guttata

( . _____ . )

I'm confused about how you "sent him the wrong essay." So you meant to plagiarize on that essay but not the one you were going to submit for the assignment? Gee darn.

Just sent mine in. A reminder that the proposal is due by 5pm local time on Thursday. Good luck!

You and I are friends now.

200+ hours? Jesus, just give up.

Standardized tests are hard, duh.

I had a larger, more eloquently worded reply, but laptop battery died and I'm annoyed now, so here: GPA: Your UG GPA isn't a dealbreaker, but for an "improvement" masters, a 3.4 isn't an improvement, it's a hold-steady at best. 1 yr vs 3 yrs lab experience: Good improvement. You've presumably (assuming a thesis-based masters) shown dedication to a project. 0 presentations vs 1 abstract, no pubs: Moderate improvement, though considering the timeframe, is this from your UG or masters? No pubs mentioned in the pipeline out of your master's research? Not exceptional, but an improvement. GRE: I can't believe this even needs to be addressed. Study. Prep. Retake it. It's not a hard test, and these scores are just not good. Even in a field like biology where the verbal scores aren't emphasized, I would take this as a warning sign considering communicating your research is kind of in the job description. 3 weak LORs vs 2/1 strong/weak: Decent improvement, considering the 3 weak LORs are quite possibly what totally doomed your previous application. Most applicants are expected to have 2-3 strong letters, the 1 weak one may be masked by the strong support, or taken as evidence of growth depending on the timing of your relationship with the writer. I also need to emphasize what others have said about your drive/desire for grad school. If you've taken this much criticism this poorly just getting in, what do you think your comps/quals/defense or peer-review for pubs is going to be like? Time to shape up. Finally, and semi-related to your final comment, what is the point of applying to solely the least competitive program? Ever hear of big fish, small pond? Once you get to the job market, it's all big pond, and coasting through the small pond will do you no favors. The PhD is no guarantee of employment. All you're doing is signing yourself up for more competition. I strongly advise that you consider your reasons, motivation, desire, and purpose for continuing in grad school. This is by no means meant to discourage you, but I hope it serves as a little bit of a wakeup call.

The purpose of the research proposal is not to lay out an entire dissertation but to prove that you can think critically, logically, and plan feasible and significant research projects.

Do your own homework.

There is no option to include your GRE scores. They are no longer considered and haven't been for several years.

Ha!

Bing masterrace

Sure. 5 pages sounds like a lot, but by the end of it - once you've addressed all the points they ask you to address - it's a bit cramped. Starts with a synopsis (abstract) for the proposed research. No different than the typical conference or paper abstract, I did not address cultural matters, etc... They ask you to complete a timeline for the program - I extended mine out to include post-program reporting and a timeframe for publication. Combined, these two took about 1 page. (1/5) My introduction includes my lit review, hypotheses/predictions, and intros my study species (I'm biology, so obviously this will vary by field). This section took 1 page. (2/5) Page 3 is largely consumed by methodology - important to note that methods were kept relatively vague. You will likely NOT have space to get into the details, depending on the size/scope of your project. Mine is so broadly described that my academic (not host) adviser came to me shortly before submitting, worried that I was too lacking in detail - it wasn't an issue. Over the last two pages, I have a number of smaller sections - Animal Use Procedures (may omit or replace with IRB discussions, field dependent), Host researcher bio and list of relevant pubs demonstrating suitability as host, Mutual benefits to myself and the hosts, Host Institution capabilities (suitability as a host center), Expected Value of host Country, and Statement of my qualifications to conduct international research (i.e., none, but that this will further my career). I've also got a short line at the end that my academic adviser will write a LOR and has no conflicts of interests with my proposed host. A number of these sections will be longer or shorter for you, and I intended to tweak mine based on last year's panel reviews. Many of these sections, at least in the last two pages, are explicitly requested in the handbooks, so make sure you're following their requests in the documentation on the website.

Just take it with the account associated with your maiden name and make a note in your application somewhere where it would make sense. As soon as you're accepted and have chosen a school you will never need to deal with ETS again anyway, so why make such a big deal about it?

Thread for EAPSI 2015. Proposals are due Nov. 13 this year. http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5284 I'll be applying again after a "Fund if possible" rating with no award last year. Good luck!

Sure seems from the tone of the summary that everyone would have gotten them at the same time. Login here: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/jsp/homepage/proposals.jsp, then click "Proposal Functions" > "Proposal Status" > your proposal # and scroll down.

Panel reviews for this round are now available in your Fastlane portal. Typical of NSF reviews, it's hit or miss depending on the reviewer how useful they'll be. Proposals are placed into one of three categories - Highly recommended for funding, Fund if possible, and Not recommended. My review cited shortcomings in my BI and high competition for Australia as negatives, but they were complimentary with respect to my actual research plan and presentation. Fund if possible, so some BI tweaks for next year and I ought to have a good shot.

Equipment purchased with a DDIG is treated like equipment purchased with any other NSF grant. In most places that means it technically belongs to the dept/school and is housed and cared for by your lab, and used as seen fit. Once purchased it belongs to the lab, not NSF, and they no longer care.

Not much. Some people with 2 reviews get the award, some get nothing. Some need a 3rd reviewer, presumably if they're on the bubble and need a reviewer to push them one way or the other. Very rarely I've seen people even get 4. Nothing myself, 3 and out. Got the exact same scores as last year with a totally different proposal - I suspect I may have been applying to the wrong subheading. VG/E G/G Just goes to show that luck of the draw with reviewers can make a huge difference. #1 loved it and would have given me the award; #2 was wholly unimpressed.

It's been sluggish in the past but has typically come up before the maintenance period ended, so who knows this year. Reviews are available immediately Seeing as I plucked a project from my dissertation proposal, I'll be sticking with mine...

Whoa, just managed to load the demo page. Thought people talking about it were BSing but apparently not. To those who can't get it it just lets you see what the Fellows page looks like but doesn't offer any new information.

You get both a Broader Impacts and an Intellectual Merit assessment independent of each other, thus two scores per reviewer.

Clearly too late, as we're up 6 whole pages since earlier this afternoon.