<p>kryptonsa36-</p>
<p>They will view an application with weak GRE scores (and above average in everything else) as uncompetitive, since there will be many applications that are strong/above average in all categories.</p>
<p>If you are worried about your scores just leave them out!</p>
<p>From the NSF website, under FAQ:
</p>
<p>The question is: How many students get an NSF fellowship without submitting their GRE scores?</p>
<p>It would be helpful for CCers who apply for the NSF fellowship to post their results when they come in March (?). This fellowship is extremely competitive, and it might be helpful for future CCers to see exactly what’s involved.</p>
<p>
Isn’t that the rub? Figuring out at what point reporting a not great score is still better than not reporting a score at all?</p>
<p>Assumedly, not reporting a score puts you at a disadvantage (instead of removing the opportunity to gain further advantage). If that weren’t the case, my decision would be easy.</p>
<p>No one here can answer that question for you. You may try calling fastlane and see if you can get anything out of them. It probably depends greatly on the field and who reviews your app. For the biomedical science, I think that 1400+ helps you and anything below 1350 may hurt you (you are under the average acceptance). Everything in between is gray. Like I said before, the score also needs to be balanced.</p>
<p>It is really hard to get this award! My friend only got HM last year and he had close to 4.0 from good school, 1450GRE+95% subject, attending top 10 good grad school, three 1st author pubs in top journals, great letter of recs, well written essays, etc. This process is very random, and even the top applicants dont get awards.</p>
<p>I am not aware of anyone that got an award without GRE scores. If you are between 1300-1400, you may want to include the scores this year. I think the scores are more important when you are still in undergrad. If you applying as a 1st/2nd year from UCSF, excluding your GRE scores probably cant hurt you much. If you are below 1300, I would not send them.</p>
<p>I was just about to consider applying for the NSF fellowship, until I read:
“If you do not have 1400+GRE, I would not submit them.”</p>
<p>I only have 1290 GRE</p>
<p>Test scores are not required, so a better consideration is not whether you should apply, but whether you should submit your scores on the application.</p>
<p>My daughter was awarded an NSF fellowship with a slightly under 1400 GRE and no refereed publications. There are many variables that go into the decision to award NSF fellowships (including the proposed research area, strength of recommendation letters, geographic area, etc.) so I would hate to see students not even try if they have no publications or a slightly lower GRE score.<br>
The funding for NSF fellowships is substantially higher this year, so chances of receiving an award are better than ever! All of you thinking about applying, do go ahead and try!</p>
<p>I think you may have quoted me. I suggest that you apply but exclude your test scores.</p>
<p>Good luck.</p>
<p>Wow…great discussion! </p>
<p>As much as I want to apply this year, I think I am going to wait until my first year into grad school before I apply to these types of fellowships just because I am already applying to so many schools (14-15) and I may really annoy my recommenders if I add one more application to their “letter writing” list. Besides, I feel like I am not the strongest applicant this year, considering I will be out of school for 2 years (2008 graduate) for fall 2010 admissions. I don’t have publications in “top” journals and those close-knit relationships with faculty who can attest to my credentials. I will have been working in the industry for 1.5 years and even though my supervisor is really nice and agreed to write reference letters for my applications–it just doesn’t compare to letter coming from someone who is a faculty member at a research university/academia (have only 1 professor from my undergrad school writing letters for me). </p>
<p>Anyways, thanks for your advice/responses–will keep these in mind when applying next year!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I have heard something similar. However, I think the crucial part is the idea and the scores are somewhat secondary. The people that I have talked with say that their reviewer comments were primarily “I hate your idea”, and that they believed that is what caused them to ultimately not get the award (though two of them were honorable mentions).</p>
<p>It should be easier to get an award this year, however. Obama tripled the funding for NSF fellowships, according to the NSF website.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think geographic area comes into play. Judging from last year, Berkeley seemed to have more awards alone than the entire Southeast. I do agree that area of research is important though. There are so few pure science awards compared to engineering.</p>
<p>Even though Obama said his budget would triple the number NSF fellowships, it’s not clear to me that that part of his budget even passed and if it did, that it even applies to 2009-2010. I remember reading on the NSF website that last year 12xx fellowships were awarded and this year 16xx will be awarded.</p>