Turn it down?
Turn it down?
Hey, so I am one of those people hoping for a second round draft. I was wondering how many people on average turn down their awards? Ball park figure of course... I am pretty much looking for anything to make my self feel better right now.
Re: Turn it down?
Grad students like myself are more likely to turn it down, as many of us already have assistantships, and some of us might get NSF fellowships, which require no service commitment.
Re: Turn it down?
...and my hope roller coaster is back up
Re: Turn it down?
I didn't win SMART but I did win NSF (start grad school in August).
Don't you prefer the service commitment though? You get to skip the post-doc altogether and have a job after graduation....I'm debating waiting on accepting the award now from NSF or waiting to see if I get SMART second round..
Don't you prefer the service commitment though? You get to skip the post-doc altogether and have a job after graduation....I'm debating waiting on accepting the award now from NSF or waiting to see if I get SMART second round..
Re: Turn it down?
Care to trade places?! I got SMART, but not NSF. Here's a breakdown of benefits of each, as I see it:guest wrote:I didn't win SMART but I did win NSF (start grad school in August).
Don't you prefer the service commitment though? You get to skip the post-doc altogether and have a job after graduation....I'm debating waiting on accepting the award now from NSF or waiting to see if I get SMART second round..
NSF:
1. More prestigious--awesome on the transcript. One of the co-founders of Google got one, many famous college professors and Nobel laureates had one. You're in a pretty elite group.
2. Academia--you can potentially get a tenure track right after you get your degree, skipping the post-doc with an NSF. It proves to people that you are serious about your research and that you also know how to write a funded grant :-)
3. No service commitment--you can go anywhere in industry right after you graduate. You could potentially go back to your sponsoring facility when you're about to graduate and ask them to hire you. Or you could get a post-doc at a national research lab, as those pay much more than University post-docs. You don't have a 3-4 year service commitment, so your salary would probably be a little bit more negotiable in either case.
4. Travel money
5. Summer funding, so no part-time relocation costs with an internship.
SMART:
1. Guaranteed job after graduation.
2. A little bit of a higher stipend, book money, health insurance money.
It depends essentially on where you want to end up. Want to teach? Take NSF. Want to work for the government? Well...still take NSF--it's more prestigious!
Re: Turn it down?
The execution is much more important than the award. Those who receive the award and then execute their degrees excellently will have a small advantage over those who just execute excellently.Guest wrote:guest wrote:
NSF:
2. Academia--you can potentially get a tenure track right after you get your degree, skipping the post-doc with an NSF. It proves to people that you are serious about your research and that you also know how to write a funded grant :-)
A fellowship doesn't do science for you, a fellowship doesn't give you pubs, and a fellowship doesn't impress a room full of faculty who have seen countless NSF fellows flounder around under the weight of the "prestige."
Call me cynical, bitter, or whatever else you want, but I've never met an NSF fellow I was impressed with, and if I were ever to higher someone with such credentials, they would mean very little next to the quality of their publications and their affect when communicating their experiences.
So to those who were awarded an NSF or a SMART, your life isn't all rainbows and unicorns now. You have to work harder than the rest of your colleagues to prove to them, your professors and yourself that you were worthy of such an award. It's unfortunate, but it's the truth.
Re: Turn it down?
Having to work hard is not unfortunate. I do agree, you will still have to make sure your PhD. shines brightly when its finished and an NSF fellowship, while a nice CV. line, will not make you a golden child by itself.
And you're definitely bitter.
Anyway, I think I'll wait until April 15th. to hear back from SMART on possible secondaries. If I don't hear back by then I'll accept NSF.
Can't wait until late April. Deadlines and all. =(
And you're definitely bitter.
Anyway, I think I'll wait until April 15th. to hear back from SMART on possible secondaries. If I don't hear back by then I'll accept NSF.
Can't wait until late April. Deadlines and all. =(
Re: Turn it down?
Take the NSF regardless. You are going to want to have options, and most PIs would be happy to fund you for your remaining years after putting in 2+ in their lab on the NSF's dime. I'm not sure how many years you asked for SMART for, but I can guarantee it wont be a 3-4 yr service committment if you're just starting (They'll pay for a maximum of 5, but i you asked for 3 and takes you 5 your service requirement will be 7). It inevitably takes longer than you think to make a novel contribution in your field, especially when you're taking time away from your research to do the internships. For your first few years, the summers are the only time your really have available to do research. I don't know a single person in my school who has taken less than 5, and these are smart motivated people with all kinds of feathers in their hat NSF, Hertz, NDSEG, SMART you name it. And if you already have a masters, it really doesn't matter, it will still take you just as long. Also, the thing to keep in mind with SMART is that there is more at play than just how qualified you are. If you read the program justification in the DOD budget one of the few metrics they give for success is the number of students that are participating in the program. Between tuition and your stipend over your graduate career, you'll cost the program roughly 400K. At the end of the day, the decision makers care that they have added x number of qualified engineers to there workforce, even if it means passing up a few extremely bright candidates, that simply cost too much. Long story short, if you dont get the SMART don't be dissappointed, take the NSF and run.
Re: Turn it down?
Thanks. That's sort of the story I'm hearing from most other corners. I've only got my B.S. No masters... My PhD. will be in Microbiology and cell science and I *think* (I'm not 100% confident) that there are far fewer biology labs than there are engineering opportunities for the DoD. That may be one reason I only made it to the semi-finals (and maybe Im just not that awesome. =)).
I got into UW-Madison and UF (and others but those were my top two choices) and once I received news of NSF I decided to stay at UF despite it being far lower on the microcell totem pole.
So UF does optional rotations and I will try to stretch the funding by doing rotations to have the department pay the first year (and try to get most of the course work out of the way) and then apply my NSF when I'm mostly done with coursework that way its paying for research time with the PI I end up with.
Hopefully I can set milestones and be done in 3.5-4 years (not counting the first year).
Thanks for the advice/input.
I got into UW-Madison and UF (and others but those were my top two choices) and once I received news of NSF I decided to stay at UF despite it being far lower on the microcell totem pole.
So UF does optional rotations and I will try to stretch the funding by doing rotations to have the department pay the first year (and try to get most of the course work out of the way) and then apply my NSF when I'm mostly done with coursework that way its paying for research time with the PI I end up with.
Hopefully I can set milestones and be done in 3.5-4 years (not counting the first year).
Thanks for the advice/input.
Re: Turn it down?
This is starting to stray off topic, but some may find it useful. I am getting my PhD in chemistry and on the subject of finishing in 4-5 years (including classes); it is dependent on so many factors. One major one is your advisers policy on the matter. My point is that when selecting an adviser you should ask him not only if people do get out of his lab in 4 years but if he will LET people out of his lab in 4 years. My adviser does not have tenure yet so he pushes us super hard and strives to get us out in 4 years. Some advisers are reluctant to let a 4th year student graduate because they are just beginning to serve as an asset in their lab (as opposed to a liability... breaking things.... not writing things down properly... not obtaining that one key bit of data... not searching the literature effectively...mishandling samples... and the list goes on). So ask ask ask ask....... Lastly, does anybody have any insight into the possibility of doing basic research or managing science facilities in the military?.... that is as opposed to going the civilian rout with DoD? So the question is, what could I do in the military with a PhD in chemistry and how would I be using my degree?
Re: Turn it down?
I think it is important to note that the job after graduation is far from "guaranteed". The Program terms stipulate a whole assortment of scenarios where the participant is ineligible for post-graduation work including clearance issues, stability of sponsoring facility funding, etc. The SMART Program and NSF GRF are incomparable. One is a "workforce development program disguised as a scholarship" and other a genuine fellowship. The work going on at the DoD labs is very murky. Some do real research whereas some are mainly responsible for program management (i.e., the people who read and manage ONR and AFOSR grants). In either case, the profile of the labs in the research community seem inconsistent at best. When was the last time you read a paper authored by DoD lab scientists?
Re: Turn it down?
Guest wrote:I think it is important to note that the job after graduation is far from "guaranteed". The Program terms stipulate a whole assortment of scenarios where the participant is ineligible for post-graduation work including clearance issues, stability of sponsoring facility funding, etc. The SMART Program and NSF GRF are incomparable. One is a "workforce development program disguised as a scholarship" and other a genuine fellowship. The work going on at the DoD labs is very murky. Some do real research whereas some are mainly responsible for program management (i.e., the people who read and manage ONR and AFOSR grants). In either case, the profile of the labs in the research community seem inconsistent at best. When was the last time you read a paper authored by DoD lab scientists?
Its the government and its a secret......so of course no papers.
Re: Turn it down?
actually DoD scientists do publish papers, although admittedly not too many because they want their discoveries and results to be used only by themselves and not other governments. when they do publish though, they just aren't adding the note that says 'hey, i work for the government!"Guest wrote:Guest wrote:I think it is important to note that the job after graduation is far from "guaranteed". The Program terms stipulate a whole assortment of scenarios where the participant is ineligible for post-graduation work including clearance issues, stability of sponsoring facility funding, etc. The SMART Program and NSF GRF are incomparable. One is a "workforce development program disguised as a scholarship" and other a genuine fellowship. The work going on at the DoD labs is very murky. Some do real research whereas some are mainly responsible for program management (i.e., the people who read and manage ONR and AFOSR grants). In either case, the profile of the labs in the research community seem inconsistent at best. When was the last time you read a paper authored by DoD lab scientists?
Its the government and its a secret......so of course no papers.
Re: Turn it down?
guest wrote: Lastly, does anybody have any insight into the possibility of doing basic research or managing science facilities in the military?.... that is as opposed to going the civilian rout with DoD? So the question is, what could I do in the military with a PhD in chemistry and how would I be using my degree?
you can do lots of things with that degree in the military. although it is probably not applications that you would have learned too much about at a university. if you want to know specifically i would recommend asking your SF. they would be able (and actually allowed) to tell you about the types of projects and applications that they are actually involved in. I can bet though that one is likely to involve rocket propulsion...
Re: Turn it down?
Sure, certain research does require some secrecy. However, not all DoD labs are equivalent or require the same amount of secrecy. Bear in mind that the military has largely outsourced R&D to academia and private contractors such as Boeing, Lockheed, Raytheon, etc. Some labs have a very large technology evaluation and acquisition role. Ever since the end of the Cold War and possibly before, the goal of at least some of the DoD labs is to "outsource majority of research/tech development to industry and academia" and to "perform focused in-house research to maintain core expertise and be a smart outsourcer" http://www.wpafb.af.mil/shared/media/do ... 22-084.ppt. Much of the work going on in the labs is managing the outsourcing. The remaining in-house research is intended to help the military become "a smart outsourcer".
Re: Turn it down?
Hi guys,
I was wondering is anyone actually plans on turning down the SMART award? Also, has anyone from the cognitive sciences (i.e. cognitive neuroscience) got the award?
I was wondering is anyone actually plans on turning down the SMART award? Also, has anyone from the cognitive sciences (i.e. cognitive neuroscience) got the award?
Re: Turn it down?
I had to turn down my scholarship. My degree is BS EE. It was with Army Signal.