snowcapk

Your name gives me a hankering for Roscoe's.

Dude, if you're still interested then def. e-mail those schools and let them know about your fellowship. They may reverse their decisions - I know a couple of people that got into their top-choice schools after being rejected. You may feel like telling those departments where they can stuff their rejection letters, but don't take it too personally. Admissions committees make mistakes and obviously you were one of them. (Also, don't wait for the departments to see the list because it might be a while before it's posted - the NDSEG is announced in waves.)

*grumble* So this is how I learn I'm not getting the award? C'mon now...every year these early indicators get more absurd. :roll: Congrats to the happy few! P.S. You guys didn't click the "Forgot password?" button exactly 365 days ago, did you?

Too late to be known as John the First He's sure to be known as John the worst A pox on that phony king of England! Oo-de-lally, Oo-de-lally Golly, what a day

?_?

Did anyone else notice this page showing that the NSF's EHR got a cool $50 million more than they requested for the 2009 budget? The GRFP accounts for ~20% of the EHR budget so maybe we will see some of that surplus. Since the budget request included a 33% increase in GRFP funding, I guess we're guaranteed some more awards this year?

I consider myself something of a NSF result notification hobbyist... A few years ago someone uploaded two copies of their personal statement, omitting the research proposal by accident: Despite the obvious DQ, menzies was notified on the same day as everyone else. Ineligible applications are supposedly notified sometime between November and February, but evidently not always. Otherwise we all hear back on the same day...and apparently that's what's meant by "as promptly as possible." ::giggle:: menses...

Yep. My applicant ID (which matches the review sheet lookup user ID) is different this year, so that's not surprising. I noticed that the password from last year is nine characters, same as the applicant ID. Do you think they randomly assign passwords or use the applicant ID to seed a password generator? How many ID/password pairs would we need to assess this? Okay, everyone send me your old IDs/passwords so I can read your sheets^H^16 *ahem* unlock the code with my M4d H4X0R 5K1lLZ 8)

Biomed, Personally my feeling is that graduate research fellowships would be a poor use of the stimulus. However difficult it is to find decent graduate funding in your field, I'm sure you'll agree that finding gainful employment after grad school will be even harder. (Well, maybe not if you're an engineer or an economist...) In the basic sciences there is no dearth of interested students, and essentially no positions in academia for graduates. I think the stimulus money is better spent on creating jobs/careers in the sciences by funding research (at the PI level). That way we alleviate (as much as a one-time burst of funding can) the current problem of producing too many PhDs with nowhere to go.

920 awards may have been made in 2007, but almost certainly the number of third-year NSF fellows is less than that. The attrition rate of NSF fellows is not very different from grad students generally. In engineering and CS, which together represent about a third of awards, it's not uncommon to enter a PhD program (in order to get funding, external or otherwise) and leave with a Master's. And then you have your Hertz, Ford, HHMI, Javitz, etc. winners who may be unable to accept all three years of NSF funding. At a 10% attrition rate for second-year students and 20% for third-year students - my guesstimates - they could afford to make 1500+ awards this year. Not that I really believe they will.

Math123, I think you have assumed that the Fed sets aside all $120K for each NSF fellow in the year they receive the award. Imagine instead that NSF asks for the money one year at a time. If NSF doubles the recipients in 2009, then they only need 33% more money for 2009 - enough to cover the extra students in their first NSF year. 2008: 800 first-year students, 800 second-year students, and 800 third-year students = 2400 students 2009: 1600 first-year students, 800 second-year students, and 800 third-year students = 3200 students :arrow: 33% more students in 2009 than in 2008, so need 33% more money

T_ruth, maybe the NDSEG would fund a project on PTSD therapies? I heard of one DoD project where they give veterans a drug and then ask them to play a war-like video game: the drug is supposed to fry all the memories the game evokes, or something like that. (Just crazy enough to work!) Math123, my department is making all of the US citizens apply for the NSF. Can't blame them, I guess, since they're the ones that profit from it. Also am concerned that other students who win this year will have priority in the popular labs I'm rotating in. Bio profs don't trust the NDSEG to cherry-pick the best students, like they trust the NSF, because the app doesn't require a proposal and because the awards have a reputation for being more random. Say, back in March I read this blurb saying there might be a lot more awards in 2009, maybe 700 more than usual. Does anyone know if this will go through? Could be budget changes now, what with the bailout.

Hi Timur, thanks for posting your NSF applications! The LaTeX is a nice touch, very classy. (BTW, you could get rid of the numbers in section headings by putting an asterisk after the word section ("\section*{}" instead of "\section{}") if you wanted, but I like it - it makes it more obvious that you wrote everything in LaTeX :wink:) I am really impressed by the improvement, esp. considering that your app was already very good. One thing stands out though - how did you address Broader Impacts? That's where I got reamed last year so I've been fishing for tips.

Tiany, the registration hasn't closed for the fall tests - it hasn't even opened yet! I think last year I registered in July or August.

False. Subject test dates are set by ETS. I'm not sure if you can register (or learn the exact dates) yet, but last year one test was offered the first Saturday of October and November.

Not worthwhile at all. You'll wind up poor and regretful. If you need help with your SOP, try LJ groups like review_my_sop or applyingtograd. During the right season, people post their SOPs there and tend to get lots of help. (P.S. - You need to become a member of each group in order to see "locked" posts, which is how people tend to post their SOPs.) You don't pick schools that "match your stats" at the grad level so much as you choose schools that have just the right research advisers for you. You will have to do the research yourself for that, so screw Kaplan's "Admissions Consultant." That said, Kaplan, Princeton Review, &c. have very good GRE study books that you can buy at any bookstore. Together with free CAT-style practice tests offered on the ETS website, those provide plenty of preparation. No need for a fancy GRE course.

I got mine, too, Chillaxitive...try calling the Operations Office?

Material girl, I think they will accept the change - in fact, I don't see it as a change. You might as well ask, because they will know which department you're in when they send the checks and when you send in progress reports. I seriously think this is a non-issue, even if your future adviser is not a bioengineer in any sense.

Cherrifaery, I would discuss this with the dean of graduate studies (DGS), department chair, or any other authority you trust at your school. Limit the number of professors that you mention these problems to, for the obvious reasons. When you discuss with the DGS or whatever, say that you have not had contact with your adviser in months and that he has not discussed possible thesis projects with you. Explain that you have tried to discuss project proposals with him, but "his eyes glaze over" &c. Do not discuss your revelation that he has sabotaged your GRFP application, because that is actually a minor concern compared to the fact that he is not concerning himself with your work in his lab, and because it will bring up a conversation or at least plant a doubt about how your adviser came about this opinion. One question that comes up for me, and probably will for the DGS, is: what have you done in this lab all year, and how did you do it without your adviser's help? Be prepared to answer that with examples that show that you have really tried to make progress in the lab. Ask what your options are. Could you start in a different lab if you identified another adviser? If you can frame an interest in another PI in terms of a shift in research interest since entering the program, be sure to say so. If you decide to transfer, will the DGS support you? Ask for advice in discussing the problem with your adviser.

Cherrifaery, that sounds horrible! We've all had a bad experience with rec letters and professors, but that truly is first-rate douche-baggery on their part. I don't know what to tell you, obvious a car-keying or ass-whooping is merited, but try to be the bigger man (or woman). It sounds like you're describing an academic adviser, because you haven't seen him/her in months and they aren't familiar with your research. They haven't asked you to work on any of their projects, so you can't have joined their lab or done research with them. So why, then, is it a huge problem to not use recommendations from this person in the future? Next year you will have had at least two, and possibly three, research advisers. Maybe you can get a third recommendation from someone you TA'd for, or a future thesis committee member, or something. If this is your research adviser, then that is very bad news. If it is your undergrad research adviser, you should try to patch it up, despite the rising urge to kill. You may need recommendations or rely on word-of-mouth from that person in the future, so get back on speaking terms and demonstrate through your actions that you are a good team player/researcher. If you apply for NSF next year, be specific about what you want them to emphasize in your recommendation: tell them that effective ability to work in a team is a criterion and describe an instance you would like him/her to mention. Faced with that evidence, they will be forced to reevaluate their statement or else explain themselves to you. If this is your grad research adviser, get out now! There is no point spending six years earning a degree that will be useless because you cannot find work. This sort of comment will sabotage your job search later, and the adviser is unlikely to become more reasonable as time goes on.

I'd sure like to see my rating sheets right about now. Why would they post the results online before e-mailing us?

Yep, my name is on there, and the names of others that I know weren't able to see the "Accept/Decline Award" option are on there too. I think this is the real deal. The number of HM recipients fits well within the normal range.

You dudes are NOT gonna believe this!!

Ohhh I'm retarded. It was totally that. Hey, that's good news for us! (Well, it couldn't be bad, anyway.)

I only wonder why we have to wait for Wednesday to hear if they've already updated all of the winners' accounts. Everyone else just gets a form letter, right? So why the delayed rollout?