Pitangus

You can't change the proposed institution as it appears on the awardee list, and it doesn't matter if you don't end up at the proposed program. When you accept the fellowship though, you do get to indicate the institution you will actually attend, but that won't change the public list.

My boyfriend and I have been long distance for almost 4 years now, with one more year to go until I finish my PhD (hopefully). We are 15 hours apart by car and see each other 2 - 3 times per year for 1 - 4 weeks at time. Why I think it has worked for us: - We've been a couple for 9 years and friends for almost 20, so we were committed to each other even before the question of long distance arose. By the time I applied to grad programs, we were also past the "honeymoon phase" of the relationship, or at least the part that often makes a couple feel as though they can't bear to live apart, which goes along with the second point below. - We are independent people pursuing careers that we enjoy, so we have enough going on in our lives to keep us engaged and busy, and this helps cut down on time spent actively missing each other. I am particularly immune to loneliness and enjoy living on my own, which made the big move for grad school less stressful for me. My boyfriend admittedly has a harder time being alone, but fortunately he is still in our home state amongst our families and friends. - We've planned from the beginning that the distance is temporary, and that I will either return to our home state after finishing my program, or we will both move somewhere that works for both of us. I'm not really set on one sort of job or another; I will take what I can get in a given location. - We have a shared hobby (video games) that serves as both entertainment and a way to communicate regularly. In my opinion, it is worth it to try long distance if both people are willing. If the distance becomes too much, if the couple grows apart and/or if new people come into play, then that would be the time to end it. Before that though, if the couple is committed, I don't see the harm in staying together. It is just important that both people are upfront about their expectations at the start and then are honest throughout when/if changes arise.

It probably varies among reviewers, and I'm sure some think that any publications are automatic signs of significant involvement, but in my experience at least some of them do take the time to consider all indications of the extent of a student's research experience. When I applied I had no papers published, but I did have one sole-authored manuscript submitted, and my letter writers confirmed that I conceived and conducted the project myself and wrote the entire manuscript. Two of my reviewers said this was impressive, so it seems that just having that evidence of independent research was enough.

I just wrote about this in another thread, but another reason I'm glad I took a year to gain specialized field experience is that I was able to plan and get started on my dissertation research right away in my first year. I knew what sort of projects I wanted to do when I chose the lab, and I already had both the funding and the needed backgrounds and skills. Now I am on track to finish in the recommended time for my program. Others in my lab, and in the program, often end up staying longer because it took them awhile to plan their dissertation and start collecting relevant data. I would recommend that everyone in my field at least consider getting some additional experience through field work jobs and/or post-bacc internships. Taking time between degrees shouldn't be seen as a negative choice that's for students who aren't "ready" to start a grad program; it's also beneficial for students who are ready and know their research interests and want to make themselves stand out to POIs (who in my experience love when their grad students come in with a lot of field experience and don't need to be taught the skills that are specific to their type of research), as well as make themselves more competitive for external fellowships.

In addition to the people that think gap years are just "time off," I think some other people still see gap years as a mark of an unprepared student; that is, they think that if a student is "ready" for grad school (i.e. has a strong enough record with enough experience and motivation to get into a program), then they don't need a gap year. I would agree that strong applicants don't "need" to take a gap year if the goal is just to get accepted somewhere, but I would also say that strong students in particular can easily benefit from one (speaking from my experience in my field since of course I can't speak for them all). I took a year after undergrad not because I felt emotionally unprepared or unsure about whether to attend graduate school. I also wasn't trying to make up for a weak undergrad record or lack of independent research experience. I would even say my motivation was more the opposite: I had developed my research interests to the point where I knew what sort of additional internships/jobs I should pursue to gain more specialized experience in my area of interest, in order to ease the transition into graduate work and make myself more competitive for programs and fellowships. One of my professors was surprised that I decided not to apply to grad school my senior year, presumably under the notion that I didn't "need" more experience. It was definitely worth it: I started my program with plenty of fellowship funding, which gave me more freedom and time to plan my dissertation research, and I was able to get started on this research right away because I already had the specific suite of skills used in the types of projects I wanted to do. So I would recommend additional work experience to anyone in my field. If you're worried about being too young, then taking this extra time should help assuage those worries and make you more confident. And if you're a strong student with previous research experience, then all the better: you'll have an easier time getting the more competitive (and better-paying) positions. One exception to this recommendation would be students who went through their undergrad program with a laser focus on their research interests and want to continue in that vein of research in grad school. The other exception would be students who are not comfortable with the idea of taking time off from being a student and then having to return to that setting. Edit: I forgot to mention another benefit of taking time after undergrad: by the time you apply to grad programs, you will have completed your thesis/senior project and will be able to list any resulting presentations and publications as more than just "in prep" or even "in review."

This is how I would see it as well. During the field season I've shared rooms with field assistants of all kinds, and occasionally either my advisor or other random researchers staying in the area for a few days. So if my advisor and I were attending the same conference I wouldn't bat an eye if she arranged for us to share a hotel room. I personally hate sharing a bedroom with anyone for more than a few days, and it is a source of stress for me every summer. But sharing rooms is common and pretty much expected in my field if you do fieldwork somewhere with dorm-style housing, so I deal with it when I have to. A couple of days, as with a conference, would not be a big deal though, even for me. I suppose because I am used to it now.

The headings request was added to the solicitation this year. The separate statements request has been the same since the 2013-2014 cycle. From the 2014 - 2015 solicitation: "Therefore, applicants must include separate statements on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their written statements in order to provide reviewers with the information necessary to evaluate the application with respect to both Criteria as detailed below." From the 2015-2016 solicitation: "Therefore, applicants must include separate statements on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their written statements in order to provide reviewers with the information necessary to evaluate the application with respect to both Criteria as detailed below. Applicants should include headings for Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their statements." A lack of headings this year should not disqualify anyone or preclude them from receiving a fellowship, but it may put them at a disadvantage during reviews. The recent request for separate statements was surely added because reviewers were having trouble identifying people's IM/BIs in the past. The new request for headings this year indicates that this is still a problem. So from now on it would benefit applicants to remember to include the separate statements and headings in order to make their IM/BIs as clear and obvious as possible.

The 2012 notifications were on Friday March 30, 2012. I got my email at 3:30 AM EST.

If an invite specifies casual dress, then dressing formally (i.e. a suit) will not impress anyone. Our recruiting event is casual, and when the occasional student wears a suit anyways they stick out, and not in a "Oh they know how to be professional" way. Dressing professionally does not automatically mean wearing a suit, especially not in EEB. You can look put together but still casual with a button down and/or sweater, a clean pair of khakis/chinos or even black/dark jeans, and a decent but comfortable pair of shoes or boots (basically anything besides sneakers and hiking boots). If you really want to wear a suit, do have it pressed beforehand and try to avoid crinkling it up during travel. Showing up in a wrinkly suit jacket counteracts the professional image you're hoping to create by wearing it.

I really don't think it will be disqualified, or thrown out by reviewers. I think at most it will receive lower reviews because the IM/BI examples will be harder to find compared to applications with labeled IM and BI statements (again assuming that most applications will have these labeled sections, which may not be the case it seems). I'm assuming that the new format was put into place because reviewers were having a hard time finding the IM/BI examples previously, given how fast they have to go through each application. Ideally they would have enough time to thoroughly consider each essay and identify each IM/BI when they are woven throughout, but I don't think that's the case.

Sounds like it might be a common mistake this year then. If so, it probably won't affect reviews if the reviewers aren't familiar with the solicitation either. But if most applications include the separate statements and headings, I could see it hurting the applications without since the reviewers will get used to the clearly marked statements.

When I applied (2011), the solicitation didn't even request separate statements. This is the first year that the solicitation has requested both separate statements and headings for Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts (last year's solicitation did not mention headings), so there's no way to know what the procedures are this year. My guess would be that not having separate statements with headings will not lead to automatic disqualification, but it will likely put the application at a disadvantage with most reviewers for not having the expected format.

If your goal is to do EEB field research, and you really don't think you can make it work with the EEB PI at your current program, then I think you should consider contacting the other program PI(s) now. They may just tell you to reapply next cycle, which will give you a year to decide if another lab at your current program interests you. Leaving with an MS is less preferable if your plan is to apply to another PhD program after, but some people do it successfully, so it is an option. I don't think it's a good idea to trudge through a lab-based PhD in your current program with the assumption that you will get a field work-based EEB post-doc position after. If your PhD research ends up being completely unrelated to what you want to do for a post-doc, then you will be at a disadvantage when trying to write post-doc fellowship applications and/or applying for advertised post-doc positions. If you do change programs, unless you can get the NSF GRF or another external pre-doc fellowship, then you will just have to accept that the stipend at the other program will be less (I'm assuming you've already considered cost of living differences when comparing the stipends).

This happened to me as well. I wrote my application at the very last minute, submitted it, and then forgot about it. It wasn't until after I received the fellowship that I looked at my essays again and saw that I had a wonky sentence in my personal statement. I would imagine that the reviewers are reading applications so fast that a typo or mistake would have to be really disruptive before they would notice.

I've been pleasantly surprised to find that for me grad school is not that stressful at all. I was a bit high strung in undergrad, but during my first year of grad school I started just rolling with things and carrying on without worrying about them. And everything worked out fine. Now I fix issues as they arise and don't put myself down with the "should'ves" and "what-ifs." Most of the time I think I've a got a sweet deal going on here. Given the nature of my research, I work long hours in the summer but have a fair amount of free time during fall/spring. I don't feel guilty about not working 24/7 because I know I don't need to in order to still be successful. It also helps that I don't have to teach since I've never been interested in a teaching position. I jumped in as a TA for one semester when the department had unfilled positions, but given the choice I wouldn't do it again (at least not for that class). The only thing that gets me down sometimes is being in a long-distance relationship. We manage, but after being apart for over three years now I'm getting itchy to finish up and move back to our home state.

I've seen successful applicants to my program who listed two professors in response to the question of whose labs interested them. I've even seen applications that were sponsored by two professors, so contacting more than one professor doesn't seem to be an issue. That said, if you are considering contacting most of the department, then you might want to reexamine your research interests and consider whether they might be too broad. I recall a case where an applicant put down four or five professors (who all worked on noticeably disparate topics and with very different study systems), and it did draw attention to the fact that the applicant's stated research interests seemed vague and undeveloped.

My parents did not get to have the college experience, and neither of them knew what graduate programs entail, so they've always liked looking at university websites and professors' research pages (my mom especially). And I certainly appreciate that they like to explore these things. But they've always done so by following my lead; that is, they'd read about programs and professors because I was interested in them and had already researched them on my own. So while I think it's great that you want to learn about grad programs, and you should feel free to explore this site as well, I think your research ought to be for your own information and enjoyment. Certainly you can discuss with your daughter when it comes time to narrow down program options, but I would advise against making any sort of packet for her, even if it's just general information. As others have said, it is important that your daughter be self-motivated and self-sufficient. She also needs to be able to handle several tasks at once in addition to keeping up with coursework. Let her come to you when she has done her own legwork and is looking for feedback on her thoughts/impressions.

You should visit the official page if you haven't yet: http://www.nsfgrfp.org/applicants/application_components/choosing_primary_field

In the same vein: people who hover over the toilet seat in public bathrooms and end up being the ones making a mess. Just sit down. You aren't going to catch any diseases through the skin of your thighs, and unless you are at a particularly seedy rest stop somewhere, that toilet seat gets cleaned more often than the one at your house.

This is what I would assume, and I think that's reasonable. If someone poured most of their time into a maintaining a high GPA in undergrad, then they probably will need to adjust their expectations for a grad program. I only have a problem with the assumption of "If you have a 4.0 GPA, then you are spending too much time on coursework." I have not encountered a professor who has expressed such an opinion, but I have heard it often enough that I wonder how prevalent it is. This is my thinking as well. If you are making good research progress and not sacrificing research goals to complete homework or study for exams, then having a 4.0 GPA is a feather in your cap, not a sign that you spent too much time on coursework.

I've heard this sentiment before, and I would hope it's just a half-serious "warning" for new grad students and not the actual way of thinking in most programs. I think it's unreasonable to assume that those who excel at coursework can only do so at the expense of their research. I'd like to think at least that advisors and committees can recognize cases where this sentiment does not apply.

PhD students are accepted into my program with 5 years of guaranteed departmental support as well. I think the only students who receive semester-by-semester funding are the coursework-based MS students.

Have you not read the program website? It's all there. https://www.nsfgrfp.org/

@shadowclaw: I understand the annoyance when someone isn't honest about their accomplishments, even if their dishonesty won't affect you. A guy in my graduating class refers to himself as "class valedictorian" on his LinkedIn page, and presumably his resume/CV as well, even though he was only first in the business program, not first in the class. I know because I actually was first in the class overall, and there was no tie. It's a different situation since it's not someone using my work as theirs; it's just a case of someone using a title they didn't earn.

I haven't, but then I didn't get anything from our CO the last time the stipend went up either. The only email I got about it was directly from NSF in late May 2013. The email subject was "2013-2014 Summary of Changes and Updates for GRFP".