SSHRC

[dramanda]

Your achievements sound impressive. I'm sure you're a great scholar, there is not need to be defensive. We are all in this together. I wish you the best of luck with this grant. It sure is a lot of money!

Agreed

[sylvinka]

Agreed

Thank you both! And being a mother of three does not make things easier.

I wish you all best!

[ontariograd]

My understanding is that if you received a rating like that you applied independently directly to SSHRC, right? I also understand that those numbers they rate you at out of 30 are not 'scores' as such but are ranks. So that out of the pool of people you were ranked in, at least 1/3 of them would have a rank of less than 10/30, a third of them would be 10-20/30 and a third would be above 20/30.

Although a rank like 5/30 could be disappointing (I know - I was once there as well), it doesn't represent an awful application, just a good one that was ranked lower.

[sylvinka]

My understanding is that if you received a rating like that you applied independently directly to SSHRC, right? I also understand that those numbers they rate you at out of 30 are not 'scores' as such but are ranks. So that out of the pool of people you were ranked in, at least 1/3 of them would have a rank of less than 10/30, a third of them would be 10-20/30 and a third would be above 20/30.

Although a rank like 5/30 could be disappointing (I know - I was once there as well), it doesn't represent an awful application, just a good one that was ranked lower.

No, if you read my previous posts, my application was selected as the best in the School of medicine and then made it to the pool with other applicants from other departments via School of Graduate Studies. My friend who applied one year before me scored 16/30 and got it. Since SSHRC does not provide applicants with reviews, it is difficult to say what went wrong. CIHR sents reviewers' reports back to applicants so they know strong and weak points in their proposals.

[dramanda]

My understanding is that if you received a rating like that you applied independently directly to SSHRC, right? I also understand that those numbers they rate you at out of 30 are not 'scores' as such but are ranks. So that out of the pool of people you were ranked in, at least 1/3 of them would have a rank of less than 10/30, a third of them would be 10-20/30 and a third would be above 20/30.

Although a rank like 5/30 could be disappointing (I know - I was once there as well), it doesn't represent an awful application, just a good one that was ranked lower.

I don't think this is right. Last year, I think you needed ~18/30 to get a SSHRC. Since 60% of A-list applicants get doctoral SSHRC each year (give or take a few), this would mean that 60% of people got above 18/30. SSHRC tells you in your letter both what your score was and what the cut-off was in your particular year to win an award.

My understanding is that it is actually a score, based on the 5 rubric categories I posed previously.

[monkeybrain]

if you also think that I am writing crapy proposals, then how come I got Dean's Fellowship from our med school in the amount of 20,000$ for 4 years? I submitted the same proposal.

For what it's worth, I think many of us will be rejected by SSHRC, and it won't be because our proposals were crappy -- it'll be because some SSHRC reviewer decided they liked another equally intelligent and deserving student's proposal better. It is possible to write a great proposal, have great letters, have great grades, and still be rejected.

[ogopogo]

Somewhere, way way back in the early pages of this thread someone mentioned that SSHRC told them that they score on a curve, so it might not be the case that the applications are divided into thirds - this is unconfirmed though, since they don't mention that elsewhere.

And a question...they don't say anything about this, but if another applicant submits a proposal that is very very similar to yours and you are both excellent candidates who would otherwise receive funding, do you figure they would they only award it to one of the two? And could this account for some of the apparent randomness of decisions?

[Snasser]

Sylvinka,

I think jackassjim has some good points. From my understanding, the SSHRC adjudication committee scores you on each of the following factors:

- past academic results, demonstrated by transcripts, awards and distinctions;

- the program of study and its potential contribution to the advancement of knowledge;

- relevant professional and academic experience, including research training, as demonstrated by conference presentations and scholarly publications;

- two written evaluations from referees; and

- the departmental appraisal (for those registered at Canadian universities)

Even if your previous awards and distinctions were COMPLETELY ignored, a score of 5/30 means that there were some problems in other aspects of the application as well. This is not meant to sound accusatory, but you should know that those 5 bulleted points listed above are fairly evenly weighted by the judges.

Hi dramanda, if you also think that I am writing crapy proposals, then how come I got Dean's Fellowship from our med school in the amount of 20,000$ for 4 years? I submitted the same proposal. In addition, my proposal ranked number 1 in the School of Medicine when submitted to the School of Graduate Studies. And if it was crapy, why SGS would choose it and send it to SSHRC? Is it so difficult to acknowledge that mistakes can happen and SSHRC messed up my file?

[ontariograd]

Somewhere, way way back in the early pages of this thread someone mentioned that SSHRC told them that they score on a curve, so it might not be the case that the applications are divided into thirds - this is unconfirmed though, since they don't mention that elsewhere.

And a question...they don't say anything about this, but if another applicant submits a proposal that is very very similar to yours and you are both excellent candidates who would otherwise receive funding, do you figure they would they only award it to one of the two? And could this account for some of the apparent randomness of decisions?

My bad -- that's what I was thinking of. So it's not necessarily divided equally, but that there are 'ranks' rather than objective 'scores', meaning that 5/30 doesn't represent an awful application or anything particularly wrong, but the application that was ranked in that position-- someone was going to get 5/30.

This is another aspect of the process that could be explained much more clearly.

[mikaela]

While I may not have earned a SSHRC last year, this person definitely didn't earn one, yet now they're sitting pretty. I find it sadly possible that a reasonable application could receive such a terrible ranking - contributing factors could easily include vindictive committee member who hates the supervisor, politics, grad studies at home institution messed up and sent an incomplete application, vindictive dept. appraisal or reference letter, wrong committee selected for adjudication...

totally agree. Getting scholarships is just so random! It often depends on who's sitting on the committees.

A friend of mine once got a 10/30 with a perticular proposal. She was a bit upset about this, so she was hesitant to re-apply (yes, students can be a bit too sensitive for their own good). Her supervisor managed to convince her to reapply at the very last minute, My friend tried to redraft, but her supervisor wasn't happy with the new proposal, so they decided she would submit the same proposal as the year before, to the same committee (although, of course, the committee was filled with new juries). In the meantime she had published one peer-reviewed paper. Guess what, she got an award.

Another case in point: three years ago, I applied and got an OGS (also got a SSHRC, so I declined the OGS). This year, I reapplied ot OGS with pretty much the same proposal, updated to reflect my advancements and with 4 publications and 5 presentations. Guess what... I didn't get it this year... but, I got a SSHRC postdoctoral fellowship for Jan :? . Academic funding will never cease to be a mystery.

[jasper.milvain]

Jesus Christ, people! Stressing over the wait is no reason to start cannibalizing!

[jackassjim]

Jesus Christ, people! Stressing over the wait is no reason to start cannibalizing!

But it tastes so good...

[canuckle]

A little bland for my tastes--I prefer richer food.

Lets wait until next week when we're all rolling in it. Until then, SSHRC is the enemy, dammit!!

[Neatgirl]

This is very unofficial, but I heard from a prof that having already received a major award does increase your chances of getting one again. Kind of a "rich get richer" scenario, but he said that reviewers generally have the impression that if you were good enough to be "chosen" once, you're good enough again. However, he and I were discussing OGS (master's) first, doctoral SSHRC next (my situation). I know SSHRC actually awards points for getting external awards previously during the review process. I don't know as much about OGS's review policies, so I can't really comment on the SSHRC first, OGS next scenario you're in.

I agree with dramanda and my own experience is that this is true. Like ashleyv (and congratulations by the way!), I had a Master's SSHRC in the first year of my MSc program and ended up getting an OGS for the second year. I'm starting a PhD in the fall and have been notified that I was successful for the OGS once again. (Although, like so many others on this board, I'm anxiously waiting on the SSHRC doctoral results and am hoping that I will get to turn down the OGS in lieu of the SSHRC!)

[none]

For what it's worth, I think many of us will be rejected by SSHRC, and it won't be because our proposals were crappy -- it'll be because some SSHRC reviewer decided they liked another equally intelligent and deserving student's proposal better. It is possible to write a great proposal, have great letters, have great grades, and still be rejected.

I think you're quite right...

...there is actually a PhD student in my department who won a SSHRC CGS scholarship and, in the same year, was turned down for the OGS (which is decided earlier)...this makes no sense whatsoever!

I think it has to do with departmental ranking procedures, Neatgirl. I posted more detailed comments on this kind of thing about a week or two ago--but then again, probably not all departments handle external awards applications in the same manner...

[sylvinka]

Hi Sylvinka,

I am sorry to hear about your previous experience with SSHRC and, with your strong qualifications, wish you well in this competition. Like many others on this board, I don't understand how these decisions get made...there is actually a PhD student in my department who won a SSHRC CGS scholarship and, in the same year, was turned down for the OGS (which is decided earlier)...this makes no sense whatsoever!

I am THRILLED to have an OGS for next year; however, for obvious reasons I would prefer a SSHRC (the greater amount of the award and the fact that it is for more than one year - it would

mean no apps this fall which would be terrific!). Mostly I think I would be excited about the multiple years funding as I am a student parent and the stress every year of wondering whether I will be able to afford to complete my education (and feed my ravenous teenage children!) is crazy so it sure would be nice to not have to worry so much! I do apologize if I came across as not appreciative of the OGS as I certainly didn't mean it!

[LyndaD]

A little bland for my tastes--I prefer richer food.

Lets wait until next week when we're all rolling in it. Until then, SSHRC is the enemy, dammit!!

HA HA HA!! I agree. Since they keep making me check their damn web page every hour just in case they have posted a new excel spreadsheet, yeah, until I know one way or the other, SSHRC reviewers be damned!!

Ack! Did I just type that?? SSHRC gods! Please, I didn't mean it!!!

Noooooooooo...

[walkerton]

HA HA HA!! I agree. Since they keep making me check their damn web page every hour just in case they have posted a new excel spreadsheet, yeah, until I know one way or the other, SSHRC reviewers be damned!!

Ack! Did I just type that?? SSHRC gods! Please, I didn't mean it!!!

Noooooooooo...

Oh you're in for it now, I bet they have spies on this very site. Although if that is true and not one sympathetic administrator leaked us info. after seeing how desperate and despaired we all are, then they should definitely all be damned.

[Cree8tiveGyal]

I'd like to chime in here, that the organizations, institutions (and we) are definitely not infallible. Somehow, some way, my OGS application made it all the way to Thunder Bay before it was noticed that I failed to sign in the required spots. Also, somehow in the transition from department to OGS, one of my transcripts magically disappeared. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that mistakes happen - we're human, it happens. Greater transparency would be fabulous and certainly help clear up some of this stuff..........

I talked to our Grad Secretary today who said she only received notification of SSHRC MA results yesterday.......so that gives me a bit of insight into the delay.......ugh.

Still wishing everyone luck!

[jferreir]

Concerning the MA results, has anyone actually received the SSHRC letter? Should I expect to receive the letter this afternoon or sometime next week? This wait is killing me!

[jouissance]

Someone posted that last year the cutoff for SSHRC was around 18, does anyone know what the cutoff for CGS was? My wife applied independently, so she already knows her score (unless they rescore?)...we really need to make some decisions soon (regarding our kids' schooling next year, as well as my work situation) if we are going to be moving from Victoria to Toronto! She scored 21 or 22, does that mean anything to anyone?

[ashleyv]

Concerning the MA results, has anyone actually received the SSHRC letter? Should I expect to receive the letter this afternoon or sometime next week? This wait is killing me!

I think sometime next week. I heard that they were mailing them out this afternoon.

[canuckle]

Someone posted that last year the cutoff for SSHRC was around 18, does anyone know what the cutoff for CGS was? My wife applied independently, so she already knows her score (unless they rescore?)...we really need to make some decisions soon (regarding our kids' schooling next year, as well as my work situation) if we are going to be moving from Victoria to Toronto! She scored 21 or 22, does that mean anything to anyone?

It is my understanding that they rescore all applications in the final round. I'm afraid she's in the same boat as the rest of us, waiting 'til next week for news. If she applied independently she might consider contacting the Grad secretary at her future school so that, come next week, she may have a bit of relationship in place to politely inquire about her results.

[eggheaddreams]

Concerning the MA results, has anyone actually received the SSHRC letter? Should I expect to receive the letter this afternoon or sometime next week? This wait is killing me!

Nope, no letter yet. I think, based only upon this thread, mind you, that they were mailing them yesterday or today. Your university knows though and in my opinion, they should darn well be telling you. One has to be tactful though. Perhaps one last appeal for mercy??

[jouissance]

It is my understanding that they rescore all applications in the final round. I'm afraid she's in the same boat as the rest of us, waiting 'til next week for news. If she applied independently she might consider contacting the Grad secretary at her future school so that, come next week, she may have a bit of relationship in place to politely inquire about her results.

Thanks for the response and the suggestion.

As a point of discussion, does anyone else find it strange that they re-score? I mean, the whole thing is set up to give the impression of objectivity, at least; it seems to me that re-scoring kind of puts the lie to that. In a time when the social sciences are trying to emphasize their scientificity (for better or worse), this strikes me as a strange strategy (again, conceptually, not necessarily in terms of 'fairness'). In any case, the implicit admission of a strong subjective element that comes with the practice of re-scoring would offer a compelling argument for greater transparency and feedback after the fact.

Thoughts?