roboticsapplicant

I hate how angry and entitled some people are on this thread. Just be glad you get back feedback, but recognize that it's still a crap-shoot process.
 
My third reviewer said I was a strong applicant, but I didn't get squat. My hope is that there was a holistic process that awarded applicants who were better qualified overall than me, rather than who got the luck of the draw with reviewers. If it means that I get high marks and don't win the award, but someone else who is actually better qualified than me (holistically, not just in a two-line review) got it, then great. This is exactly what the system should be - there's no way to "normalize" different reviewers.
 
So stop complaining you arrogant entitled fools.

Got the email saying still being considered. Computer Science.
 
I was super excited with the "We are pleased to" but then saw "still being considered" and I was all "WTF?"
 
Who the hell writes a sentence like that? It's like if your boyfriend/girlfriend were to say "We need to talk... Nutter-butters are a seriously underrated cookie."

I think you have to use 3 years of funding within a 5 year window. So yes, you can defer for two years, as long as you're making progress on your graduate studies.
 
But don't quote me on this, check with NSF.

It's been shown that women (and I believe minorities) are more self-selecting.

It's been shown that women (and I believe minorities) are more self-selecting.

Not you. I'm addressing the people that have been saying things like: "omg I can't believe why my reviewers were too thick to understand how awesome I am."
 
Granted, that is a minority response on this thread, but I really don't like it.

Not you. I'm addressing the people that have been saying things like: "omg I can't believe why my reviewers were too thick to understand how awesome I am."
 
Granted, that is a minority response on this thread, but I really don't like it.

Yes, because every other application (whether it's to college, grad school, fellowships, or jobs) gives you helpful, detailied feedback about your strengths and weaknesses. /sarcasm
 
For the vast mjaority of things that people apply to, they get 0 feedback. In my mind, any feedback you get is a positive. And certainly, don't simply reject the feedback or deny it. Try to understand why the reviewer thinks what he wrote. That's the only way it'll be useful.
 
And if you think your feedback didn't address your application specifically or properly, maybe that means that you need to rethink how to write these statements for reviewers who are alloted just a few minutes per application. In previous years I had much denser statements. This year I made it less dense and easy to quickly read, and the results were positive.

I hate how angry and entitled some people are on this thread. Just be glad you get back feedback, but recognize that it's still a crap-shoot process.
 
My third reviewer said I was a strong applicant, but I didn't get squat. My hope is that there was a holistic process that awarded applicants who were better qualified overall than me, rather than who got the luck of the draw with reviewers. If it means that I get high marks and don't win the award, but someone else who is actually better qualified than me (holistically, not just in a two-line review) got it, then great. This is exactly what the system should be - there's no way to "normalize" different reviewers.
 
So stop complaining you arrogant entitled fools.

I hate how angry and entitled some people are on this thread. Just be glad you get back feedback, but recognize that it's still a crap-shoot process.
 
My third reviewer said I was a strong applicant, but I didn't get squat. My hope is that there was a holistic process that awarded applicants who were better qualified overall than me, rather than who got the luck of the draw with reviewers. If it means that I get high marks and don't win the award, but someone else who is actually better qualified than me (holistically, not just in a two-line review) got it, then great. This is exactly what the system should be - there's no way to "normalize" different reviewers.
 
So stop complaining you arrogant entitled fools.

Yes, because every other application (whether it's to college, grad school, fellowships, or jobs) gives you helpful, detailied feedback about your strengths and weaknesses. /sarcasm
 
For the vast mjaority of things that people apply to, they get 0 feedback. In my mind, any feedback you get is a positive. And certainly, don't simply reject the feedback or deny it. Try to understand why the reviewer thinks what he wrote. That's the only way it'll be useful.
 
And if you think your feedback didn't address your application specifically or properly, maybe that means that you need to rethink how to write these statements for reviewers who are alloted just a few minutes per application. In previous years I had much denser statements. This year I made it less dense and easy to quickly read, and the results were positive.

Yes, because every other application (whether it's to college, grad school, fellowships, or jobs) gives you helpful, detailied feedback about your strengths and weaknesses. /sarcasm
 
For the vast mjaority of things that people apply to, they get 0 feedback. In my mind, any feedback you get is a positive. And certainly, don't simply reject the feedback or deny it. Try to understand why the reviewer thinks what he wrote. That's the only way it'll be useful.
 
And if you think your feedback didn't address your application specifically or properly, maybe that means that you need to rethink how to write these statements for reviewers who are alloted just a few minutes per application. In previous years I had much denser statements. This year I made it less dense and easy to quickly read, and the results were positive.

I hate how angry and entitled some people are on this thread. Just be glad you get back feedback, but recognize that it's still a crap-shoot process.
 
My third reviewer said I was a strong applicant, but I didn't get squat. My hope is that there was a holistic process that awarded applicants who were better qualified overall than me, rather than who got the luck of the draw with reviewers. If it means that I get high marks and don't win the award, but someone else who is actually better qualified than me (holistically, not just in a two-line review) got it, then great. This is exactly what the system should be - there's no way to "normalize" different reviewers.
 
So stop complaining you arrogant entitled fools.

I hate how angry and entitled some people are on this thread. Just be glad you get back feedback, but recognize that it's still a crap-shoot process.
 
My third reviewer said I was a strong applicant, but I didn't get squat. My hope is that there was a holistic process that awarded applicants who were better qualified overall than me, rather than who got the luck of the draw with reviewers. If it means that I get high marks and don't win the award, but someone else who is actually better qualified than me (holistically, not just in a two-line review) got it, then great. This is exactly what the system should be - there's no way to "normalize" different reviewers.
 
So stop complaining you arrogant entitled fools.

A lot of it is also in the lack of feedback that can actually be used for improvement. When reviewers consistently say "great outreach", "good broader impacts", etc. but they vary from E to G and there is nothing about improving to go beyond the lower scores, it makes you wonder what you're doing wrong or what you can improve. This is not positive feedback. This is an empty comment that doesn't help with improvement or explain the differences in scoring.
 
Yes, it's good to get feedback when a lot of applications don't give it to you, blah, blah, blah. A lot of my feedback was very helpful. But there are other applicants who only got the vague responses like I stated above but get varying scores without any notes for improvement.

Yes, because every other application (whether it's to college, grad school, fellowships, or jobs) gives you helpful, detailied feedback about your strengths and weaknesses. /sarcasm
 
For the vast mjaority of things that people apply to, they get 0 feedback. In my mind, any feedback you get is a positive. And certainly, don't simply reject the feedback or deny it. Try to understand why the reviewer thinks what he wrote. That's the only way it'll be useful.
 
And if you think your feedback didn't address your application specifically or properly, maybe that means that you need to rethink how to write these statements for reviewers who are alloted just a few minutes per application. In previous years I had much denser statements. This year I made it less dense and easy to quickly read, and the results were positive.

Yes, because every other application (whether it's to college, grad school, fellowships, or jobs) gives you helpful, detailied feedback about your strengths and weaknesses. /sarcasm
 
For the vast mjaority of things that people apply to, they get 0 feedback. In my mind, any feedback you get is a positive. And certainly, don't simply reject the feedback or deny it. Try to understand why the reviewer thinks what he wrote. That's the only way it'll be useful.
 
And if you think your feedback didn't address your application specifically or properly, maybe that means that you need to rethink how to write these statements for reviewers who are alloted just a few minutes per application. In previous years I had much denser statements. This year I made it less dense and easy to quickly read, and the results were positive.

Yes, because every other application (whether it's to college, grad school, fellowships, or jobs) gives you helpful, detailied feedback about your strengths and weaknesses. /sarcasm
 
For the vast mjaority of things that people apply to, they get 0 feedback. In my mind, any feedback you get is a positive. And certainly, don't simply reject the feedback or deny it. Try to understand why the reviewer thinks what he wrote. That's the only way it'll be useful.
 
And if you think your feedback didn't address your application specifically or properly, maybe that means that you need to rethink how to write these statements for reviewers who are alloted just a few minutes per application. In previous years I had much denser statements. This year I made it less dense and easy to quickly read, and the results were positive.

Yes, because every other application (whether it's to college, grad school, fellowships, or jobs) gives you helpful, detailied feedback about your strengths and weaknesses. /sarcasm
 
For the vast mjaority of things that people apply to, they get 0 feedback. In my mind, any feedback you get is a positive. And certainly, don't simply reject the feedback or deny it. Try to understand why the reviewer thinks what he wrote. That's the only way it'll be useful.
 
And if you think your feedback didn't address your application specifically or properly, maybe that means that you need to rethink how to write these statements for reviewers who are alloted just a few minutes per application. In previous years I had much denser statements. This year I made it less dense and easy to quickly read, and the results were positive.

These two -
The comments can only help you if you actually receive helpful comments. Understanding the blood, sweat and tears that go into these applications, I understand where people get angry when they recieve entirely unhelpful comments or non at all. 

I don't feel entitled. I'm not even saying my application is strong, but I'm not happy with feedback that says I don't discuss in enough detail disease related goals of my research when the Program Solicitation says: 
 
"Research with disease-related goals, including work on the etiology, diagnosis or treatment of physical or mental disease, abnormality, or malfunction in human beings is normally not supported."
 
Make up your damn mind. 

I hate how angry and entitled some people are on this thread. Just be glad you get back feedback, but recognize that it's still a crap-shoot process.
 
My third reviewer said I was a strong applicant, but I didn't get squat. My hope is that there was a holistic process that awarded applicants who were better qualified overall than me, rather than who got the luck of the draw with reviewers. If it means that I get high marks and don't win the award, but someone else who is actually better qualified than me (holistically, not just in a two-line review) got it, then great. This is exactly what the system should be - there's no way to "normalize" different reviewers.
 
So stop complaining you arrogant entitled fools.

I hate how angry and entitled some people are on this thread. Just be glad you get back feedback, but recognize that it's still a crap-shoot process.
 
My third reviewer said I was a strong applicant, but I didn't get squat. My hope is that there was a holistic process that awarded applicants who were better qualified overall than me, rather than who got the luck of the draw with reviewers. If it means that I get high marks and don't win the award, but someone else who is actually better qualified than me (holistically, not just in a two-line review) got it, then great. This is exactly what the system should be - there's no way to "normalize" different reviewers.
 
So stop complaining you arrogant entitled fools.

I hate how angry and entitled some people are on this thread. Just be glad you get back feedback, but recognize that it's still a crap-shoot process.
 
My third reviewer said I was a strong applicant, but I didn't get squat. My hope is that there was a holistic process that awarded applicants who were better qualified overall than me, rather than who got the luck of the draw with reviewers. If it means that I get high marks and don't win the award, but someone else who is actually better qualified than me (holistically, not just in a two-line review) got it, then great. This is exactly what the system should be - there's no way to "normalize" different reviewers.
 
So stop complaining you arrogant entitled fools.

I hate how angry and entitled some people are on this thread. Just be glad you get back feedback, but recognize that it's still a crap-shoot process.
 
My third reviewer said I was a strong applicant, but I didn't get squat. My hope is that there was a holistic process that awarded applicants who were better qualified overall than me, rather than who got the luck of the draw with reviewers. If it means that I get high marks and don't win the award, but someone else who is actually better qualified than me (holistically, not just in a two-line review) got it, then great. This is exactly what the system should be - there's no way to "normalize" different reviewers.
 
So stop complaining you arrogant entitled fools.