SSHRC Doctoral 2019-2020

[polsciguy88]

2 hours ago, JHSinclair said:

did everyone else just get the email announcing the results are now available?  ??  A bit late now, at least for most of us.  Hopefully they improve the system over the next year, because this was extremely frustrating.

 

Yes, lol.

[Shawli2689]

 

3 hours ago, JHSinclair said:

did everyone else just get the email announcing the results are now available?  ??  A bit late now, at least for most of us.  Hopefully they improve the system over the next year, because this was extremely frustrating.

 

Um.... nope. Still haven't heard a thing. Is there anyone else out there? Do I assume my application was lost in the fray 

[Cola97]

For whoever has received their logins but cannot see the results: I have received my login but cannot see my results in my folder. So I contacted SSHRC at Webgrants@sshrc-crsh.gc.ca . I spoke with a few different agents who concluded that my results are indeed in my profile, but I cannot see them for some reason. I was told to contact technical support. I suggest that anyone who cannot view their results yet should contact SSHRC's technical support as this might be a technical error with the system. I am still waiting for an update to my situation. 

[ilovelabs]

1 minute ago, Cola97 said:

For whoever has received their logins but cannot see the results: I have received my login but cannot see my results in my folder. So I contacted SSHRC at Webgrants@sshrc-crsh.gc.ca . I spoke with a few different agents who concluded that my results are indeed in my profile, but I cannot see them for some reason. I was told to contact technical support. I suggest that anyone who cannot view their results yet should contact SSHRC's technical support as this might be a technical error with the system. I am still waiting for an update to my situation. 

Yes I am in the same boat! I also emailed technical support. Hopefully they solve this issue sooner rather than later!

[CarefreeWritingsontheWall]

On 5/1/2020 at 3:48 PM, elodie said:

can I ask what your score was to help get a sense of waitlist for this committee? thx : )

Sorry for the delay! My packet was scored a 14.10/ 20. Hope this is helpful. 

[Hitnake]

Does anyone know what are you supposed to put in for the Award number in the direct deposit form for the SSHRC? 

I only received a reference number with my letter of award. 

[CarefreeWritingsontheWall]

I've never accepted one of these awards before. In line with the award holder's guide, I emailed that I was accepting the terms of the award and the start date. I have yet to get a reply, however, and as the deadline to accept approaches I'm getting nervous that I did something wrong. Can anyone confirm how they accepted their award?

[angrycrustacean]

13 minutes ago, CarefreeWritingsontheWall said:

I've never accepted one of these awards before. In line with the award holder's guide, I emailed that I was accepting the terms of the award and the start date. I have yet to get a reply, however, and as the deadline to accept approaches I'm getting nervous that I did something wrong. Can anyone confirm how they accepted their award?

I e-mailed fellowships@sshrc-crsh.gc.ca with my acceptance on Sat. May 2, and on Thu. May 7 I received the response "Good morning, I acknowledge receipt of the acceptance of your award.  A copy of this e-mail will be placed on your file.  We wish you success in your research." 

If you accepted early in the month and have not yet heard, it couldn't hurt to send them a followup e-mail to make sure nothing horrible happens.

 

 

 

[CarefreeWritingsontheWall]

20 hours ago, angrycrustacean said:

I e-mailed fellowships@sshrc-crsh.gc.ca with my acceptance on Sat. May 2, and on Thu. May 7 I received the response "Good morning, I acknowledge receipt of the acceptance of your award.  A copy of this e-mail will be placed on your file.  We wish you success in your research." 

If you accepted early in the month and have not yet heard, it couldn't hurt to send them a followup e-mail to make sure nothing horrible happens.

 

 

 

Thanks so much for this! I emailed on May 8th (after confirming with my department some funding questions). I followed up last night as you suggested and woke up to an email stating the same thing this morning. 

[lolplsfundme]

Do any successful applicants feel comfortable sharing tips for proposal writing? I put my absolute ALL into my proposal last year and was rejected with a score of 11.5. I'm feeling pretty discouraged, especially given that I now only have one more chance for the CGS-D (entering PhD 1 in the fall). 

At the time of application last year I had zero publications, so I thought that may have played a large role, however I'll be entering this round with two/potentially three.

Please feel free to reply to this message or DM me -- thanks in advance!

[Clinpsyc01]

On 7/3/2020 at 10:34 AM, lolplsfundme said:

Do any successful applicants feel comfortable sharing tips for proposal writing? I put my absolute ALL into my proposal last year and was rejected with a score of 11.5. I'm feeling pretty discouraged, especially given that I now only have one more chance for the CGS-D (entering PhD 1 in the fall). 

At the time of application last year I had zero publications, so I thought that may have played a large role, however I'll be entering this round with two/potentially three.

Please feel free to reply to this message or DM me -- thanks in advance!

I may be wrong, but I think you are still eligible for the CGS-D past PhD1. I know of people last year who got it when applying in PhD2, although obviously that could’ve changed. 
 

That being said, I got a similar score last year when I applied as a masters student. I applied this year in the first year of my PhD and scored ~16. Honestly, there weren’t any major changes in my app, especially not anything to truly justify the jump in my scores. I changed one letter writer to someone more SSHRC oriented (I’m in psych, so some faculty are more NSERC/CIHR). I was also able to provide a more defined timeline and plan since I was in the program already. Really, I think I just got luckier with my reviewers since there’s a lot of chance involved. 

Edited July 5, 2020 by Clinpsyc01

[angrycrustacean]

On 7/3/2020 at 10:34 AM, lolplsfundme said:

Do any successful applicants feel comfortable sharing tips for proposal writing? I put my absolute ALL into my proposal last year and was rejected with a score of 11.5. I'm feeling pretty discouraged, especially given that I now only have one more chance for the CGS-D (entering PhD 1 in the fall). 

At the time of application last year I had zero publications, so I thought that may have played a large role, however I'll be entering this round with two/potentially three.

Please feel free to reply to this message or DM me -- thanks in advance!

Hi! Sorry this happened to you. It sucks. As has been pointed out, these things come down to luck of the draw - the best proposal in the world probably can't save you if one of your adjudicators just doesn't like your idea, your supervisor, or the weather that day. Last year I applied as a direct applicant and scored a soul-crushing 9 points. This year as a first-year Doctor of Musical Arts student I got 17.5 - some things had changed, which I'll talk about below, but I think I had unusually difficult adjudicators the first time and unusually generous ones this second time.

That being said, some things I've been thinking about over the years for CGS-M, OGS, CGS-D, and the like:

1) In all of these applications, I have invariably done better when I can utilize the school's own grantwriting support programming. I attribute my CGS-D success this time around to the fact that I had the "inside scoop" on what kinds of information my proposal should highlight in order to even make it out of the faculty/university. Not only that, but professors/the faculty grants officer had a long memory about what kinds of proposals had been successful in the past. I worked on my proposal with five professors.

2) Paradoxically, I've also found that my grant applications are more successful when I follow my gut about what I want to say. Along the way I've had professors who had such strong opinions that it almost seemed like they wanted to write my proposal for me, or at least wanted to insert large chunks of ideas that I felt were outside of my scope. It's hard to decline or dilute those suggestions, but for every word I yield to those external ideas, I'm losing an opportunity to elaborate more clearly on what I really want to say.

2a) When I wrote up my first CGS-M proposal, a professor looked it over and complained that it lacked "spark" - it was a decent idea but it didn't seem to convey that I cared about it, wanted to do it, and was invested in the outcome. Sure enough, that application was unsuccessful. I really deeply cared about that particular proposal, but he was right. Following the rules and respecting the additions others had suggested had led to a proposal that was missing all of the excitement I'd originally had about the idea. It may be a coincidence, but when I followed my instincts and jettisoned the extraneous content people had added to my first CGS-M and CGS-D proposals, I was successful with second applications. Obviously we can't be gushing with enthusiasm as we write within these rigid proposal guidelines, but I think it's important to find subtle ways to show who you are and why you're excited about this.

3) Time is your friend. When I click to submit any proposal I invariably feel like it's My Finest Writing™, hand-delivered to me by an angel on a cloud.  A couple of hours after submitting I start to wonder if I should have changed "that one thing." By the next week I'm filled with dread about having submitted irredeemable garbage, which only gets amplified by a rejection. But after a really long while, I can finally see a proposal for what it was - pretty good for when I wrote it, but with some things I'll change because now I know more. If somebody asked me today to show them My Finest Writing™, I wouldn't show them my "successful" CGS-D proposal unless I had some time to rewrite it to reflect all the thoughts I've had in the last 8-10 months.

When you reapply - even aside from your new publications - I think your biggest advantage will be that you've thought about all of this for over a year, and you can build on the work you've done. I believe you 100% when you say you put your all into it - but this time, you'll have even more to put into it.  

Edited July 6, 2020 by angrycrustacean

[smallaxe]

 

On 7/3/2020 at 10:34 AM, lolplsfundme said:

Do any successful applicants feel comfortable sharing tips for proposal writing? I put my absolute ALL into my proposal last year and was rejected with a score of 11.5. I'm feeling pretty discouraged, especially given that I now only have one more chance for the CGS-D (entering PhD 1 in the fall). 

At the time of application last year I had zero publications, so I thought that may have played a large role, however I'll be entering this round with two/potentially three.

Please feel free to reply to this message or DM me -- thanks in advance!

I used this proposal as a guide: https://www.bethtimmers.com/blog/2019/2/26/getting-canadian-federal-funding-for-your-phd-an-example-of-sshrc-program-of-study

I found the structure helpful as it showed how to address all of the parts SSHRC suggests. The longest section of my proposal was the Contribution to Knowledge and I made sure to explain how it aligned with one of SSHRC's Future Challenge Areas. I also used the Applicant's Statement section to talk about my relevant research experience and academic activities. I was also lucky enough to have my proposal workshopped with a group of peers, professors, and post-docs.

It's important to say that a lot of it is just luck of the draw. Sometimes you get a reader who thinks your research is fascinating and gives you a high score regardless and other times you don't, so you really have to take care to articulate clearly how you meet all of the selection criteria.

[Dryad]

On 5/11/2020 at 8:52 AM, ButterTurtle said:

A question about the review process (not sure that anyone can answer) so I can move forward/improve for next year. I e-mailed SSHRC to get a breakdown of my scores. One reviewer scored me 3/10, another reviewer scored me 8/10. I'm not understanding this AT ALL. How can I effectively improve an application with these huge differences? I'm sure many of us are in the same boat.

I hope they have safeguards in place so your application will be reviewed once again when large discrepancies exist.

On 4/30/2020 at 11:22 AM, Sco said:

I think it's also because the Joseph-Armand Bombardier CGS-D favors people who apply going into year 2.

I think so too. I got CGS-D as an masters entering PhD, but I kept getting told by faculty how that rarely happens.

[Dryad]

On 7/3/2020 at 7:34 AM, lolplsfundme said:

Do any successful applicants feel comfortable sharing tips for proposal writing? I put my absolute ALL into my proposal last year and was rejected with a score of 11.5. I'm feeling pretty discouraged, especially given that I now only have one more chance for the CGS-D (entering PhD 1 in the fall). 

At the time of application last year I had zero publications, so I thought that may have played a large role, however I'll be entering this round with two/potentially three.

Please feel free to reply to this message or DM me -- thanks in advance!

I didn't make it past our departmental round the first time I applied because I had no publications (I wasn't even considered at the university-level). Published a couple items and overhauled my application, and ended up getting a top CGS-D ranking. I think having 2-3 publications will improve your chances drastically. I have my fingers crossed for you.

Regarding the application itself, I recommend making sure that your research/application is aligned with their strategic plan and 16 Future Global Challenges (https://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/funding-financement/merit_review-evaluation_du_merite/index-eng.aspx). Position yourself as someone who's on the beat about what challenges Canadians face, and clearly articulate how you're going to be a scholar that will help them meet these long-term goals through your specific brand of research.

I also don't agree with the idea of partitioning the discussion about the significance of proposed research into the 3rd or 4th paragraph (typically second page). In the successful applications I've seen, we've added that commentary into every single paragraph. 

They've also updated their selection criteria, as to include service activities/volunteerism as a consideration to evaluate relevant experience and achievements. I recommend taking part in academic service activities, such as organizing a conference panel, putting together a symposium, or serve in your university's governance. 

Best of luck, and feel free to DM me if you want more pointers .

[lolplsfundme]

WOW - coming back to this forum as I work on my new proposal I am so surprised and thankful for all of your helpful responses. 

@Dryad this makes me feel so much better & I will definitely be looking into the "16 Future Global Challenges". I will also take the tip about talking about significance throughout as well, I totally agree that it shouldn't just be in the last 2 paragraphs. 

@smallaxe thank you for the helpful resource! I definitely agree that a lot of it is luck - we will see how this year plays out. No one at my University was even awarded a SSHRC CGS-D this year so hopefully as a whole next year will be better. Fingers crossed!

@angrycrustacean thank you for such helpful and detailed tips. Your reply is super motivating and I appreciate the time you took to compose such a well-thought-out and helpful response. 

@Clinpsyc01 great point about the referee fit and also the timeline. It is so hard to write a PhD proposal before you've even started data collection for your master's! I do feel that I'm in a much better place this year with regards to what I want to study and my knowledge of the literature, so hopefully it shows through my proposal. 

[CanadianPhDinUSA]

Denied third year in a row, 12.1 with no waitlist (I forget which committee but I'm in a History program). I could be feeling bitter but it seems to me there are just some topics that Canadian reviewers don't care about? I reviewed all 1026 awards that started in 2019 (518 CGS-D and 508 Doctoral Fellowships) and there were only 11 on Latin American topics (1% of the total awards given) and of these only one went to a specifically history-oriented project (0.097%). Further, I'm at a US school and only 33 awards total (out of 1,026) went to Canadian students in the US. Am I essentially just SOL for SSHRC? I've got one more chance to apply, wondering if it's actually worth my time with those odds.

[BTF]

Just now, CanadianPhDinUSA said:

Denied third year in a row, 12.1 with no waitlist (I forget which committee but I'm in a History program). I could be feeling bitter but it seems to me there are just some topics that Canadian reviewers don't care about? I reviewed all 1026 awards that started in 2019 (518 CGS-D and 508 Doctoral Fellowships) and there were only 11 on Latin American topics (1% of the total awards given) and of these only one went to a specifically history-oriented project (0.097%). Further, I'm at a US school and only 33 awards total (out of 1,026) went to Canadian students in the US. Am I essentially just SOL for SSHRC? I've got one more chance to apply, wondering if it's actually worth my time with those odds.

Have you published, presented at conferences, increased your GPA in each subsequent year you've applied? As a third year + PhD student your application should be years ahead of those applying with less experience. 

[CanadianPhDinUSA]

@BTF So I'm only just now starting the third year of the PhD program here (my first application was submitted in the final year of my MA at a Canadian institution, on the basis that I would hold the award at my current institution). I've got no sole author publications but I am cited as a translator from Spanish to English in a forthcoming Latin American history publication, I have presented at conferences, and I've received only As (4.0) on my PhD transcripts. Regarding publications, I don't actually know of any history student who has published prior to becoming a dissertator; of the two history students I know who've been awarded SSHRC (one in Canada, and one at my institution here), neither one has a single publication (and I had both of them look over my program of study several times prior to submission). Generally, history students don't publish until they've been dissertating for at least a year, for example our two new hires, from Harvard and Michigan, didn't get their first publications until the sixth years of their programs, and even my advisor didn't get his first publication in History until the fifth year of his program (he'd had about 7 years of surgery publications under his belt by that time though).

That only one award out of 1026 was given to a Latin American history dissertation leads me to believe perhaps we (Latin Americanists) are just not *it* for Canadian reviewers? I've been fairly successful with internal awards at my institution (and am not yet eligible for SSRC's IDRF because COVID fucked up my in-field research plans for my prospectus so I don't know how I fare at that level just yet).

Edited August 24, 2020 by CanadianPhDinUSA
Addressed responder

[BTF]

3 hours ago, CanadianPhDinUSA said:

@BTF So I'm only just now starting the third year of the PhD program here (my first application was submitted in the final year of my MA at a Canadian institution, on the basis that I would hold the award at my current institution). I've got no sole author publications but I am cited as a translator from Spanish to English in a forthcoming Latin American history publication, I have presented at conferences, and I've received only As (4.0) on my PhD transcripts. Regarding publications, I don't actually know of any history student who has published prior to becoming a dissertator; of the two history students I know who've been awarded SSHRC (one in Canada, and one at my institution here), neither one has a single publication (and I had both of them look over my program of study several times prior to submission). Generally, history students don't publish until they've been dissertating for at least a year, for example our two new hires, from Harvard and Michigan, didn't get their first publications until the sixth years of their programs, and even my advisor didn't get his first publication in History until the fifth year of his program (he'd had about 7 years of surgery publications under his belt by that time though).

That only one award out of 1026 was given to a Latin American history dissertation leads me to believe perhaps we (Latin Americanists) are just not *it* for Canadian reviewers? I've been fairly successful with internal awards at my institution (and am not yet eligible for SSRC's IDRF because COVID fucked up my in-field research plans for my prospectus so I don't know how I fare at that level just yet).

Interesting, apologies, I wasn't aware the norm is not publishing in history at your stage. Do you present posters or papers at conferences? Did you receive external funding for your masters? Have you written for none academic outlets like newspapers, trade journals, etc? Maybe been an RA on projects throughout your studies.

 

Have those that received SSHRC outside your institution in history published in academic journals?