2012 Applicants

[Guest]

Likewise, good luck to everyone!

[FrownyFace]

I was just denied. A couple questions for those who were recommended to the next stage if you don't mind me asking. What was your GPA, how many recommendations (2 or 3), and did any of you have close to no research experience?

Just wondering since I remember seeing a bunch of posts from the 2009-2011 award year saying how this stage mostly came down to GPA, and I'm a bit surprised that a 3.7 GPA isn't top 50% or so.

[Guesty]

I was just denied. A couple questions for those who were recommended to the next stage if you don't mind me asking. What was your GPA, how many recommendations (2 or 3), and did any of you have close to no research experience?

Just wondering since I remember seeing a bunch of posts from the 2009-2011 award year saying how this stage mostly came down to GPA, and I'm a bit surprised that a 3.7 GPA isn't top 50% or so.

Made it to the next round, 3 recs, decent amount of research/experience, 3.5<GPA<3.6

[ggguuueeessttt]

I was just denied. A couple questions for those who were recommended to the next stage if you don't mind me asking. What was your GPA, how many recommendations (2 or 3), and did any of you have close to no research experience?

Just wondering since I remember seeing a bunch of posts from the 2009-2011 award year saying how this stage mostly came down to GPA, and I'm a bit surprised that a 3.7 GPA isn't top 50% or so.

I have read multiple places that they determine your field and degree level and in your specific group ( e.g. PhD in Aero) they cut at 50%. It isn't just a flat cut for all applicants I don't think. I could be wrong though.

[GuestL]

I was just denied. A couple questions for those who were recommended to the next stage if you don't mind me asking. What was your GPA, how many recommendations (2 or 3), and did any of you have close to no research experience?

Just wondering since I remember seeing a bunch of posts from the 2009-2011 award year saying how this stage mostly came down to GPA, and I'm a bit surprised that a 3.7 GPA isn't top 50% or so.

I was selected for the next round. I have a 3.69 GPA, only 2 recs (my 3rd and best missed the deadline by a couple minutes!), but I feel I have a good amount of research experience for an undergrad, ~2 yrs including both professional and academic research.

[cmont4]

I have a 3.81 GPA, 3 recommendation letters, and two years of research experience. I'm also pursuing a BS in Biochemistry, so there's probably less applicants in my pool.

[empty]

I was selected for the SMART program in 2011. The first wave of applicants are judged on a number of factors. I think that "it comes down to GPA" is probably a gross oversimplification. My GPA was alright (maybe 3.55?) but I had a number of first author scientific publications.

I also heard from someone on the panel of people making that first wave of selections that there was a huge stratification of quality in the resumes, especially at the undergrad level. Grades help, but I think its weighted on a number of factors.

[james]

I moved on to the next phase.

I'm working on a MS in engineering. I have good research experience, 3 recommendations, a 4.0 GPA for my MS so far, and a 3.8ish GPA for undergrad.

I'm only asking for funding for one semester, so perhaps I was at an advantage because I'd be cheap and quick.

I also (intentionally) asked people I know if they know anyone who works at a DoD lab so I could get some insider information about current projects, etc. I was contacted by a lab today. They specifically mentioned who I talked to that worked there. Seems that networking helps.

Good luck to everyone else.

[tseug]

I moved on and am curious what others in the applicant pool like like. I'm 3.9 GPA, aero undergrad, 3 recs, no research.

Another thing to keep in mind is that a 3.5 at one university could be more commendable than a 4.0 at another. All schools are not created equal, and I'm sure they take that - and many other things - into consideration.

[tseung]

*look

[aboardwine]

After looking at some of these posts, I consider myself incredibly lucky. Maybe this just isn't something that math majors in general aim for. 3.7, 3 recs, and zero research... but I would only be awarded one year of funding. I guess we'll see what happens! Congratulations or consolations, as the case may be!

[Guest11]

I still haven't received anything ... now I'm worried!!

[round2]

Hey guest11, have you checked your spam folders? Just a thought.

I went to a big state school (new public ivy?) and finished by BS with a 3.651, three LORs (one was from EPA Math modeler that I did research with). ~2 years research experience including 1 summer working with EPA. EPA is actually using our computer model in their large scale compartment model. Currently at an Ivy working on MS now. I think I only applied for a year of funding.

[yrinasuimuri]

I made it to round 2. I have a 3.5-ish GPA, 3 LORs, and zero research. I have got a lot of work experience and one yearlong internship (though it isn't relevant to my current major.) I'm a CS major at a large public school with another 1-1/2 years to go.

I am surprised I am even competitive, given my weak GPA. However, I did make it to round 2, so maybe they are looking at my personal statement/internship/LORs. I suggest those who have a high GPA but got denied look into gaining work experience, whether it is internships or research. I mean, it would also be beneficial to you. I actually love the feeling of working, it is quite a bit different than studying!

Also, I think your chances go up the closer you get to graduation :)

[guest01234]

WAHOOOOOO FOR MOVING ON! =) Congrads to all who are still in so far- now we just need to be selected by a facility right? I wish we could have picked more than 3 facilities. Hopefully facilities will realize we may not have picked them because there were only 3 spots and we couldn't list em all... Well... on to this next part. Good luck getting selected by a SF guys and gals.

[meimarrissa]

I got my email today too! As for my qualifications, I have a 4.0 GPA and am majoring in Engineering Physics. I have research experience working at a national lab for the Department of Energy.

What do you all think of my chances of making it?

[guestguestguest]

I was just denied. A couple questions for those who were recommended to the next stage if you don't mind me asking. What was your GPA, how many recommendations (2 or 3), and did any of you have close to no research experience?

Just wondering since I remember seeing a bunch of posts from the 2009-2011 award year saying how this stage mostly came down to GPA, and I'm a bit surprised that a 3.7 GPA isn't top 50% or so.

3.55 GPA, 3 recommendation letters (branch head, division head, and deputy dept head), 780/800 math gre, research performed unter my masters was submitted for a patent, had not started my PHD research at the time, but it was very well defined and was perfectly aligned with my center. Resume showed 20 years of engineering experience. As others have mentioned, I believe that its the application as a whole not just GPA. I also think I lucked out, I did not think I was going to make the cut. I very pleased and thankful...

[meimarrissa]

I got my email today too! As for my qualifications, I have a 4.0 GPA and am majoring in Engineering Physics. I have research experience working at a national lab for the Department of Energy.

What do you all think of my chances of making it?

Also, my LOR's were from an Engineering Prof, an Advisor, and the Director of the department I worked in with the DOE.

[empty]

Everyone just needs to remember that the second round is much more like a job application than a best-of-the-best application.

Just because you don't make it past the second cut doesn't mean you don't have fantastic credentials, it just means that there wasn't a lab/department that needed someone with your skills this year.

Good luck all.

[ranger]

I am a freshman CVEN major and I was also selected to move on as a finalist. Good luck to everyone!!

[Guest2012]

Everyone just needs to remember that the second round is much more like a job application than a best-of-the-best application.

Just because you don't make it past the second cut doesn't mean you don't have fantastic credentials, it just means that there wasn't a lab/department that needed someone with your skills this year.

Good luck all.

Actually first round is based solely on your application info and not the needs of the DoD, as stated pretty clearly throughout the entire application process. Still doesn't mean your credentials are bad, but it means your credentials were not broad enough. It is not solely GPA, but rather GPA, experience, strength of letters and strength of essays. The DoD lab needs assessments comes in this round, where about 1/4 people will be recommended to receive a scholarship by a lab. From there, the recommended applicants are fowarded to the SMART Program Office, where selections will be made (about 2/3 of those recommended will receive an offer). Overall it is about a 16.5% chance of receiving a scholarship at this point.

I made it to semi-final round. I am a chem major, with about a 3.85 GPA (4.0 in classes taken as part of the requirements for my PhD degree). I had 3 letters of recommendation, about 5.5 years of research including undergrad and grad and a couple papers, including a first author paper in a top-tier journal. All of this won't matter if my research interests and experience don't fit in appropriately with a DoD laboratory, but hopefully they will.

Congratulations to the other semi-finalists and better luck next year to those who did not move on this year.

[guest26]

I feel out of place now. I was accepted to the next round with a 3.09 Gpa and 2 LoRs. Although I think being a veteran helped with it at this point. I'm an EE undergrad.

[Guest]

didn't make top 50%

feels bad man

[guest001]

I made it to the next round but I also feel out of place. I am a BME with one semester left and a 3.2 GPA. I had 3 letters and 2 summer internships. Lets hope for the best though.

[empty]

Everyone just needs to remember that the second round is much more like a job application than a best-of-the-best application.

Just because you don't make it past the second cut doesn't mean you don't have fantastic credentials, it just means that there wasn't a lab/department that needed someone with your skills this year.

Good luck all.

Actually first round is based solely on your application info and not the needs of the DoD, as stated pretty clearly throughout the entire application process. Still doesn't mean your credentials are bad, but it means your credentials were not broad enough. It is not solely GPA, but rather GPA, experience, strength of letters and strength of essays. The DoD lab needs assessments comes in this round, where about 1/4 people will be recommended to receive a scholarship by a lab. From there, the recommended applicants are fowarded to the SMART Program Office, where selections will be made (about 2/3 of those recommended will receive an offer). Overall it is about a 16.5% chance of receiving a scholarship at this point.

I made it to semi-final round. I am a chem major, with about a 3.85 GPA (4.0 in classes taken as part of the requirements for my PhD degree). I had 3 letters of recommendation, about 5.5 years of research including undergrad and grad and a couple papers, including a first author paper in a top-tier journal. All of this won't matter if my research interests and experience don't fit in appropriately with a DoD laboratory, but hopefully they will.

Congratulations to the other semi-finalists and better luck next year to those who did not move on this year.

Hey Guest 2012, read what I wrote: "The SECOND ROUND..." Meaning after you're a semi-finalist.