Jump to content

NSF GRFP 2014-2015


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 863
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'd just like to point out that I personally don't recommend staying up to see the results.  I was tired AND unhappy the next day last year.

you were rejected from schools, just like you will be rejected from the NSF. Expect it. Doesn't mean that you won't go on to do great things. It just means you wont have that badge of prestige. Have a

Wait, I got VG/VG, E/E, E/VG for bioengineering undergrad senior, but I go no award or even honorable mention.  But I heard that someone got worse reviews (4 VG and 2 E), was senior undergrad in bioengineering and got honorable mention.  Isn't this unfair?  Should I call them tomorrow?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy crap holy crap holy crap!!!! I GOT IT!!! Good thing I checked on here because the email went to my spam folder. Sorry to the guys who got good scores but no award. Happened to me last year. Also, $34,000!! Whoever predicted an increase was correct! Only one in my program to get it muahahahah. I took the "bold important lines" approach and my reviewers seemed to have a better time processing everything (or they were just better reviewers)

IM: VG, E, E      BI: E, E, E

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, I got VG/VG, E/E, E/VG for bioengineering undergrad senior, but I go no award or even honorable mention.  But I heard that someone got worse reviews (4 VG and 2 E), was senior undergrad in bioengineering and got honorable mention.  Isn't this unfair?  Should I call them tomorrow?

 

i wouldn't go about it this way. you never know whats in an application. some may have had "worse" reviews than another one but gotten a fellowship. it's a crapshoot... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@DubbleBubble

 

Probably also look at GPA, GRE, prestige of undergrad institution, current grad institution, etc, etc

 

I feel your pain, brah. All Es except one VG, all glowing reviews. Not even an HM. Oh well!

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I'm pretty sure how it works is each group of reviewers has their own pool, and there can be a certain number of winners/HMs from each pool. So the review scores have no true objective value between review groups, it's your ranking within the group that determines whether you get it or not. Groups may vary in grader strictness and competition. Someone please correct me if I'm making all of this up; I think I read this on here a long time ago, but am having trouble finding it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ugh, i'm just being pissy.  Hopefully NDSEG or CSGF give me good news.  Sorry to be annoying if I was!

 

Not at all! Sorry about the bad news :/ Good luck on the rest! Your strong scores for NSF bode well for your other apps, despite NSF's weird flukes 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Been lurking long enough, thought I would share.

 

E/E, VG/E, E/E, E/E - awarded.  First time applying/first year grad student. I'm completely stunned, but very grateful. I had a high undergrad GPA and quite a bit of service that would qualify as "broader impacts", so I think that's what clinched it.  No pubs, but a few "in progress" plus 3 presentations.  I was worried my proposal was better suited for NIH, but it worked out. 

 

Congrats to the other fellows, and heartfelt sympathy for those of you who didn't get it this time.    

Edited by heatherkh
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as a note to everyone: if you want to save the pdf of your reviewer comments, you can't just save it as a PDF for some reason (it is as a .do file, whatever that is). Or at least I can't.

 

Simple fix: Just Print-->Save to PDF 

 

...This may seem like common sense to a lot of people (sorry if so), but i just wanted to put this out there in case anyone else was confused but wanted to save a copy of their comments. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

@DubbleBubble

 

Probably also look at GPA, GRE, prestige of undergrad institution, current grad institution, etc, etc

 

I feel your pain, brah. All Es except one VG, all glowing reviews. Not even an HM. Oh well!

 

Something I want to share, from talking with a prof who did reviews for the GRFP for a long time, is that they actually keep quotas. All the clear top picks get chosen, all the clear losers get sorted out, then the rest are sent to a third party agency* who ensures that the quotas are followed. These quotas include your standard ethnicity, gender, etc., but also institutions. They want to ensure that the awardee list is not overwhelmed by applicants from Ivies and the UC system. My prof was generally predisposed against quotas, emphasizing merit of proposal, but there's only so much one can do.

 

Of course, this is hearsay, but I have a feeling some of you might have heard similar stories.

 

* Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the applications, reviews, and/or reviewer rankings are sent to a third party within the NSF who are not the reviewers. I stand by the overall message re: quotas though, and I don't think things have changed in recent years. In fact, I expect that the quotas have gotten more strict.

Edited by Burr
Link to post
Share on other sites

Something I want to share, from talking with a prof who did reviews for the GRFP for a long time, is that they actually keep quotas. All the clear top picks get chosen, all the clear losers get sorted out, then the rest are sent to a third party agency* who ensures that the quotas are followed. These quotas include your standard ethnicity, gender, etc., but also institutions. They want to ensure that the awardee list is not overwhelmed by applicants from Ivies and the UC system. My prof was generally predisposed against quotas, emphasizing merit of proposal, but there's only so much one can do.

 

Of course, this is hearsay, but I have a feeling some of you might have heard similar stories.

 

* Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the applications, reviews, and/or reviewer rankings are sent to a third party within the NSF who are not the reviewers. I stand by the overall message re: quotas though, and I don't think things have changed in recent years. In fact, I expect that the quotas have gotten more strict.

 

This information agrees with what I have learned from my boss. I work for the Grants and Fellowship Office for my university and trained in helping students apply for the NSF GRFP (I was also applying too). There was only so much my boss could say without breaching privacy, but NSF mission statement is to provide opportunities for minorities (ethnic, gender, veterans, etc.).

 

Is honorable mention CV worthy?

 

Yes. HM is considered a NSF GRFP winner that isn't funded.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Congrats to all who have received it!

 

I didn't get it this year (G/F VG/F VG/G). I'm applying as a senior undergrad, so I will very likely apply again next year, and I hope to learn from this year's experience.

 

I was wondering if anyone has suggestions about how to improve the "Broader Impacts" part? For example, what are they looking for? Is it based on the graduate research proposal, or the personal, relevant background and future goals statement, or both? Thanks for sharing!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.