NSF GRFP 2016

[DavidB144]

Hey all, quick question

So I submitted late (8:05 for 8pm deadline)

I've accepted that it most likely won't be reviewed, but I just want to double check if this is 100% true. Only because if so, I don't want to make my advisor write a rec he doesn't need to write

 

Sorry to hear that, but I would suggest not saying anything, since the PI will have that LOR on hand and could be adapted to another fellowship (Ford foundation?).

 

Edit: Sorry, can't reply to OP since forum is quoting the wrong person. This should not be a reply to rehab-robotics.

Edited October 31, 2015 by DavidB144

[rehab-robotics]

Sorry to hear that, but I would suggest not saying anything, since the PI will have that LOR on hand and could be adapted to another fellowship (Ford foundation?).

 

Edit: Sorry, can't reply to OP since forum is quoting the wrong person. This should not be a reply to rehab-robotics.

That's strange... I hope I didn't submit mine late .

But yeah, your letter writers won't be told that you were rejected for submitting late. So you could do what DavidB144 said. Just have an explanation prepared for them (whatever that means to you) in April when reviews come back. I don't know if it's common for professors to ask to see your reviewers' comments.

[farflung]

Go with B. Prof vs. post-doc does make a difference -- I've always been told to use/solicit letters of rec from the highest-ranking professor possible (who still knows you and your work -- and it sounds like person B does). They have more experience writing letters, and a more secure title & name recognition. Also, are you sure that person B's letter talks exclusively about your classroom performance? It seems like for this kind of fellowship, the prof would logically write about your potential to do future grad-level research as well. 

Letter writer A is a postdoc who was in charge of my project at the REU over the summer. This research was similar to what I wrote about for my research proposal. Letter writer B is an assistant professor I took a class from (though the class does correlate to what my research will be on). Both know me well and I think both will have nice things to say, but the content will be different (A will talk about research and B will talk about my classroom performance). So, my dilemma is, should I use A's letter, which focuses on research, but may be redundant since I already have a letter from that REU? Or should I use B's letter, which only comments on my academic ability? Also, does postdoc vs professor make any sort of difference??

[Songbird222]

On 9/29/2015, 4:37:10, alexhunterlang said:

Great tip! I never thought of that. So some general advice for finding useful examples:

1. Google
2. I've put together a table with all the examples I found. I also have given my general advice on applying.
3. @coffee_grad's email tip (past winners here)
4. Local resources at your college. Most schools have some writing / application advisors. Or you can start with the experienced person list. 

Good luck everyone

I meant to say "thank you" for these tips. I did go to my local university, and their example essays are all the old format, and all in one discipline (not mine, ha!). The past winning essays were helpful, but for sure the most helpful resource was contacting people who are also focused on STEM Education and Learning. I think that since this field was just added in recent years, there are naturally less "winning" examples out there.

[thecoralgirl]

Anybody know if the funding rates remain relatively consistent within fields and sub-fields? 

[Songbird222]

21 hours ago, thecoralgirl said:

Anybody know if the funding rates remain relatively consistent within fields and sub-fields? 

This was discussed back on page 3. It's apparently based on the number of applicants they have in each field.

[kafcat]

Anybody having trouble with the letters of recommendations?? All but one have submitted it and I haven't heard back from her even though I already emailed her twice. She has the letter, all she needs to do is submit it...how should I email her without sounding pushy??

[Flux2]

I've listed my teaching experiences on my online application but I haven't mentioned them in my personal statement. Will this cause any problem? Will they be looking for experiences listed on my personal statement or will they take account what was written on the online application. 

[pterosaur]

I think the issue would mostly likely be missing the teaching experience, if it's not in the personal statement. You won't necessarily have everything from your list in your personal statement, but if youryour teaching is part of your broader impacts argument, it might hurt you by being overlooked. 

[Infinito]

Looks like they extended the deadline for LORs until Friday, due to an outage that occurred on November 3rd.

 

"This message is being sent to notify you that the deadline for reference letters for the 2016 National Science Foundation (NSF) Graduate Research  Fellowship Program (GRFP) has been extended to Friday, November 6, 2015 at 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time due to a  FastLane outage that occurred on November 3, 2015.

All reference letters must be received by the November 6th deadline; there will be no more extensions."

[sierra918]

Now that the deadline has passed, I'd like to wish everyone good luck with their applications!! 

[Humulus_lupulus]

On 10/29/2015, 2:30:04, yolk said:

Is anyone else not reading their statement and proposal after submitting? I'm terrified I will find mistakes or find a phrase that could have been better said. It's very out of character for me to care.. but I suppose funding is on the line. Maybe I'll stumble across it after a few drinks

One of my PIs sent my proposal back like three days after it was due with MINOR edits...I'll hold off on looking at it until I am working on submissions for other fellowships. I'm a little scared, though.

[juilletmercredi]

Quote

Is anyone else not reading their statement and proposal after submitting? I'm terrified I will find mistakes or find a phrase that could have been better said. It's very out of character for me to care.. but I suppose funding is on the line. Maybe I'll stumble across it after a few drinks

I found a typo (I can't remember whether it was a missing word or an entire missing chunk of a sentence) in one of my statements after I got the award. I don't think a typo necessarily removes you from the running.

Edited November 17, 2015 by juilletmercredi

[Neist]

On 11/8/2015, 2:43:17, sierra918 said:

Now that the deadline has passed, I'd like to wish everyone good luck with their applications!! 

Same to you!

I'm glad it's over. The process of applying is probably more stress for me than the potentiality of not getting it. I'm going to be incredibly happy when this cycle of applications is done.

January can't come fast enough.

[Pitangus]

6 hours ago, juilletmercredi said:

I found a typo (I can't remember whether it was a missing word or an entire missing chunk of a sentence) in one of my statements after I got the award. I don't think a typo necessarily removes you from the running.

This happened to me as well. I wrote my application at the very last minute, submitted it, and then forgot about it. It wasn't until after I received the fellowship that I looked at my essays again and saw that I had a wonky sentence in my personal statement. 

I would imagine that the reviewers are reading applications so fast that a typo or mistake would have to be really disruptive before they would notice. 

[kjc]

Even though it was now months ago... I am still stewing over my NSF GRF application. 

I FULLY and completely read the solicitation once, and went back and skimmed/looked at specific sections multiple times. At first, I had a broader impacts and intellectual merit section in both statements. After having them reviewed by multiple other students, I was told by two students and a prof that I didn't actually need the statements to be separate (i.e. their own paragraphs), that they just needed to be evident. 

Since having the statements separate in the relevant background/etc. statement seemed clunky, I took out the heading and integrated it with the rest of the essay. I left the separate headings in the research statement. 

I have looked back at the solicitation and it does ask for them to be addressed separately. I am really kicking myself and have accepted that I won't get the fellowship (and I have learned the lesson that I should read the solicitation fully multiple times and not listen to other students that are applying). Does anyone know if my application will be returned without review? I can handle a rejection, but I might end up with a broken heart if they don't even look at it after all that work (i'm sure my advisor will be pretty unhappy with me, as well). 

[Pitangus]

19 hours ago, kjc said:

Even though it was now months ago... I am still stewing over my NSF GRF application. 

I FULLY and completely read the solicitation once, and went back and skimmed/looked at specific sections multiple times. At first, I had a broader impacts and intellectual merit section in both statements. After having them reviewed by multiple other students, I was told by two students and a prof that I didn't actually need the statements to be separate (i.e. their own paragraphs), that they just needed to be evident. 

Since having the statements separate in the relevant background/etc. statement seemed clunky, I took out the heading and integrated it with the rest of the essay. I left the separate headings in the research statement. 

I have looked back at the solicitation and it does ask for them to be addressed separately. I am really kicking myself and have accepted that I won't get the fellowship (and I have learned the lesson that I should read the solicitation fully multiple times and not listen to other students that are applying). Does anyone know if my application will be returned without review? I can handle a rejection, but I might end up with a broken heart if they don't even look at it after all that work (i'm sure my advisor will be pretty unhappy with me, as well). 

When I applied (2011), the solicitation didn't even request separate statements. This is the first year that the solicitation has requested both separate statements and headings for Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts (last year's solicitation did not mention headings), so there's no way to know what the procedures are this year. My guess would be that not having separate statements with headings will not lead to automatic disqualification, but it will likely put the application at a disadvantage with most reviewers for not having the expected format.

Edited December 28, 2015 by Pitangus

[rehab-robotics]

2 hours ago, Pitangus said:

When I applied (2011), the solicitation didn't even request separate statements. This is the first year that the solicitation has requested both separate statements and headings for Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts (last year's solicitation did not mention headings), so there's no way to know what the procedures are this year. My guess would be that not having separate statements with headings will not lead to automatic disqualification, but it will likely put the application at a disadvantage with most reviewers for not having the expected format.

I also didn't thoroughly reread the solicitation this year, so my personal statement and research statements don't have headings for these. I wouldn't be that concerned, since most reviewers will likely have done this for multiple years before and will be familiar with the old (and IMO better and less clunky) format. I would be willing to bet that a lot of the other applicants did the same.

[Kinetic Isotope Defect]

Okay, I looked back at last year's solicitation (link here) and it also asks for "separate" statements on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts, using pretty much the exact same wording as this year's. The only difference is the extra statement "Applicants should include headings for Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their statements." I definitely don't think ignoring the heading suggestion will end with the applications being returned without review, and I doubt most reviewers will even notice that the NSF is now asking for these specific headings unless they are specifically told to look for them this year. 

In my case, I have a Broader Impacts section in both of my statements, but I didn't make explicit Intellectual Merits sections because that seemed clunky. Hopefully the people who review my proposal will not be sticklers about that, it would be really annoying if I got dinged for not putting a stupid heading in my statements.

Edited December 29, 2015 by Kinetic Isotope Defect
clarification

[Pitangus]

Sounds like it might be a common mistake this year then. If so, it probably won't affect reviews if the reviewers aren't familiar with the solicitation either. But if most applications include the separate statements and headings, I could see it hurting the applications without since the reviewers will get used to the clearly marked statements. 

[kjc]

1 hour ago, Pitangus said:

Sounds like it might be a common mistake this year then. If so, it probably won't affect reviews if the reviewers aren't familiar with the solicitation either. But if most applications include the separate statements and headings, I could see it hurting the applications without since the reviewers will get used to the clearly marked statements. 

Yeah it sounds like I am definitely not the only one, which hopefully lessens the severity of the mistake. I am pretty resigned to the fact that I will not get the award now. I feel like not explicitly following instructions makes mine an easy application to throw out when reviewers are laboring over multiple excellent applications. 

But hopefully since it is a common mistake I won't get returned without review. I feel like putting in all that work for absolutely nothing is the worst case scenario. Oh well, we shall see. Now I will just continue with my goal of forgetting about it until April. Thanks for the input everyone! 

[Pitangus]

21 minutes ago, kjc said:

Yeah it sounds like I am definitely not the only one, which hopefully lessens the severity of the mistake. I am pretty resigned to the fact that I will not get the award now. I feel like not explicitly following instructions makes mine an easy application to throw out when reviewers are laboring over multiple excellent applications. 

But hopefully since it is a common mistake I won't get returned without review. I feel like putting in all that work for absolutely nothing is the worst case scenario. Oh well, we shall see. Now I will just continue with my goal of forgetting about it until April. Thanks for the input everyone! 

I really don't think it will be disqualified, or thrown out by reviewers. I think at most it will receive lower reviews because the IM/BI examples will be harder to find compared to applications with labeled IM and BI statements (again assuming that most applications will have these labeled sections, which may not be the case it seems). I'm assuming that the new format was put into place because reviewers were having a hard time finding the IM/BI examples previously, given how fast they have to go through each application. Ideally they would have enough time to thoroughly consider each essay and identify each IM/BI when they are woven throughout, but I don't think that's the case. 

[mylifeinshambles]

When do we start hearing back for this? 

[Neist]

15 hours ago, mylifeinshambles said:

When do we start hearing back for this? 

I'd like to know as well, but I'm suspecting not for a while.

It's a pretty massive pool of applicants, even with quite a few committees to review them.

[pterosaur]

I think in the past it's been around the beginning of April.