2027 CLS Selection Criteria and Evaluation Process Webinar

Summary

The webinar explains how the Critical Language Scholarship (CLS) Program evaluates applications for its 2027 summer program. Selection is merit-based and holistic: evaluators look for clear, specific evidence across the entire application, not a particular background, credential, or “ideal” applicant profile.

The five selection criteria

1. Commitment to language learning

   • Show sustained interest in the language and its associated cultures.
   • Explain how CLS would help you build proficiency.
   • Describe a realistic plan to continue learning after the program, such as tutoring, conversation exchanges, independent study, or campus and community resources.
   • Demonstrate initiative through actions you have already taken to pursue the language.

2. Preparation for and alignment with program expectations

   • Show readiness for an intensive academic schedule and an immersive environment.
   • Explain how you handle challenges, persist through discomfort, seek support, and work constructively with others.
   • Relevant evidence may come from coursework, employment, community responsibilities, caregiving, military service, or other demanding experiences.
   • CLS has no minimum GPA. Evaluators consider an applicant’s experiences, strategies, choices, and growth rather than a single metric.

3. Connection between language study and academic or professional goals

   • Explain the direction you are pursuing, why language proficiency and regional knowledge matter to it, and what the CLS experience could enable next.
   • Make the connection credible for your current stage. Goals may still be exploratory, especially for earlier-stage students.
   • Saying only that “the language would be useful” or “it would make me more competitive” is not a persuasive explanation.

4. Contribution to citizen diplomacy

   • Show openness to new perspectives, adaptability, collaboration, and reciprocal learning.
   • Explain how you would learn with people in language communities, not only learn about them.
   • Thoughtful representation of the United States matters, but citizen diplomacy is not simply about teaching others about America.

5. Contribution to national impact

   • Describe a plausible way to apply language and cultural expertise through a career, field, institution, or community in support of U.S. interests.
   • Potential areas include business, innovation, security, education, research, and public service.
   • A realistic pathway is more persuasive than a broad or inflated promise, such as claiming you will improve bilateral relations without explaining how.

What makes application evidence persuasive

• Be specific: Describe actions, decisions, challenges, and examples rather than relying on general claims such as “I work hard.”
• Be reflective: Explain what an experience meant, what changed, and what you learned.
• Be realistic: Outline achievable next steps and future contributions.
• Connect the narrative: Link experiences, language study, goals, and plans into a coherent application. Essays that feel like separate “silos,” or leave important details assumed, can be harder to evaluate.
• Preserve your authentic voice: Advising is most helpful when it prompts reflection rather than supplies answers or over-edits the student’s writing.

The webinar suggests these self-review questions:

• How did you change or grow because of an experience?
• Why is this language necessary for your direction?
• What will you do if learning resources are limited?
• How will you learn with, not only about, others?
• What is the next realistic contribution you can make?

Holistic review and context

Evaluators apply the five criteria across the complete application. Essays are important, but academic information, language and travel history, activities, employment, and previous programs may also provide relevant evidence. Each application is assessed on its own merits, with attention to academic level, institutional context, and prior language experience.

Prior travel, study abroad, or participation in another scholarship program is neither an automatic advantage nor a prerequisite. Evidence can come just as persuasively from local experiences, family responsibilities, work, campus leadership, or community commitments.

The stated exception is that, all other factors being equal, preference is given to veterans of the U.S. Armed Forces. ROTC students do not receive that preference, though relevant ROTC or military experience may still provide evidence for the criteria.

Evaluators and selection process

Evaluators may include language faculty, area specialists, education-abroad professionals, fellowship advisors, and CLS alumni. They receive training in the shared criteria, scoring expectations, and calibration. Language proficiency or experience teaching a CLS language can be helpful but is not required. Evaluators are independent of CLS staff and the State Department personnel involved with the program.

Selection has two rounds:

1. First round — after the November deadline through December

   • Each application receives two independent reviews.
   • Evaluators score all five criteria on a one-to-five scale; scores are averaged.
   • Top applications advance. Applicants are notified of semifinalist status by late January.

2. Second round — late January to early February

   • Each semifinalist application receives three additional independent reviews from a separate evaluator pool.
   • Evaluators then participate in a virtual, day-long panel to discuss applications and recommend finalists, alternates, and non-select applicants.
   • Finalists are notified by early March and have about two weeks to accept or decline.

The shared scoring scale is:

• 1 — Unqualified: Does not address the criterion’s guiding questions.
• 2 — Somewhat unqualified: Omits some questions or remains vague and general.
• 3 — Somewhat qualified: Relevant and plausible, but lacking depth or specificity.
• 4 — Qualified: Detailed, supported by relevant examples, and shows strong understanding.
• 5 — Highly qualified: Exceptional insight, clarity, detail, and alignment.

The scale rewards evidence, specificity, clear reasoning, and alignment—not prestigious experiences or particular backgrounds. The detailed criterion-specific rubric is reserved for evaluator training.

Program and application details addressed in Q&A

• Applicants apply for a language, not a specific host location. Locations and dates for the 2027 institutes were not yet finalized; the program expected to announce them in spring when finalists were notified.
• Institutes generally run for eight weeks, beginning at staggered times in June and ending in August. In-person programs combine intensive classroom instruction with language partners and engagement in the host community. Virtual institutes are also intensive—about 20 hours per week—and may meet outside typical U.S. business hours.
• Applicants should explain their connection to the language even if their preferred region, dialect, or location may not match the eventual institute site. Evaluators do not know the location during application review.
• No faculty recommendation is required. Applicants self-identify their language level based on what they expect to have completed by the program’s start. Finalists take an oral proficiency assessment, and partner institutes conduct placement testing.
• A scholarship cannot be deferred. Someone who cannot attend must withdraw but may apply in a later year; the later application is evaluated anew.
• The summer 2027 application deadline was stated as Tuesday, November 17 at 8 p.m. Eastern / 5 p.m. Pacific. Applicants were advised to submit early because last-minute technical problems do not extend the deadline.
• The recording and slides were expected to be posted on the CLS website. Questions could also be directed to the CLS Program by email or phone, and applicants and advisors were invited to use the program’s office hours.

Central takeaways

• Evidence matters: Evaluators can assess only what the application demonstrates.
• Review is holistic: No single essay, experience, activity, or credential determines the result.
• Context matters: Evaluators consider what applicants have done and the initiative they have shown within their circumstances.
• The program is mission-driven: Strong applications connect language learning and future goals to building linguistic skills, regional knowledge, and relationships that can support U.S. interests.

Speakers and sources featured

• Caitlin Ting — CLS Manager for Outreach and Selection; presenter and Q&A respondent.
• Becca AbuRakia-Einhorn — CLS Program Director; presenter and Q&A respondent.
• Critical Language Scholarship Program — The program whose selection process and application guidance were presented.
• U.S. Department of State / U.S. government — Identified as the program’s funder.
• American Councils for International Education — Identified as supporting program implementation.
• Audience members — Submitted questions during the Q&A; individual questioners were not identified in the subtitles.