OH YES youre totally right it was the 10th
but everything else has been submitted and the parental signatures form popped up after everything else so i didn’t know if i had to get it in right away
one more thing: this has been asked before but does anyone have an estimate on how many ppl usually apply for the scholarship?
would you guess the numbers to be in the 100s or 1000s?
1 Like
Hmmm…I don’t know how many people usually apply, but I don’t think its more than a thousand. The requirements are so stringent and the scholarship isn’t hugely advertised, so I think that naturally makes less people apply, but that often means that the remaining applicants are very dedicated and competitive.
It’s rough applying for the literature category, they pick many stem fellows, but in the past few years they picked less literature fellows for some reason 
1 Like
very true 
they used to select 3-4 literature fellows but for the past two years there has only been 1
may the gods of writing and luck dawn upon us <33
Do you know how long the process essay should be? Mine is probably going to be only two pages, but I really hope that’s not too short.
Mine’s only 3 pages, I’m sure you’re fine.
yes mine’s about 3 pages too but it’s not in essay form
it’s alright if I copy-pasted the questions and answered them as bullet points? bc i feel like the questions were just to grasp how everything went and isn’t really that crucial in deciding whether the applicant is qualified or not… i think?
Submitted. Good luck to all.
i kind of feel stupid in that as a musician, both my process and significance essays were eight pages each. what a mess.
Does anybody know how the reviewers verify application materials? Do they look beyond just the applications? There was a honorable mention recipient in 2020 whose research paper was retracted by the Optical Society of America due to research misconduct and self plagiarism. The incident was captured in all leading research integrity forums (retraction watch, research gate, etc). The episode seems quite odd since one of the Davidson core values is integrity.
Hmmm, that is an interesting question. Maybe they’re not as thorough for their honorable mention recipients? I’m not familiar with scientific research, so I can’t really extrapolate further.
The retraction was for having too much overlap with a previous article by the same authors. Since the student was in high school at the time, and possibly not entirely familiar with all of the procedures, it is almost certainly the fault of the faculty mentor, who was a co-author on both articles. I would guess that the second author may have been looking to inflate their resume by “double dipping”.
On the other hand, The research itself is solid, and it was published in a peer-reviewed journal - the first article was not retracted, nor was there a need for that to happen.
2 Likes
Hmm. Interesting. The Davidson fellow honorable mention was the 1st author for both papers, it is really hard to imagine that she was not part of the “double-dipping” scheme. Both authors have to sign the author integrity form for papers to get published and the 1st author must be aware of the action and outcome. Double submission is a serious plagiarism, which is against the selection criteria for Davidson or any other decent award.
There must be some mitigating circumstances, seeing that she still has her honorable mention and that her acceptance to Stanford has not been rescinded.
Good point. Thought Davidson Fellows were best of the best, not someone that is less bad or having had past misconduct and relied on mitigation. Awarding the truthful is the only way to be fair to other honest applicants. Otherwise it is bad to the reputation of the foundation. Being the 1st author, she must know that something wasn’t right upon signing the author integrity form for both journals, in order to be published.
I’m not disagreeing with you, but, as I wrote, if it were indeed something egregious she would likely have had her acceptance to Stanford rescinded as well. I guess that mitigating circumstances + the fact that she did not receive any real awards was enough for Davidson. Of course, they may very well just be behind in updating the webpage.
Also, the award was for the research itself, not for the fact that it led to a peer-reviewed publication. So long as the research itself was not based on bad practice, the honorable mention would.
Interesting enough, a quick google of egregious comes back egregious abuses of copyright 
, and it indeed happened in this episode. As defined in Optical Society of America (OSA)’s “Editorial on Plagiarism”: “Plagiarism is a serious breach of ethics and is defined as the substantial replication, without attribution, of significant elements of another document already published by the same or other authors.”
Taking a closer look at the submission, revision, and publication date, one would quickly discover that:
The double dipping was intentional: 1. The two papers were submitted on two different continents; 2. The papers carried totally different titles; 3. The papers didn’t cite each other; and 4. The dates of submission, revision, acceptance, and publication for both papers are very close to each other, no more than 2 to 3 weeks apart. Yet, the two papers carry the same 33 numbered equations in the main body, a serious breach of copyright agreement they signed with both journals. The author integrity forms they signed for both papers means they committed to both journals that each paper was original, all equations are new, and wouldn’t be published elsewhere. After both journals published both papers, they did not withdraw either one willingly. It is only logical that both authors were aware of their actions of wrongdoing.
Unfortunately, Davidson Institute, a key stakeholder in this case, does not seem to uphold ethical standard and award only the truthful applicants. It is so ironic that they still put integrity as their No. 1 core value.
Does anyone know when the decisions come out?
Everyone is supposed to be notified on or before July 15th
has anyone received a notification yet?