<p>My friend in grad school recommended that I apply for the NSF fellowship. However, I'm not too sure how useful this is since 1) I've already contacted many faculty members and have asked if they think they'll have funding in 1-2 years and 2) many biology programs have a 1st year umbrella program that the department funds, not the invidual lab/professor. </p>
<p>In choosing to apply for this NSF fellowship, how much do colleges care that you click "yes" to applying for the grant on your application? Is it a disadvantage not to? What happens if you click 'yes' but don't end up applying after all? I guess what I'm getting at is, is it a disadvantage to show colleges that you didn't apply for an NSF fellowship? </p>
<p>I know in the past that grants have magically turned rejection letters into acceptance letters, so I know getting personal funding absolutely carries A LOT of weight. The question is what if I don't do it. It's 3 essays including a proposal, and different rules for letters of recommendation. More time and energy than I want to spend. Truthfully, my priority right now is not about funding (though I know it should be), but rather getting noticed/my foot in the door. Thanks!</p>
<p>It’s extremely helpful to get, of course. As a US citizen, in the programs you’re interested in, the departments will have funding for you. But of course they would rather not, it might even allow them to take on an extra student that year? But the admissions committee knows how many people, including current grad students apply for these. If they see that you’ve applied they won’t assume that you’re going to get it (and if they <em>do</em> assume so, it will be because the rest of your application is extremely strong). They do like to see that you realize the importance of funding, though.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t state that you’re applying for it if you’re not. However, I know you’ve submitted some materials to some schools already. So if you have and are changing your mind now, I wouldn’t sweat it too much.</p>
<p>I’ve been on the fence about this myself. Despite how many (dozen of?) times I’ve been told that the research proposal is an exercise in your ability to develop a coherent research plan, and not a guaranteed plan that you will complete, it still feels somewhat dishonest when I read through the directions. I could write it about the research I’m doing now, or the specific research I would do if I worked in the lab of my choice (not written from a hypothetical perspective, however). But that’s not what the directions ask for.</p>
<p>A friend called the NSFGRFP and asked if they would indeed be expected to complete the experiments proposed, if accepted, etc. They stated that you should not write about something that you do not intend to complete. I am not sure who she spoke to or how qualified they are to answer the question.</p>
<p>Thank you so much Virions for a very helpful response. </p>
<p>I am new to this too. My friend at a UC said that 1 out of 14 people got it in his group last year, and 2 out of 30 got it the year before that. Fortunately for us, their criteria for evaluating incoming students is different than first years and second years, etc. etc. In other words, they’re the toughest on second year students. </p>
<p>I remember reading on their website that you don’t research experience in the subject to write the proposal. But I’m guessing that’s a fairly weak proposal then, and that’s the boat I’d fall into. </p>
<p>This is sort of akin to applying to an extra school, though I’d consider the requirements and likelihood of success even harder. I’m on the fence too. For me, it’s looking like a 80% chance “no thanks” and 20% “maybe.” LOL.</p>
<p>Yeah, I feel the same way. It would be not only a lot more work for me, while I’m already quite busy, but a lot of work for my advisor to read through drafts of it. And even if it were a hypothetical experiment, the amount of work that would go into the proposal would end up being the same as if it were real. That’s not a bad thing, experience-wise, but I just don’t know if I’ll have the time.</p>
<p>Since each of the three essays is unique compared to any school I’m applying to, I’d say it will be more work (though less pricey) than applying to another school.</p>
<p>And I’ve read that choosing the option to write about an area of research you’re interested in as opposed to a research proposal is a surefire way to fail. Who knows, though.</p>
I am an NSF fellow. I BSed my research proposal two days before the deadline, by expanding on a question that was thrown up in a seminar the day before. Turned out that the question I proposed to research was complete crap - but none of my reviewers paid any attention to the scientific content of my proposal. Instead they focused on superficialities of the presentation: “did not elaborate on broader impacts”, “beautifully presented”, etc.</p>
Although I don’t doubt this is NSF’s official line, under no circumstances are you required to complete the research you propose in your application. Even for first-year grad students, the proposal is generally just speculation – a labmate of mine wrote her proposal based on the lab in which she was rotating at the time, then joined my lab and did a totally different project for her thesis, with not so much as a peep from NSF. They are funding you, not the specific research you propose.</p>
<p>My friend (who now goes to a big Midwest R1) got the GRFP and is doing research completely unrelated to his proposal. He even checked twice with NSF to see if it’s okay, and they gave him the thumbs up.</p>
<p>Most graduate school applicants DON’T apply for the NSF before they apply to graduate school. So applying for it will help, but not applying won’t help you.</p>
<p>But honestly, your foot in the door doesn’t matter if you don’t get funding.</p>
<p>A friend called the NSFGRFP and asked if they would indeed be expected to complete the experiments proposed, if accepted, etc. They stated that you should not write about something that you do not intend to complete. I am not sure who she spoke to or how qualified they are to answer the question.</p>
<p>I have a GRF and this is true. The reviewers are not stupid; they can tell when you have written about something that you’ve already done, especially since you have to write a previous research statement that talks about the past work that you’ve done. If you omit past projects related to that work, then you don’t have any connectivity. If you include it, it’s quite obvious that you’re rewriting old news. The goal is not to see if you can summarize old research; anyone can do that. The goal is to see if you can think of a compelling and engaging research project that will contribute to both science and the greater good, and if you can plan it out in a way that shows intellectual promise. Now if you switch labs or decide to do something more interesting later, that’s a different story.</p>
<p>They’re the toughest on second year students but it’s also easiest to write as a second-year student. I got it in my second year of graduate school. I already had my advisor set up, my research project planned, I had an excellent graduate record behind me and three graduate professors to write my recommendation letters.</p>
<p>I also think that b@r!um is an outlier. Most people who I have talked to who have successfully won the proposal started working on it months before the submission deadline, and my reviewers certainly commented on the scientific content of my proposal.</p>