NSF GRFP 2013-14

[Guest]

This feels like a dumb question, but under the "Proposed graduate program" section, what exactly is the difference between "proposed program" (after "proposed university or college") and "department" ?

[okiedokie]

This feels like a dumb question, but under the "Proposed graduate program" section, what exactly is the difference between "proposed program" (after "proposed university or college") and "department" ?

 

I didn't really understand this either, I just put the same thing.  I think if your PI is in a really different department than your program, then I guess you'd put something different.  But my PI is a faculty member in my program.

[Eigen]

Of if there are either multiple departments with the same program (ie, interdisciplinary program, of which you are in a particular department or a program that can be located at several places) or, multiple programs within one department. 

[guttata]

And applications are now closed. Good luck to everyone who applied.

[unbrokenthread]

Ditto--good luck to all!

When do applicants typically hear back?

[guttata]

The official date is early April, but the last two years have been around the 28-30 of March. Reports are NSF is changing how reviews are done this year. Instead of traveling to DC, reviewers will go over applications remotely. I suspect this could speed up the review process, but may not speed up announcements.

Edited November 10, 2013 by guttata

[okiedokie]

The official date is early April, but the last two years have been around the 28-30 of March. Reports are NSF is changing how reviews are done this year. Instead of traveling to DC, reviewers will go over applications remotely. I suspect this could speed up the review process, but may not speed up announcements.

 

At least I hope this saves money for more fellowship awards

[PhDplease!]

Hello all,

 

If you have reference letter writers who still have not submitted their letters how would you remind them gently while letting them know to get it done! lol 

[kaister]

I plan to email a friendly reminder either tomorrow or Tuesday…lol

[loginofpscl]

NSF Deadline for Reference Writers extended to the 18th. Give your advisers time to breathe y'all.

 

https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/grfp/Login.do

[PhDplease!]

So, its around 4 hours before the deadline of the extension for reference letter writers and one of my recommenders has yet to submit her letter! What should I do? I contacted her last week before the original deadline and she said,"its on my calendar--good luck!" and today....nothing. Any ideas????

[Eco PlantGirl]

I would send a gentle email reminder - especially if you are in a different time zone than the "8pm" deadline. One of my letter writers only just submitted their letter, too... After a gentle reminder. Good luck!

[PhDplease!]

Thank you Eco Oakgirl. How did you word yours? The last reminder I sent her said," Hello Dr. X the deadline for the NSF grfp is this upcoming Thursday Nov, 14th at 8:00pm. Please let me know if there is anything else you need from me. Again, thank you for the letter and I look forward to hearing from you soon." 

 

Would you recommend sending the same note?

[Eco PlantGirl]

I'd change it a little. I also knew my letter writer fairly well, and was a little less formal: It basically went "Dear So-and-so, As you know, the NSF GRFP deadline for reference letters has been pushed back to today at 5pm (my time zone). Please let me know if you need anything else before submitting the letter today, or if the official NSF email didn't not make it to you. Thanks!"

[PhDplease!]

I just sent it and I hope she comes through. I'm a little surprised she would wait to the last minute as she writes grants for our college all the time. Nevertheless, thank you for your advice. I was freaking-the-%&$#-out!! 

[hobokennojokin]

So did she pull through?! hahah

[PhDplease!]

No, she sent me an email at 8:18 saying she did not know of the extension. If she was aware of the original deadline (email from me and nsf was sent to her)but did not submit it by then she either was never going to submit it or she knew of the extension. I did my homors thesis with her and she edited my essays for me! Said she emailed nsf I told her don't bother. Am I allowed to let her know how I feel? Is that unprofessional?

[tuckbro]

I had a last minute scramble also.  It was my third recommender and I sent several gentle reminders.  FInally Sunday night I asked him if he was experiencing problems submitting it as my app would be disgarded if not received in time.  He did say he had deleted the email so I sent him specific instructions on how to login, change his password and submit. Six hours later he finally successfully submitted it, just a few hours before deadline.  Took ten years off my life.

 

In retrospect I wish I had done 4 just in case...live and learn.

 

PhDplease, I am so sorry this happened to you.  I am not sure that I would expess your concern to your recommender at this point however, I feel like it might be burning a bridge you may need moving forward.  If she asks however, I would tell her that unfortunately your application was disgarded because one of my references was not submitted by the dealine. 

[clandry]

No, she sent me an email at 8:18 saying she did not know of the extension. If she was aware of the original deadline (email from me and nsf was sent to her)but did not submit it by then she either was never going to submit it or she knew of the extension. I did my homors thesis with her and she edited my essays for me! Said she emailed nsf I told her don't bother. Am I allowed to let her know how I feel? Is that unprofessional?

I'm sorry this happened! It's very unethical (intentional or not) for her to have done this. Unfortunately, I really doubt NSF will bend the rules. They'll probably just use the "well, we gave you 5 slots, so you should've had some back-ups" excuse. 

 

What she said doesn't make much sense. "did not know of extension" seems very awkward. Is she saying that she missed the first deadline so she thought it'd be pointless to submit and apparently did not know of an extension. That doesn't explain how she missed all your emails or how she emails you 18minutes after the deadline. Sounds real sketchy to me.

 

Idk if you should email her. I act on impulse, which is pretty bad, so I would've emailed her an angry, but professional email.

 

 

 

 

Anyways, I should've probably asked this earlier, but does the ranking system for letter of recs have any impact? If you have more than 3 letters, then I know they'll read the top 3, but what if you only have 3? How would they look at the rankings? 

I hope that doesn't mean they're only gonna read #1. I guess I just don't get the point of it for people with 3 LORs.

Edited November 20, 2013 by Blue4123

[threnagyn]

To all those who applied - I think this year is going to be the easiest year in the history of NSF GRFP to recieve a fellowship, especially if you are a 2nd year grad student.

 

A few years ago, the number of awards jumped from 1,000 to 2,000. Even though this attracted more applicants, the number of applicantions did not double - thus, the success rate went up. The award rate has been around 15-20%. Also, There is a cumulative effect with each passing year if you are applying at later stages (1st or 2nd year grad). This is because your competition is worse than it would be if there were less awards in previous years. Confusing? Let me explain. More competive applicants win the award at earlier stages (senior year of undergrad, 1st year grad) and are 'removed from the running' at subsequent stages. Somebody who won during their senior year can't apply later on obviously. If more people win at these earlier stages, then less competitive people will be applying next year at the next stage. Also, the award rate at each stage is proportional to the number of applicants that applied at that stage - In simpler words, if 35% of all applicants are 2nd year grad students, 35% of the awards will go to second year grad students. This means that if you are applying as a second year grad student, you are really only competing with those that applied in previous years and failed (even with the high success rate) and those that are applying for the first time as a 2nd year PhD student.

 

But wait, it gets better! The number of awards is expected to increase from 2,000 to 2,700 this year because NSF wants to stimulate STEM fields!

 

tl;dr version: If you applied as a 1st or 2nd year PhD student, you probably have the best chances of winning the award than at any other point in time because your competition is worse and because award/application ratio will probably be higher than its ever been.

 

Good Luck. I don't think you'll need it.

Edited November 20, 2013 by threnagyn

[Electric_displacement]

 

 

Anyways, I should've probably asked this earlier, but does the ranking system for letter of recs have any impact? If you have more than 3 letters, then I know they'll read the top 3, but what if you only have 3? How would they look at the rankings? 

I hope that doesn't mean they're only gonna read #1. I guess I just don't get the point of it for people with 3 LORs.

 

The ranking is only for those who list more than three references.  The website says that the reviewers will not see the ranking the applicant puts the references in.

[guttata]

I'm sorry this happened! It's very unethical (intentional or not) for her to have done this. Unfortunately, I really doubt NSF will bend the rules. They'll probably just use the "well, we gave you 5 slots, so you should've had some back-ups" excuse. 

 

It is not unethical unless she agreed to write a letter with the direct intention of never submitting to sabotage the application. It is, however, HIGHLY unprofessional regardless. This woman, purposefully or not, is responsible for your disqualification. If she is someone that you will need to maintain contact with for future applications (which is sounds like is the case, as your thesis adviser), it is absolutely worth having a discussion with her to try and find out if it was an accident or if she has reservations about writing a strong letter. In the event that it was either malicious or the result of a reluctance to support you, you NEED to find out because it means you need to replace her in your applications ASAP. Personally (and especially depending on how many application opportunities you have left), I'd be livid and I totally sympathize with your position, PhDplease.

 

I agree with Blue's assessment about NSF's response. I've heard similar situations pop up before and they are pretty strict about their deadlines. I can't imagine the fact that they extended the deadline by days will make them any more sympathetic. However, Blue, I disagree that the 5 slots explanation is an "excuse." You have 5 slots as a contingency for just this situation. NSF gives you the flexibility to avoid this problem from the start and the onus is on YOU to win the award, not for THEM to give it to you.

[PhDplease!]

I appreciate the advice everyone has shared and I definitely learned from this experience. I wish you all good luck on your applications and I've decided to apply for the Ford Foundation fellowship since it's goals are aligned with my future research goals. But apps are due today by 5:00pm!   Again, thank you all for the great advice!

[agarcia59]

tl;dr version: If you applied as a 1st or 2nd year PhD student, you probably have the best chances of winning the award than at any other point in time because your competition is worse and because award/application ratio will probably be higher than its ever been.

 

Good Luck. I don't think you'll need it.

 

So those of us 2nd years who still don't get it, should feel twice as bad about a rejection? JK, thanks for the analysis, it definitely makes sense.

 

I appreciate the advice everyone has shared and I definitely learned from this experience. I wish you all good luck on your applications and I've decided to apply for the Ford Foundation fellowship since it's goals are aligned with my future research goals. But apps are due today by 5:00pm!   Again, thank you all for the great advice!

Way to stay strong! Best of luck with Ford!

[vertices]

Let me explain. More competive applicants win the award at earlier stages (senior year of undergrad, 1st year grad) and are 'removed from the running' at subsequent stages. Somebody who won during their senior year can't apply later on obviously. If more people win at these earlier stages, then less competitive people will be applying next year at the next stage. Also, the award rate at each stage is proportional to the number of applicants that applied at that stage - In simpler words, if 35% of all applicants are 2nd year grad students, 35% of the awards will go to second year grad students. This means that if you are applying as a second year grad student, you are really only competing with those that applied in previous years and failed (even with the high success rate) and those that are applying for the first time as a 2nd year PhD student.

On the other hand, there are more worthy applicants than there are awards, even with the numbers having been significantly bumped up. Those 2nd years that weren't awarded in previous years and are trying again aren't necessarily "worse." A lot of work goes into meeting that bar of 'award worthy' but in the end there's always an element that is outside of an applicant's control, like getting unlucky with a reviewer (someone whose other applications make your z-scores less competitive, someone who doesn't like your subfield and won't advocate for you, someone who is tired because your application was at the bottom of their stack, etc) or getting tanked by a letter writer like PhDplease! In a sense, these applicants are stiffer competition because they're starting with already strong applications from the previous year and making them even stronger. Several people here will tell you that they won on their second try and can articulate how they learned from the experience and addressed the reviewers' feedback.

 

I know my undergraduate application was a trainwreck. I think replacing the 'tossed together in the last week' with 'meticulously crafted using knowledge from 5,000+ GradCafe posts' probably helped. I've always believed my 1st year application was stronger than my 2nd year would have been because I didn't get any papers accepted my first year while I'm sure other applicants did. Further, would the growth in sophistication of my proposal 'kept up' with the growth in everyone else's? Who knows!?

 

Also, I had heard that while the awards are given to fields of study in proportion to applicants, they're given out by year roughly in thirds. I would guess that there are more 2nd year applicants than undergraduate applicants, making it a tougher pool. [ Does anyone have hard data? ] I know several people in my program who didn't apply until their 2nd year because they either didn't know about it or thought it impossible until they were encouraged by people who pointed out the acceptance rate lately has been too good not to try. Some people come from undergraduate institutions or labs that don't emphasize the award.

 

Finally, graduate school is a time of learning and growing. Someone who might not have been 'competitive' as an undergraduate may be quite competitive by the time they're a second year. We're not always going to be roughly the same level of "competitive" with respect to each other as we were in undergrad. It could be finding the right research project, coming in contact with great mentors, being in the right kind of environment, or having better resources to do either research or outreach that can help someone really shine. (At the same time, the reverse can be true making some "competitive" folks less so. It feels weird saying that because we're all graduate students which makes us all pretty strong to begin with.)

 

In summary, your competition isn't necessarily worse. Of course, I still believe your chances are too good not try. Good luck everyone!