NSF GRFP Eligibility Extenuating Circumstances

[starmaker]

Has anyone here pulled off eligibility through extenuating circumstances (i.e. you had too much graduate study already, by their standards, and managed to convince them that you should be eligible anyway)? What were your circumstances?

I have too many part-time graduate study credits for the NSF right now (we won't go into what I think about their eligibility standards for part-timers, which is a whole other can of worms). But. I did my undergrad in a different field. When I switched to CS, I did a "Post-baccalaureate minor", which was designed for people new to CS who want to work in it or study it in a grad degree program, and was a mix of graduate-level and undergraduate-level classes, and meant to be equivalent to a CS minor. I'm wondering if I can make the case that, since it's a program for people without undergrad prep in CS, and they even call it a minor, like an undergrad minor program, I was in a functionally equivalent situation to an undergrad who takes grad classes as part of his/her undergrad program. If the grad-level class from the post-bac minor don't get counted "against" me, then I'm left with what I've taken in my part-time MS program, and I become eligible.

Anybody had a case similar to this?

[mechengr2000]

From what I can tell, NSF doesnt abide by their own rules. I have met a whole slew of people that had vast professional experience (~3-4 years) between graduatings from undergrad and then applying for PhD/NSF support and they WON. NSF's own rules state you cannot have that much professional experience and then apply for it, and yet I have many people who have won funding from them with this.

Since you are actually doing something legitimate by their own written rules, I think you are in the clear, but make sure you still write your eligibility essay well, just in case.

[hupr]

It looks like the eligibility criteria have changed this year. I'm pretty sure I looked into it last year, when I was applying, and one could be eligible if there was a 2-year gap between current and previous graduate work. Now it looks like that only applies if you didn't earn a degree during the previous graduate work. So if you attempted but didn't finish an MA, you'd be eligible so long as it was at least 2 years ago, but if you graduated, then you're ineligible. How much sense does that make?

[Anthro14]

so they're rewarding failure?

[jaystaf]

Yea, this year's set of rules kind of blew me out of the water. I busted my ass to get an MS before my advisor left the university, completed it with less than a year's grad work. Figured I'd still be eligible, since I haven't spent any more time in grad school than eligible second year students. Nope. I would have only been eligible had I dropped out and not fought for the degree. I was hoping to receive my third HM this year, as well. No hat-trick party for me

[Krypton]

From what I can tell, NSF doesnt abide by their own rules. I have met a whole slew of people that had vast professional experience (~3-4 years) between graduatings from undergrad and then applying for PhD/NSF support and they WON.

What? The GRFP does not place any restrictions on the amount of time you can spend getting "professional experience," only on the amount of time you can spend on graduate studies. Two winners from my program had 5 and 10 years of previous professional experience, but had applied in their first year of a PhD program following that.

Edited November 17, 2011 by Krypton