NDSEG 2010

[xkindofbluex]

Oh, rejected. Oh well.

[jollieduck]

rejected

[Neurone]

Ah! I won both!

[xkindofbluex]

congrats, Neurone!

[UnlikelyGrad]

another rejection...what a surprise

Congrats, Neurone! That's a huge accomplishment!

[WaitingGradStudnt]

I just got a rejection email as well. Bummer.

[virati]

......??

What the heck is 'alternate'? As in, they need more time to consider? They need more time to reject? They're being nice by making me wait?

Anyways, got an email notifying me of being an alternate, they'll send out another notification april 20th apparently.

[UnlikelyGrad]

......??

What the heck is 'alternate'? As in, they need more time to consider? They need more time to reject? They're being nice by making me wait?

Anyways, got an email notifying me of being an alternate, they'll send out another notification april 20th apparently.

Maybe some people will turn down the award, opening up room for you, I guess. (But who the heck would turn down the NDSEG? So much prestige!!)

[Neurone]

Maybe some people will turn down the award, opening up room for you, I guess. (But who the heck would turn down the NDSEG? So much prestige!!)

Actually this is what I was wondering about. I know NDSEG is harder to get than an NSF, but is it true that one carries more prestige? Also, I would more likely apply for grants in the future through the NSF - should this factor into what one should choose? I expect to be in grad school for only about 3 more years.

[virati]

Maybe some people will turn down the award, opening up room for you, I guess. (But who the heck would turn down the NDSEG? So much prestige!!)

I didn't imagine that they would only give people ~1 week to decide but I suppose that can be reasonable. I guess we'll see how this turns out...

I got rejected for NSF with 2 reviewers (basically the exact same application as NDSEG): Excellent, Very Good; Good, Excellent. Didn't make too much sense so I'm hoping NDSEG offsets my confusion...

[zxcv]

Maybe some people will turn down the award, opening up room for you, I guess. (But who the heck would turn down the NDSEG? So much prestige!!)

Well, lucky for you guys it looked like I will be one of those turning down the NDSEG. I also won the NSF and new DOE but I think I should be able to graduate in three more years so there is no point in taking two. Not sure how I was so ridiculously lucky this year -- it was my third time applying.

[Neurone]

Well, lucky for you guys it looked like I will be one of those turning down the NDSEG. I also won the NSF and new DOE but I think I should be able to graduate in three more years so there is no point in taking two. Not sure how I was so ridiculously lucky this year -- it was my third time applying.

I'm in a similar position; what made you decide to take the NSF (or DOE) over the NDSEG?

[hello! :)]

Neurone, can I recommend that you take the NSF over NDSEG, since you have the potential of helping someone else out by giving them your spot. As for prestige, I've definitely seen both fellowships on professors' CVs before... It usually says "deferred to accept NDSEG" or vice versa. In any case, a big congratulations to you! That is a great feat!

Edit: I forgot to add a congratulations to zxcv too!

Edited April 12, 2010 by helloheehee

[virati]

Neurone, can I recommend that you take the NSF over NDSEG, since you have the potential of helping someone else out by giving them your spot. As for prestige, I've definitely seen both fellowships on professors' CVs before... It usually says "deferred to accept NDSEG" or vice versa. In any case, a big congratulations to you! That is a great feat!

Edit: I forgot to add a congratulations to zxcv too!

Haha, while I am one of those waiting for a spot I'm going to have to really disagree with your recommendation, in good spirit though it may be. Neurone, find out which one is best for you. I've heard from most people that NDSEG is more prestigious (the academic definition of which eludes me to this day). I would go with NDSEG over NSF but that's only based on the meager amount that I know of the differences between the two. I have also seen the 'deferred to accept _____' and it seems to be effective in getting across the 'prestige' of getting the award so no matter what you're not losing that.

Good luck deciding!

[xkindofbluex]

Haha, while I am one of those waiting for a spot I'm going to have to really disagree with your recommendation, in good spirit though it may be. Neurone, find out which one is best for you. I've heard from most people that NDSEG is more prestigious (the academic definition of which eludes me to this day). I would go with NDSEG over NSF but that's only based on the meager amount that I know of the differences between the two. I have also seen the 'deferred to accept _____' and it seems to be effective in getting across the 'prestige' of getting the award so no matter what you're not losing that.

Good luck deciding!

Yeah, I'd take NDSEG. It's more money. And on a CV you are still an NSF winner. You can put something like: NDSEG (accepted), NSF (declined).

[xkindofbluex]

Also, the reason to take DOE is that it's way more cash!

[meggo]

Add me to the rejected list haha

[BKMD]

Rejected, but no big deal. Congrats to everyone who won!

As for NSF vs NDSEG - I think there's a big difference in that NDSEG pays full tuition while NSF only pays partial tuition. This means that with NSF, your school will still have to find some funding for you through grants (but not nearly as much with the fellowship), so while it should be easier to find projects to work on, you don't have the full independence that you would get with NDSEG, so I think it only makes sense to choose this. That's my understanding at least.

[hello! :)]

Actually, I heard NSF GRF may be more prestigious compared to NDSEG, since many academics know that the NSF award is more heavily weighted on one's proposal in addition to accomplishments. On the other hand, fewer people receive NDSEG, so in that sense, yes, it may stand out more. Of course, the extra money that NDSEG gives is nice too.

But for the record, I'm just a disinterested voice in the crowd, as I am not on the waitlist for this award.

[anir-dendroica]

"Prestige" is a fairly arbitrary thing. I would choose an award based on:

1) Benefits (stipend, research funding, tuition), and

2) Networking/applicability to your career ambitions

The DOE SCGF and EPA STAR both require fellows to attend conferences, and almost certainly give recipients a leg up if they are aiming to work in the energy/environmental fields, respectively. The NSF is regarded as the highest graduate honor by most research scientists, and is probably the best choice if you are looking to go into basic research. As for the NDSEG, I am less certain, but as it is administered by ASEE I imagine that it is respected more than the NSF grant in engineering and applied research fields.

That said, congrats to all who get to choose between multiple fellowships! I don't think it's possible to choose wrongly, and going with the one that provides the most benefits is never a bad idea...

[zxcv]

anir-dendroica -- I think you have the right idea, but may be confused about the applicability of each award. The DOE, for example, funds far more than simply energy research, including many areas of fundamental physics (even String Theory!). I don't think there is any lack of pure scientific prestige there. Right now their offer is most attractive to me (baring unforseen restrictions in the fine print) because working in a national laboratory aligns with my career goals. And their advantage over the DOD is about the money, not the least including the 5k research stippend. I'll still have an excellent chance for a permanent job or postdoc with NRL when I finish my PhD. After all, I will presumably still be doing the sort of research they are interested in. And of course all the awards still go on your CV anyways.

BKMD -- You make an interesting point about full tuition reimbursement with the NDSEG. I will be asking administrators about this difference. If it comes down to it, though, I'm sure my adviser has finding that could make up the difference, which would be at least partially offset by the research stippend anyways.

If I thought I was likely to stay in grad school for more than three years, I would decline the DOE for the combined NDSEG/NSF, but that seems unlikely to me right now.

[zxcv]

Actually this is what I was wondering about. I know NDSEG is harder to get than an NSF, but is it true that one carries more prestige? Also, I would more likely apply for grants in the future through the NSF - should this factor into what one should choose? I expect to be in grad school for only about 3 more years.

Here the choice seems pretty obvious -- take both, and use the NSF only if by some unforeseen circumstance you need to (you can use it for funding in years 4 and 5).

[Neurone]

Here the choice seems pretty obvious -- take both, and use the NSF only if by some unforeseen circumstance you need to (you can use it for funding in years 4 and 5).

I expect to be done in 3 years though.

[anir-dendroica]

anir-dendroica -- I think you have the right idea, but may be confused about the applicability of each award. The DOE, for example, funds far more than simply energy research, including many areas of fundamental physics (even String Theory!).

It's true that the DOE funds research areas seemingly unrelated to energy, but I suspect that they are funding String Theory and other fundamental physics in the hope that a breakthrough in that area could ultimately lead to a new energy technology. Similarly, their office of Biological and Environmental Research funds fundamental research on biochemistry and cellular processes with the ultimate goals of efficient biofuel production and synthetic mimicry of biological energy conversion processes. I don't think you will see them funding research on the ecology of African elephants or any other research that lacks a conceivable link to energy. But who knows, they might surprise me...

Anyway, enough with the off-topic philosophizing :-)

[UnlikelyGrad]

It's true that the DOE funds research areas seemingly unrelated to energy, but I suspect that they are funding String Theory and other fundamental physics in the hope that a breakthrough in that area could ultimately lead to a new energy technology. Similarly, their office of Biological and Environmental Research funds fundamental research on biochemistry and cellular processes with the ultimate goals of efficient biofuel production and synthetic mimicry of biological energy conversion processes. I don't think you will see them funding research on the ecology of African elephants or any other research that lacks a conceivable link to energy. But who knows, they might surprise me...

I used to think like you, so I didn't apply to the DOE this year. But then just last week, my advisor mentioned that she had put in a grant proposal to the DOE. There's no way that any of the stuff she does can be applied to energy technology...ever. Environmental remediation is the only possible application of what she does as far as I can see. So...I think they must have a slightly broader field of interest than just energy.