NSF GRFP 2012-2013

[Pitangus]

Is it kosher to list papers that haven't been published yet? I have one accepted for review and one under revision. Would it also be ok to cite these in my essays? Can I just include all the standard citation info + (under review) or ?? And would you bother to list an unpublished honors thesis?

I don't think you need to cite an honors thesis itself as a publication, especially if you have journal publications or manuscripts submitted/in review/in press etc. Of course, you can still mention in your essays that you wrote the thesis, but I don't know if it's necessary to cite it in the same way as your in review/under revision manuscripts.

I had submitted a manuscript based on my thesis research, and I did cite that and list it in the part of the application form that asked for publications, but I didn't list the thesis itself.

[guttata]

In a similar vein, I listed a presentation at a national conference that had been accepted but not presented yet. The presentation was in January, so I presented by the time reviewers saw my application. Doing the same thing this year for the same conference, different presentation.

[InquilineKea]

How much of the "Intellectual Merit" portion of the NSF Fellowship is based on how unique, original, and transformative the applicant's research *could* be? E.g. if I'm in a field that *very* few other grad students are in, could that potentially help?

Also - which one of these is more important for prior research?

(a) you did the professor's research and you mostly did what the professor told you to do, and it landed you a publication

(b )you mostly did your own research under a supervisor, produced results that probably aren't publishable, but learned lots in the process

And are there any sample essays that fit under category (b )?

What is the best way to convince professors to add more content for your NSF fellowships, and not to simply reuse the LORs they wrote for your grad apps?

If you've done a lot of outreach but your professors don't mention such outreach on their LORs, then is that a red flag for NSF Fellowship apps?

If I took 8 grad-lvl courses as an undergrad, does that disqualify me from applying for the NSF Fellowship for my 2nd year of grad school?

Are most NSF Fellowship "honorable mentions" usually the result of insufficiently large public outreach?

How much do awards like the Goldwater Scholarship factor into the award decisions process?

How important is it that the idea is your own and not your professor's?

If your proposal is interdisciplinary, could it possibly hurt? One professor told me that they might take the average of the reviews across both disciplines.

I beg to differ with Usmivka's assertion. Unlike NDSEG and the DoE fellowships, GRFP does not give much weight to the merit of your proposal. Its what you have done till date that counts like research, academic achievements etc and yes, you need to have an acceptable GPA. It need not be perfect though ( like a 4.0 GPA ). There is also the caveat that a low GPA from a good school with no grade inflation (like Caltech) may be acceptable. They need to be convinced that you have the aptitude to do research and is in for the long haul. Also unlike the grad school admission process, I haven't heard about many low GPA's winning NSF fellowships. An application with a good proposal with less than steller credentials has less chance to be selected than the other way around. But if coba11 has some good research to back the application, along with good LOR's, its worth giving a shot. I've felt Lor's are key in situations where something in your app pulls you down. You can also mention in the personal statement about your low GPA especially if you've had a steep recovery after a few bad semesters.

How do you know that the NDSEG puts a higher weight to the merit of one's proposal?

There are multiple comments in past years from students with relatively low GPAs having success winning the award. The common thread in most cases seems to be that at SOME point there were strong semesters - these weren't students getting 2.8s across the board. There was a semester with an illness, or a family problem, or something, that caused the dip or that the student figured and recovered from. The key is to note that and what you've done to remedy the problem and show how you grew from it. Off the top of my head, one student I know had ~3.2 (an acceptable GPA but maybe a bit low for most applying for the GRF) but won the award. He spent a good deal of his application addressing his dyslexia and time spent bouncing between majors (declared 3 different majors in 3 different fields during 4 years, IIRC) as contributing factors.

In short, it's not impossible, but you do need to spin things the right way.

Ok. My GPA was horrible until I got diagnosed with ADD and the ADD meds I badly needed. At this point, would you suggest that I mention that fact? The fact that I got meds afterwards might be sufficient enough to convince them that my past failures might not be reflective of future performance (and would be sufficient enough to sum up my academic issues in a single sentence), but people have such a huge stigma against ADD that it's hard.

I have near-perfect GRE scores, and that's what really impressed my advisers. Is it bad if my advisers "sneak" in my GRE percentile scores in their LORs for me? My advisers suggested that I include my GRE scores (since I'm in an extremely special case - as one professor said - I had higher GRE scores than *anyone* she saw, but also a lower GPA than almost everyone too), but it would sound kind of "corny" for me to do it, so it might be better if they did it?

Also, are NSF reviewer comments basically completely UNINFLUENCED by the letters of recommendations?

Edited October 20, 2012 by InquilineKea

[InquilineKea]

Also, is it a good idea for me to mention that *only* a NSF Fellowship would make my proposed research possible? (it is something for which my professor does not have funding for - and it is unlikely that I would work on any of my adviser's pre-existing projects since there are other people who are better-suited for those). It is within his interests though - in the direction of something that he wants to expand into (planetary atmospheres). Or in other words, does the NSF Graduate Fellowship prefer applications from projects that probably would not exist were it not for the student's own initiative?

Does connecting undergrads with professors for research count as public outreach? What about developing a course plan for them? In terms of actual impact, it's probably bigger, but it doesn't involve actively teaching them science.

Or in other words, does advising individual people to pursue a scientific career count as scientific outreach for NSF Graduate Fellowships?

Are NSF Fellowships more forgiving of extremely high-risk applicants compared with graduate schools?

How competitive are NSF Fellowships compared with, say, admissions to top graduate programs?

Edited October 20, 2012 by InquilineKea

[vertices]

How much of the "Intellectual Merit" portion of the NSF Fellowship is based on how unique, original, and transformative the applicant's research *could* be? E.g. if I'm in a field that *very* few other grad students are in, could that potentially help?

It really depends on the reviewers and how much they see the work as such and believe in it in the context of the rest of your application. There's no way to determine 'how much.'

Also - which one of these is more important for prior research?

(a) you did the professor's research and you mostly did what the professor told you to do, and it landed you a publication

(b )you mostly did your own research under a supervisor, produced results that probably aren't publishable, but learned lots in the process

And are there any sample essays that fit under category (b )?

I would write about both in your Previous Research. For (b ), did you give a talk or present a poster about the research?

What is the best way to convince professors to add more content for your NSF fellowships, and not to simply reuse the LORs they wrote for your grad apps?

If you've done a lot of outreach but your professors don't mention such outreach on their LORs, then is that a red flag for NSF Fellowship apps?

Talk with your letter writers. Explain to them the evaluation criteria for the NSF. Give them copies of your essays and explain to them how you are addressing the criteria.

If I took 8 grad-lvl courses as an undergrad, does that disqualify me from applying for the NSF Fellowship for my 2nd year of grad school?

No. Fastlane will ask you if you're sure you selected the right box given that you have so many graduate units already, but your transcripts will show that the units were taken as an undergraduate and thus do not count against graduate time.

Are most NSF Fellowship "honorable mentions" usually the result of insufficiently large public outreach?

That's hard to know. It seems like a lot of people who don't get the award do get reviews that mention there's not enough broader impacts. However, is that because they don't have large enough public outreach or because they didn't present their outreach as well as other candidates? Also, I have seen plenty of people who got comments on their grades or research as well. Sometimes it's a reviewer that just really doesn't like like the research process.

How much do awards like the Goldwater Scholarship factor into the award decisions process?

It's a plus, but unless you can weave it into your story well, I would leave it to the Awards/Honors section. Maybe your undergraduate letter writer(s) can mention how it is a national level scholarship?

How important is it that the idea is your own and not your professor's?

It's a definite plus to your intellectual merit. How much I don't know.

If your proposal is interdisciplinary, could it possibly hurt? One professor told me that they might take the average of the reviews across both disciplines.

As discussed before, it is highly unlikely that you would get reviews across disciplines. You'll get whatever panel goes with field of study you list as primary.

Ok. My GPA was horrible until I got diagnosed with ADD and the ADD meds I badly needed. At this point, would you suggest that I mention that fact? The fact that I got meds afterwards might be sufficient enough to convince them that my past failures might not be reflective of future performance (and would be sufficient enough to sum up my academic issues in a single sentence), but people have such a huge stigma against ADD that it's hard.

I have near-perfect GRE scores, and that's what really impressed my advisers. Is it bad if my advisers "sneak" in my GRE percentile scores in their LORs for me? My advisers suggested that I include my GRE scores (since I'm in an extremely special case - as one professor said - I had higher GRE scores than *anyone* she saw, but also a lower GPA than almost everyone too), but it would sound kind of "corny" for me to do it, so it might be better if they did it?

I think you should address your ADD and take a note from irugga's application experience. I assume that now that you have the proper treatment, your more recent grades are higher? If you're worried about a stigma against ADD, you could discuss it as an unspecific 'learning disability' and 'treatment' rather than ADD and meds. (For what it's worth, I don't think any less of people with ADD.)

I don't think the reviewers would give too much weight to GRE scores. I suppose your letter writers could drop a mention in the context of explaining how intellectually merited you are, but I would hope they would have better, more fleshed out stories to support the picture of you as a smart and prepared future scientist

Also, are NSF reviewer comments basically completely UNINFLUENCED by the letters of recommendations?

No, letter writers are extremely important. You really need strong letter writers who know you well and can write to your strengths. One of my reviewers wrote about something one of my letter writers wrote.

[vertices]

Also, is it a good idea for me to mention that *only* a NSF Fellowship would make my proposed research possible? (it is something for which my professor does not have funding for - and it is unlikely that I would work on any of my adviser's pre-existing projects since there are other people who are better-suited for those). It is within his interests though - in the direction of something that he wants to expand into (planetary atmospheres). Or in other words, does the NSF Graduate Fellowship prefer applications from projects that probably would not exist were it not for the student's own initiative?

The Personal Statement essay asks how winning the award would contribute to your future career (in addition to other questions). You should mention that the GRFP will make following your direction of interest possible there. I don't know if the GRFP prefers applications like that, but I think it is a good way to address that question (along with some discussion of further future goals like becoming a professor or working NASA or whatnot.)

Does connecting undergrads with professors for research count as public outreach? What about developing a course plan for them? In terms of actual impact, it's probably bigger, but it doesn't involve actively teaching them science.

Or in other words, does advising individual people to pursue a scientific career count as scientific outreach for NSF Graduate Fellowships?

It's hard to say with this level of detail, but that sounds like mentoring to me which is part of broader impacts. I would maybe put a statement about how I like to do this in my Personal Statement and then follow it up with success stories that illustrate you really do like to do this and it has led one or more mentees into research or a scientific career. Especially later in the essays, it's those individual success stories that tend to stick in my opinion. Sound bites early, stories later.

Are NSF Fellowships more forgiving of extremely high-risk applicants compared with graduate schools?

How competitive are NSF Fellowships compared with, say, admissions to top graduate programs?

I suppose they are less competitive given that 2,000 people won out of 12,000 last year. However, it's a process that turns down a lot of really good applicants. There are more people who would make great use of the award than there are awards to give still. That makes it pretty competitive.

I'm not sure how you define 'high-risk applicants' but in my experience, the winners have put together strong applications that address the review criteria. They may not be perfect-people and some may consider themselves 'high-risk' because of past transgressions, but they demonstrate to the reviewers that they are ready to both do good science and make an impact on the world around them.

[SensLu]

Thanks for the advice. I feel reallly constrained by time right, currently focusing on proposed plan. I've always knew what I wanted to propose, I know it's creative and will fill gaps in research on my topic, I'm wondering if it's important enough to be worthy of an award. Though I think ecological issues are important, I wonder how the panel who could be from any discipline would think of it. Like how much of their bias as to whether a topic is relevant or not plays into who gets the award...

[InquilineKea]

Wow - thanks *so* much for your answers again, vertices!

[InquilineKea]

Is the success rate for NSF Fellowships really 5%? And what of NDSEG?

Also, reviewers are supposed to recuse themselves from reviewing if they know the applicant. But what if they know the professor that the applicant is under?

Edited October 21, 2012 by InquilineKea

[Pitangus]

Though I think ecological issues are important, I wonder how the panel who could be from any discipline would think of it. Like how much of their bias as to whether a topic is relevant or not plays into who gets the award...

If you choose Life Sciences - Ecology, then all of the applications reviewed by your panel will be about ecology, so I can't imagine there being a bias against you based on field.

Are panels actually made up of people from different disciplines? I assumed panelists were in that discipline, but I don't remember reading anything that clearly explains.

Edited October 21, 2012 by Pitangus

[vertices]

Is the success rate for NSF Fellowships really 5%? And what of NDSEG?

Also, reviewers are supposed to recuse themselves from reviewing if they know the applicant. But what if they know the professor that the applicant is under?

The success rate for GRFP is about 1 in 6 (16.7%) -- approximately 12,000 applied last year and 2,000 were awarded (http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=124859&org=OCI&from=news ). NDSEG is about 10% (http://ndseg.asee.org/faq/the_application ).

As for conflicts of interest, NSF Form 1230P applies: www.nsf.gov/attachments/108234/public/coi_1230P.doc and reviewers should not be from the home or proposed institution of the applicant, be advising the applicant, or be collaborating with anyone the applicant is proposing to work with. Simply knowing is not enough for a conflict of interest. Collaborations are usually counted as work within a period of time.

[vertices]

Are panels actually made up of people from different disciplines? I assumed panelists were in that discipline, but I don't remember reading anything that clearly explains.

The FAQ (https://www.fastlane...plicants.htm#43 ) makes it sound like they are: "Panelists are a diverse group of individuals who are recognized experts in the relevant academic disciplines and have experience in graduate education."

Edit: By 'they are', I meant "were in that discipline" and not "different disciplines". I realized that was unclear.

Edited October 21, 2012 by vertices

[guttata]

The FAQ (https://www.fastlane...plicants.htm#43 ) makes it sound like they are: "Panelists are a diverse group of individuals who are recognized experts in the relevant academic disciplines and have experience in graduate education."

Bold is mine. They aren't going to take physicists and ask them to evaluate a biologists work. Now, as an ornithologist, I may get someone who studies mammals or something along those lines, but the people reviewing your application aren't going to be totally outside your field. Neither are they going to match you up specifically with someone who studies the same thing you do.

[Pitangus]

Thanks for the quote vertices.

Bold is mine. They aren't going to take physicists and ask them to evaluate a biologists work. Now, as an ornithologist, I may get someone who studies mammals or something along those lines, but the people reviewing your application aren't going to be totally outside your field. Neither are they going to match you up specifically with someone who studies the same thing you do.

True, I had assumed when I applied that reviewers on the Life - Ecology panel(s) were all ecologists in some capacity. It certainly makes sense, but I couldn't remember if I had actually read it somewhere.

The program solicitation says "Applications will be reviewed by panels of disciplinary and interdisciplinary scientists and engineers and other professional graduate education experts," which I suppose is a bit confusing because it's missing the "relevant" aspect mentioned in the FAQ.

Edited October 21, 2012 by Pitangus

[SensLu]

Thanks again, I assumed all the Life Science applications would be lumped together. And I remember reading somewhere to assume that your audience is not from your field. But that could have been just been a tip for writing proposals so we don't get hung up on jargon.

[vertices]

The tentative panel compositions are here: https://www.nsfgrfp.org/how_to_apply/choosing_a_primary_field#lifesci

You still don't want to get hung up on jargon though because though the panel is full of experts, they might not know acronyms and the like from your particular area.

I started off my personal statement with a field-specific joke because I expected my panel to be all from my major... but it was one that anyone who had taken (and cared about) the second semester intro course would have gotten.

[Jimbo2]

... so is this application taking over anyone else's life?

[InquilineKea]

Ohh I see, so if I'm applying for climate science, then I'll be reviewed by panels consisting of people from

• Aeronomy
  
• Climate and Large-Scale Atmospheric Dynamics
  
• Geochemistry
  
• Geodynamics
  
• Geophysics
  
• Glaciology
  
• Magnetospheric Physics
  
• Marine Geology and Geophysics
  
• Physical and Dynamic Meteorology
  
• Physical Oceanography
  
• Solar Physics
  
• Petrology
  
• Sedimentary Geology
  
• Tectonics
  

I guess that might make things interesting.

... so is this application taking over anyone else's life?

Yup - it's taking over mine. Like, almost to the extent that grad admissions took over my life last year. My facebook status updates and Quora feed are filled up with NSF updates, even.

Edited October 21, 2012 by InquilineKea

[SensLu]

... so is this application taking over anyone else's life?

Yes and chances of getting it is so small too... I wanted to apply for the EPA star grant as well but running out of time.

[agarcia59]

... so is this application taking over anyone else's life?

Yes

[InquilineKea]

Do profs who write LORs for their student applying for the NSF fellowship look at the application materials of their student again to help them write their LORs, *especially* the letters of recommendation that the student's old professors wrote for the student?

^this question is actually quite important for me since my primary adviser right now actually isn't even in the department I applied to, so he wouldn't have access to them... And the LORs my old professors wrote aren't exactly something that's easy to ask to transfer over....

Edited October 27, 2012 by InquilineKea

[InquilineKea]

Also I'm wondering - is it okay to include figured that come from other papers as long as I properly cite them?

Should most proposals contain at least 5 citations?

Also, how would I cite a paper that is submitted but not published? (if it's on the author's website).

How should I also mention mentoring a low-income student without sounding cheesy? I don't target my outreach to under-represented groups, but the wonderful thing about Internet outreach is that it often does contain large samples of certain under-represented groups. Also, is it bad if I only make mention of outreach to people with disabilities, people with low-income, and people of under-represented geographical areas, without mention of women or under-represented minorities? I've tried especially hard with women, but it just hasn't worked out as well as it has with males I've done outreach with, probably since my disabilities and unique life experiences (GPA issues) disproportionately affect men.

If a NSF Fellowship would be *truly* necessary for my work (my adviser might not be able to take me on if I don't get it simply since he doesn't have the funding for my project), should I mention that on my PS? What about cutbacks to Planetary Science funding? (since planetary science has been hit especially hard by budget issues relative to other fields)

Has anyone ever been docked points for having lots of interdisciplinary interests but not having enough focus?

If I have a 810 on the Biology GRE, could I mention that? (even though I'm in an entirely different field, but a high biology score could be helpful for astrobiology). The most important thing it shows about me is that I can rapidly pick up things in other disciplines on my own.

Edited October 27, 2012 by InquilineKea

[rockbender]

Hey everyone! Question for you all... I have two potential directions that I could go for my project proposal:

1. Write something related to the work I did for my thesis (mantle geochemistry), even though I have no intention of continuing anything like that research in grad school. The benefit would be that I am already familiar with the field and the proposal would be easier to write.

2. Write something related to the work I want to do in grad school, even though I have no real background in it (paleoceanography). The benefit would be an intensive introduction into the field and the opportunity to work on the proposal with a potential advisor at my top school (still waiting for a response from him about helping me with the proposal, but I pretty sure he'll say yes).

Which direction do you think would be better? I am way more interested in #2; I'm just worried that I won't be able to catch up on enough of the literature in the field to write a good proposal before the deadline...

[guttata]

Which direction do you think would be better? I am way more interested in #2; I'm just worried that I won't be able to catch up on enough of the literature in the field to write a good proposal before the deadline...

How good a proposal and how many people can you get to read it in two weeks? I think you've delayed yourself into a corner and would be better served writing about something you're familiar with. My proposal has been in revision for a month at this point, and edited by about 5 people.

The nice thing about the GRF is that they're just looking to see that you can devise a logical project. You aren't tied to this proposal, so, you can write about the stuff you know and continue on to do your new project that you're actually interested in.

[guttata]

Okay, essay reply time....

Do profs who write LORs for their student applying for the NSF fellowship look at the application materials of their student again to help them write their LORs, *especially* the letters of recommendation that the student's old professors wrote for the student?

^this question is actually quite important for me since my primary adviser right now actually isn't even in the department I applied to, so he wouldn't have access to them... And the LORs my old professors wrote aren't exactly something that's easy to ask to transfer over....

Talk to them. Everyone does their LORs differently. One professor asked for a phone interview because I've been away for a few months, another just asked for an updated CV to bring an older letter up to speed. I would think they would use just about anything at their disposal. Remember, its in their interest to get you funded too.

Also I'm wondering - is it okay to include figured that come from other papers as long as I properly cite them?

Yes, of course. I'm usually amazed at people that can fit a full figure, let alone multiple into a proposal. I'm butting up against limits as it is....

Should most proposals contain at least 5 citations?

You should cite as much as it takes to support your proposal. Mine last year had 10. A funded proposal last year had 12. My current one has 16. I've seen fewer than all of these examples.

Also, how would I cite a paper that is submitted but not published? (if it's on the author's website).

Same way you would in a peer-reviewed publication. Jones et al. In press or In review.Blah Blah Blah. J. of Crap. then a access number or DOI or whatever your field uses, since there won't be a reference issue.

How should I also mention mentoring a low-income student without sounding cheesy? I don't target my outreach to under-represented groups, but the wonderful thing about Internet outreach is that it often does contain large samples of certain under-represented groups.

can you elaborate? This sounds a little iffy. I'm not sure how big of a deal to make out of "internet outreach," since, at least here, you make it sound like a large group kind of thing.

Also, is it bad if I only make mention of outreach to people with disabilities, people with low-income, and people of under-represented geographical areas, without mention of women or under-represented minorities? I've tried especially hard with women, but it just hasn't worked out as well as it has with males I've done outreach with, probably since my disabilities and unique life experiences (GPA issues) disproportionately affect men.

Not necessarily. You're trying to sell yourself. Highlight the the good especially, and while you maybe shouldn't totally ignore the bad, don't focus on them and try to highlight them as areas for future growth.

If a NSF Fellowship would be *truly* necessary for my work (my adviser might not be able to take me on if I don't get it simply since he doesn't have the funding for my project), should I mention that on my PS? What about cutbacks to Planetary Science funding? (since planetary science has been hit especially hard by budget issues relative to other fields)

No. That won't win you any points. In fact, I think theres a couple places where they say you shouldn't make it about the money (even if it is, and we all know it is).

Has anyone ever been docked points for having lots of interdisciplinary interests but not having enough focus?

Who knows. This whole thing is a crapshoot by the time it hits reviewers. The main point is that your project should be feasible within course of a PhD (or masters), so if you make it too grandiose or far-reaching I can see someone docking you.

If I have a 810 on the Biology GRE, could I mention that? (even though I'm in an entirely different field, but a high biology score could be helpful for astrobiology). The most important thing it shows about me is that I can rapidly pick up things in other disciplines on my own.

Since it's in an irrelevant field and they no longer take into account GRE scores, I doubt it would be incredibly helpful. If you have space, I also doubt it would hurt, so you could include it.

Edited October 27, 2012 by guttata