NSF GRFP 2016

[mylifeinshambles]

2 hours ago, pterosaur said:

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

That's a long wait. Do you hear back sooner for disqualifications or any other bad news? 

[pterosaur]

I don't think so. You can look back at GRFP threads from previous years on Grad Cafe to verify what people heard when, but I'm pretty sure everyone finds out at the same time. If you were disqualified, you won't get reviews, but it'll come out at the same time.

[sqxz]

23 hours ago, mylifeinshambles said:

That's a long wait. Do you hear back sooner for disqualifications or any other bad news? 

 

22 hours ago, pterosaur said:

I don't think so. You can look back at GRFP threads from previous years on Grad Cafe to verify what people heard when, but I'm pretty sure everyone finds out at the same time. If you were disqualified, you won't get reviews, but it'll come out at the same time.

No, I don't think that's right. If your application is going to be returned without review, I'm pretty sure you find out almost immediately after that determination has been made. See this post from last year, for example:

 

[littlemoondragon]

2 hours ago, sqxz said:

 

No, I don't think that's right. If your application is going to be returned without review, I'm pretty sure you find out almost immediately after that determination has been made. See this post from last year, for example:

 

You're correct. If your application was disqualified or not be reviewed, you will be notified soon after the deadline. Typical reasons for return are: missing the deadline, formatting, missing components, missing letters, etc.

[littlemoondragon]

On 1/9/2016 at 10:07 PM, mylifeinshambles said:

When do we start hearing back for this? 

This info is from thecoralgirl and rehab-robitcs on a previous post.

2015: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 @~3:00AM

2014: Tuesday, April 1, 2014 @ ~2:00AM

2013 :Friday, March 29, 2013 @ ~2:00AM

2012: Friday, April 1, 2012 @ ~2:00AM

2011: Tuesday, April 5, 2011 @ ~12:50AM

2010: Tuesday, April 6, 2010 @ ~1:00AM

2009: Friday, April 10, 2009 @ ~1:00AM

2008: Tuesday, April 1, 2008 @ ~2:00AM

2007: Monday, March 23. 2007 @ ~11:20 PM

[pterosaur]

Ah, my mistake then. That's actually good, though, because if you haven't heard back it means no disqualification!

Do you know what time zone those announcement times are in? 

[littlemoondragon]

2 hours ago, pterosaur said:

Ah, my mistake then. That's actually good, though, because if you haven't heard back it means no disqualification!

Do you know what time zone those announcement times are in? 

Eastern. Good luck!

[jh689]

I contacted them through the website form, and they told me that people who have been disqualified for formatting or late submission have already been notified. People who are disqualified for eligibility reasons will be notified in the future, maybe in February. I assume if they missed a formatting issue and a reviewer notes it, you might still get disqualified, but hopefully then at least you'd get comments. 

People on here are sometimes really unpleasant about disqualifications (e.g. "if you can't follow basic formatting instructions, you don't deserve it"). If I were disqualified, I might not want to deal with that on top of rejection, so I bet that's one reason why it's hard to find out when people received notice! 

[Pitangus]

On 1/10/2016 at 5:53 PM, littlemoondragon said:

This info is from thecoralgirl and rehab-robitcs on a previous post.

2015: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 @~3:00AM

2014: Tuesday, April 1, 2014 @ ~2:00AM

2013 :Friday, March 29, 2013 @ ~2:00AM

2012: Friday, April 1, 2012 @ ~2:00AM

2011: Tuesday, April 5, 2011 @ ~12:50AM

2010: Tuesday, April 6, 2010 @ ~1:00AM

2009: Friday, April 10, 2009 @ ~1:00AM

2008: Tuesday, April 1, 2008 @ ~2:00AM

2007: Monday, March 23. 2007 @ ~11:20 PM

The 2012 notifications were on Friday March 30, 2012. I got my email at 3:30 AM EST. 

[Songbird222]

22 hours ago, jh689 said:

I contacted them through the website form, and they told me that people who have been disqualified for formatting or late submission have already been notified. People who are disqualified for eligibility reasons will be notified in the future, maybe in February. I assume if they missed a formatting issue and a reviewer notes it, you might still get disqualified, but hopefully then at least you'd get comments. 

People on here are sometimes really unpleasant about disqualifications (e.g. "if you can't follow basic formatting instructions, you don't deserve it"). If I were disqualified, I might not want to deal with that on top of rejection, so I bet that's one reason why it's hard to find out when people received notice! 

Yes, yes, yes, I totally agree! 

[Bschaefer]

You would think that when uploading the documents that a formatting check would be conducted or that the documents are converted to the right format - or else not allowed to upload rather than waiting 4 months for a disqualification email. I guess that's just wishful thinking 

[pterosaur]

As a programmer - that's probably trickier than it seems. They'd have to hire someone to write code to do that which wouldn't be worth the cost to them. 

[Songbird222]

Check out the recent news about NSF funding:

The National Science Foundation (NSF) will not tolerate harassment at grantee institutions

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=137466

NSF may terminate funding to any institution found to be in noncompliance with Title IX regulations and that does not voluntarily come into compliance.

[rewindmind]

On 1/27/2016 at 2:15 PM, pterosaur said:

As a programmer - that's probably trickier than it seems. They'd have to hire someone to write code to do that which wouldn't be worth the cost to them. 

(I know I'm late here, but..) Honestly, I don't think this is that hard. I was rejected this year (notified 11/30/15) for incorrect margin size and/or text size. It is funny, because I have submitted two years in a row using the exact same formatting document, and my application was reviewed the previous year (actually, got some pretty good reviews).

When I questioned them about it, they told me my margins were 0.9in rather than 1.0in, and that my font was 11 rather than 12. Whether or not they are correct in their measurements (my editors still says 1.0 inch and 12pt Liberation Serif font), their system for accepting proposals is ridiculous and desperately needs revision. What is the point of PDF verification? Can a human visually discern 0.1in margin, or delta-1pt font size in a different font, via a PDF?

If they cannot write the code (and I don't blame them), they should at least impose a hard character limit and allow for the uploading of 1-2 graphics with a finite area (say, equivalent of 600x600pixels total). That is how the CSGF does it (no pictures though), and its extremely reasonable as it gives candidates a way to validate their application!

I finished my app nearly a week in advance, after refining and proofing my statements carefully. Its a shame it was rejected, and that too for such a petty reason. Sighh.. I'm done venting.

[pterosaur]

Aw man, that sucks! It's hard to believe they're pulling out a ruler and checking that closely. Your frustration seems totally justified. 

[motherofdragons]

A classmate of mine had their application returned without review today, apparently the email claimed that their intended field of study was not eligible.  This student works on what is essentially a systems biology/cell biology problem, which would fall within the bounds of the Life Sciences category.  I took a look and compared our apps and the only real difference I can see is that he checked the "Is your field interdisciplinary?" (paraphrasing) box.  

Would that be grounds for a return without review? Also, what is the best way to fight this? The email said he has until Feb 24 to appeal, and I recommended getting a rebuttal letter from the director of our graduate program.  Any advice would be appreciated.

[Bschaefer]

1 hour ago, motherofdragons said:

A classmate of mine had their application returned without review today, apparently the email claimed that their intended field of study was not eligible.  This student works on what is essentially a systems biology/cell biology problem, which would fall within the bounds of the Life Sciences category.  I took a look and compared our apps and the only real difference I can see is that he checked the "Is your field interdisciplinary?" (paraphrasing) box.  

Would that be grounds for a return without review? Also, what is the best way to fight this? The email said he has until Feb 24 to appeal, and I recommended getting a rebuttal letter from the director of our graduate program.  Any advice would be appreciated.

I would contest it. My area is Bioarchaeology and intrinsically interdisciplinary and if I had a project and was told that it was the wrong category, then i'd be upset. Getting a letter from the director or one of the recommenders would be the best place to start

[juilletmercredi]

I do understand your frustration, @rewindmind, but they do have to draw a hard line somewhere. Students who use smaller margins and a smaller size font are essentially giving themselves more room than others to write their essays, which is unfair. When they start letting exceptions slip by, they will get into a crisis. If they allow 0.9 and 11 point font for you, then the applicant who used 0.7 margins and 10.5 point font so they could fit all their citations on the page might have an argument...

While I would say that most people can't visually discern a 0.1 margin difference, most people CAN discern a 1-point font difference - especially if you are reviewing 30-40 other applications that all have the same font size. And noticing that the font is different might make a reviewer compare in other areas.

On 2/12/2016 at 8:24 PM, motherofdragons said:

Would that be grounds for a return without review? Also, what is the best way to fight this? The email said he has until Feb 24 to appeal, and I recommended getting a rebuttal letter from the director of our graduate program.  Any advice would be appreciated.

Interdisciplinary fields? No, of course not; interdisciplinary fields are reviewed all the time. The feedback that the field of study is ineligible sounds less like a quibble with the interdisciplinary nature and more like a problem with the field itself, or the research topic. Did your friend propose disease-related goals or clinical research in his proposal? The problem could be "essentially" cell/systems biology and still come across as public health or disease-related or focused on clinical or seemingly clinical areas of study.

If he can submit supporting letters for his appeal, how about a letter from an uninterested/neutral third party in the field who can attest that the research is basic science oriented and not clinical or disease-related?

[ihatechoosingusernames]

I know we still have at least a month before the results are announced, but I'm feeling really impatient! I wish the results were announced in December so that we could know when we were applying for graduate programs. 

[Neist]

30 minutes ago, ihatechoosingusernames said:

I know we still have at least a month before the results are announced, but I'm feeling really impatient! I wish the results were announced in December so that we could know when we were applying for graduate programs. 

I feel as though it's a little bit rude to graduate programs as well. If I get awarded one, it might affect my decisions as to where I attend. As it stands, I have to hold off until late March.

[sierra918]

2 hours ago, ihatechoosingusernames said:

I know we still have at least a month before the results are announced, but I'm feeling really impatient! I wish the results were announced in December so that we could know when we were applying for graduate programs. 

I completely agree! Many programs expect you to respond to their offers well before the GRFP awards are announced. I know someone whose acceptance to a program hinged on whether they got the GRFP, so they weren't accepted until after they'd been awarded in April!! Can you imagine?

That being said, we are in the homestretch now! Good luck ?

[Merlin]

On the flipside though, if GRFP results were released earlier, then graduate schools might base admissions decisions on who got them, which would be a double kick in the crotch to those who don't get them.

[Neist]

8 minutes ago, Merlin said:

On the flipside though, if GRFP results were released earlier, then graduate schools might base admissions decisions on who got them, which would be a double kick in the crotch to those who don't get them.

You do make a good point.  

[pterosaur]

I think that's exactly one of the reasons that they don't release the decisions earlier.

[sierra918]

On February 29, 2016 at 9:26 PM, ihatechoosingusernames said:

9 hours ago, Neist said:

You do make a good point.  

Agreed!