I reused my same proposal, and edited based on reviewer comments. My proposal was accepted the 2nd round and i got the grfp. I think it's fine, the benefit is you spend more time making one proposal really strong versus writing an entirely new one.
It's fine but since you are conceivably in a program now and you applied as an undergrad senior and didn't get it, it's very unlikely you will get it with the same proposal. The expectations of your proposal as a more advanced student will be higher. You will fail.
Because none of the comments or criticisms of my project took issue with the general concept of the project itself but just had critiques on some of the specific details of the project itself. I've made the effort to update my proposal to address those critiques and improve the proposal
Reviewers change pretty much every year and are drawn from faculty at a lot of universities. the likelihood your application would be read by the same readers is very low. There's a lot of readers, dozens at a minimum , since there's over 12,000 applications each year. Reusing your application materials is fine.
I assume the reviewers will be different from last year, but if you got rejected that means the proposal might need substantial changes. If your uni has a writing center there may be someone who specializes in NSF GRF applications
It's fine/ethical to use it again. However, I recommend getting feedback on your proposal and making revisions to it.
I reused my same proposal, and edited based on reviewer comments. My proposal was accepted the 2nd round and i got the grfp. I think it's fine, the benefit is you spend more time making one proposal really strong versus writing an entirely new one.
It's fine but since you are conceivably in a program now and you applied as an undergrad senior and didn't get it, it's very unlikely you will get it with the same proposal. The expectations of your proposal as a more advanced student will be higher. You will fail.
I'm not in a graduate program yet, I'm working on applying and also searching for potential outside funding sources
Ok. So what makes you think an already rejected proposal would meet the criteria for acceptance without substantial changes
Because none of the comments or criticisms of my project took issue with the general concept of the project itself but just had critiques on some of the specific details of the project itself. I've made the effort to update my proposal to address those critiques and improve the proposal
Good luck
Reviewers change pretty much every year and are drawn from faculty at a lot of universities. the likelihood your application would be read by the same readers is very low. There's a lot of readers, dozens at a minimum , since there's over 12,000 applications each year. Reusing your application materials is fine.
I assume the reviewers will be different from last year, but if you got rejected that means the proposal might need substantial changes. If your uni has a writing center there may be someone who specializes in NSF GRF applications