Fulbright 2017-2018

[Horb]

40 minutes ago, sat0ri said:

Great answer, thanks!

I'd also argue that science can be cultural exchange as well. Cultural exchange is a lot more than literature, art, etc. And it should happen across many platforms/fields.

[cardinalowl]

21 hours ago, Vegan Burrito said:

No I think the 16-17 refers to the year of the application, so this cycle.

If you go to the Applicants Home Page, it states that the 2017-2018 competition is now closed. I just looked at a PDF of my submitted application and it says "Application for Study, Research, or English Teaching Assistant 2017-18" as well. All I remember is that the stats for the China Open Research grants are the same now as they were when I was thinking to apply over the summer, which wouldn't make sense if they were updated stats from the previous cycle.

[Horb]

4 minutes ago, cardinalowl said:

If you go to the Applicants Home Page, it states that the 2017-2018 competition is now closed. I just looked at a PDF of my submitted application and it says "Application for Study, Research, or English Teaching Assistant 2017-18" as well. All I remember is that the stats for the China Open Research grants are the same now as they were when I was thinking to apply over the summer, which wouldn't make sense if they were updated stats from the previous cycle.

I guess that makes sense. I doubt they'd have the same number two years in a row.

[sat0ri]

2 hours ago, Horb said:

I'd also argue that science can be cultural exchange as well. Cultural exchange is a lot more than literature, art, etc. And it should happen across many platforms/fields.

Yeah agreed, without a doubt (hence the great many STEM-based proposals). I just thought that art/humanities lends itself more to making a compelling case for cultural exchange aspect, generally. I do think @describeblue brings up a good point about creating a "sense of urgency" can be more straightforward with science-based projects. I guess this is reminiscent of the classic divide between procuring funding in science vs the humanities.

[Horb]

1 hour ago, sat0ri said:

Yeah agreed, without a doubt (hence the great many STEM-based proposals). I just thought that art/humanities lends itself more to making a compelling case for cultural exchange aspect, generally. I do think @describeblue brings up a good point about creating a "sense of urgency" can be more straightforward with science-based projects. I guess this is reminiscent of the classic divide between procuring funding in science vs the humanities.

I mean, I would disagree to an extent. The Fulbright is devoted to cultural exchange, but it really is the person, not their field, that matters. Like, you could do archival work but never surface to make cultural exchanges happen, you know? I'd find it more likely people talking in a lab would have more cultural exchange than humanities students who are often divided, studying alone, etc. But that's just my opinion!  

[describeblue]

11 hours ago, Horb said:

I mean, I would disagree to an extent. The Fulbright is devoted to cultural exchange, but it really is the person, not their field, that matters. Like, you could do archival work but never surface to make cultural exchanges happen, you know? I'd find it more likely people talking in a lab would have more cultural exchange than humanities students who are often divided, studying alone, etc. But that's just my opinion!  

I definitely think both the humanities and science disciplines lend themselves to cultural exchange. Humanities scholars often work with others in museums, universities, artist communes, etc. so they're not always alone. I suppose it really does depend on the person. For Fulbright, I think it's a tricky balance of selecting the right person but also the right proposal. 

[sat0ri]

14 hours ago, Horb said:

I mean, I would disagree to an extent. The Fulbright is devoted to cultural exchange, but it really is the person, not their field, that matters. Like, you could do archival work but never surface to make cultural exchanges happen, you know? I'd find it more likely people talking in a lab would have more cultural exchange than humanities students who are often divided, studying alone, etc. But that's just my opinion!  

EDIT: I think this is an interesting topic; I'm not trying to stir anyone's blood, just a friendly discussion will we wait for some results.

Fulbright states a main component of successful applications is having compelling justification of why you want to travel to a specific location, why you couldn't possibly go anywhere other than the university you selected. The vast majority of scientific research is being conducted independently by many lab groups across the globe, so justifying the necessity that you go to a particular university can be challenging if you're basing it on the research project alone (because far more often than not, you could conduct similar research at other places in the world). Further, rarely is scientific research contingent on the place it is located and it is almost never "cultural" (science is supposed to be objective by definition). For example, synthesizing a new antibiotic will be the same in an Australian chemistry lab as it will be in a French chemistry lab; there is nothing about Australian or French culture that would make one location better than the other, necessarily. Naturally, I can think of a few exceptions where the location of the lab might be important (studying an endemic species, ecosystem, geography, etc), but I can think of a great many more cases where the location of the laboratory won't influence your work in any way. Compared to a humanities project, if you are proposing studying Italian history or French literature, making a case of why you should go to Italy or France respectively becomes much, much more straightforward. There are obviously ways to do this with STEM research projects--for example, a leading researcher, facilities, industry connections--but again, tying this into cultural exchange (instead of why it will be good for you and your career) can be difficult when compared to the humanities. I'd say the trade off is, like @describeblue first brought up, justifying the importance/urgency of, say, developing a new cancer drug can be easier than justifying why you want to study postmodern Spanish art. I guess I think there are differences between securing funding between STEM and humanities projects, which I think is true for the Fulbright as well considering the importance that is placed on the culture and location of where you conduct the research.

Edited December 16, 2016 by sat0ri

[Horb]

2 hours ago, sat0ri said:

EDIT: I think this is an interesting topic; I'm not trying to stir anyone's blood, just a friendly discussion will we wait for some results.

Fulbright states a main component of successful applications is having compelling justification of why you want to travel to a specific location, why you couldn't possibly go anywhere other than the university you selected. The vast majority of scientific research is being conducted independently by many lab groups across the globe, so justifying the necessity that you go to a particular university can be challenging if you're basing it on the research project alone (because far more often than not, you could conduct similar research at other places in the world). Further, rarely is scientific research contingent on the place it is located and it is almost never "cultural" (science is supposed to be objective by definition). For example, synthesizing a new antibiotic will be the same in an Australian chemistry lab as it will be in a French chemistry lab; there is nothing about Australian or French culture that would make one location better than the other, necessarily. Naturally, I can think of a few exceptions where the location of the lab might be important (studying an endemic species, ecosystem, geography, etc), but I can think of a great many more cases where the location of the laboratory won't influence your work in any way. Compared to a humanities project, if you are proposing studying Italian history or French literature, making a case of why you should go to Italy or France respectively becomes much, much more straightforward. There are obviously ways to do this with STEM research projects--for example, a leading researcher, facilities, industry connections--but again, tying this into cultural exchange (instead of why it will be good for you and your career) can be difficult when compared to the humanities. I'd say the trade off is, like @describeblue first brought up, justifying the importance/urgency of, say, developing a new cancer drug can be easier than justifying why you want to study postmodern Spanish art. I guess I think there are differences between securing funding between STEM and humanities projects, which I think is true for the Fulbright as well considering the importance that is placed on the culture and location of where you conduct the research.

I still disagree (in a friendly way, of course!). There are certain labs that do specific techniques. There are certain labs that have rare equipment. There are certain labs that house eminent scholars in the field. There are certain labs that have amazing and important networks/connections. And in terms of what you could give: you give an American approach. You give paid man power. You give your unique perspective on something. It is the same with humanities. What could a non-Italian give to Italian studies? Their own perspective, backed by research. And sure, the lab could move, but so could an archive (or important document) a humanities student wants to use (and they have). I'll also add that I think having to push beyond the straightforward why do I need to go here would actually benefit them. It is easy to say "Well...I study French lit, so france." What about the places France colonized? Why not there? Or, even more so, is that really the only reason?

I understand wanting to study Italian lit makes sense in Italy, but unless those texts aren't available elsewhere, it would make for an interesting choice: person who could do there work elsewhere, but would benefit from cultural immersion or person who couldn't do their work elsewhere, doesn't need cultural immersion, but really wants it. 

If I were choosing, I'd go with the second person, because the necessity it stronger. I say this as a humanities student who never thought they'd defend the sciences to vigorously! 

[cardinalowl]

5 hours ago, sat0ri said:

EDIT: I think this is an interesting topic; I'm not trying to stir anyone's blood, just a friendly discussion will we wait for some results.

Fulbright states a main component of successful applications is having compelling justification of why you want to travel to a specific location, why you couldn't possibly go anywhere other than the university you selected. The vast majority of scientific research is being conducted independently by many lab groups across the globe, so justifying the necessity that you go to a particular university can be challenging if you're basing it on the research project alone (because far more often than not, you could conduct similar research at other places in the world). Further, rarely is scientific research contingent on the place it is located and it is almost never "cultural" (science is supposed to be objective by definition). For example, synthesizing a new antibiotic will be the same in an Australian chemistry lab as it will be in a French chemistry lab; there is nothing about Australian or French culture that would make one location better than the other, necessarily. Naturally, I can think of a few exceptions where the location of the lab might be important (studying an endemic species, ecosystem, geography, etc), but I can think of a great many more cases where the location of the laboratory won't influence your work in any way. Compared to a humanities project, if you are proposing studying Italian history or French literature, making a case of why you should go to Italy or France respectively becomes much, much more straightforward. There are obviously ways to do this with STEM research projects--for example, a leading researcher, facilities, industry connections--but again, tying this into cultural exchange (instead of why it will be good for you and your career) can be difficult when compared to the humanities. I'd say the trade off is, like @describeblue first brought up, justifying the importance/urgency of, say, developing a new cancer drug can be easier than justifying why you want to study postmodern Spanish art. I guess I think there are differences between securing funding between STEM and humanities projects, which I think is true for the Fulbright as well considering the importance that is placed on the culture and location of where you conduct the research.

While I do agree that the cultural component of arts projects may be more straightforward, I actually think that a decent number of public health and psychology/sociology research is cultural – there is a strong argument that the majority of such research has been historically conducted in Western countries, and such findings may not be relevant in other societies. For example, the worldwide prevalence of mental disorders varies dramatically by country (e.g. The US has a much higher rate of ADHD diagnoses than anywhere else). Why is that? What societal reasons lead to ADHD being overdiagnosed in the US and underdiagnosed in other countries? How might one adjust the ADHD diagnostic criteria in a country like Japan, where children are expected to spend a much longer time focusing on their studies? And so on.

[sat0ri]

On 12/16/2016 at 0:11 PM, Horb said:

I still disagree (in a friendly way, of course!). There are certain labs that do specific techniques. There are certain labs that have rare equipment. There are certain labs that house eminent scholars in the field. There are certain labs that have amazing and important networks/connections. And in terms of what you could give: you give an American approach. You give paid man power. You give your unique perspective on something. It is the same with humanities. What could a non-Italian give to Italian studies? Their own perspective, backed by research. And sure, the lab could move, but so could an archive (or important document) a humanities student wants to use (and they have). I'll also add that I think having to push beyond the straightforward why do I need to go here would actually benefit them. It is easy to say "Well...I study French lit, so france." What about the places France colonized? Why not there? Or, even more so, is that really the only reason?

I understand wanting to study Italian lit makes sense in Italy, but unless those texts aren't available elsewhere, it would make for an interesting choice: person who could do there work elsewhere, but would benefit from cultural immersion or person who couldn't do their work elsewhere, doesn't need cultural immersion, but really wants it. 

If I were choosing, I'd go with the second person, because the necessity it stronger. I say this as a humanities student who never thought they'd defend the sciences to vigorously! 

Right, and I did acknowledge all of this in my previous comment ("There are obviously ways to do this with STEM research projects--for example, a leading researcher, facilities, industry connections--but again, tying this into cultural exchange instead of why it will be good for you and your career can be challenging") but it is not a career development program in its intents; it is fundamentally about cultural exchange. You could come up with a thousand examples of how to integrate STEM disciplines into cultural exchange--and this has literally been done by Fulbright over the years--but I am saying there is general trend is that the humanities, by virtue of being a central and inextricable part of the culture itself, therefore naturally and inherently lends itself to being culture exchange. Most of the times humanities are focused on culture and Fulbright is about cultural exhange (not necessarily academic excellence, like many other scholarships), so I just think it's a more natural fit for humanities projects.

I'm applying with a STEM proposal after all, I am just saying relatively speaking, finding the nexus to your host country isn't as straightforward. Sure there could be these counterexamples (faculty, facilities, techniques, etc) but I'd say 90% of chemist, biologist, neuroscientist could perform some iteration of their work in nearly any country, so identifying the necessity of a certain country is relatively more challenging than explaining why you want to study French literature in France/French colony--not necessarily because of text/facilities/faculties being available, but rather because it would be more immersive to study in the environment where the literature was produced.

On 12/16/2016 at 3:12 PM, cardinalowl said:

While I do agree that the cultural component of arts projects may be more straightforward, I actually think that a decent number of public health and psychology/sociology research is cultural – there is a strong argument that the majority of such research has been historically conducted in Western countries, and such findings may not be relevant in other societies. For example, the worldwide prevalence of mental disorders varies dramatically by country (e.g. The US has a much higher rate of ADHD diagnoses than anywhere else). Why is that? What societal reasons lead to ADHD being overdiagnosed in the US and underdiagnosed in other countries? How might one adjust the ADHD diagnostic criteria in a country like Japan, where children are expected to spend a much longer time focusing on their studies? And so on.

I'd say this is a fair point. I should have specified the so-called "hard sciences". I also think your example is very interesting; but I think the issue you raised is my point. Sociology, something that is focused on the study of societies and cultures, will naturally lend itself to making a more facile connection with the host country when it comes to a program like Fulbright. If I was interested in stem cell biology, justifying it why I want to study in Turkey vs Peru could be more challenging. Not impossible, just more challenging relative to if I wanted to propose a project studying Peruvian culture in some way.

[sat0ri]

I also thought it was a bit challenging writing a proposal for studying in the UK as an American, because their culture is one of the most similar to American culture. However, some current events (e.g., Brexit, Trump administration, etc) have made it all the more relevant in my opinion. @Horb I believe you were applying to UK, did you find that part challenging?

[Horb]

4 hours ago, sat0ri said:

I also thought it was a bit challenging writing a proposal for studying in the UK as an American, because their culture is one of the most similar to American culture. However, some current events (e.g., Brexit, Trump administration, etc) have made it all the more relevant in my opinion. @Horb I believe you were applying to UK, did you find that part challenging?

I applied two years ago to the UK (I made it to the final round). I am applying to Germany now. I didn't actually find it challenging, but I was studying UK culture for the grant so I was very aware of the differences.

[Photogeographic]

When is it acceptable to start guessing when we will get our notifications? 

[Horb]

1 hour ago, Photogeographic said:

When is it acceptable to start guessing when we will get our notifications? 

NOW! I will go with January 12 (12-15 if we can guess ranges).

[cardinalowl]

On 12/21/2016 at 8:19 PM, Photogeographic said:

When is it acceptable to start guessing when we will get our notifications? 

I was doing so well in not thinking about it up until now... Now it feels like we're actually getting close 

[Horb]

1 hour ago, cardinalowl said:

I was doing so well in not thinking about it up until now... Now it feels like we're actually getting close 

I'm surprising not consumed by it like I was the first time I applied. I did set my phone up, so I'll avoid seeing the preview. The first time I did this, the message began with "I am pleased to inform you" which was great to see, but if I don't get that (i.e. if I get rejected), I'd like to be able to cherish the possibility of being a Fulbrighter before I open the email. 

[WildeThing]

When I applied I got a "We're pleased to inform you've been selected...

for the waitlist." 

 

It worked out in the end but don't get your hopes up until you read the response in full.

[Photogeographic]

On 12/23/2016 at 1:55 PM, Horb said:

I'm surprising not consumed by it like I was the first time I applied. I did set my phone up, so I'll avoid seeing the preview. The first time I did this, the message began with "I am pleased to inform you" which was great to see, but if I don't get that (i.e. if I get rejected), I'd like to be able to cherish the possibility of being a Fulbrighter before I open the email. 

 

Yeah, I did the same thing last year and made a filter to a Fulbright folder in Gmail. Mostly because I didn't want to get a rejection notice unexpectedly on my phone in the middle of work or somewhere I wouldn't have personal space to just process whatever the results were. 

I'm hoping we hear back by the week of the 16th at the latest. I can't remember, have notifications ever gone out on a weekend? 

[Horb]

On 12/23/2016 at 5:01 PM, WildeThing said:

When I applied I got a "We're pleased to inform you've been selected...

for the waitlist." 

 

It worked out in the end but don't get your hopes up until you read the response in full.

This was only for round 1! Wouldn't dream of it in round 2 haha.

[sammid]

On 12/13/2016 at 4:47 PM, Horb said:

Good luck! I know we are technically in competition with each other, but I really hope you get it! Also, as you probably know, München is SUPER expensive. There are, however, ways to increase your living stipend (or so I've heard) if you can show how expensive your city is. So make sure to check that out when you win BECAUSE YOU WILL! I mean, having a completely new approach to research sounds like an amazing take on the grant.

AH, yes! I do know how expensive München is ! BUT that's news I was not aware of (potentially increasing the stipend!). Good to know! Thanks for spreading the knowledge!

[Horb]

1 hour ago, sammid said:

AH, yes! I do know how expensive München is ! BUT that's news I was not aware of (potentially increasing the stipend!). Good to know! Thanks for spreading the knowledge!

Yup! The German website says the stipend is between 750 and 1000 Euros, which is quite a lot!

[UWI17]

Hey All! Anyone else apply for an ETA to the Slovak Republic? I am getting pretty excited!!! Trying not to obsess too much... Anyone else starting to doubt their SOGP and Personal Statements? Gotta figure out how to deal with this waiting game a bit better because I know we are in for the long haul!

Edited December 30, 2016 by UWI17

[Regab]

Anyone applying to Sri Lanka? We should find out if we make the first round so soon-eek!

[Photogeographic]

On 12/31/2016 at 11:46 AM, Regab said:

Anyone applying to Sri Lanka? We should find out if we make the first round so soon-eek!

Not applying to Sri Lanka but have been working there this past year ! What an amazing country !! Good luck ! 

[jango102]

Has anyone who applied for the Switzerland research Fulbright heard back about the second stage application? The Fulbright website (as well as the Swiss scholarship website) said that people who made it past the first round would have to fill out an additional application for the Swiss committee in December but I haven't received any notification of that, whether acceptance or rejection.