lol NSF GRF

[carlsaganism]

Just got the reviews for my NSF proposal back, one of them says

"As an undergraduate, the applicant demonstrates the desire, communication and computation
ability to conduct meaningful research for the chosen field. Overall, I get the impression that the applicant has many ideas, but needs guidance narrowing the scope of work and setting realistic expectations. With work and mentoring, the applicant could conduct impactful research in their chosen field."

but 

"The applicant has research experience as shown by the applicant's publication and presentation record. The proposal is
ambitious, and I believe it is to the point that the applicant will be unable to be achieved during a single PhD. The applicant's
research statement would benefit from more focus and detail on fewer topics. The reference letters together do not assuage my
fears that the applicant will be unable narrow the focus of the research without a strong and involved advisor."

 

 

soooo rejected?????

 

anyways, it's okay, I already have a fellowship with 30k per year before taxes, it's just that I spent so much time on this....

Edited March 29, 2016 by carlsaganism

[Eigen]

Sounds like you have a strong shot next year if you can narrow your focus for the proposal though, which is good. 

Worth remembering that most feedback is just the notes that they took while reading your file- sometimes very useful, sometimes not. Mine just summarized the points in my proposal, with no actual feedback.

[Neist]

41 minutes ago, carlsaganism said:

anyways, it's okay, I already have a fellowship with 30k per year before taxes, it's just that I spent so much time on this....

Yeah, same. I got good responses from two reviewers, and a double poor from the third. 

Eh well. Guess there's something to polish for later.

[carlsaganism]

haha yea I got double very good from one, and quadruple fair from the other two....

[carlsaganism]

57 minutes ago, Eigen said:

Sounds like you have a strong shot next year if you can narrow your focus for the proposal though, which is good. 

Worth remembering that most feedback is just the notes that they took while reading your file- sometimes very useful, sometimes not. Mine just summarized the points in my proposal, with no actual feedback.

thanks! Yeah, it was a shot in the dark anyways, I kind of wrote the proposal on my own with little advising from professors.... I am still glad that they gave me solid criticisms

[Neist]

4 minutes ago, carlsaganism said:

haha yea I got double very good from one, and quadruple fair from the other two....

It's almost baffling how one review can give me very good for broader impacts and one can give me poor.

That last person must have really hated my proposal. 

[emmuhhs]

I received two double Very Goods and a double excellent. No advice for how to improve, just glowing compliments. Is it appropriate to reach out and ask for further clarification for some critiques, as none were provided as to why I was not chosen?

Sadly, this lack of funding has put the nail in the coffin of multiple of my school applications and likely for any acceptance at all. Funding is apparently proving very hard to come by for professors and students alike.

[TakeruK]

Remember that NSF awards are very difficult! From the experience of my friends in earth sciences (as a non-citizen, I don't qualify for NSF), you basically need all "Excellent" ratings to win an award. My friend won one after 2 previous years (honorable mention one of those years). This year, the score was all E, but in the past unsuccessful years, they were some E, mostly VG and a few G. 

I also think that if you are getting lots of VGs and Es but not chosen, it's not that you could have done a lot better, but there are fewer awards than deserving proposals. So, would have to just try again in the future, if that's possible!

[GeoDUDE!]

That's also my experience.

I didn't even get an HM with a E/E E/VG VG/F.

Reviewer #3 is always the menace 

[gelologist]

1 hour ago, GeoDUDE! said:

Reviewer #3 is always the menace 

Truer words: never spoken.

Still, better than last year I suppose? When my proposal was summarized thusly: "I regard this as an average application."

Edited March 29, 2016 by gelologist

[geographyrocks]

On 3/29/2016 at 2:25 PM, TakeruK said:

 you basically need all "Excellent" ratings to win an award.

I just wanted to point out that this is incorrect.  There are so many things that go into how they choose winning proposals.  They need a good mix among all of the various categories.  They need a good mix of demographics.  They are also looking for things that will further a certain field.  I've seen many people get all E's and then not get funded because there were so many proposals in their individual field.  They also want to see a polished proposal which has clearly went through the review process because it shows that you put in extra effort.

You definitely need a proposal that can be completed in the PhD time frame.  That could be the major factor that kept you from the award.  NSF has reporting guidelines of their own where they must prove that they are funding successful projects and people.