successful.

Knowledge of host country:
She is exceptionally well informed. She has a firm grasp of the history and development of the anthropology of law in Italy, both in larger principle and in specific detail.

Evaluation of impression candidate will make abroad as a citizen representing the United States:
The candidate’s personal charm and gentle ways should win her personal acceptance wherever she goes. Her determination and perseverance in the face of handicap should win her respect. Her intellectual competence will clearly win her admiration. She is an excellent representative of the United States.

General comments:
His exciting plans for after-hours will surely make him popular among the people abroad.
Her plans to engage the community beyond her project are well thought-out for her location and will clearly help promote the Fulbright goal of inter-cultural mutual understanding. Generally, the committee found the candidate to be extraordinarily well-organized, well-focused and coherent in her presentation. Her need to express herself economically but completely has led to a clarity of thought and organization of subject matter that is refreshing, rewarding, and all too rare. She has the Committee’s strongest endorsement.

7. HOW TO USE THE CCE

You are not expected to fill all of each box space but rather are asked contribute a few choice nuggets to help the compiler assemble a weighty report from various sources.
Simply type a sentence or more into each box for which you have a comment.

You may on the other hand know the candidate well, from interface over a number of years and can, perhaps better than others, comment authoritatively and extensively - especially about factors not covered in the application that (only) you would know about.
This is very much welcomed too because it is precisely this kind of extra information that is sought - it is just that we are not specifically expecting that you do comment comprehensively when your experience of the candidate may be slight.

Use the CCE blank that the applicant should have sent you, otherwise download the pdf from
http://www.smith.edu/fulbright/includes-documents/CCE_form_blank.pdf

Note: You must download the pdf before you can edit it.

The CCE pdf has 13 boxes you can type into.
These text boxes are not visible until you click on them.
Click in the open space just under the question headings to activate the box so you can type into it.

You can use TAB only to switch between Name of Student, Country, and Field or Grant Category text boxes.
Otherwise, TAB doesn't work.

Saving the form will save whatever text you've typed into each box.

Each text box is limited in characters.
The form will not let you type more than the allowed number of characters.
See below for the character limits.

To spell check in Preview (for Mac), go under Edit > Spelling and Grammar and select "Checking spelling while typing".
This will only highlight words you've misspelled in the field you currently have selected.
Misspelled words in other fields will not be shown until you click on that field.
Other directions coming soon.

Box Measurements

The answer space for each box question is:

• Academic or professional qualifications relative to proposed project; ETA relative to ETA responsibilities
5 LINES = max 700 characters with spaces.

• Research: Validity and feasibility of proposed project. ETA: Communication skills/expression in English language
4 LINES = max 575 characters with spaces

• Language qualifications (with special reference to proposed project and to the requirements of the host country)
3.5 LINES = max 450 characters with spaces

• Evidence of maturity, motivation, and adaptability to a different cultural environment (personal stability)
4 LINES = max 575 characters with spaces

• Knowledge of host country
3.5 LINES = max 450 characters with spaces

• Evaluation of impression candidate will make abroad as a citizen representing the United States
4 LINES = max 575 characters with spaces

• General comments
5 LINES = max 700 characters with spaces

Thank You!
Please email fellow@smith.edu if you have any questions about the CCE form.
Click to CCE Blank.
Must download form to use it.