daykid

Some POI's don't reply out of principle. They don't want to communicate with any students before they've read the applications. I wouldn't take a school off the table if it is a good fit just because the POI doesn't respond to your initial inquiry.

I reached out after I had a completed SOP draft. In my email I explained my interest in the program and mentioned that I had an SOP I would be happy to send along if they would like. One or two took me up on it. One or two responded but didn't want to see the draft. And, at least one did not respond to the email at all until after I was offered an interview at the program.

I agree with Hats' post above. [Edit: Just read Hats' original post and it is excellent! Most of what follows here is a sloppier version of that] I think that more than having a hyper specific project in mind, a SOP should try to demonstrate how you can formulate questions of anthropological interest and why the program you are applying to will help you develop those questions into a project that will produce new knowledge. Based on what you've said your broad interests are: "(language/discourse as vehicles for power, social theory of objectivity and knowledge production, China, social media, science and environmental studies, technology and politics), " You've got a region identified: China. You've also got some theoretical areas identified: Language and Power; Politics of Knowledge, Social Media, STS, and Environmental Anthropology. For your SOP try to identify what intersections of these areas you want to explore more and why. That could be specific enough of a project pitch at this stage so long as it is well articulated and matches up with interests at the universities you are applying to. Maybe its something about how language and social media platforms are involved in disseminating and producing knowledge about climate change in China. I have no idea and am making something up based on..well, nothing... but I think that is the type of leap you want to make. You want to situate yourself as having the potential to do something new and interesting while also showing connections to existing areas of scholarship that the department is already working on. The faculty know you're project will likely change. They want to see how you think. I don't know if this helps.

My advisor received my award letter, dated 10/11. I am still waiting on mine, but am over the moon!

Just got a budget request with the magic words "No need to reapply for the Nov 1. deadline". I am over the moon.

Got official rejection/comments this morning.

Based on previous timelines and last cycle, I wouldn't expect anything before mid-October - around 2 weeks before the Nov 1 submission deadline to give folks time to resubmit.

Thanks, that's what I figured. Honestly, I wasn't holding my breath on this one. Congrats to everyone who got good news!

So it seems like quite a few folks heard on Friday. Do we think that all the good news has gone out at this point and if we haven't heard it's probably a no?

Would folks who have heard be willing to share the countries where they work?

Just got my rejection. Rated 3.3 out of 5. Encouraged to resubmit. Good luck to others!

Sadly, I don't think the WG social media person has any knowledge about the grant stuff. They're there for the jokes. Doesn't stop me from checking it obsessively, though.

Nope, I was on the earlier panel. But a friend who was on the 3/23 panel was recently declined.

This was the breakdown I got when I was declined by NSF. This is half of the total apps. A. COMPETITIVE: 14 proposals (Highly Competitive: 3; Competitive: 11). B. NOT COMPETITIVE: 82 (Needs Moderate Revision: 23 proposals; Needs Serious Revision: 59 proposals) Also, looks like today is not the day for WG

Crickets on my end.