WLOG8

In my case, "Damn you reviewer one!" Haha. I wish there were some sort of standardization in the reviewing process. It seems unimaginable to me that I can get a P (the lowest possible rating!) from one reviewer in the BI section, yet two VG's from the others. Just thought I would commiserate with you. Good luck with your next applications. Personally, I don't know if I'm going to reapply. Unfortunately, the P was given with no constructive comments, so I don't know how I can make my app any better. There seems to be too much randomness in the review process to make it worth my time. Maybe I can submit the exact same app next year, and I'll do much better simply because I don't have the reviewer from hell! Nevertheless, congrats to all awardees!

Just got my reviews sheets. Very confused. And sad. But mostly confused. E/P E/VG VG/VG I just don't see how the first reviewer's rating in the BI section could be so wildly different from the ratings of the others, who remark on my tutoring, teaching, grading, involvement and leadership in related extracurric's, community outreach, and desire to communicate with the community. It's likely that this singular rating killed my chances, which is crazy. No constructive comments given by this wildcard reviewer either: "Unsure what the applicant means by 'the whole community.' The applicant could improve the research statement by explaining the potential impact on a broader audience. The applicant has been involved in, to a limited extent, community outreach." Essentially, saying "the applicant can do better in the BI section by doing better in the BI section." How is this supposed to help me if I want to apply again? Moreover, the other reviewers thought that my potential for broader impact was so strong that they gave me VG's. Can't believe this.