SSHRC Doctoral 2020-2021

[Generic_Applicant]

1 minute ago, _bibliomancy said:

I really didn't think it would happen but I know one other person who got it on their first round. I wish we got more insight into the scoring and what it actually means. 

Yes, I was going to ask if you knew what the 'secret ingredient' was but that's wishful thinking and I doubt there is any one such thing... 

[maverick__]

16 hours ago, asdf1123 said:

Same here! I emailed them to ask about it. I thought I was the only one in this situation! 

 

16 hours ago, MuchSynergyWowSoIntersec said:

I'm in the same boat here. Though, if you read the CGS eligibility very carefully it is actually confusing and makes no sense. It is clear that it must apply to a Canadian institution, but otherwise very vague in terms of applicant eligibility. 

Hey there @asdf1123  @MuchSynergyWowSoIntersec & @roxy31512 I'm in the same situation, I was awarded CGS-D and I am attending a University in the US. I called SSHRC today and they told me to send an email (which of course I did yesterday) I will let you all know if I hear anything. Congratulations on your awards! 

[maraoud]

Hi Everyone,

It was also my first time applying. I received a CGS with a score of 17.49. I have no idea what committee my application was in, but I study diasporas. I'll be starting my PhD in the Fall. 

As I wrote in a previous post, just to put things in perspective for everyone, my partner applied for a Marie Currie Post Doc this year and was in the bottom 50% of the selection committee, but for a Canadian SSHRC PostDoc was number 4 out of 120 for the committee. 

It was a very similar proposal, so the takeaway was: sometimes what you're doing gels with the readers and sometimes it doesn't. Try to not get too hung up on the results. 

That being said, I imagine it must be heartbreaking. 

I gleaned quite a bit of useful information from this forum in developing my proposal, so I thought I'd give my experience here for any future applicants. I began developing relationships with potential supervisors several years ago, bouncing ideas, and meeting up for coffee now and then to discuss possibilities until a meaningful research proposal came to light. 

I started working in earnest on my proposal in June, and by July was sending drafts to people I knew, ABD PhD students in my field, all my potential supervisors, and scholars in (somewhat) related fields. Every person had their own feedback  (sometimes highly varying!) and I was able to craft my proposal to take in the good points of them all. I also made sure that my proposal highlighted the SSHRC Future Challenge areas that related to it. It also helped me to not take their feedback seriously. As I've read more, I realized that a lot of the feedback was right on point, even though at the time it felt almost like an attack. Other feedback was less helpful, but everything helped me to develop a new perspective on the issues I'm researching. Also, everyone was more than happy to help out!

I don't have a lot of scholarly experience, but I do have over a decade of professional experience in my field, which is highly competitive, so I'm sure that also helped a bit. It was important for me to think outside of the box, look at my history and see what work experiences had merit, even if they might not have been peer reviewed. 

Regardless, I still maintain that it's a crap shoot. I happened to be on the good side this time, but I've also received many rejections from other grants I've applied for over the years, both for myself, and for others through my work place. 

It's always disheartening. With the rejections, I always try and remind my self that we're so lucky to live a place that has a robust grant system in place. For all it's flaws, it does support so much good work. 

Last night I opened the email with my partner and our son - I wanted us to all see the results together.

Before opening the result letter my son asked whether or not I was nervous and I said "You know, I'll for sure be disappointed a bit if I don't get it, but either way, I'll be cooking you dinner afterwards."

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 29, 2021 by maraoud

[roxy31512]

Congratulations to everyone who was awarded.

First time applying - awarded CGS with a score 17.33.

[MuchSynergyWowSoIntersec]

15 minutes ago, maverick__ said:

 

Hey there @asdf1123  @MuchSynergyWowSoIntersec & @roxy31512 I'm in the same situation, I was awarded CGS-D and I am attending a University in the US. I called SSHRC today and they told me to send an email (which of course I did yesterday) I will let you all know if I hear anything. Congratulations on your awards! 

Incredible that there are so many of us, just even among this forum. Very curious to hear what they say. My guess is that they will convert our awards into regular Doctoral Awards, but for the four years instead of the three envisioned by the CGS-D ones. 

[maverick__]

4 minutes ago, MuchSynergyWowSoIntersec said:

Incredible that there are so many of us, just even among this forum. Very curious to hear what they say. My guess is that they will convert our awards into regular Doctoral Awards, but for the four years instead of the three envisioned by the CGS-D ones. 

@MuchSynergyWowSoIntersec There are a surprising number of us, I hope they convert the awards to SSHRC too. It seems like the CGS-D designation is based on our scores. The auto-reply email said there is a 4 business day turn around time.. I am so excited to tell my Advisor about the award, but I want to wait to find out first. Hopefully one of us will hear back soon. 

[seeveeargh]

1 hour ago, maverick__ said:

@MuchSynergyWowSoIntersec There are a surprising number of us, I hope they convert the awards to SSHRC too. It seems like the CGS-D designation is based on our scores. The auto-reply email said there is a 4 business day turn around time.. I am so excited to tell my Advisor about the award, but I want to wait to find out first. Hopefully one of us will hear back soon. 

I believe if you are offered a CGS but are studying abroad, you get the Fellowship instead. I'm not 100% on this but seem to recall reading something along these lines in the 2019-20 SSHRC doctoral thread:

 

[maverick__]

16 minutes ago, seeveeargh said:

I believe if you are offered a CGS but are studying abroad, you get the Fellowship instead. I'm not 100% on this but seem to recall reading something along these lines in the 2019-20 SSHRC doctoral thread:

 

@seeveeargh Thank you for your encouraging comment. I sure hope this is correct! Congratulations on your CGS-D award! Will you be studying in Canada or abroad? 

 

[Generic_Applicant]

3 hours ago, maraoud said:

Hi Everyone,

It was also my first time applying. I received a CGS with a score of 17.49. I have no idea what committee my application was in, but I study diasporas. I'll be starting my PhD in the Fall. 

As I wrote in a previous post, just to put things in perspective for everyone, my partner applied for a Marie Currie Post Doc this year and was in the bottom 50% of the selection committee, but for a Canadian SSHRC PostDoc was number 4 out of 120 for the committee. 

It was a very similar proposal, so the takeaway was: sometimes what you're doing gels with the readers and sometimes it doesn't. Try to not get too hung up on the results. 

That being said, I imagine it must be heartbreaking. 

I gleaned quite a bit of useful information from this forum in developing my proposal, so I thought I'd give my experience here for any future applicants. I began developing relationships with potential supervisors several years ago, bouncing ideas, and meeting up for coffee now and then to discuss possibilities until a meaningful research proposal came to light. 

I started working in earnest on my proposal in June, and by July was sending drafts to people I knew, ABD PhD students in my field, all my potential supervisors, and scholars in (somewhat) related fields. Every person had their own feedback  (sometimes highly varying!) and I was able to craft my proposal to take in the good points of them all. I also made sure that my proposal highlighted the SSHRC Future Challenge areas that related to it. It also helped me to not take their feedback seriously. As I've read more, I realized that a lot of the feedback was right on point, even though at the time it felt almost like an attack. Other feedback was less helpful, but everything helped me to develop a new perspective on the issues I'm researching. Also, everyone was more than happy to help out!

I don't have a lot of scholarly experience, but I do have over a decade of professional experience in my field, which is highly competitive, so I'm sure that also helped a bit. It was important for me to think outside of the box, look at my history and see what work experiences had merit, even if they might not have been peer reviewed. 

Regardless, I still maintain that it's a crap shoot. I happened to be on the good side this time, but I've also received many rejections from other grants I've applied for over the years, both for myself, and for others through my work place. 

It's always disheartening. With the rejections, I always try and remind my self that we're so lucky to live a place that has a robust grant system in place. For all it's flaws, it does support so much good work. 

Last night I opened the email with my partner and our son - I wanted us to all see the results together.

Before opening the result letter my son asked whether or not I was nervous and I said "You know, I'll for sure be disappointed a bit if I don't get it, but either way, I'll be cooking you dinner afterwards."

 

 

 

 

 

This post has made my day and lightened my heart! I have pubs and experience and yet every year I fall short. For me, it's my proposal. My clinical mindset is there but my researcher mindset is still very much in the beginning stages. I didn't send around my proposal a lot because I was afraid of criticism and also thought I wouldn't have the energy to deal with all of it. But THIS IS SO ON POINT! I think getting varied critique, taking it seriously, and addressing it to the best of my ability may make a huge difference. I am very excited to try again now! 

[seeveeargh]

1 hour ago, maverick__ said:

@seeveeargh Thank you for your encouraging comment. I sure hope this is correct! Congratulations on your CGS-D award! Will you be studying in Canada or abroad? 

 

@maverick__I hope I'm correct for your sake, too!

I'll be studying in Canada (Manitoba, specifically). I've been working 9-5 office jobs since finishing my MA in 2018 and oh my god I can't take it anymore -- so excited to return to academia!

What about you?

[alxnl]

Got rejected by SSHRC with a fairly low score compared to others who were also rejected. FRQSC is my only hope now. Has anyone ever received drastically different scores from the two agencies for the same proposal? 

[treya25]

How do we accept the award?

[CaffeineFueled]

Hey folks! Today is FRQSC results time. As I didn't get a grant, but was next in line (3 grants, 4th place), do you know if they still offer the grant to the next person in line if someone has to refuse it (let's say because they got the CRSH) ? That also goes for CRSH : anybody heard if waitlists are still happening?

Edited April 30, 2021 by CaffeineFueled

[ovidius-naso]

Anyone else not receive any email at all? Not the heart attack email, not a results email, nothing! 

[alxnl]

2 hours ago, CaffeineFueled said:

Hey folks! Today is FRQSC results time. As I didn't get a grant, but was next in line (3 grants, 4th place), do you know if they still offer the grant to the next person in line if someone has to refuse it (let's say because they got the CRSH) ? That also goes for CRSH : anybody heard if waitlists are still happening?

I'm also wondering about this. I received a score of 88.5 and ranked 4th in my category for FRQSC. My letter says only three grants were awarded, so I'm assuming I would be next in line? On top of that, the website says a 5 grants were awarded in my category--if that's the case, shouldn't I receive an award? Somebody make it make sense!

Appui à la recherche-création

[Generic_Applicant]

2 hours ago, CaffeineFueled said:

Hey folks! Today is FRQSC results time. As I didn't get a grant, but was next in line (3 grants, 4th place), do you know if they still offer the grant to the next person in line if someone has to refuse it (let's say because they got the CRSH) ? That also goes for CRSH : anybody heard if waitlists are still happening?

I emailed them and they said there are no second round of offers. Very frustrated myself too!

[Generic_Applicant]

18 hours ago, alxnl said:

Got rejected by SSHRC with a fairly low score compared to others who were also rejected. FRQSC is my only hope now. Has anyone ever received drastically different scores from the two agencies for the same proposal? 

A friend of mine got the SSHRC doctoral but not the FRQSC this year. Weird!

[socphd20]

Does anyone know whether sshrc doctoral is solely based on your score within your committee? 

[socphd20]

5 minutes ago, Generic_Applicant said:

I emailed them and they said there are no second round of offers. Very frustrated myself too!

How long did they take to get back to you? 

Edited April 30, 2021 by socphd20

[Generic_Applicant]

Just now, socphd20 said:

How long did they take to get back to you? 

I replied to the notification email so emailed Mathieu and heard back within 30 min I'd say

[Splendid Isolation]

58 minutes ago, socphd20 said:

Does anyone know whether sshrc doctoral is solely based on your score within your committee? 

Hi, from what i can gather from these postings, the score within committees does not seem to be the final determining factor (I was 16.28/20 rejected, committee 3 Sociology). I assume there must be other factors at play that explain why lower scores in the same committee and same subject area receive awards over higher scores. I don't think it has anything to do with quota numbers to institutions as in the past the quotas relate to the number of applications an institution is able to forward to SSHRC, not the number of SSHRCs awarded to the institutions (this is what was explained to me at my uni anyway). 

So really it could be anything, haha. Speculating here, but there might be another review after the scores are tallied, where they make sure that there an equal number of applications across different entry years or demographics etc. I might just inquire to SSHRC out of curiousity. I did think the score was the sole determinant but now I know differently!  Regardless I am so happy for all the award winners and I am trying to give SSHRC every benefit of the doubt as to how they make their final decisions. Naive sociologist here perhaps!

Cheers and let me know if you hear any explanation of how scores matter (or don't!)

 

[socphd20]

2 minutes ago, Splendid Isolation said:

Hi, from what i can gather from these postings, the score within committees does not seem to be the final determining factor (I was 16.28/20 rejected, committee 3 Sociology). I assume there must be other factors at play that explain why lower scores in the same committee and same subject area receive awards over higher scores. I don't think it has anything to do with quota numbers to institutions as in the past the quotas relate to the number of applications an institution is able to forward to SSHRC, not the number of SSHRCs awarded to the institutions (this is what was explained to me at my uni anyway). 

So really it could be anything, haha. Speculating here, but there might be another review after the scores are tallied, where they make sure that there an equal number of applications across different entry years or demographics etc. I might just inquire to SSHRC out of curiousity. I did think the score was the sole determinant but now I know differently!  Regardless I am so happy for all the award winners and I am trying to give SSHRC every benefit of the doubt as to how they make their final decisions. Naive sociologist here perhaps!

Cheers and let me know if you hear any explanation of how scores matter (or don't!)

 

I've sent an email to inquire so will let you know if I hear back! My understanding is that it is based on scores per committee. It seems to me that it would undermine the scoring process if at the end of the day it's at the discretion of the committee. I am sure there is some explanation! 

[Slow Poke]

1 hour ago, Generic_Applicant said:

A friend of mine got the SSHRC doctoral but not the FRQSC this year. Weird!

Why is that weird? The committees for both are different and both involve subjective assessment of applications. In such a scenario, one's application is likely to fall in the hands of a person who appreciates it differently from another. It's perfectly understandable.  

31 minutes ago, Splendid Isolation said:

Hi, from what i can gather from these postings, the score within committees does not seem to be the final determining factor (I was 16.28/20 rejected, committee 3 Sociology). I assume there must be other factors at play that explain why lower scores in the same committee and same subject area receive awards over higher scores. I don't think it has anything to do with quota numbers to institutions as in the past the quotas relate to the number of applications an institution is able to forward to SSHRC, not the number of SSHRCs awarded to the institutions (this is what was explained to me at my uni anyway). 

So really it could be anything, haha. Speculating here, but there might be another review after the scores are tallied, where they make sure that there an equal number of applications across different entry years or demographics etc. I might just inquire to SSHRC out of curiousity. I did think the score was the sole determinant but now I know differently!  Regardless I am so happy for all the award winners and I am trying to give SSHRC every benefit of the doubt as to how they make their final decisions. Naive sociologist here perhaps!

Cheers and let me know if you hear any explanation of how scores matter (or don't!)

 

I was also struck by this - two people put up scores their scores for sociology, and that with the lesser score seemed to have got the funding. However, I am putting it down to:

1. One of them misreading or mistyping their score here, or

2. One of them mistyping their subject (people from different education systems often seem to jumble anthropology with sociology). 

However, if it were me, I would write to SSHRC and seek a clarification.  

[Generic_Applicant]

2 minutes ago, Slow Poke said:

Why is that weird? The committees for both are different and both involve subjective assessment of applications. In such a scenario, one's application is likely to fall in the hands of a person who appreciates it differently from another. It's perfectly understandable.  

I was also struck by this - two people put up scores their scores for sociology, and that with the lesser score seemed to have got the funding. However, I am putting it down to:

1. One of them misreading or mistyping their score here, or

2. One of them mistyping their subject (people from different education systems often seem to jumble anthropology with sociology). 

However, if it were me, I would write to SSHRC and seek a clarification.  

Yeah I mean the whole point is that it's not really supposed to be subjective lol and SSHRC is more competitive than provincial, so it seems odd. But you're right in that the subjectivity of it is unavoidable but still frustrating 

[rimbaldienne]

2 hours ago, Generic_Applicant said:

A friend of mine got the SSHRC doctoral but not the FRQSC this year. Weird!

No that weird, FRQSC is increasingly competitive. Acceptation rate was 27% last year, 28% this year.