Jump to content

fd.711

Members
  • Posts

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Application Season
    Not Applicable
  • Program
    Social Psychology

fd.711's Achievements

Decaf

Decaf (2/10)

7

Reputation

  1. Yeah, I do see that, but the lack of info from any official source makes me wonder if it's actually going to happen or not. Don't want to get my hopes up until the extra cash is in my bank account (or my CO tells us that it will be soon). Fingers crossed...
  2. I mean...you're not wrong (the IRS doesn't know about stipends reported on a 1098T per se*), but if you deliberately under-report income that you know is taxable, the technical term for what you're doing is "tax fraud." So, you know...don't do that. The IRS may not catch it if you don't--especially considering that they're notoriously understaffed at the moment and thus unlikely to waste time going after your small-fry income--but the penalties if you ARE caught can be harsh, and it's just not worth the risk. (Not to mention dishonest, for whatever that's worth.) *You can verify this by accessing your wage and income transcript on the IRS' website.
  3. I honestly can't say much about the review process beyond what's described in the program solicitation. (And even if I did know anything beyond NSF's official info, I'm not really supposed to know it.) Most of what I know comes from my own experiences as an applicant and the general advice I received about how to make a strong application. I was awarded the GRFP last year (2nd of 2 attempts), and I'm happy to share my experiences here. But I'm afraid I don't have any more insight than you guys about the inner workings of the review process . I can only imagine that GRFP decisions are like laws and sausages (and journal articles): You're better off not knowing how they're made.
  4. Exactly. The GRFP is a fellowship, not a grant; that is, it funds YOU, not your research. That said, your ability to develop (and concisely explain) a feasible, useful research program is a pretty important factor in determining whether or not you, as a researcher, should receive the funding. Even if you never conduct the project(s) you proposed in your application, you still need to demonstrate that you can come up with enough good ideas to keep you busy for the duration of the fellowship.
  5. This is the review process for a full NSF grant, NOT the NSF-GRFP. (Among other clues, the GRFP isn't administered by the Division of Grants and Agreements, it's administered by the Division of Graduate Education. Also, NSF would never refer to GRFP reviewers as "peer" reviewers, because the reviewers--faculty and other experts in the various fields--are NOT the applicants'--current and future grad students--peers. They're our superiors!) The info in this post therefore may or may not be applicable to the GRFP review process. From the program solicitation, this is the review process specifically for the GRFP:
  6. Heh. That formula--which is entirely empirical, I'm sure --seems reasonable, although I might tweak some of the weights (and I prefer the term "serendipity" to "luck" in the context of GS admissions.) Anyway, you are also absolutely correct that having publications will increase your chances. That said, I think you may be overstating how much pubs help. To be sure, research experience, preferably including studies of your own design, is critical, but publications are...well, I like to think of them as extra credit--they definitely help, but you can do okay without them. Also, it's worth noting that different programs--and professors--may have different standards for what constitutes a strong application. As such, it is possible that there are programs (or professors) that won't seriously consider an applicant who doesn't have any publications, but if I had to guess, I'd say they're in the minority (at least in social psych). The chances of consistently--once every few years--finding sufficient applicants who have solid credentials, are a good fit, AND have a non-zero publication record are just too low to set the bar so high. Finally, I don't want anyone reading this thread to think that having lots of publications is a Golden Ticket to grad school. (Not that I think anyone here would, but it bears mentioning anyway.) You could have all the pubs in the world and you'll still get rejected if you can't coherently describe your research interests, for example. Conversely, you could be the only applicant out of dozens to a particular lab who doesn't have any publications--and still get in, because your numbers are amazing, your letters are glowing, and your personal statement perfectly describes why you're the best fit for that lab out of all of the applicants. Point is, don't get discouraged just because you don't have any publications. If your application is otherwise strong and you're a good fit for all of the programs to which you've applied, you still have a fighting chance. (And if your application isn't otherwise strong and/or you aren't a good fit to your chosen programs, then the lack of publications ain't gonna be what keeps you out.)
  7. No, you don't. Source: Am in grad school (PhD @ R1 university), did not have any publications at time of admission. Also know/know of students who were admitted before and after me w/o publications. Remember, graduate school is still, well, school. You're not expected to come in with a record as strong as someone who has been in the program for awhile, just as you weren't expected to know everything about psychology (or whatever) when you picked it as your undergrad major. Publications are a product of your research training, and grad school is where you get the vast majority of that training in the first place. Furthermore, graduate programs want students who will benefit from the program, and vice-versa, meaning they're not concerned with what you have done so much as with what you can do. So it's true that having publications will help your case, because it clearly demonstrates that you're capable of executing the research process from start to finish--but NOT having any pubs doesn't imply that you are incapable of executing the research process from start to finish, and there are other things that might also reflect your ability to succeed in grad school (e.g., your academic record, your letters of rec, the quality of your personal statement, and whatever research experience you DO have*). If you have the chance to get a publication, or publications, before starting grad school, by all means go for it. But don't assume that getting published is a prerequisite for getting accepted. I speak from firsthand experience when I say that anyone who tells you otherwise is full of crap. (P.S.: if you still don't believe me, don't forget that getting published is f***ing hard. If grad schools only accepted applicants who had already been published, they'd quickly run out of grad students. P.P.S.: For the record, I went to an obscure public liberal arts college--not an Ivy or some other "prestigious" school--and I still got in.) *Listed in no particular order.
  8. Rule #1: Until you have been officially offered admission (with guaranteed funding), EVERY interaction you have with ANYBODY affiliated with the university should be considered an "interview." That is, you are always being evaluated/judged, and anything you do (or say) can and will be reported to your POI/the admissions committee, who in turn can and will consider that information when deciding whether or not to accept you. (Actually, this rule holds even after you've been offered admission--they just can't reject you anymore.) Rule #2: When in doubt, see Rule #1. That being said, Gepetto's advice is good: Be relaxed and be yourself. Focus on being as friendly, outgoing, and professional as you possibly can be and you'll do fine--not to say you'll get in, but you'll give yourself a fighting chance (and you won't hurt yourself with anything stupid). And try to have fun! Even if you assume that you're always being evaluated, it's certainly possible for interview weekends to be fun, engaging experiences. Indeed, they really should be enjoyable; after all, you get to hang out with a bunch of people with very similar interests--professional and, frequently, personal--to your own. That's a pretty good weekend in my book, and I've had a great time at interview weekends even for programs that ultimately rejected me. (Also, if you don't enjoy the interview weekend, you probably won't enjoy being in the program, either.) Plus, interview weekends are a great opportunity to learn new things, both about your field and about yourself. Treat every interview as a chance to grow, personally and professionally, regardless of whether you enjoy the weekend or ultimately end up at that university. TL;DR: Always assume that it's more than just a formality--but don't let that assumption spoil the weekend. (P.S.: these same principles will apply later in your career when you're on the job market, so you might as well embrace them now .)
  9. Maybe so, but it still depends on the faculty member. Apparently the student accepted by the prof I wanted to work with intends to accept his offer. I'd be next (or second-from-next, I'm not entirely sure) on his list if she turned the offer down, and I'd almost certainly accept it, so he wouldn't be interviewing anybody else even if the accepted candidate declines the offer.
  10. If this is true, it depends on the faculty member. The POI I applied to work with has already made his decision post-interview. Unfortunately, it wasn't me
  11. TAMU's visit/interview stuff was last weekend (i.e., last weekend of Feb, not yesterday.)
  12. No other schools in Canada. I applied to a baker's dozen programs, but all of them except Toronto are in the US. That said, should I consider lack of any contact from a Canadian school a bad sign, good sign, or non-sign at this point? It seems from what I'm reading here that they're a little behind the US schools in the process, so maybe I'm not out of the running yet. Though I don't have my hopes up.
  13. May I ask what your program is? I applied to Toronto, although I haven't heard anything from them so I'm basically expecting another rejection at this point. Still, any information would be better than none if you go there or happen to know what their status is.
  14. I'm a little confused about my status at Rochester. I got an email from a POI there a few weeks ago (first weekend of Feb) telling me I was one of the students they were considering, but I wasn't invited to interview and I'm pretty sure I got that email after interview invites went out; one student told me she interviewed w/the same prof but received the invitation in January. I haven't heard anything since. Dunno what to make of that...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use