Hello, everyone,
I followed the forum for a few days and thought that maybe my experience would be useful for some people. Yesterday, I was fortunate to received CGS-D confirmation (Geosciences committee 168). Last year (as an incoming student) I did not get anything, and I was actually pretty far down the ranking, so you can imagine that my hopes of getting anything this year were relatively low.
For those interested in getting an idea of personal profiles, I had been working for 4 years after my M. Eng. and I had 4 papers (3 as a first author, 1 as the second author). I did my Masters at Polytechnique Montreal (3.92 GPA), and my undergrad at a small university in Latin America you will never find in any sort of ranking list. However, my profile had not really changed this year from the previous year. So, what happened?
Well, I am not sure how much each factor influenced the overall strength of my application, but here it goes:
- Changed committee, even though I am a civil engineer by training, I chose this time to go with the geoscience committee based on the specific area of application.
- Added more minor prizes and awards from previous programs, even those with no monetary value.
- Really worked a lot on the proposal. I took a bunch of passes at it, with 5 people reading it with very substantial comments and changes.
- My supervisor made several comments to the “previous contribution statement”. Beyond focusing on the merits of each paper/contribution on its own, she told me to try and link it as much as possible to my proposal. That involved cutting some parts that I liked, but in the end, it helps sell the argument “why are you the ideal person to carry out this project?”
I do not know how much the fact that I was already registered at the university influenced the outcome or not (i.e. applying as first year student as opposed to applying at the same time you apply for university admission). Nevertheless, given my experience, I think the actual quality of the proposal and supporting documents can play a much bigger role than the background profile (e.g.: number of peer reviewed papers, coming from a prestigious university, etc.). So, I would recommend working on making sure the different components of the application help sell the idea that you are the ideal candidate for your project, even if you feel your background profile is not the most flashy or impressive. Oh… and really, really, really work on the proposal. Conversely, a flashy profile does not guarantee anything and still needs work to make sure an application is cohesive and interesting.
I sincerely understand the disappointment many of you are experiencing (been there myself). I hope that my experience can help some of you perform better next year and hopefully get an award!
Have a good weekend!
