NSF GRFP 2021-2022

[sPeLLeFaCdArG]

Dear 2022-23 thread, 

The Tuesday/Friday pattern is no more. Please apply your anxieties toward new speculations concerning the inner workings of the NSF.

Cheers, 

-the 2021-22 thread

Here is one *provocative* theory for your consideration:

  

[JustScienceThings]

Reviewer 1: "The technical approach is systematic, well-resourced, and likely to succeed in [its objectives]. Letters are strong, citing independence, initiative, and consistent engagement in scientific discussion during lab meeting. The transcripts are puzzling, with several low grades in relevant coursework. Many brilliant scientists do not achieve high marks in traditional coursework, but the application should provide some contextual information [for these low grades]."

Reviewer 2: "Though, low GPA during undergrad is a concern, the applicant provides a highly original self-developed research proposal. The proposed studies are highly challenging but have a great potential in [advancing knowledge of the field]. Previous research experiences of the applicant in both wet lab settings and bioinformatics perfectly suit the applicant's current proposal. The applicant also is well supported by strong supporting letters... Overall the applicant demonstrated outstanding research performance and provides a high quality research proposal."

Rejected. Not even an honorable mention.

Glad to know that academia cares more about grades than the proposal, whilst simultaneously and explicitly acknowledging that grades are not reliable indicators of research ability or potential. And with that, I am officially giving up on neuroscience and the PhD pursuit. Academia wouldn't even give me one single interview in my third cycle applying, yet somehow I'm good enough to bag a $85K/yr entry-level job in industry working with Feng Zhang. Re-read that last sentence and think about how messed up the academic processes must be for that to occur.

(For the context of those outside of biology, though Jennifer Doudna won the Nobel Prize in 2020 for the discovery of the gene-editing molecule CRISPR Cas9 [recall headlines about designer babies], Feng Zhang was independently working on it at the same time and was the first to engineer and prove its efficacy in mammalian cells. Many believe that he should have shared the Nobel Prize. That's who I'll be working with.)

TLDR: I'm done waiting for academia to recognize me. I'm moving on.

Best of luck to everyone else in your ongoing PhD pursuits! Keep your head up, take care of your mental health, and don't forget that there's always great opportunities out there - even if you can't immediately see them.

Edited April 5, 2022 by JustScienceThings

[lkaitlyn]

On 4/4/2022 at 3:58 AM, hopefulastro said:

Not awarded, not even an HM! IM: E/VG/E, BI: E/VG/E. I do not understand their process - how do some with lower ratings get HM or are awarded? Reviewer 1 also said I had an excellent GPA and reviewer 3 said I had very strong letters ☹️

In answer to this (and as info for future applicants who have the same question): NSF uses z-scores to standardize the numerical scores that reviewers give applicants (which you don't get to see) — basically, if you get a reviewer who was harsh with everyone they reviewed, it adjusts for that, and likewise adjusts for if you got a reviewer who gave everyone high scores. This process is still a total crapshoot but the TL;DR is that the E/VG/G thing masks a numerical score, and that numerical score is further adjusted after the conclusion of the reviewing process. Also keep in mind that they try to award proportionally to broader subfields (social sciences, etc.) based on applicant volume in each subfield, so you might have just wound up in an unusually strong subfield pool.

[Nolove]

Congrats to those who recieved an award and HM and to all who worked so hard to apply! This application was a huge learning experience for meee! Growing pains for sure especially being away from school for years. 

I am curious to those who recieved the fellowship, it was suggested not to use it in first year and begin tenure 2nd year of PhD. Anyone else going to do that? Because bulk of research wont really begin first year and I can get teaching experience done in beginning before knee deep in projects. 

[lkaitlyn]

On 4/8/2022 at 8:14 AM, Nolove said:

Congrats to those who recieved an award and HM and to all who worked so hard to apply! This application was a huge learning experience for meee! Growing pains for sure especially being away from school for years. 

I am curious to those who recieved the fellowship, it was suggested not to use it in first year and begin tenure 2nd year of PhD. Anyone else going to do that? Because bulk of research wont really begin first year and I can get teaching experience done in beginning before knee deep in projects. 

I got it in my first year so I'm using it year 2, 4, and 5 of my PhD. But if you'd otherwise be teaching in fall of your first year, I'd personally recommend using it first year. You want a semester/quarter to adjust to grad school without having to teach.