Causes of GRFP application returned without review?

[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). 

Also- does anyone know when you find out that your application is returned without review? Do you have to wait till April?

[cwr]

Take this with a grain of salt, because I'm also applying for the GRFP this cycle (and its my first crack, so I have no prior experience with the process). 

That being said, I'm worried that it might come back without review, because this is what I was told by my university's writing specialist during the process (she cited this to ensure we would all put the headings in our statements). I obviously have no expertise in this matter, so hopefully I'm mistaken and they at least take the time to give comments. 

Either way, as you said, this should serve as a lesson to everyone (I know it was a good reminder to me) about both taking advice and giving advice to others regarding awards. I'm sure I've been guilty of giving outdated advice previously, and I've also received it, so the moral of the story (as you also said) is whoever is applying should read the solicitation and trust that over any "advice" from third parties.

[knp]

As someone who found out about the GRFP in November and has been researching it recently, my impression from some of last year's example essays is that you won't be disqualified on that basis unless the rules have changed again—I found a set of example essays on Alex Lang's website (Matheus Fernandes, awarded 2015) that have neither broader impact nor intellectual merit sections and that got an award. (And his reviews don't mention anything about his lack of categories!) It's possible the application has changed in minor ways this year, but I viewed his example as a sign that you didn't need to do the full multi-subheading treatment of some of the other examples if you could address the topics clearly without them.

Edit: in the other thread, I see that the rules did change on this from last year to this year, so never mind, but I'm going to leave this here rather than have a mysterious blank post.

Edited January 3, 2016 by knp

[artlesspredilection]

The criteria to include separate statements for BI and IM have been included in prior solicitations (including the 2013 + 2014 ones), so I would not worry about the headers since winners have won without. I think the idea of the two being separate means that you've clearly made the case for both independently somewhere within the essay (of course, if it is bracketed, all the better). Essays are generally only rejected w/o review if they fail to follow basic formatting (12 size font in body, 10 min for ref, page length requirement, etc.). 

[littlemoondragon]

Hi Everyone! I know this topic has been a big concern. I work for my university's Grants and Fellowships Office under the Graduate School, where I mostly help graduate students apply for the NSF GRFP. Here is some info that echoes some posts and hopefully help ease minds.

Also, I am actually meeting my boss tomorrow, and will ask him about this issue further. I will update the information below tomorrow night once I know.

Edit: The reason I want to ask my boss is because he has been attending all of the NSF GRFP Program Manager's webinars and I'm sure he has asked his question. If he doesn't know, I recommend contacting the program manager. Part of the manger's job is to answer any questions concerning the award.

1. Causes for application returned without review: Common causes are essay formatting, missing letters, etc. These issues are addressed usually within the month, so applicants have been told well before the essays are seen by reviewers.
2. Why the separate headers? NSF GRFP has increasingly become more competitive and there is a huge demand for reviewers. Based on last year's cycle, reviewers are looking at a stack of 50 or so applications. Having sections makes it easier for reviewers to read through your essays.
   1. As an aside...most reviewers are lazy. You need to "spoon feed" them why you are awesome with headers and everything. I tell applicants all the time you basically have to smack the reviewers upside the head, "I'm awesome! YOU HEAR ME! I'm SO awesome, GIVE ME MONEY!"
3. Does this mean those who haven't could still win? Maybe. As said before, the NSF GRFP is becoming more and more competitive. The likelihood that someone has similar qualities to you, but followed the BI and IM headers is high. Reviewers are fickle and not consistent. Your application is given to three people to review (who may or may not be in your field!). Some might "forget" about the headers and review as normal. Some might remember and give more points to those who had the headers. Some might provide comments that they saw your essay and didn't see headers. Since there is no standardize way to integrate headers (NSF didn't specify at all how they wanted them such as should headers be bold or centered), this seems to be more on making the reviewers' lives easier.
4. How do reviewers decide? I made a webpage on applying for the NSF GRFP with a section on the review process.(http://www.clairemckaybowen.com/fellowships.html#reviewer)

Good luck!

Edited January 3, 2016 by littlemoondragon

[littlemoondragon]

My boss is sick today. :/ I will ask him later this week. Sorry everyone!

[doomination]

Look at this: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2014/nsf14590/nsf14590.htm#review

 

Quote

Therefore, applicants must include separate statements on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their written statements in order to provide reviewers with the information necessary to evaluate the application with respect to both Criteria as detailed below.

This was from last year. I know many people who won last year and did not include a separate header for each critera (BI, IM). Here's 2015:

http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2015/nsf15597/nsf15597.htm#prep

Quote

Therefore, applicants must include separate statements on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their written statements in order to provide reviewers with the information necessary to evaluate the application with respect to both Criteria as detailed below. Applicants should include headings for Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their statements.

 

Nowhere does it say the application will be returned without review. They're pretty explicit about that elsewhere. But it will almost certainly hurt your (and my, unfortunately) application.

Edited January 5, 2016 by doomination

[kjc]

On January 4, 2016 at 1:07 PM, littlemoondragon said:

My boss is sick today. :/ I will ask him later this week. Sorry everyone!

Did you ever get a chance to ask him?

Thanks for all the input everyone! The consensus seems to be that a lack of headings won't result in a return without review, but will likely hurt overall chances of being funded. 

[littlemoondragon]

7 hours ago, kjc said:

Did you ever get a chance to ask him?

Thanks for all the input everyone! The consensus seems to be that a lack of headings won't result in a return without review, but will likely hurt overall chances of being funded. 

No...he got super sick. I could ask via email, but I would rather talk in person so I can get more details (Sometimes you have an answer that sparks more questions.)

Our meeting got re-rescheduled for next Thursday. I promise to post here as soon as I speak with him.

[littlemoondragon]

He was busy...again... It's Fulbright Season, and our institution is famous for being one of the top universities for Fulbright. So, my boss is swamped. First cold and now Fulbright. I don't think I'll get to have a proper conversation with him for a while.

Anywho...I talked to someone else in the office and he believes that you will not be out right disqualified for the lack of BI and IM, but it will be against you since it was in the Solicitation.

[geographyrocks]

I did not separate out my broader impacts and intellectual merit last year. I believe the solicitations have not changed since last year.  Generally, your application is returned without review because you ignored the page count, font size, didn't get all the letters in, etc. 

Headings do not disqualify you. However, it is beneficial to you to clearly display the most important parts of your essay.  I did this by using boldface for such things as undergrad TA and such.  This helps the reviewer in seeing what your qualifications are.  They have very little time to read your essay so it's easy for them to miss important things if you don't help them out. 

Anyway, don't stew too much.  You still have several months before you hear back.  It can drive you crazy if you dwell on it too long.  I know. 

[Pitangus]

23 hours ago, geographyrocks said:

I did not separate out my broader impacts and intellectual merit last year. I believe the solicitations have not changed since last year.  Generally, your application is returned without review because you ignored the page count, font size, didn't get all the letters in, etc. 

Headings do not disqualify you. However, it is beneficial to you to clearly display the most important parts of your essay.  I did this by using boldface for such things as undergrad TA and such.  This helps the reviewer in seeing what your qualifications are.  They have very little time to read your essay so it's easy for them to miss important things if you don't help them out. 

Anyway, don't stew too much.  You still have several months before you hear back.  It can drive you crazy if you dwell on it too long.  I know. 

The headings request was added to the solicitation this year. The separate statements request has been the same since the 2013-2014 cycle.

From the 2014 - 2015 solicitation:

"Therefore, applicants must include separate statements on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their written statements in order to provide reviewers with the information necessary to evaluate the application with respect to both Criteria as detailed below."

From the 2015-2016 solicitation:

"Therefore, applicants must include separate statements on Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their written statements in order to provide reviewers with the information necessary to evaluate the application with respect to both Criteria as detailed below. Applicants should include headings for Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts in their statements."

 

A lack of headings this year should not disqualify anyone or preclude them from receiving a fellowship, but it may put them at a disadvantage during reviews. The recent request for separate statements was surely added because reviewers were having trouble identifying people's IM/BIs in the past. The new request for headings this year indicates that this is still a problem. So from now on it would benefit applicants to remember to include the separate statements and headings in order to make their IM/BIs as clear and obvious as possible.