chickenandwaffles

trawling the internets, seems like some DEB folks were notified, all seem to be evolutionary biology. but i'm not sure if there were multiple review panels or not, mine says external review started 1/22/14 with status pending. i guess i probably didn't get funding........darn.

any updates? (i applied to DEB)

just got updated to declined.....good luck!

no other news eh?

congrats (i assume your proposal was awarded!) and wow, a call? from someone at nsf? do you know of anyone else that got notified (through any means) for those that applied in november?

i applied for the november 9th 2012 deadline. i'm showing external review date of 02/13/13........

i just want to make sure of a few generalizations: - "external review" date typically corresponds to the first (or only) day of the review panel meeting(s) found here: http://www.nsf.gov/events/advisory.jsp - rejections and acceptances are generally sent out 2 weeks after the meeting date while those in limbo are held for a bit - communications through email/fastlane status change anyone want to jump in?

does anyone have any idea how many applications are submitted, on average, in the past few years (for biological science DEB)?

wow, that is a unique situation. i wonder if they'll accept you afterwards?

guesses as to when first announcement of any winners? (put your guess under the previous one)...winner gets the satisfaction of being right...and hopefully a nsf grfp. april 7th - chickenandwaffles

well, i guess people from other parts of the world can carry on....... anyone else currently outside the US right now?? I'm currently GMT +3.

i agree, it's difficult to view the GRFP as a rational actor. but, if not, what else are we to think? my guess is that they are doing serious work (not just waiting around for responses, that's part of it). i don't think most of us in "limbo" are thinking that many will be getting the award (~1500, at the very least are HM from 2005-2009). i guess the total number when everything is said and done will be 1176 awards for 2009...anyone else???

yea, i agree, it makes most sense to just look at the rankings (percentile) and if nsf gave GRFP funds for XX more awards, they would take XX from the top. i suppose they need some kinda way to choose between disciplines/subfields, b/c i dont know if they rank people across or if its precise enough to just take XX number of people from the "top."

i called the 866 number, got a chill person (male) asked for my name (after i told him about others getting email notification about their status). he then told me (like others report) that my "status was still under review." at first, i didn't think many new awards would be awarded (not this cycle at least) but considering how long they are taking now (if they do announce next friday, which is more than 2 weeks after "end of march"), the time frame seems reasonable to ask some members of panels to re-review files and go through a smaller version of the process they went through in feb.

thanks for the clarification, i didn't get anything from nsf, i guess 1 more week. :roll:

does that mean you got an email that said you were "in limbo?"

my 0.02, i believe there is a relationship between research (as measured by publications and funding) and "big name" schools (and their respective departments). so it isn't surprising to me that "big name" schools get a lot of grants. they have research many consider "cutting edge," and many faculty working in these "cutting edge" areas work help their students on the applications. to me, it makes plenty of sense. now, as to whether or publications and/or funding (endowment, external grants, etc) are representative of "good research" is another entirely different question. and i would think this differs across disciplines. something purely quantitative, (ie, mathematics), I imagine, would suffer less from the "eliteness" effect, compared to, something heavy in technology/industry (ie, chemistry, physics). IMO, at least.

i'm one of those in limbo.....and i couldn't resist (i was already working in OOCalc) the life sciences awards for the past 5 years 2009 = 257 2008 = 240 2007 = 209 2006 = 227 2005 = 261 life sciences-ecology 2009 = 39 2008 = 34 2007 = 29 2006 = 31 2005 = 39

so they can't do porn anymore....instead, could you imagine nsf/call center employees following this forum and giving scintillating responses to see how fast it would get posted then follow with generic answers for a while until the person feels like rousing up desperate grad students again?????

not sure about the official categories i was marked down for. all i saw were the text for the first 2 reviews. one was glowing. other was good but not as glowing as the other. i didn't make it to the third one. of course the caveat is that this is all relative. i feel like i am very critical of myself, so if that's any gauge......how about this: one made me feel warm and fuzzy inside and the other one just made me feel warm.

i hope that's not the case................

what i find difficult to wrap around my head is that between the post first suggesting the reviews page and my getting on the reviews site (enough time to read a the first two) it shut down......i suppose, of course, it is possible that the few of us that actually saw the review comments were just incredibly lucky to check during that time frame....

so another thought. that was an awfully quick response from NSF/fastlane and their IT people. do you think they could be looking on in this forum with us? or am i just starting to sound paranoid?

@ snow, yea, me too, at the time i joined. @math, yea, i guess you're right. i would laugh at myself if this became a news story: "hundreds of graduate students refresh NSF webpage for days" @t_ruth dammit. discovered!

just a thought that occurred to me. there was an incident in may 2005, where MBA students "hacked" (not sure how they defined "hack" so could be something as simple as the html editor done last year or more involved and illegal). one person posted instructions on how to do this exactly in a forum. all the business schools (harvard, stanford, duke, dartmouth) rejected those that accessed their files. now....i suppose this was done last year too and the hack really isn't a "hack" if the data are already on the web......but i suppose one could make an argument on ethical grounds (which was the main thrust of the 2005 controversy). this is the most reputable source i could come up with. not sure where everyone else's pieces went. http://www.pcworld.com/article/119938/h ... _site.html again, it's just a thought that occurred to me....... should i delete this post? lol