farflung

Congratulations -- that means you got it! Perhaps have your advisor take a look before sending an e-mail response? I don't think you need to be overly formal. If you haven't received any other sources of outside funding, just briefly thank them and let them know that. However, if you have proposals still under consideration, you should tell them that too -- perhaps also elaborating on whether those budgets would overlap with what you've requested from Wenner-Gren.

SO true about reference letters. I mean, can't we just agree that faculty at PhD-granting institutions are way too busy to write letters for everything under the sun, even if they love their students? Especially for dissertation proposals, which should be able to stand on their own merit. On the job market front, I've heard that some very smart search committees aren't requiring rec letters until they weed out at least 75% of the candidates based on CV/publicatios. With the job market the way that it is, apparently all of the rec letters these days for TT positions are like "MY STUDENT IS IN THE TOP 1% OF ALL STUDENTS EVER!!"

Hi! I should have specified - I only received one reviewer's comments last time, but I also didn't make it past the first round! So I got cut in February, and then had a long while to revise before the May 1 deadline. Time is the obvious upside to getting eliminated early. In my case, I knew the theoretical thrust of the proposal had major problems, but the project design was good. I blocked off about 10 days to rewrite in April (once the sting of the reviewer comments wore off), and really went after it 12 hrs/day with no interruptions during that time. I started with the literature review, then reframed Questions 1 and 5. The project's potential to advance anthropological theory is, I believe, W-G's main criteria, and so better situating the project in important & timely theoretical debates in the field is crucial. The project design and methodology are more important in NSF, but Wenner-Gren cares most about theory. Since you've made it to the second round of review, you will definitely receive comments from 3 reviewers. This is good! 3 sets of comments will provide a more balanced & nuanced picture of what you're doing well and not so well, but yes - you have less time to revise if you don't receive funding. I totally think 2 weeks is enough, and I wouldn't wait until next May to resubmit. Sit on the comments for a few days -- talk them over / gripe about them with advisers and colleagues, because they're often quite devastating. But you'll need to be tough and start assimilating those comments into your revisions very quickly. If you end up submitting for Nov 1, make sure you block off a couple days to exclusively focus on the resubmission statement. Based on all of the resubmission statements I have read (from successful proposals), you should use that essay not just to matter-of-factly trace what you've changed, but to further justify your project and defend its intellectual worth. Sneak in comments like "The reviewers suggested I do ____. In response, I have ____, a change which better illustrates (why my project will change anthropology / is super revolutionary!!)." Hope that helps! As I said, I'm at the end of my dissertation-proposal-writing career, and all I can say is soldier on... Can anyone who has made it to the second round before confirm whether we'll get individual scores from each reviewer?

Ha! I would have to agree on those points about Chicago and Harvard, but that's just Anthro gossip (no direct experience with either, I'm sure they have lovely people). If this is your first application cycle, keep in mind that you should definitely have a plan B in case you don't gain admission this time around -- hopefully working in something that is related to your field of study or interest. I had to apply to graduate school two years in a row, and I learned a lot from year 1 to year 2. Fortunately, now I'm in a great program that is a great fit for me. On the topic of funding, you're not alone! Applicants to humanities and social science PhD programs -- except for the exceptionally wealthy -- should really avoid programs that come with a price tag. Being an anthropologist is not a lucrative profession, and there is no guarantee of academic employment even with a PhD and a stellar record. So if anyone else is reading this, please do not take on debt to get a PhD in Anthropology.

I'm in a 4-field Anthro PhD program with a strong group of archaeologists. We're not a huge department, and yes, all graduate classes are seminars -- small courses, very little lecturing, and you will be called upon to engage in discussion and even teach your peers about weekly readings. From what I've heard from arch folks, grad seminars tend to be heavily theoretical, and there is very little technical training in any particular techniques. Perhaps the theoretical focus is unique to PhD programs though? Some students take technical courses outside of the department or even outside of the university, but they're also in the field every summer learning the "hands-on" stuff they'll need to do dissertation work.

Literally all of those schools have good reputations in cultural anthro, many of them have stellar reputations (Toronto, Yale, Columbia, UI Urbana-Champaign especially). I don't know much about Notre Dame. The UC schools give me pause because I've heard that funding is super super tight, and PhD programs should ideally be fully-funded for multiple years. I say apply for the programs that interest you, but in the spring when it comes time to decide you'll want to prioritize who gives you funding. Money is so so important for quality of life & quality of research down the road -- trust me! Many graduate programs list their current students, with e-mail addresses and descriptions of their research interests, on their department website. So go digging on those department sites for grad student e-mails, and don't be shy about e-mailing them with application advice and such. Good luck!

I know a bit about some of those departments. What kind of information are you looking for? Can you be more specific about your potential research topic? And perhaps professors that you're interested in working with at those schools? Perhaps a good place to start would be e-mailing current graduate students at those departments and asking what they think of your fit for the school-- keeping in mind that they are EXTREMELY busy, and thanking them profusely if or when they respond.

Hi! Current student lurking here. That's a list of great schools, Baloch. However, many of the schools you have listed do NOT in fact offer terminal MA programs -- they award the MA en route to the PhD (as do all American PhD programs). Brown doesn't have a terminal MA, Yale doesn't either -- those are just the ones that I know of. Just don't want you to waste your time on MA applications for departments that only admit students interested in a PhD.

Thanks for drawing attention to this! I would guess funding ran out for the GROW with USAID, but I'm not sure. Does the NSF GRIP still exist? I contacted the program contacts a few weeks ago about when to expect a Dear Colleague Letter (if at all), and never heard back.

Yes, this is exactly the policy at my university as well (large urban private university, it's possible we're at the same institution). Anyone who accepts outside fellowship money in excess of 15k or something loses the normal graduate student fellowship. No combining allowed. I'm in the social sciences, but I believe this is the policy across departments. Of course, the dollar amount awarded for outside fellowships in social science/humanities tend to be much lower than in the natural sciences -- so the policy hurts us more! Also, accepting outside fellowship money does not extend the 5 years of funding I was promised upon entrance to graduate school. So yeah. Win lots of money because it's good for your CV / career, but you're still out the door in the same amount of time as everyone else, and probably not making much more money. SILVER LINING! It's not huge (I think an extra $300 per month or so), but my university does provide a bonus for those who are on outside fellowship. So I earn my outside fellowship amount + $300 each month. This is supposed to incentivize us to win fellowships. Personally, I'm with you in believing we should be able to accept all money we are awarded -- both from the university and from outside agencies.

Thanks! This cycle was a resubmission for me-- as I imagine is the case for many May applicants-- and last round I only got one reviewer's comments. I'm 100% out of energy & time to do a third round. At this point I need to pay exclusive attention to feedback which will actually help me DO the project (not propose it more elegantly)!

Yes, should be anytime before October 15! The sooner the better. As I understand it, if we've made it to the WG second round we should receive 3 reviews regardless of the outcome -- is this correct?

Hi, I'm a current GRFP fellow, on an additional NSF grant now, and have faculty mentors that have been NSF reviewers. You are judged for GRFP on the basis of intellectual merit and broader impacts -- that is truly it. Your 3 reviewers will sit down and read through your application, as quickly as possible, then write a few sentences about whether/how it complies with BI and IM. In other words, they will give you a score from Excellent --> Poor on BI and IM, then move on to the next application because they have others to read. NSF reviewers simply don't have time or energy to sift through who on your CV could have written you a letter but didn't. Just write badass statements and get 3 strong letters, that's it! And a general word of wisdom to everyone: spend your energy crafting excellent statements that do your research justice and are EASY to read, not worrying about holes in your record that you can't control. Good luck!

Many many GRFP fellows do research involving human subjects, including almost all social scientists. What you're asking about, I think, is what qualifies as clinical research. So, what exactly is your research question? In other words, why are you doing direct observations of symptoms of this particular neurological disorder? If these observations are oriented toward direct clinical outcomes (i.e testing drugs or interventions to see which one works best), you are doing applied clinical research, which is excluded from the NSF GRFP. However, if you're merely studying interactions between symptoms, and have some larger question to probe that contributes to neuroscience as a whole (i.e. reasons to do these kinds of observations that aren't geared toward direct clinical interventions), you definitely qualify. It sounds like you fall more in this second category, so I say apply!

Also, to the question of your chances -- um, yes! You have two MA degrees? That should make you more than qualified to compete with the best of the best for entrance into top programs. Be sure to emphasize your experience writing up and presenting prior research!

Anthropology is eclectic and interdisciplinary by nature. We draw on non-anthropologists for inspiration, cite non-anthropologists, and welcome non-anthropologists (who love ethnography or anthropological theory) into the fold. So yes, in my experience it is extremely common for people with no BA or MA in Anthropology to gain entrance into top-ranked Anthropology programs. I'm in a well-regarded Anthro PhD program, and I think only 30% or so of my cohort had a previous degree in Anthropology before beginning. Others came from history, modern languages, area studies, development studies, political philosophy-- at both the BA and MA level. Both of your projects sound anthropological to me. Just make sure you show off your research chops and ground your statements of purpose in anthropological thinking and writing (i.e. cite anthropologists). What matters is a coherent and compelling research plan that matches the interests of the department faculty, solid research experience (ethnographic, historical, archaeological, whatever), and lots of luck.

Hi elunia -- I strongly disagree with the poster above. If you're getting a PhD in Anthropology, I say go for it. Anything under the wide umbrella of anthropology is, by definition, related to the "humanities" in a basic sense. Do you see your work as advancing knowledge of human origins, behavior, wellbeing, etc? If so, you are engaging in humanistic research. You may use empirical or scientific methods ((all anthropologists do, even socio-culturals engaged in ethnographic work)), but empirical methods don't necessarily make your work less humanistic than folks who are interpreting texts or creating philosophical arguments. Although my department does not do bioarchaeology specifically, I've known a few anthropological archaeologists who have won the ACLS. It's a fabulous opportunity. Good luck!

Wow, I wonder why the dip? The total # of projected awards (at least on the initial call for applications) was actually up in 2015 compared to years past. My update is I did finally heard from my CO yesterday, who was indeed on vacation. Unfortunately no good news to report. Congrats to grantees! My CO tells me that comments will be released to unsuccessful applicants in November -- has anyone received more detailed instructions on accessing comments? I kind of hate that the Dept of Ed refuses to communicate with individual applicants.

Hi all - have any NSF graduate fellows had experience applying for the NSF GRIP program? I realize this is a pilot program, so there are very few of us & very little information available from either the NSF or internship sponsors. I am considering applying for the upcoming cycle ((info/deadline still not released)) and would love to speak to someone about their experience or swap statements with someone else thinking of applying this year. Feel free to PM me!

Don't be discouraged! Entrance to graduate programs in Anthro can be tough, and it occasionally requires more than one application cycle. I applied 2 years in a row. However, I was coming from a no-name undergrad program (you're very lucky to be coming from an Ivy & have experience in grad seminars), and I applied exclusively to programs that 1) were fully funded (DEBT IS A NO-NO FOR YOUR PHD), 2) were places I actually wanted to attend, 3) were prestigious programs for my field of interest, where I had a chance of getting an academic job upon completion. So if you want to stay in the Northeast, DO IT, there are tons of great programs! Grad school is hard enough without moving yourself to a part of the country you don't want to live in. Two other pieces of advice : 1) Apply to PhD programs if you think you want to get a PhD. You'll get a Master's en route. 2) You don't necessarily need extensive research experience in Anthro, plenty of people enter grad programs with little background in the field. It sounds like you're taking steps to get the research experience you've been missing at your current school. If you come up short in the admissions process this year, try to make your plan B something geared toward your potential field site / language / research area, which will give you a leg up next year.

I interpreted "out of pocket" as things you purchased which were NOT reimbursed. If this is indeed the case, you have every reason to believe this is unusual and unfair! In my experience [[in a department which usually struggles with organization/timeliness/bureaucratic functioning]] graduate students are reimbursed for even the most minor expenses (paper plates for a lunch presentation, etc) by the financial administrator of our department. She also completes the reimbursement paperwork on our behalf -- we simply bring her receipts and make sure she knows who / what grant to charge it to. Is there an administrative assistant or someone who is not your PI you could consult with about this? Many departments also keep petty cash on hand for small expenses, so you could try casually asking if such a system exists. There is no reason you should be footing the bill for lab expenses.

Hi everyone, I haven't heard anything from my CO. Any thoughts as to what this means? I'm thinking (1) they send out rejections late & my institution didn't win any grants, or (2) my CO is on vacation and hasn't bothered to notify. Either way, SO frustrating!

I haven't heard anything either. Does anyone know if Fulbright-Hays purchases plane tickets for all grantees, or will do reimbursements? I really need to start my fieldwork October 1 (my proposed start date) and am getting antsy to get a ticket in my hand -- I'm going abroad whether or not F-H provides the $. Would anyone advise just going ahead and purchasing a ticket?

I'm a former Fulbright IIE recipient and now applying for the Fulbright-Hays-- I think your 2-year timeline is technically possible, but you'll want to check with your campus Fulbright representative. If this is allowed, you would need to make an air-tight case for why your dissertation research requires two consecutive years in the host country, especially when it comes time to apply for your second grant. Almost all agencies want to fund 12-16 months of fieldwork/archival work abroad. Requests for funding beyond that are often read negatively: "why didn't this person get their work done in 12 months? why didn't she do what she said she would do [[e.g. the whole project]] in the last grant? why should we fund this person to hang out for another year when we can fund an entirely new project that can be completed in 12 months?" PS - these are not my thoughts on research abroad - I understand that more time in field is often necessary/better, but you will be up against these perceptions! Here's my advice : Fulbright IIE: Includes the ETA and Research Grant. Open to anyone with a B.A. Degree. September/October Deadline, requires an interview with your campus panel. Administered through IIE. This grant favors applicants who have little or no experience (usually less than 6 months, although check me on that - it's on the website) living in the host country. So, if you do decide to apply for both, you need to apply for this one first, before you garner substantial experience in the country. Fulbright-Hays DDRA: Only for doctoral candidates conducting dissertation research abroad in fields (broadly) related to area studies. Spring deadline. No interview required, usually very short application period. Administered through the Department of Education -- totally separate funding source and administrative apparatus than IIE. Applicants are recommended by American panel of area studies experts, and then merely rubber-stamped by the host country (whereas the host country does more of the selecting with the IIE). How you could win both: In the fall of 2015, apply for Fulbright IIE. Win it! You'll hear back in Spring 2016. In Spring/Summer 2016, apply for Fulbright-Hays. Propose a start date that is around the end of your Fulbright-IIE year. Make a solid case for why the Fulbright-Hays is absolutely essential to complete your project, acknowledging that you'll be abroad on the Fulbright IIE for 10 months prior. Do not request a long project (16 months of funding or something) from Fulbright-Hays when they know you've already had 10 months of IIE funding-- apply for 6 months or something modest. Keep in mind that the stipend is much, much higher for Fulbright-Hays -- in my case roughly 2x what I would receive with Fulbright IIE. This is because per diems are calculated on the state department's rate for Fulbright-Hays, and Fulbright IIE offers a flat $1000/month stipend (or something like that) in almost every corner of the world. Because Fulbright-Hays is designed for advanced doctoral candidates who often have families, you can also request substantial funding for dependents. If I were you I would really shoot for the Fulbright-Hays, and then plan to stretch the money as long as you possibly can -- you may find that you can do 2 years of research abroad with merely one year of salary from Fulbright-Hays. Good luck!

FYI, from the Wenner-Gren Foundation Twitter Feed August 4: "STAGE 1 decisions for individual grant apps have been sent by email. If you have not received re: your appl status, pls email app office!"