ChanEcon Posted June 16, 2010 Posted June 16, 2010 Given a choice between the explanation being that 88 awards have been mysteriously delayed for unclear reasons, and the explanation being that 88 fewer awards are being given out because the economy is shit, I'd go with the simpler explanation. I think there are just fewer awards. "Missing" awards are only "missing" if you assume that SSHRC gives out a constant number of awards every year, and I don't think that's a valid premise. I'm fine with the idea that my post includes whishful thinking at the end. However, the facts are that more money was put in the scholarship program, and there are 88 scholarships fewer than before the money was put in. That's strange. Furthermore, the "business related money" money was invested in SSHRC because the economy was going through a downturn. To say that the downturn would cause a reduction in SSHRC budget seems counter-intuitive, since there was a policy effort to do exactly the opposite. I am not sure whether assuming that policy-makers contradict themselves in such a blunt fashion is a much better premise than thinking that scholarships are "missing". Again, it is possible that there are fewer scholarships, but it doesn't make that much sense, especially not to that extent. We'll see.
transboundary Posted June 16, 2010 Posted June 16, 2010 hey all...lurker coming out here. you folks have been great! just thought i'd contribute to the waitlist discussion. me: PhD, score: 16.8, 4th on waitlist in my sub-committee. i got this response from SSHRC staff yesterday: "I would recommend sending an email to SSHRC in 3-4 weeks to see if there has been any movement on the waiting list. There is a small possibility that you may receive a grant, we will have a better idea in a couple of weeks." not holding my breath, but there is hope!
Canuckonomist Posted June 16, 2010 Posted June 16, 2010 I'm fine with the idea that my post includes whishful thinking at the end. However, the facts are that more money was put in the scholarship program, and there are 88 scholarships fewer than before the money was put in. That's strange. Furthermore, the "business related money" money was invested in SSHRC because the economy was going through a downturn. To say that the downturn would cause a reduction in SSHRC budget seems counter-intuitive, since there was a policy effort to do exactly the opposite. I am not sure whether assuming that policy-makers contradict themselves in such a blunt fashion is a much better premise than thinking that scholarships are "missing". Again, it is possible that there are fewer scholarships, but it doesn't make that much sense, especially not to that extent. We'll see. What mudlark is pointing out, is that more money does not imply more scholarships. More money is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for that. In fact, because there is more 'business money' that may contribute to the fewer scholarships than you'd expect, because I'm pretty sure that business money was in the form of CGS awards, which take up a considerably larger sum than a regular SSHRC. Not to mention, if there were more CGS awards given out, the number of scholarships goes down. Perhaps the effort in the downturn was to keep more students with awards in Canada, and hence the distinct possibility that the number of CGS-type awards went up. Also, the number of single and double-year awards could have also decreased in favour of more awards of the three and four-year variety. This doesn't contradict with what the policymakers say, though policymakers, if as an economist, you've known any, are far from completely reliable. Not trying to crap on your sundae, just ironing out what I think Mudlark's case is. Here's hoping you're right though.
ChanEcon Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 (edited) The Small/Big SSHRC argument doesn't hold the road. According to the info from SSHRC, we know the distribution of awards by year of doctoral studies (http://www.sshrc.ca/...s/docs_2010.xls) for both 2008-2009 and 2010-2011. Furthermore we know the number of CGS awarded in 2008-2009 was 422 (http://www.outil.ost...vLangue=Anglais). Let's now make a couple of simplifying assumptions: 1) the CGS awarded in 2008-2009 were all given to 1st year students. I'm trying to minimize as much as possible the budget of 2008-2009. 2) all the 1st and 2nd year students in 2010-2011 received CGS (3rd and 4th year students cannot receive CGS). I'm trying to maximize as much as possible the budget fo 2010-2011. The budget for 2008-2009: 376*105+47*105+252*60+276*40+144*20=73387 The budget for 2010-2011: 307*105+279*105+195*40+139*20=72121 According to my assumptions that largely exagerate the budget for 2010-2011 and largely understate the budget for 2008-2009, and considering the fact that new money was invested for 2010-2011 in comparison to 2008-2009, there is still a 1 million dollar missing in 2010-2011. The small/big SSHRC doesn't hold the road. The difference between the two awards is just not big enough to account for the difference in scholarships. More money doesn't mean more scholarships, but in this case, it does. I still believe there are scholarships missing, because I don't think there was a budget cut. And even if we assume that these numbers are correct and that the budget was cut by at least $1 million, it still means that a lot of students studying abroad received CGS and will have to decline them. For every 4 students refusing a CGS and declining it, there is one small SSHRC that becomes available for a 1st or 2nd year student. If students at the top of the waiting list are starting their 3rd or 4th year, it will go even faster. Your pessimistic arguments with CGS actually lead to an optimistic end. I need two people taking the Vanier, and at most 12 people with CGS studying abroad. I am looking forward to my sundae... Edited June 17, 2010 by ChanEcon
Canuckonomist Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 ... I need two people taking the Vanier, and at most 12 people with CGS studying abroad. I wager you mean "at least", here. And this is in our subcommittee alone. What happens in other subcommittees doesn't help us. 2 were offered Vaniers, and 34 others combined for the SSHRC/CGS awards in that subcommittee. From what I've heard from SSHRC, someone declining a Vanier may be detrimental to us, as from what I gather, the award is not necessarily 'passed on' in that subcommittee -and what's more, they get a Small SSHRC from somewhere if they decline the Vanier. That said, I hope you're right about all this, because your getting an award is a sufficient condition for my getting one. Further, it's possible that if all this happens, I may win a CGS, and I haven't even won a small SSHRC yet. Where were you on the waitlist (just out of curiousity)? Your calculations do lead to a more optimistic view, but a number with this view have been burned by admissions/scholarship committees not giving full information, as tends to be common. For those who applied for the 2009-2010 academic year to the UChicago Econ Ph.D program, they might remember this all too well. We applied being told by their website, and by admins that there were the usual 25 funded spots, and because they're Chicago, 85 spots in total (they like to give a number of students a chance, and take their money while they're at it.) After applying, and waiting, we hear from an admin that 'the economy' had forced them to cut the number of funded spots to 15. So, at the end of the day, there were 25% more applicants, and 40% less spots. Would have been nice if they had told us that at the beginning, so that some of us wouldn't have wasted the $120 to apply (UChicago is a gold mine for admin fees). Again, not trying to say you won't get one, but you've given this more thought than I think might be good for your ability to cope with rejection, should that be the ultimate, and unfortunate outcome. It's not uncommon for budgets to change mid-year for all sorts of reasons, and who knows what happened this year. That said, a member of my program this year didn't initially win an award, but received a 'business CGS' in July. Anything is possible, it's true. Canuck
mudlark Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Your degree of bluntness is almost a turn on. Didn't have the heart to be nearly as forward. Hah! Sorry, it's a bad habit. Would you believe I'm actually much more tactful than I used to be? ChanEcon, I'm not awake enough to plow through your numbers, so I'm going to assume that they're right and plausible. I hope you get an award. For me, there's still the question of why SSHRC would choose to deliberately delay a certain number of awards, especially when they delay releasing results every year so that they can get all of the notifications out at the same time. Also, there's the possibility that the extra funding going to SSHRC is being spent on administrative and clerical salaries, increasing costs for maintaining the office space, or just some government red tape clusterfuckery. *shrug* Not trying to be an asshole, just feeling like we don't know enough about how SSHRC works to make the assumptions that you're basing your argument on. Of course, I'm happy to eat crow when you come back to wave your notice of award in my face.
ChanEcon Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 I'm not sure how this multiquoting goes, so I'll just do it the old way. @Mudlark: SSHRC is not deliberately delaying awards. I think they just don't know how much money they have, and they are being extremely conservative and slow at approvals. That's how the civil service works. Fear is the "driving" force of the Canadian civil service. @Canuck: I just got a publication out in a refereed journal, so I am semi preparing next year's application. You have to know that I am a bored civil servant with lots of time on my hands. Also, I was kind of annoyed to get these bogus arguments from both of you, so I was ready to invest some time to prove you wrong! By the way, I am fifth on the waiting list, but I have been working 3 years outside university so the letters were probably kind of rusty, and the only comment I received from a prof was "looks okay". Overall, I am really happy with my standing considering the competition and the circumstances. I'll keep you posted.
Phalène Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Just popping in to say that no special business PhD SSHRCs were given out this year (that was a 2009-10 only thing, though the MA business awards go on for 2 years). Not sure if this makes a difference to any of the arguments, lol. Also, I'm in my first year of my PhD and got the regular SSHRC... so definitely not all PhD1 students received a CGS. (am hoping but not expecting to be bumped, of course!)
ChanEcon Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 Just popping in to say that no special business PhD SSHRCs were given out this year (that was a 2009-10 only thing, though the MA business awards go on for 2 years). Not sure if this makes a difference to any of the arguments, lol. Also, I'm in my first year of my PhD and got the regular SSHRC... so definitely not all PhD1 students received a CGS. (am hoping but not expecting to be bumped, of course!) That was just an extreme case to show that shifting CGS to regular SSHRC cannot explain the change in the number of scholarships. As to the "business related" money, here's what I found first: "In Budget 2009, the Government of Canada announced a temporary increase of $17.5 million to SSHRC's budget to fund additional Joseph-Armand Bombardier CGSs for business-related research. This temporary increase allows SSHRC to award, over two years, 400 additional master's and 100 additional doctoral scholarships for research related to business." but then, "In Budget 2009, the Government of Canada allocated $17.5 million over three years to SSHRC to fund additional Canada Graduate Scholarships (CGS) focused on business-related research. One hundred business-related CGS doctoral scholarships are being awarded in the current competition (2009), and SSHRC will offer 200 business-related master's awards this summer through a special call for applications." So I really cannot understand why there were fewer PhD scholarships in 2009-2010 than in 2008-2009. Maybe the special CGS are not accounted for...
dramanda Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 To add to the hope.... I was also 'recommended but not funded' last year. I emailed in July and found out that I was #13 on the waitlist for my subcommittee on July 16th. By September 1st, I was #10. So, at least in the past, there has been *some* movement over the summer, and even that late in the summer.
ChanEcon Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 To add to the hope.... I was also 'recommended but not funded' last year. I emailed in July and found out that I was #13 on the waitlist for my subcommittee on July 16th. By September 1st, I was #10. So, at least in the past, there has been *some* movement over the summer, and even that late in the summer. Thanks for the hope!
Phalène Posted June 17, 2010 Posted June 17, 2010 "Additional funding for 100 CGS Doctoral Scholarships for business-related research –fiscal year 2009-2010 only" (this is from the presentation SSHRC gave to my uni) ^^ I would think that would imply that they were only given out last year, especially given that it mentions additional MA awards for the 2010-11 fiscal year.
Canuckonomist Posted June 18, 2010 Posted June 18, 2010 ...I just got a publication out in a refereed journal. Congrats! Not an easy thing to do. Also, I was kind of annoyed to get these bogus arguments from both of you, so I was ready to invest some time to prove you wrong! I don't think these arguments are entirely bogus, especially when your arguments and numbers are based on the really heavy assumption about a perfect information framework, which is oversimplifying the situation considerably. I don't have the time to crunch through your numbers, but the argument that there is so much red tape to pay for does hold water. The fact that you've provided 2 quotes from SSHRC that differ considerably from one time to the other, show that the pieces of information we get from SSHRC are only noisy signals of the truth, and so we can't entirely base our 'proofs' on those noisy signals. Something tells me that if the money is indeed delayed, it's delayed because it's uncertain, and there is a positive probability not equal to one that the funding will not actually be clawed back. (TransitCity in Toronto is a loose example of money that is promised by government bodies to a project, when it later gets retracted before it can be used). Still, all these things aside, you're 5th on the waiting list, when my initial impression was that you said somewhere that you were 15th, -a point on which I am obviously mistaken. My cautionary advice was only in that context, where I figured that your research didn't prove with any concreteness that the waitlist would move 15 spots. Given that you are 5th, I see no reason why it isn't likely that the 2 Vaniers would accept, and 3 of 34 would decline. So I'm with you on this one, and hopefully in not too short a time, we'll both be drinking moderately-priced wine on a government bill.
LogicBomb Posted June 20, 2010 Posted June 20, 2010 (edited) Hey, Thought I would let the hopefuls know that I was bumped from a regular sshrc to a CGS a week or two ago. My PHD is going to be starting in September and is in history. My score was 20.40. I don't know where I was on a wait list or anything as I just assumed that I would be eventually bumped up with my score. I was told via email and confirmed via email. I was also told t expect a letter.<br><br>EDIT: I forgot to add that I know someone who has a lower score and they did not have any movement. I also know of people who, in years past, found out in August. For you MA students, I have a friend who was awarded a CGS MA award in January, after applying for the previous May.<br> Edited June 20, 2010 by LogicBomb
mudlark Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 Congrats, LogicBomb! Hey, Thought I would let the hopefuls know that I was bumped from a regular sshrc to a CGS a week or two ago. My PHD is going to be starting in September and is in history. My score was 20.40. I don't know where I was on a wait list or anything as I just assumed that I would be eventually bumped up with my score. I was told via email and confirmed via email. I was also told t expect a letter.<br><br>EDIT: I forgot to add that I know someone who has a lower score and they did not have any movement. I also know of people who, in years past, found out in August. For you MA students, I have a friend who was awarded a CGS MA award in January, after applying for the previous May.<br>
Canuckonomist Posted June 24, 2010 Posted June 24, 2010 Still waiting, of course. But on that note, passed 1 of 2 comps, the harder of the two. Rewrite again in August, and with hope, I'll have a SSHRC to put to use upon passing that. At least waiting for the comps results is over, for the time being. Canuck
Bea Posted June 24, 2010 Posted June 24, 2010 Just wondering if anyone has heard results from the Sport Participation Research Initiative Supplement? Apparently results are announced June 2010... still waiting....
ChanEcon Posted June 30, 2010 Posted June 30, 2010 Congrats! Not an easy thing to do. I don't think these arguments are entirely bogus, especially when your arguments and numbers are based on the really heavy assumption about a perfect information framework, which is oversimplifying the situation considerably. I don't have the time to crunch through your numbers, but the argument that there is so much red tape to pay for does hold water. The fact that you've provided 2 quotes from SSHRC that differ considerably from one time to the other, show that the pieces of information we get from SSHRC are only noisy signals of the truth, and so we can't entirely base our 'proofs' on those noisy signals. Something tells me that if the money is indeed delayed, it's delayed because it's uncertain, and there is a positive probability not equal to one that the funding will not actually be clawed back. (TransitCity in Toronto is a loose example of money that is promised by government bodies to a project, when it later gets retracted before it can be used). Still, all these things aside, you're 5th on the waiting list, when my initial impression was that you said somewhere that you were 15th, -a point on which I am obviously mistaken. My cautionary advice was only in that context, where I figured that your research didn't prove with any concreteness that the waitlist would move 15 spots. Given that you are 5th, I see no reason why it isn't likely that the 2 Vaniers would accept, and 3 of 34 would decline. So I'm with you on this one, and hopefully in not too short a time, we'll both be drinking moderately-priced wine on a government bill. The only point I wanted to make was that the number of scholarships was much lower this year, and that no obvious reason could explain this decrease. If we can agree on that, than I'm fine. We'll just see for the rest. Anyway, congrats on the comps and good luck for August!
dramanda Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 No SSHRC news in a while, I guess? Has anyone ventured to email about their status?
student4life_2010 Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 No SSHRC news in a while, I guess? Has anyone ventured to email about their status? I have been granted a small SSHRC for three years (with a score of 21.1). At the beginning, I was fourth on the waiting list to get bumped to a big SSHRC. Now, I am the next one (an agent told me by email). Keeping my fingers crossed...
SpaceJump Posted July 8, 2010 Posted July 8, 2010 (edited) I have been granted a small SSHRC for three years (with a score of 21.1). At the beginning, I was fourth on the waiting list to get bumped to a big SSHRC. Now, I am the next one (an agent told me by email). Keeping my fingers crossed... Congratulations! That's excellent news! Mind if I ask: When did you find out? Did you have to ask them, or did it just come out of the blue? EDIT: Wait - I think I got that wrong... did you get the small SSHRC right away? I originally read that as you had been on the waiting list and have now moved up to a small SSHRC, and are still waiting on the big one, but I think that I've misunderstood. (Either way, congrats!) Edited July 8, 2010 by SpaceJump
transboundary Posted July 9, 2010 Posted July 9, 2010 No SSHRC news in a while, I guess? Has anyone ventured to email about their status? The SSHRC folks told me on June 15th to send an email in 3-4 weeks for an update. I was planning on waiting until Monday or Tuesday before bugging them again.
Groulxsome Posted July 9, 2010 Posted July 9, 2010 Hi all, I've been lurking this forum for months while waiting for my SSHRC masters funding to work out. Yesterday (July 8) I received notification that I have received one of the Bombardier CGS scholarships. The letter was dated July 5 and I am located in Newfoundland. My research area is Science and Technology Studies. So, if anyone else is waiting for a CGS masters scholarship: hope is not lost! Cheers,
dramanda Posted July 9, 2010 Posted July 9, 2010 I emailed yesterday and received a response this morning. It seems there has been no movement in my subgroup since the day I received my letter and spoke to someone at SSHRC. Surprising and unfortunate
student4life_2010 Posted July 9, 2010 Posted July 9, 2010 Congratulations! That's excellent news! Mind if I ask: When did you find out? Did you have to ask them, or did it just come out of the blue? EDIT: Wait - I think I got that wrong... did you get the small SSHRC right away? I originally read that as you had been on the waiting list and have now moved up to a small SSHRC, and are still waiting on the big one, but I think that I've misunderstood. (Either way, congrats!) Sorry for the confusion. Right away I was granted s small SSHRC and at that time I was fourth on the list to get bumped up to a big. Now I am the next one on the list. So there has been movement to get bumped up to a big one in my subgroup...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now