nanograd

Congrats everyone! I didn't get awarded with E/VG E/VG E/F. 2nd year grad student, but i already have a fellowship so I'm not too upset. I knew broader impacts would kill me. Reviewers loved the intellectual merit portion of my app. Atleast I know that my letter writers (including PI) thinks I'm an excellent researcher and a visionary!

Guys I finally had enough focus to do some lab work and not just work on data/figures for the first time in weeks

Okay good to know! I think I will hold off on changing it in fastlane, out of superstition that they for some reason will send it back "without review" because my name doesn't match my transcripts We will see if I even need to worry in the morning . Thank you!

I think the consensus is that it is very likely for the results to be released tonight/tomorrow morning.

Okay so curious about something if anyone has any input or ideas. Since applying this fall, I have gotten married, so my last name that I applied under is changed. Will I have troubles accepting the fellowship if I am awarded? Or does it go by social security? Will NSF change my name on the awarded/HM list to my new last name?

I don't think I will be able to sleep tonight or function tomorrow, regardless of the results. So here's to constant refreshing tonight.

*Sweats profusely*

It "should be" ...hm... interesting phrasing

What course if you don't mind me asking, i'm a chem grad student? If it were me, I would get up extra early, study for a few hours until I felt pretty good about the material, open the results ~1 hour before the exam, and then take a walk to process before sitting down to the exam. I think knowing either way and having a bit of time in the morning will help you to focus during the exam.

For the last tuesday release they posted maintenance on monday

This guy gets it

I had a dream that i woke up in a panic around 3am and checked my phone and had an email with a link to the fastlane grfp page. The "2018 season is closed" headline was changed to the title of my research proposal and it was a link. But I tried to click on it and it was broken. Guys I'm done.

Basically like she said: If they know they are going to release tomorrow why would they wait up until 9pm to advise maintenance? At that point no one but us will be checking advisories anyways.

Yeah I'm very doubtful we will get results tomorrow.

Poetic.

Not ready for this

Was looking over the NSF GRFP website and saw this: "For GRFP applicants and reference writers who are located in Puerto Rico, the US Virgin Islands and other islands in hurricane-impacted areas there will be an extension of the application and reference letter deadlines until 5:00 p.m., submitter’s local time, Friday December 29, 2017. Submitter’s local time is determined by the applicant's mailing address. " i knew there was a delay but didnt realize it was until Dec. 29th. Do you think this will substantially change the release day?

I feel like this is a sick game that NSF is playing with us and they are just lurking this forum waiting for us to be defeated before they release

I am absolutely not saying to limit access to higher education. High school students, however, should be better supplied with the information needed to decide if college is the best option for them, as well as offering great technical alternatives as a mainstay (see Education in Germany). I myself am a first generation college graduate (and first PhD student in my family), I only learned about college from high school, friends, media, etc, and I was fully supported by financial aid throughout my undergrad. Access to college as well as technical schools for students from all backgrounds is what I am suggesting.

In 2016 when it was a Tuesday release, there was a gradcafe post at 9:30 AM the Monday before:

Some trades don't need to be a source of long term growth or create new technologies. Some trades are simply an art and don't need to be researched or improved; they just need to be passed on.

CS and stats are two of the fields I think we need a lot more minds investing in. It is the future. But I still stand by my word that most everything can be self-taught with the current internet and knowledge availability. I am all for the GRFP, I was talking about continual funding of PIs by NSF. Yes basic research is a need, but as I've stated, we can certainly do more with less. I don't think NSF should be cut, as discussed above it will have almost zero effect on government spending. And yes I absolutely agree with cutting the major expenses as well to control government spending. But cutting the BA and BS overproduction won't be done without some serious effort, as it is a massive business that cares only about number of students they can pump out and suck money out of. That will have a trickle-up effect that will help tune us into the fields with the highest demands.

And we can encourage the pursuit of PhDs for such careers through the lessening of the draw towards being a PI (ie less funding and less positions because we have less of a BA/BS load). Kind of like making PhDs more of a training and learning experience, as they should be, with a few great PIs per generation. (Again, I know, bold and not the most favorable way to look at it.)

It is quite bold, I know, but my reasoning is as follows. I am a bit of a minimalist, and I think we can do the same work ("we" = PhD workforce as a whole; all fields, academia+industry. "work" = pursuit of scientific and technological advancement) with much less. We don't need as many professors in academia if we stop encouraging everyone and their brother into getting a bachelor's degree, and instead offer some technical secondary school and beyond options, to help save trades which are necessary and dying. We will need less funding for PIs, and thus smaller incoming PhD classes. I'm not saying there aren't jobs out there, but I am posing the question; were these jobs created so that PhDs could work, or were PhDs created so they could do these jobs? I'm just offering up my opinions here to stir up some thoughts in some young bright minds, not saying I am right or wrong.

Alot to unwrap there For clarity, I am a chemist and I love science in every way. It has truly changed my life and I am forever grateful. But I see both sides of this argument and cannot be biased towards my own career development. I am sorry, but in no way do I think debt is a good thing. We would be much better off with zero debt ie living within our means. And right now, the debt is insane. I agree that cutting government funding will not help our nation's debt. But I am talking about the academic industry as a whole. We are over-producing PhDs, as well as BA/BS students. And continuing to pump funding into research only drives this siphoning of funds from kids who will see little return on their time spent earning a degree which has been devalued. Perhaps this is a good thing, though. Starting to discourage the natural and social sciences from continual PhD pumping. We are in an age where knowledge is so readily available. You can teach yourself anything you want to know; anyone can make a career online from scratch and some hard work, or at least with only a BA/BS.