NSERC PGS D 2022-2023

[nervousbiochemist]

Hey guys, congrats to everyone who nabbed an award. Obviously a lot of luck involved in this whole process given the crazy impressive academic track records of some people who didn't - academia is indeed hell. 

Was wondering if any past applicants can remember if NSERC sends out feedback (and how)? I've heard murmurings about physical letters being mailed to people's house or whatever but I'm not sure if they ditched that re: COVID. Also, is the feedback just scores on a rubric or are there actual comments like how CIHR does it? 

Thanks! 

 

 

[okyes]

2 hours ago, chemistrysucks said:

Well I'm kind of surprised I didn't get anything, although from the wording of the letter and comments in this thread I guess I'm waitlisted. I have 8 publications (2 first-author and 3 second-author), 3 oral conference presentations, an oral presentation award at CCCE and 2 other poster presentations. Lots of community involvement in student groups and university committees and although no previous NSERCs I have a decent amount of internal awards (total ~55k over my grad studies). I had two previous CGS-D winners and a few profs look over my proposal and application package so I don't think it was terrible. My grad level GPA is 4.4 but my undergrad is only 3.5, I can't imagine that would be affecting my results very much? How much info do we get when we actually see our scores, do they break down how we scored on each category?

I know the process is subjective and everyone who even got to the national level is highly competitive so I shouldn't be too disappointed but I expected at least a PGS-D. On paper my application seems better than my friend from my department who got a CGS-D this year. I'm not even sure why I'm typing this, just ranting at this point. I have an internal award with almost equal value to the PGS-D until January 2023 so it wouldn't have even changed much for me. Probably done with academia at this point, going to sell my soul to big pharma and go to the USA for $$$. Congrats to everyone who got one!

Committee 179 in chemistry since I see people posting that. 

Seems we are in the same committee. I got waitlisted as well. At the point of application, I had 7 publications (4 first authorships); over 10 conference presentations and industrial technical reports; OGS; Mitacs; 3 internal scholarships and some other small scholarships and still did not even get PGS-D. Ofcourse I have bunch of extracurriculars as well. A friend in the same department as me had similar profile as me but with little previous scholarships, my overall grades (both grad and undergrad) are better than her, but with 10 publications (only 1 first authorship) and end up getting CGS-D. She had 2 scholarships and all those scholarships, I already have won them. She have a winning package but so do I, and I am just not sure what went wrong. This is my second time of applying, I have one more to apply. 

[WC_Grad]

1 hour ago, nervousbiochemist said:

Hey guys, congrats to everyone who nabbed an award. Obviously a lot of luck involved in this whole process given the crazy impressive academic track records of some people who didn't - academia is indeed hell. 

Was wondering if any past applicants can remember if NSERC sends out feedback (and how)? I've heard murmurings about physical letters being mailed to people's house or whatever but I'm not sure if they ditched that re: COVID. Also, is the feedback just scores on a rubric or are there actual comments like how CIHR does it? 

Thanks! 

 

 

Unfortunately, they don't give any comments. It's just a grading from 1-6 on the two sections that they weigh your application and how you rank based on that grading. It's really wild that they can't release that immediately...

[WC_Grad]

4 hours ago, chemistrysucks said:

Well I'm kind of surprised I didn't get anything, although from the wording of the letter and comments in this thread I guess I'm waitlisted. I have 8 publications (2 first-author and 3 second-author), 3 oral conference presentations, an oral presentation award at CCCE and 2 other poster presentations. Lots of community involvement in student groups and university committees and although no previous NSERCs I have a decent amount of internal awards (total ~55k over my grad studies). I had two previous CGS-D winners and a few profs look over my proposal and application package so I don't think it was terrible. My grad level GPA is 4.4 but my undergrad is only 3.5, I can't imagine that would be affecting my results very much? How much info do we get when we actually see our scores, do they break down how we scored on each category?

I know the process is subjective and everyone who even got to the national level is highly competitive so I shouldn't be too disappointed but I expected at least a PGS-D. On paper my application seems better than my friend from my department who got a CGS-D this year. I'm not even sure why I'm typing this, just ranting at this point. I have an internal award with almost equal value to the PGS-D until January 2023 so it wouldn't have even changed much for me. Probably done with academia at this point, going to sell my soul to big pharma and go to the USA for $$$. Congrats to everyone who got one!

Committee 179 in chemistry since I see people posting that. 

I'm in Committee 179 too. I had compared my application to a friend of mine last year that got CGSD, but the major difference was just that she got a NSERC USRA and CGSM while I had other internal USRA's. It seems like NSERC really likes to give PGSD/CGSD to those who have previously received other NSERC scholarships. 

They only break down the categories in the two sections that they weigh us in: Research ability etc. and Relevant experience etc. But that's it... Just two grades (1-6) and how you rank based on those two grades with everyone else in that committee. There's no comments, no suggestions, nothing. So I don't know what NSERC is doing having us wait until June for these results...

[PNW_]

I was rejected last year and awarded this year in a very competitive committee. Like a few of you, I struggled to understand why I didn't score higher last year (e.g. ranked bottom 1/4 for experience even though I had professional experience which  produced multiple pubs). My supervisor and friends who have NSERCs thought I had a good chance of getting an award because of how I looked on paper vs some other previous winners. 

Not sure how much luck vs strategy played a role but here is as summary of changes I made between my first and second application: 

-Wording. I mimicked their own language as well as writing style from previous award winners. I used their keywords throughout my personal statement. I did some digging and found this repository which I used for writing style:

 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EszlHbIctBJZ0HbnNwP5b75YwIhPLGdpgl6KrhZkmBQ/htmlview#

Reviewed Appendix A of the Selection committee guide: https://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/_doc/Students-Etudiants/SelectionCommitteeGuide_e.pdf I used this appendix to identify 'key words'.

-References. I suggested/provided my references specific examples (academic and experience) and key words to use. In an NSERC Q&A session I came across, someone mentioned that if you aren't able to fit all your examples relevant to selection criteria, give the extras to your references so they can state them for you. 

-Delays/gaps. I specifically stated why I took longer than expected to graduate. For example, my undergrad was longer than 4 years because I did co-op. One piece of advice I got was that this kind of delay needs to be spelled out (even though the experience section would reflect the same info). 

For those of you facing disappointment, I'm sorry you're going through this. This is not a reflection of your ability. 

[MarleyBarley]

is anyone impatiently waiting for rankings ? lol 

[Methomz]

I applied for PGS-D as I am at a foreign institution (already enrolled, 2nd year, got rejected last year) but got CGS-D. I will have to decline because I am obviously not eligible (In my understanding this means someone else will get bumped to CGS-D, so be on the look out for that if you are in committee 202) but can I still get the PGS-D? Anyone has ever been in this situation or heard of it? Also asking for a friend - anyone heard of someone keeping CGS-D while enrolled in a foreign institution (I know I am asking about an impossible miracle lol but feels weird to even be offered this award considering I am already enrolled and in my 2nd year?) Thanks!

Also to those who did not get it this year: Last year I ranked above 40 in committee 202 (cutoff is around 28) for PGS-D and this year got bumped to a CGS-D award, which if I understand means around top 10-15. I went directly from bachelor to PhD so was already at a disadvantage in terms of master thesis description and publications. So please do not get discouraged, anything can happen. I am struggling to understand how I got such a huge difference in score this year and curious to see my ranking in June. From this experience, I would say you can significantly increase your ranking by rewording key elements of your application.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Methomz

[cosmocube]

8 hours ago, Methomz said:

I applied for PGS-D as I am at a foreign institution (already enrolled, 2nd year, got rejected last year) but got CGS-D. I will have to decline because I am obviously not eligible (In my understanding this means someone else will get bumped to CGS-D, so be on the look out for that if you are in committee 202) but can I still get the PGS-D? Anyone has ever been in this situation or heard of it? Also asking for a friend - anyone heard of someone keeping CGS-D while enrolled in a foreign institution (I know I am asking about an impossible miracle lol but feels weird to even be offered this award considering I am already enrolled and in my 2nd year?) Thanks!

Also to those who did not get it this year: Last year I ranked above 40 in committee 202 (cutoff is around 28) for PGS-D and this year got bumped to a CGS-D award, which if I understand means around top 10-15. I went directly from bachelor to PhD so was already at a disadvantage in terms of master thesis description and publications. So please do not get discouraged, anything can happen. I am struggling to understand how I got such a huge difference in score this year and curious to see my ranking in June. From this experience, I would say you can significantly increase your ranking by rewording key elements of your application.

Also foreign institution here! From what I understand, offering you the CGS-D just means you got ranked near the top, but practically you would only end up with the PGS-D in terms of money, since the CGS-D is restricted to Canadian institutions only. I'm pretty certain you can't keep the extra money, but I have seen people add the extra line in their CV about declining the CGS-D in favour of the PGS-D. A friend of mine in a different committee also got the CGS-D this year, even though they were also at a foreign institution.

Adding on to your second paragraph, do you know where and when we would check in June to see our feedback?

[Methomz]

37 minutes ago, cosmocube said:

Also foreign institution here! From what I understand, offering you the CGS-D just means you got ranked near the top, but practically you would only end up with the PGS-D in terms of money, since the CGS-D is restricted to Canadian institutions only. I'm pretty certain you can't keep the extra money, but I have seen people add the extra line in their CV about declining the CGS-D in favour of the PGS-D. A friend of mine in a different committee also got the CGS-D this year, even though they were also at a foreign institution.

Adding on to your second paragraph, do you know where and when we would check in June to see our feedback?

Thanks for the info! I will add it to my resume as well then.

Last year it was released on the extranet between June16-19. I don't remember if they send out another email to let you know that a new document was added tho.. I think I learned about it by staying updated here on last year's post. It gives you the score in each category, your ranking in each category and your global ranking

Edited April 28, 2022 by Methomz

[timeforschool]

21 hours ago, PNW_ said:

I was rejected last year and awarded this year in a very competitive committee. Like a few of you, I struggled to understand why I didn't score higher last year (e.g. ranked bottom 1/4 for experience even though I had professional experience which  produced multiple pubs). My supervisor and friends who have NSERCs thought I had a good chance of getting an award because of how I looked on paper vs some other previous winners. 

Not sure how much luck vs strategy played a role but here is as summary of changes I made between my first and second application: 

-Wording. I mimicked their own language as well as writing style from previous award winners. I used their keywords throughout my personal statement. I did some digging and found this repository which I used for writing style:

 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EszlHbIctBJZ0HbnNwP5b75YwIhPLGdpgl6KrhZkmBQ/htmlview#

Reviewed Appendix A of the Selection committee guide: https://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/_doc/Students-Etudiants/SelectionCommitteeGuide_e.pdf I used this appendix to identify 'key words'.

-References. I suggested/provided my references specific examples (academic and experience) and key words to use. In an NSERC Q&A session I came across, someone mentioned that if you aren't able to fit all your examples relevant to selection criteria, give the extras to your references so they can state them for you. 

-Delays/gaps. I specifically stated why I took longer than expected to graduate. For example, my undergrad was longer than 4 years because I did co-op. One piece of advice I got was that this kind of delay needs to be spelled out (even though the experience section would reflect the same info). 

For those of you facing disappointment, I'm sorry you're going through this. This is not a reflection of your ability. 

Thanks for sharing! I got flat-out rejected with 1 first-author, 2 second author, 2 third author papers and 4 conference presentations + 2 posters. My undergrad grades are trash, M.A.Sc grades are ok (3.56/4.00) and Ph.D grades are perfect, so I'm curious to see where I ended up ranking. I also have 2 years experienice working as a research associate between my master's and Ph.D, but have no major scholarships (see trash undergrad grades).

For next year's application I'll have another first-author paper and conference presentation, and will have finished my Ph.D. coursework with a 4.00/4.00 GPA. I'm also be paying a lot more attention to my language and writing style as suggested, and will give more guidance to LoR writers. We'll see if that's enough to bump me up a little higher, and if not I will just blame it on my research subject not being sexy enough hahaha.

  

Edited April 28, 2022 by timeforschool

[topti]

20 hours ago, MarleyBarley said:

is anyone impatiently waiting for rankings ? lol 

hi, I just noticed something weird in the nserc extranet system. They updated my document yesterday at about 3pm, adding a prefix "PGS D" to the result letter name... although the content of the letter remains unfortunate. I might be overthinking but could this mean anything? I'm pretty sure on 26th the document's name was just myname_Notification of results_appnumber_year.

I wonder what do you see in the system? Is there a similar update?

[MarleyBarley]

33 minutes ago, topti said:

hi, I just noticed something weird in the nserc extranet system. They updated my document yesterday at about 3pm, adding a prefix "PGS D" to the result letter name... although the content of the letter remains unfortunate. I might be overthinking but could this mean anything? I'm pretty sure on 26th the document's name was just myname_Notification of results_appnumber_year.

I wonder what do you see in the system? Is there a similar update?

I got the same letter twice as well. I don't know why they do that. what committee are you in if i could ask ? 

[topti]

2 minutes ago, MarleyBarley said:

I got the same letter twice as well. I don't know why they do that. what committee are you in if i could ask ? 

Ah ok looks like I'm overthinking it. I'm in 194

[PNW_]

1 hour ago, timeforschool said:

Thanks for sharing! I got flat-out rejected with 1 first-author, 2 second author, 2 third author papers and 4 conference presentations + 2 posters. My undergrad grades are trash, M.A.Sc grades are ok (3.56/4.00) and Ph.D grades are perfect, so I'm curious to see where I ended up ranking. I also have 2 years experienice working as a research associate between my master's and Ph.D, but have no major scholarships (see trash undergrad grades).

For next year's application I'll have another first-author paper and conference presentation, and will have finished my Ph.D. coursework with a 4.00/4.00 GPA. I'm also be paying a lot more attention to my language and writing style as suggested, and will give more guidance to LoR writers. We'll see if that's enough to bump me up a little higher, and if not I will just blame it on my research subject not being sexy enough hahaha.

  

I feel for you. Last year I looked up several award winners in my committee and a few of them had one 1st author and maybe a co-authorship or two and a couple individuals even had no 1st authorships. My 'stats' are similar to yours but with additional co-authorships and longer work experience. My impression (though this is pure speculation) is that the reviewers often have a specific type of applicant in mind and when you deviate from the formula, you need to work pretty hard at emphasizing why you're still deserving. I know a lot of applicants talk #pubs, previous big scholarships etc. but based on my experience and sleuthing, it seems something else is also at play (e.g. luck, wording or writing style).

Speaking of having a sexy research subject, in my proposal I made minor changes to further emphasize the project's appeal and dropped a couple of the more technical sentences. One theme I noticed in previous award winner's applications, was that there was a lot more talk of relevance than detailed methods (as opposed to what you might have written for you department's candidacy/project proposal). Not sure if this change helped but after my first rejection, I decided to give it a shot.

Good luck on your application next year!

[cwjlee]

Got CSG D :) Was my last try so I am pretty happy right now.

Undergrad GPA 4.2/4.3

at time of applying, 4 second author pubs, 1 first co-author pub.

6 conferences: 3 talks/3 posters

In second year of PhD.

Committee 187

Good luck to everyone applying next year and congratz to those who got it this year!

[Genes129]

On 4/27/2022 at 7:02 PM, okyes said:

Seems we are in the same committee. I got waitlisted as well. At the point of application, I had 7 publications (4 first authorships); over 10 conference presentations and industrial technical reports; OGS; Mitacs; 3 internal scholarships and some other small scholarships and still did not even get PGS-D. Ofcourse I have bunch of extracurriculars as well. A friend in the same department as me had similar profile as me but with little previous scholarships, my overall grades (both grad and undergrad) are better than her, but with 10 publications (only 1 first authorship) and end up getting CGS-D. She had 2 scholarships and all those scholarships, I already have won them. She have a winning package but so do I, and I am just not sure what went wrong. This is my second time of applying, I have one more to apply. 

I would really suggest to follow the advice below and similar strategies. 

On 4/27/2022 at 10:22 PM, PNW_ said:

I was rejected last year and awarded this year in a very competitive committee. Like a few of you, I struggled to understand why I didn't score higher last year (e.g. ranked bottom 1/4 for experience even though I had professional experience which  produced multiple pubs). My supervisor and friends who have NSERCs thought I had a good chance of getting an award because of how I looked on paper vs some other previous winners. 

Not sure how much luck vs strategy played a role but here is as summary of changes I made between my first and second application: 

-Wording. I mimicked their own language as well as writing style from previous award winners. I used their keywords throughout my personal statement. I did some digging and found this repository which I used for writing style:

 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EszlHbIctBJZ0HbnNwP5b75YwIhPLGdpgl6KrhZkmBQ/htmlview#

Reviewed Appendix A of the Selection committee guide: https://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/_doc/Students-Etudiants/SelectionCommitteeGuide_e.pdf I used this appendix to identify 'key words'.

-References. I suggested/provided my references specific examples (academic and experience) and key words to use. In an NSERC Q&A session I came across, someone mentioned that if you aren't able to fit all your examples relevant to selection criteria, give the extras to your references so they can state them for you. 

-Delays/gaps. I specifically stated why I took longer than expected to graduate. For example, my undergrad was longer than 4 years because I did co-op. One piece of advice I got was that this kind of delay needs to be spelled out (even though the experience section would reflect the same info). 

For those of you facing disappointment, I'm sorry you're going through this. This is not a reflection of your ability. 

I completely agree. A lot of people focus on their CV (obviously this is a crucial part of your application) but perhaps spend less time on the small details of their application such as wording, grammar and structure. Most applicants are quite competitive if they've made it to national competition so the difference between your application and a colleague could be down to an eloquently written proposal. 

My old institution ran a tri-council writing seminar where they provided a lot of great writing tips for the proposal and contribution sections. Most of these tips are mentioned above. It would be worth while to inquire with your institution to see if they run similar sessions or if the office that collects NSERC applications can provide any tips/feedback etc. A mentor of mine suggested paying close attention to the optional documents you can provide: inclusion in research, explanation of delays, etc. Even if it may be obvious why your program was delayed because of COVID (as an example) its a bonus to include a blurb acknowledging these aspects and how you persevered despite this. 

As mentioned above, asking your references to highlight certain aspects of your research/volunteer/academic experience, your proposal or general attributes may go a long way to complimenting your application package. While they may be writing you a positive letter, you may take it for granted that your referees are being specific, which can emphasis some of these points (particularly if you've run out of space in the relevant sections). 

Unfortunately, application committees are made up of people who have biases (whether intentional or not) and when faced with a stack of excellent applications choices have to be made. Rejection from NSERC does not determine your worth or your value as a scientist - speaking from someone who was rejected on my first try. Good luck to everyone hoping to apply again!

[MarleyBarley]

Has anyone have any idea if and when waiting list applicants will hear anything? I hear start of june is usually the date. 

[topti]

14 hours ago, MarleyBarley said:

Has anyone have any idea if and when waiting list applicants will hear anything? I hear start of june is usually the date. 

Haven't heard anything yet. Although from posts here I noticed in the past years people get off the waitlist as late as Jan next year

[DairySkydiver58]

Any ideas on when ranking info will be released?

[Methomz]

On 6/21/2022 at 4:09 PM, DairySkydiver58 said:

Any ideas on when ranking info will be released?

I noticed that a new png file titled ''spcommon[1]'' was added yesterday in my extranet, but the content of the image is very weird (a bunch of signs pictured.? makes no sense) so maybe it will soon be released and they are testing their system again by uploading weird stuff in preparation

[timeforschool]

On 6/21/2022 at 4:09 PM, DairySkydiver58 said:

Any ideas on when ranking info will be released?

I was expecting mid-June based on last year's thread, but now it's almost August and still no word. I've already started revamping my application for this Fall, but it would be very useful to actually have some guidance on what needs improving...

[Montreal_fellow12]

2 hours ago, timeforschool said:

I was expecting mid-June based on last year's thread, but now it's almost August and still no word. I've already started revamping my application for this Fall, but it would be very useful to actually have some guidance on what needs improving...

Yeah... It would be helpful indeed. 

[PNW_]

On 6/21/2022 at 1:09 PM, DairySkydiver58 said:

Any ideas on when ranking info will be released?

I sent an email to NSERC asking this question and instead of giving me a date, they just gave me my ranking in the email text (no formal document).  I guess instead of waiting for a document upload, you may as well send an email as well. 

[fantastic_elbow]

I also just followed your method and emailed them and got back a number representing my ranking. Although I'm not sure the number itself is very helpful (without any breakdown of where you went wrong). The number just tells you just how you were compared to other applicants. Has anyone gotten a full breakdown of their ranking?