[NSF GRFP 2011-2012]

That's an awesome idea! Thank you and congrats on being offered an award!

Ps. Have you not seen the link on how to get to the reviewer comments? Someone posted it here. Or you can just wait until they officially come up tomorrow.

I didn't see the link, but I did get the official reviews. E/E E/E E/E . I can confirm that the reviewers approve of the 'learning from struggles' and taking action to help others based on this. Every reviewer spent most of the broader impacts reivew talking about this. Overall my approach was "This was a problem, but isn't anymore. Dealing with these health issues made me more aware/sensitive to students who have various struggles. Here is how I have worked with XY and Z to increase accessibility .Here is what I currently have in the works, and I plan to do this other thing."

One other thing I should mention is that I asked my undergraduate research advisor to include in his statement how I did have these health difficulties, but how we were able to work around them. I also asked my current advisor to include something about how it isn't interfering with my graduate work. I don't know if these things were important to do or not.

[NSF GRFP 2011-2012]

Got HM.

G/VG

VG/E

VG/E

The reviewers were really positive actually, the only negative thing they all mentioned was that there are some weaknesses in my undergraduate academic records. AKA low undergrad GPA.

How do you fix that? With broader impact you can always do more outreach. Feeling discouraged to reapply next year. :/

I wouldn't feel discouraged about applying for next year. I didn't even make it to the third round of reviews my first two times, and got the award this year. If you got HM you're very close. It's true you can't redo your undergrad, but if that really sunk you, you wouldn't even have HM. If you're getting good grades in your graduate program, that will help.

If there is a reason you struggled in undergrad, you can make that a focus of your personal statement and actually spin it into a positive. For example if you had an (undiagnosed?) learning disability, you can talk about how that makes you more aware and sensitive to the struggles of students with disabilities. Make sure you take actual, positive action based on this - follow the rule of show, don't tell. In this example, you could work with your services for students with disabilities office to identify accessibility barriers, and make changes that allow a student with a disability to conduct undergraduate research.

This is the big change I made between my prior, unsuccessful applications. Instead of trying to downplay weaknesses in my undergrad, I cast them in a positive light and took action based on this. I don’t have my review sheets back, so I can’t say whether this is what made the difference or not, though.

[NSF GRFP 2011-2012]

This is the sort of thing I might bring up discretely with a trusted letter writer. Emphasis on trusted. They will likely have insight into how people within your field are likely to view such a disclosure. Moreover, if they deem that this is information that should be pasted on, I suspect a LOR is the most appropriate form for accomplishing this. The LOR will let the reivewers know the situation and provide secondary evidence that you are on track and likely to stay that way. It also won't derail your essays from the science in explaining what seems to be a percieved dificiency in your record. Also, if I was your LOR writer I would spin this as a tale of overcoming adversity so they can make it a positive for you while providing important context for your pre-graduate academic career.

There is of course another route. Make this an element of your application explicitly. I think that this is the more courageous route if you can pull it off well. I would do this by subtly suggesting that your presence within the field increases the field's diversity. This type of argument would be especially strong if you can show that your BI activities also promote the diversity of classroom and science by the inclusion of previously excluded voices due to medical/learning concerns. I do think for this to successful, it needs to be a component in a multipronged and consistent narrative that shows your improvement as well as activism as part of a coherent whole. If you BI activities don't suggest this, I would leave it to the trusted LOR writer to discretely address and hopefully successfully spin.

Thanks for the advice! My strongest "narrative" could be about teaching and learning, which could integrate this. I'd appreciate it if I could get your, or anyone else's advice on whether my idea would be a good theme.

I'm not sure on the forum etiquette for potentially long and personally specific posts. Do I correctly assume it would be more appropriate to PM someone who is willing to help?

[NSF GRFP 2011-2012]

I'm a student with a disability which is often misunderstood and stigmatized. It is serious but treatable once identified, and the identification took years. It manifested for me during my undergraduate work, and as a consequence I have a large gap in my transcripts (total disability) followed by taking courses part time (recovery) and a change in both school and major. I am more healthy now and the disability is not getting in the way of my graduate work.

When I applied last year, I didn't include any reference to this because of fear of discrimination. However, I'm worried that by not bringing it up I might be leaving the reviewers wondering if I'm someone who is unfocused and can't follow through on things.

Does anyone have advice on how I should handle this?