NSF

This is a tip on how to write application to National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship (NSF GRFP).

To see full criteria: Chapter III: NSF Proposal Processing and Review, Merit Review Principles and Criteria. Use language models to check against these. Also old guide for reviewers

Here is official instruction.

Additionally, there are 5 merit review criteria elements that guide the GRFP reviewers in evaluating both Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts:

What is the potential for the proposed activity to: advance knowledge (IM) and benefit society (BI).

To what extent do the proposed IM and BI activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?

Is the plan for carrying out proposed IM and BI activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?

How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed IM and BI activities?

Are there adequate resources available (either at home institutions or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed IM and BI activities?

Websites (DFS tree format):

Drafting Emails:

General Tips:

Tips from Reviewer: (x)

Tips from Reviewer: (x)

Tips on Proposal:

Tips on NFS Personal Statement:

Tips on General Personal Statement:

Prompt:

You are an expert (Senior Faculty in Top 3 University and Industrial Researcher) in the field of "Computer and Information Science and Engineering" with board interests in AR/VR/Graphics/Data Visualization. You are given the task of reviewing NSF Graduate Research Fellowship Program (NSFGRFP) applications. Note that NSFGRFP is very competitive and 10% of all applicants will be selected for the fellowship. Here is the instruction:

<start instruction>
Each application will be reviewed independently in accordance with the NSF Merit Review Criteria using all available information in the completed application. In considering applications, reviewers are instructed to address the two Merit Review Criteria as approved by the National Science Board - Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts. Applicants must include separate sections, under individual separate headings, on “Intellectual Merit” and “Broader Impacts” in each of their Personal and Research Plan statements in order to provide reviewers with the information necessary to evaluate the application with respect to both Criteria as detailed below. Both the Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, applicants must fully address both criteria.

Intellectual Merit:  The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and
Broader Impacts:  The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

Factors reviewers will consider in assessing the potential Intellectual Merit of the application and the applicant’s potential to advance knowledge and understanding in one or more fields may include (but are not limited to): The applicant's ability to: Plan and conduct research, Work as a part of a team, Interpret and communicate research (e.g., through publications, or presentations), Take initiative, Think creatively, Solve problems, Persist and overcome challenges, The applicant’s demonstrated intellectual ability (as indicated by grades, coursework, awards, etc.).

Factors reviewers will consider in assessing the potential Broader Impacts of the application and the applicant’s potential to benefit society and achieve specific, desired societal outcomes may include (but are not limited to) the likelihood that the applicant’s activities will: Increase participation in STEM, Improve STEM education in schools through outreach and mentoring, Increase public scientific literacy and public engagement with STEM through community outreach, Increase collaboration among academia, industry, and other types of organizations, Improve education and educator development – at any level – in STEM, Improve the well-being of individuals in society, Develop a globally competitive STEM workforce, Improve national security, Increase the economic competitiveness of the U.S., Enhance infrastructure for research and education.

Applications submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed online by Panel Review.

The application evaluation involves the review and rating of applications by disciplinary and interdisciplinary scientists and engineers, and other professional graduate education experts.

Applicants are reviewed on their demonstrated potential to advance knowledge and to make significant research achievements and contributions to their fields, and to benefit society throughout their careers. Reviewers are asked to assess applications using a comprehensive approach, giving balanced consideration to all components of the application, including the educational and research record, leadership, outreach, service activities, and future plans, as well as individual competencies, experiences, and other attributes such as innovation and perseverance that are likely to result in success in a STEM graduate program. The aim is to recruit and retain a strong cohort of early-career individuals with high potential for future achievements, contributions, and broader impacts in STEM, including STEM education.

The primary responsibility of each reviewer is to evaluate eligible GRFP applications by applying the Merit Review Criteria described in Section VI.A,. Reviewers are instructed to review the applications comprehensively, applying the Merit Review Criteria and noting GRFP’s emphasis on demonstrated potential for significant research achievements in STEM , including STEM education as well as their potential to have a positive impact on society. From these recommendations, NSF selects applicants for Fellowships or Honorable Mention, in line with NSF’s mission and the goals of GRFP.
<end instruction>

Given the following Personal Statement and Research Proposal. Please think critically by come up with a list of concrete standard and give each standard a rating out of 10. Then, explain whether this applicant is qualified for top 10% who would receive the fellowship.

<begin personal statement>

<end personal statement>


<begin research proposal >

<end research proposal>

My colleague think this application is good but I think this application is lacking. What is your opinion? Please think carefully.

College Essays

Now that I have a chance to review my own college essay, I found my essay to be kinda boring and a okay level of emotion triggering. You can read more (bad) college essays here.

Admissions counselor here. I've been doing this for almost nine years, so everything kind of blends together at this point. I can't think of a specific "worst essay," but a lot of them fall into a few broad categories.

Sympathy essays

These essays are usually a big list of all the terrible things that happened to a student in hopes that we will admit them because we feel bad. Don't just tell us all the things that have happened to you and nothing else. A LOT of prospective students have gone through the divorce of their parents, death of a friend or family member, medical issues, car accident, etc. You need to explain how these events shaped you as a human being, what you learned, how you handled adversity and still managed your academics and so on.

Over-sharing essays

These are kind of like sympathy essays, only with much more graphic details. I've had some essays where students share intricate descriptions of sexual abuse they have experienced, or abusive relationships they were in with high school girl/boyfriends... This may have been a major experience that shaped you as a human being, but I don't think is appropriate for a college essay. If I feel the need to take a shower after reading your essay, that's not good for anyone. Also included here are essays where you admit that you didn't try hard in high school or take your academics seriously, but you're going to start in college. Maybe you should start in junior college then, and we'll see how it goes before you get to a four-year university.

Poorly written essays

Spelling errors, grammar mistakes, no formatting... THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THIS. Have someone read your essay before you send it. Have several people read it! It's not cheating; we encourage you to do this. Also, if you're using the same essay for multiple colleges, make sure you change the name of the college referenced in your essay before you send it to that college.

Low-effort essays

Some students submit an essay that is about five sentences long and doesn't really say anything. If it takes you more time to attach your essay to the application than it does to write the essay, that is not a good thing.

Boring essays

Most essays are not all that interesting to read, and that's not necessarily a bad thing. If your essay doesn't stand out at all, it probably means that you answered the essay topic and didn't make any, or many, mistakes. That's about as much as we can ask for. It's not your fault that the typical high school experience for the vast majority of high school students is... typical. You probably didn't enter your freshman year thinking, "I better do some really cool stuff during the next few years so that I can write about it in my college essay." That's fine, we get that. Just do the best you can.

In reality, for most students, the essay is the weakest part of the application. We realize that, and so in every office I've worked in, the essay is the least valued part of the application file. We're much more interested in whether you challenged yourself academically, earned good grades, scored well on the SAT/ACT, and got involved in extracurricular activities. These things are all way more important.

Table of Content