NSF GRFP 2018-2019

[cullenish]

Just now, vargas said:

I'm not sure if someone else has mentioned this, but I've heard rumors that the announcements will be later than normal this year. The review process was kind of a mess because of the government shutdown - my advisor is reviewing in other fields and he said that they'll likely have to delay announcements. I could be wrong though!

I do know that, at least in the fields that my advisor reviewed, they did not do a conference call with all the reviewers. That's a deviation from previous years - normally your reviewers read and rate them independently and then discuss on the phone. Those phone calls were scheduled during the shutdown so they all got cancelled. Not sure if any of them got re-scheduled, but it didn't sound like it to me. 

I've heard the same thing about conference calls being cancelled, but I was also told that NSF was pushing for no delay. What exactly they see as a delay is up in the air. They might see being 1 month late as a delay but not 1 week late. Who knows! Regardless, I have a feeling this year is going to be a mess. A few professors who have reviewed for NSF in the past have talked a lot about how some applicants don't get selected simply because no one advocates for them in the panels, even if everyone liked the proposal. We might not be getting the benefit of one of our reviewers standing up for us.

[avargs]

3 minutes ago, cullenish said:

We might not be getting the benefit of one of our reviewers standing up for us.

This is what I'm worried about too - because this also means that any big misconceptions about the work aren't corrected during a conference call. Reviewers have to read a bunch of statements back to back, so sometimes they just miss information that's clearly there. 

One student I know got honorable mention because a reviewer said she didn't have specific aims... despite having a full paragraph dedicated to her specifics aims. Weird things can happen!

[Paleo-Math]

2 minutes ago, avargs said:

This is what I'm worried about too - because this also means that any big misconceptions about the work aren't corrected during a conference call. 

I'm also concerned about this. I believe having a reviewer stand up for your app who understands it the best out of the other reviewers is huge. My app is under the umbrella of ecology, but it is very much theoretical ecology with lots of differential equations theory - so not all ecologists appreciate the theoretical side as much as the empirical  

[Ryleigh Moore]

Does anyone know if people only in your area read the application or do people from similar areas as well? For example, will an applied math application be considered by applied math and pure math people? Or similar situations as that.

 

[milka49]

5 minutes ago, Ryleigh Moore said:

Does anyone know if people only in your area read the application or do people from similar areas as well? For example, will an applied math application be considered by applied math and pure math people? Or similar situations as that.

 

They mostly try to keep you within larger discipline, but you aren't guaranteed smaller discipline. An applied mathematician might have pure mathematicians reading their proposal, but they shouldn't have, say, biologists reading it. 

[plantlady]

22 minutes ago, cullenish said:

I've heard the same thing about conference calls being cancelled, but I was also told that NSF was pushing for no delay. What exactly they see as a delay is up in the air. They might see being 1 month late as a delay but not 1 week late. Who knows! Regardless, I have a feeling this year is going to be a mess. A few professors who have reviewed for NSF in the past have talked a lot about how some applicants don't get selected simply because no one advocates for them in the panels, even if everyone liked the proposal. We might not be getting the benefit of one of our reviewers standing up for us.

I was already freaking out a little but now I'm mega freaking out yall. Why can't they just release awards tonight :,(

[cullenish]

8 minutes ago, plantlady said:

I was already freaking out a little but now I'm mega freaking out yall. Why can't they just release awards tonight :,(

The way I look at it, no one is getting it because it's the freaking NSF-GRFP. We all put down amazing applications, though. It's a crap shoot! No need to freak out!

[Ryleigh Moore]

11 minutes ago, milka49 said:

They mostly try to keep you within larger discipline, but you aren't guaranteed smaller discipline. An applied mathematician might have pure mathematicians reading their proposal, but they shouldn't have, say, biologists reading it. 

Awesome. Thank you!

[FunInPhonology]

I’m an indigenous linguist studying archival material from my own language as well as comparing this to other neighboring languages in the same language family. I will be making this process more accessible to interested youth and other community members. I will also be contributing to a lineage of scholarship which is at this time still a growing field for my particular language. 

 

Excited, but not holding my breath. This process has been great! 

[happytransformer]

Electrical engineering here! One of the professors in my department told me they rescheduled the review panels right after the shutdown ended, and they were like mid-February. I'm assuming they're trying verrrry hard to get results out as early as they can before April 15. I wouldn't be surprised if the results are released on not Tuesday/Friday or the maintenance notification doesn't go up because the shutdown was a very special circumstance affecting the timeline. 

[cullenish]

Just now, happytransformer said:

Electrical engineering here! One of the professors in my department told me they rescheduled the review panels right after the shutdown ended, and they were like mid-February. I'm assuming they're trying verrrry hard to get results out as early as they can before April 15. I wouldn't be surprised if the results are released on not Tuesday/Friday or the maintenance notification doesn't go up because the shutdown was a very special circumstance affecting the timeline. 

Well if we've learned anything so far in this forum, it's that we've learned nothing about how this review process actually played out. 

[DrBillyBeans]

I would not be surprised if the date of release was not a Tuesday or a Friday but I would be very surprised if the results went up without the maintenance notification. I don't think the system allows them to upload results without taking the site offline. If they could, they wouldn't have been doing it that way for so many years. Perhaps this is why they are moving everything to a new page?

I know you guys are excited. I was practically foaming at the mouth this time last year but it's wishful thinking to expect something different than the past few years. Stop refreshing fastlane and go do your homework. ?? 

[clinicalpsych20192020]

Does anyone know the previous release dates?

[DesertWolverine]

6 minutes ago, clinicalpsych20192020 said:

Does anyone know the previous release dates?

Someone listed them in last year's thread: 

For 2018, it was April 3.

[jmillar]

2 hours ago, clinicalpsych20192020 said:

Does anyone know the previous release dates?

2018: Tuesday, April 3
2017: Friday, March 17
2016: Tuesday, March 29
2015: Tuesday, March 31
2014: Tuesday, April 1
2013: Friday, March 29
2012: Friday, March 20
2011: Tuesday, April 5
2010: Tuesday, April 6
2009: Friday, April 10 & Tuesday, May 19 (released in 2 batches)
2008: Tuesday, April 1
2007: Friday, March 23
2006: Thursday, March 30
2005: Saturday, April 9
2004: Thursday, March 18
2003: Friday, April 4
2002: Friday, March 15
2001: Tuesday, March 20

Edited April 2, 2019 by jmillar

[StressedPhD]

Alright, I'm guessing tuesday April 9th for us. def not this week because of the shutdown and April 12th seems a bit too late

[boo009]

Definitely by April 9th maybe April 5th. Ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh 

[FunInPhonology]

46 minutes ago, jmillar said:

2018: Tuesday, April 3
2017: Friday, March 17
2016: Tuesday, March 29
2015: Tuesday, March 31
2014: Tuesday, April 1
2013: Friday, March 29
2012: Friday, March 20
2011: Tuesday, April 5
2010: Tuesday, April 6
2009: Friday, April 10 & Tuesday, May 19 (released in 2 batches)
2008: Tuesday, April 1
2007: Friday, March 23
2006: Thursday, March 30
2005: Saturday, April 9
2004: Thursday, March 18
2003: Friday, April 4
2002: Friday, March 15
2001: Tuesday, March 20

Impressive data collection here 

wtf happened in 2009

 

[ArchaeoKiwi]

I was super hopeful for tomorrow so I could stop fixating and like actually be productive again...?

I'm looking at the chemical analysis of iron production slag from several different sites open during the Anglo-Saxon. Trying to determine if there appear to be any continuing distribution networks after the diminished Roman presence. It's kind of like a mix of production, sourcing, and communication among the different cultural communities who has migrated England during this time.

I appreciate the distraction I got from reading all of your proposals!! ✌️

[sous]

Does anyone know if every field has to allot at least one award to non-grad students? I applied to a smallish field of study in the social sciences, where it seems like most GRFP awardees are in their first or second year. I haven't done much digging of previous awardees to confirm whether this is true or not.

[jmillar]

8 hours ago, FunInPhonology said:

Impressive data collection here 

wtf happened in 2009

 

They were waiting to see what the budget would be that year. Most years in the decade before were a bit variable up to that point, between 900-1000 awards. The final budget was delayed, so they released 950 in a first batch, and then waited to see how many more they could add. Starting the next year they formalized the total awards to 2000.

[rowboat]

Not to add any stress, but I was wondering if anyone else noticed that the number of awards is lower this year than in previous years. Apparently they are only offering 1500 awards as opposed to 2000. I'm upset because we have a lesser chance of winning. 

[jmillar]

3 minutes ago, rowboat said:

Not to add any stress, but I was wondering if anyone else noticed that the number of awards is lower this year than in previous years. Apparently they are only offering 1500 awards as opposed to 2000. I'm upset because we have a lesser chance of winning. 

Oh, jeez, I missed that. Looks like it will be the case for the next two cycles as well. ( https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2018/nsf18573/nsf18573.htm )

[Ryleigh Moore]

5 minutes ago, rowboat said:

Not to add any stress, but I was wondering if anyone else noticed that the number of awards is lower this year than in previous years. Apparently they are only offering 1500 awards as opposed to 2000. I'm upset because we have a lesser chance of winning. 

Bummer ?

Edited April 2, 2019 by Ryleigh Moore

[lambda]

Website doesn't have a maintenance notice again....gargh. I just want to find out already.