NSF GRFP 2019-2020

[CeXra]

Awarded. 2nd Year, Sociology PhD. 

VG/VG, E/E, E/E

I have a serious question for those who were awarded... maybe undergraduates will be best suited? How do I change my institution. I will be enrolling to a new school this Fall 2020, so I need to change my current institution on Fastlane.. Please help!

[MrsDoubleE]

E/VG E/E E/E --> w/ comments like 'EXCEPTIONAL candidate', 'outstanding record of scientific success', etc... as an undergrad applicant, by the way.  And not even an HM????  You can't tell me this isn't rigged.  I applied in under clinical psychology- neuropsychology, where very few were awarded or given HM.  Not a fair playing field.  I'll still re-apply from my graduate institution, but man this is a bit hard to understand.  

[ChemApplicant44]

Honorable Mention: E/E E/E E/VG

Chemistry - Chemical Structure, Dynamics, and Mechanism / First-year graduate student Congratulations to everyone

[goldenxpenguins]

HM: E/E E/E E/VG

Post-bacc student; Interdisciplinary (Developmental Psychology and Communications) 

I received really positive reviews that I wasn't expecting, looking forward to applying again! 

[Nutellaoatmeal]

@CeXra After you officially accept the award, you'll have a chance to change the institution when declaring your status (tenure or reserve).

[Odlaw]

My reviews were all over the place, but judging from the comments they definitely all read the right application... G/VG, VG/E, E/E... Returning Civil Engineering Student... "Fellowship Awarded".

A few comments: I graduated with my master's in 2011 so I have a master's thesis and almost a decade of work experience under my belt all in the same field. I had 3 conference presentations during my working years, but none as a student. My research topic was really easy to tailor to the broader impacts section and my master's research was tangentially related to my work and future research so I was able to talk about that. I have been active in STEM outreach as a professional (scholarship boards, student outreach, and etc.). I got a lot of help from the writing center at my Master's institution (Also where I'm going for my PhD).

Takeaways/Lessons Learned for Future Applicants: 1) If you are a returning student don't be afraid to apply. What you have done in your professional life is likely to be more helpful than hurtful. 2) Broader Impacts of both your research and volunteering are weighted heavily as outlined by the solicitation. 3) I'm certain that they normalize the reviews or that G/VG would have sunk my application. 4) Get Help! Have as many people read your application and provide feedback as possible. 5) This isn't a total crapshoot (more effort into the application will better your odds but is certainly not a guarantee) but there is definitely some luck involved.

Congrats to all the selected and honorable mention applicants.

 

[rnf13]

How are y'all seeing your comments? I haven't received an email or anything.

Edit: found it

 

Edited April 21, 2020 by rnf13

[surface4]

Geoscience - Hydrology. 2nd-year PhD student, first time applying

VG/G, E/E, E/E. Not awarded, nor HM.

[rnf13]

2nd year PhD, Honorable Mention

VG/E, VG/E, VG/VG. I had absolutely no criticism in my reviews, they were all incredibly positive calling my research "sophisticated and original". Super bummed about not being awarded.

[tootmcgoot]

2nd year PhD, Neuroscience, Not Awarded, Only time applying

G/VG VG/VG, VG/VG

Had a very low UG GPA but high grad GPA with pubs/poster presentations.  No awards in UG (I wasn't a very good UG to be honest) or anything beyond the ordinary.  No negative comments were made about my grades, so those of you who have low GPAs, don't fret too much.  

Every reviewer wished that I had elaborated on the analytical techniques I would use beyond what I addressed, but otherwise were extremely complimentary, much to my surprise.  My proposal was the main thing discussed, even under the BI subsection, with little to no mention of BI for any reviewers.  It seems like while most of the advice given was to focus on BI, that wasn't what "sunk" my application, but rather details  not included in my proposal about specific analytical techniques beyond what I proposed.    

Overall, reviews were very kind and claim I have an excellent career ahead of me in my field and that my proposal is technically challenging but has the potential for high impact.  Every one of them said I have a strong /excellent application, but that might be what they write for us totally average applicants as to not hurt our feelings! 

Edited April 21, 2020 by tootmcgoot

[Eman2]

6x VG, not awarded.

reviews were all positive but not super enthusiastic. I guess my  application didn't have the wow factor necessary to win. The only complaints I have are that 1.) the comments didn't really provide any suggestions for improvement. One reviewer suggested  I get a rec letter from one of my internships but thats it. 2.) One of the reviewers said my proposal was on a completely unrelated topic than it actually was???! likely it was their 'meh' form response and they forgot to change the specific topic. So I'm not super upset because my application should have been more impactful to catch their attention.. but still....

[pdcook]

Graduating bachelor in Math/Physics, going to Ph.D. in Condensed Matter Theory: Awarded

V/E V/E V/V E/E

 

I was also awarded the NDSEG ($38.4k/year first three years) and can only accept NDSEG or NSF. Any advice?

Edited April 21, 2020 by pdcook

[CeXra]

For people who recieved the award... did you guys get to this part "Please indicate your five-year fellowship plan or the plan for the years remaining on your fellowship, by selecting On Tenure, On Reserve, or On Deferral for each year applicable. This data is being collected for program planning purposes only. Your actual fellowship status may not be accurately reflected in this 5-year plan."

I chose Tenure for the first three years... but its asking me to put something for year 4 and 5??? Should I put reserve or deferral? Does it matter? Its not letting me skip unless all of the 5 boxes are filled/checked with something... and I can't do Tenure more than 3 times apparently.

[pdcook]

Just now, CeXra said:

For people who recieved the award... did you guys get to this part "Please indicate your five-year fellowship plan or the plan for the years remaining on your fellowship, by selecting On Tenure, On Reserve, or On Deferral for each year applicable. This data is being collected for program planning purposes only. Your actual fellowship status may not be accurately reflected in this 5-year plan."

I chose Tenure for the first three years... but its asking me to put something for year 4 and 5??? Should I put reserve or deferral? Does it matter? Its not letting me skip unless all of the 5 boxes are filled/checked with something... and I can't do Tenure more than 3 times apparently.

From the official acceptance letter:

""Tenure" means you draw a stipend, "Reserve" means that you do not."

"This is used for forecasting only, and is not viewed as a permanent or binding commitment on your part."

 

So just put 'Reserve' for your fourth and fifth years.

[CeXra]

17 minutes ago, pdcook said:

From the official acceptance letter:

""Tenure" means you draw a stipend, "Reserve" means that you do not."

"This is used for forecasting only, and is not viewed as a permanent or binding commitment on your part."

 

So just put 'Reserve' for your fourth and fifth years.

Thank you!

[CeXra]

2 hours ago, Nutellaoatmeal said:

@CeXra After you officially accept the award, you'll have a chance to change the institution when declaring your status (tenure or reserve).

Ty

[applicant123123]

G, VG ; E,E ; G, VG - 2nd year comp sci (machine learning) PhD, honorable mention

Who else feels they got stuck with a sub-par reviewer? Consider this feedback:

"Judging from [their] GPA, it seems that [their] mathematical and computational skills might not be strong enough to conduct the proposed research, which requires to deal with the highly theoretical problems such as measurement error and uncertainty assessment."

..... Please, someone tell me, you see this is a ridiculous statement. Measurement error, highly theoretical?  SCOFF! And GPA... don't get me started. I have a 4.0 now, undergrad was around 3.4/3.6 (can't recall), which is pretty great in computer science. Most of all though, that has nothing to do with MEASUREMENT ERROR. 

p.s. I got other genuinely helpful feedback on my proposal being too ambiguous/lacking rigor,  which I appreciate and saw coming. I'm just pissed at this one bit of feedback that feels targeted and ill-founded. They know our genders, schools, and lots of personal information that can cause bias. I'd almost rather it be bias than to believe this person seriously believes in the above statement. 

 

 

[fearfulocelot]

Not awarded, 1st year student

E/VG VG/VG, E/VG

I got some good feedback (including someone who thought I had a 4.0 grad GPA--lol, I had no reported graduate scores at the point when I applied) and was overall mentioned as a strong candidate. Probably should've detailed my outreach plans better! Oh well, live and learn. I'm disappointed too but please remember, it's all a crapshoot and it isn't "rigged" and nobody is "out to get you". It's a large pool of candidates and if you didn't get it it's not personal! 

[boulderboi]

Not awarded. Second year chemistry PhD student. Reviews were very mixed. One reviewer saying they highly recommend me and one saying I'm not creative enough haha. If you are not an obvious "yes", it definitely comes down to the reviewers you get (IMO).

G/G, E/E, VG/G

For future applicants: Definitely be specific about the outreach you plan on doing! Two of my reviewers mentioned that one of my weak points was vague claims of outreach.

[ms123456]

Microbial Biology:  2nd year graduate student: Honorable Mention: VG/E, E/E, E/E

I was surprised I didn't get attacked for a lack of publications (0) and conference talks (only 4 poster presentations), or my GPA from UG 3.54. It seems that my LORs had a big impact on IM. (a pub may have pushed me to being funded section though). All 3 reviewers stated that the letters indicated I was "extraordinary" and "posses all of the qualities to be a successful researcher. It seems if you can get people who really know you, then some IM problems will be overlooked. I think I may have just got nice reviewers whose Es weren't counted as highly as tough reviewer's Es. 

All of my reviewers wrote paragraphs of information down. I know they sincerely looked at my application unlike some others have indicated in previous years. 

[homesteadjoe]

Hi! There was an email around 5 this morning but I have not been able to read it since email server is currently down. Can someone please share a screenshot of the email or a summary of its contents? I just want to make sure I have all of the information. Thank you!

[trollsloot]

Awarded VG/G VG/VG E/E. Super detailed comments, although some of the comments were directly copied from my statement haha.

[Apico3]

17 hours ago, struggleknot said:

I want to say it depends on the field and like general pool? Then again, it's kind of a crapshoot... some years people have gotten almost straight E's and weren't even awarded..

 

17 hours ago, jychung said:

Honorable mention, senior undergraduate applying in Microbial Biology. I got E/E, VG/VG, E/E and overall pretty positive reviews... do you have to get all E/E to get an award?

Based on this reddit post (believe what you will): https://www.reddit.com/r/GradSchool/comments/ft094n/comments_from_a_grfp_reviewer/, reviewers assign scores and then Z-scores are calculated for each reviewer (i.e., a lower score from a consistently hard reviewer might have a higher Z-score than a higher score from a consistently easy reviewer). These normalized Z-scores are then used to rank order applicants within a review panel and the lists are sent to NSF. The E/VG/G/F/P labels are assigned by each reviewer and are not subjected to the normalization process, so this would explain why some 3x E/E's don't get awarded and some folks with a number of VG scores do get awarded.

[captivatingCA]

I'm curious, did most people get lengthy reviews?

I suppose it might vary by field. Mine were pretty terse, just a few sentences each. They gave enough info, but it would have been nice to hear more of the reviewers' logic for their scores.

[iheartscience]

Awarded, STEM Education, incoming PhD student with a prior masters and ~15 years in the field. 

E/E, G/G, E/E. Reviewers largely agreed on strengths/weaknesses of my proposal. The IM and BI in my statements seemed compelling and timely to the E/E reviewers, and they spoke specifically to this in their summary comments. G/G reviewer seemed less compelled by the significance of the problem I posed. I wonder if my areas of interest happened to overlap more with the two E/E reviewers than the G/G reviewer, and my results could have easily swung the other direction if I had a different reviewer panel. Surely some of this process boils down to chance.

G/G also wanted to see more direct justification for why I should be awarded the GRFP especially given that I had attended a master's program previously, and wanted more direct discussion of my intended institution (I didn't build my essays around matriculation to a specific program as I hadn't been admitted yet.) It ended up working out for me anyway, but I thought I'd name these concerns as at least some reviewers want to see those issues addressed in the application. 

I'm curious how the individual reviews get translated into decisions. Do the reviewers compare notes and then make a group recommendation? 

I feel grateful for having been selected, and I found the process has helped me clarify my strengths and areas of growth as I begin my doctoral program. 

 

 

Edited April 22, 2020 by iheartscience