Academic Jobs Wiki

This page is for tracking SSHRC awards to be held during the 2016-2017 academic year.

SSHRC Postdoctoral Fellowships proposals are expected to respond to the objectives put forward in the call for proposals for the Talent program.

SSHRC Postdoctoral Fellowships support the most promising Canadian new scholars in the social sciences and humanities and assist them in establishing a research base at an important time in their research careers.

SSHRC Postdoctoral Fellowships provide stipendiary support to recent PhD graduates who are: undertaking original research; publishing research findings; developing and expanding personal research networks; broadening their teaching experience; preparing for research-intensive careers within and beyond academia; and preparing to become competitive in national research grants competitions.

Fellowships will normally be awarded to candidates affiliated with a university other than that which awarded the PhD. SSHRC Postdoctoral Fellowship awards are tenable at Canadian or foreign universities and research institutions.

SSHRC welcomes applications involving Aboriginal research, as well as those involving research-creation.

Value: $40,500 per year

Duration: 12 to 24 months

Application deadline: (8 p.m. eastern) September 23, 2015

Results announced: February 2016


NEW PAGE for 2017-18 Awards: SSHRC 2017-2018


Applying as an ABD: 18

Applying with a PhD (0-1 years out): 9

Applying with a PhD (2-3 years out): 1

Total: 28

Applying to hold at a Canadian institution: 20

Applying to hold at a non-Canadian institution: 7

RSS Feed[]

Subscribe to RSS Feed for This Page:

Pages from Previous Years[]

SSHRC 2011-12

SSHRC 2012-13

SSHRC 2013-14

SSHRC 2014-15

SSHRC 2015-2016

SEE ALSO: Humanities and Social Sciences Postdocs 2015-16

Acknowledgement of application received[]

  • Submitted on Monday Sep. 22nd, marked as forwarded. Tuesday Sept. 23rd marked as received. No e-mail confirmation as of yet.
  • Submitted on Wednesday, Sept. 23rd; marked as forwarded, marked as received Sept. 24. No email confirmation yet.
  • Submitted Sunday, Sept 21; by Sept 23 marked as received. No email confirmation yet.
  • Submitted Wednesday, Sept. 23rd; Marked as received Sept. 24th. No email confirmation. Nail-biting now pathological.
  • Submitted Wednesday, Sept 23rd; marked as forwarded first and then as received. No email confirmation yet as of Sept 26th.
  • Submitted Wednesday, Sept 23rd; No email confirmation yet as of Sept 29th.

  • Anyone receive an email confirmation yet? Last year I got an acknowledgement email on Sept. 30th.**
  • No, as of October 8th, I haven't received email confirmation yet. Should I be worried about this?
  • I don't have anything either. 
  • I got an email confirmation on October 9th.
  • As of Oct. 15, no confirmation either.
  • I haven't received confirmation of Oct. 28th.
  • no confirmation as of Nov 1
  • Nothing as of Nov 9.. Should I be worried? Everything checked out on the portal.
  • I wrote to SSHRC on Nov 12 to ask about the email confirmation and they said that I was in fact sent a confirmation on Sept 24th, and they sent me the text of the email (but did not resend the actual email). It was apparently sent to my current email address. I have no idea why I didn't receive it.
  • I emailed SSHRC on Nov. 16 to inquire about the lack of confirmation and they responded saying that they had indeed emailed me. As with the previous comment, I have no idea where that alleged email went.
  • Adding one more voice to the discussion just above: I emailed them finally on November 18th to ask about confirmation and they wrote back saying that it had been sent to the email address listed in my profile. The text of the supposed original email was copied into the reply. It never arrived in my inbox and did not get spam-filtered. Glad to hear I'm not the only one. If you haven't received an email, I'd suggest contacting them; the confirmation includes your application number, which is probably handy to have on file.
  • Same deal as person above. No confirmation email, but supposedly was sent one.
  • I also emailed them yesterday (December 3rd) inquring about confirmation, since I received no email. I got a reply almost instantly with the text of the email they supposedly sent, along with my application/file number. It seems like there is a problem with their system, as I've colleagues who applied for this round and received their confirmation emails without problem. (I didn't, for the record, receive any such email.) If anyone is still wondering about this I would recommend emailing .
  • I had a confirmation e-mail on October 8, 2015.
  • I read all of your comments, so I emailed SSHRC to ask for my application number on Jan 4, 2016 and received a reply the day after. I was told I was sent a confirmation email... but as many of you, I didn't actually receive such confirmation. Anyhow, I was given the application number, so all is good.
  • I also emailed SSHRC at the beginning of January because I had never received a confirmation. The response I got back said that I should have some news about my application "sometime this month". But the subject line of the email reads: "sshrc postdoc:Accepted". Might this be an unofficial way of indicating that I can expect some *good* news later this month, or am I reading in?
  • I wouldn't bank on it.. but, do report back on this. [Update: It was good news.]
  • "Sometime this month", as in January? Wouldn't that be nice..
  • That's what they said! But who knows... I'm predicting a Valentine's Day rejection, so as not to set myself up for disappointment.
  • I spoke to someone at SSHRC this week, they said letters will be mailed sometime in the first or second week of Feb.
  • I would love for this to be true, rather than waiting until the end of February like last year.
  • I have no doubt that SSHRC said that, but don't they have a long history of repeatedly saying they'll be out "in the next week" over and over again? I'm betting that those of us in Canada will receive the letter the week of Feb. 22-26.
  • Feb 1 - Let the obsessive checking of mailboxes begin.
  • Feb 8 - ....and this wiki.
  • Email from SSHRC:  The results will be mailed probably tomorrow or on Monday February 15.
  • What were the details of the e-mail, if you don't mind me asking?
  • That was it... a simple response.
  • Exciting! Except Monday is a holiday in Ontario. I love all of the "probably" statements from SSHRC!
  • Mail would still be delivered as its a provincial not a federal holiday. Post office would close only on federal holidays.
  • On behalf of everyone else waiting and biting their nails, thanks for calling and trying to get some information out of them.
  •  Yea, you the real MVP.
  • Results were mailed out Friday, February 12th by regular mail - confirmed in an email from SSHRC. [posted Feb. 15]
  • That's good news! I've been watching their Twitter feed as for the last several years they've tweeted to indicate when letters were mailed and they haven't (yet) this year so I thought not.
  • I agree, it's strange they wouldn't also post on twitter since they have for the last few years at least. Are you sure it was the post-doctoral results that were mailed on the 12th?
  • Feb.16 - Has anyone received their results?
  • No, not yet. I'll post as soon as I do.
  • No letter in London ON as of 8pm on Feb. 16
  • Still no letter in London, ON on Feb. 17.
  • Nothing yet for me (located in GTA, if that helps). I will also post as soon as I do.
  • No (in Toronto); I expect tomorrow (the 17th) will be the day...
  • I'm in Toronto as well. Having a hard time finishing my article revision!
  • Just received my letter in Toronto - a rejection. Results below.
  • The exact wording of the email was: "The results for the SSHRC Postdoctoral competition were sent out by regular mail on Friday February 12, 2016."
  • Cool! Thanks!
  • Letter Received: Feb 16th, Southwestern Ontario. Will post full results later. Good luck to you all!
  • Letter received in Montreal on Feb 16th, awarded and to be held at McGill University, details later. Good luck guys.
  • Anyone receive a letter in BC yet?
  • Haven't even received letter in Mississauga yet, so BC unlikely.
  • I was about to ask the same: anyone with a response in BC yet? But apparently, no. Nothing as of Feb 17. :(
  • Have all of you in Toronto now received your letters? (Feb 17th)
    • Letter Received: Feb. 17th, Toronto (x2)
  • Letter Received: Feb 17th, Northeastern United States
  • Letter Received: Feb 17th, Richmond Hill, Ontario, Canada
  • Letter Received: Feb 18, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
  • Letter Received: Feb 18th, California
  • Letter Received: Feb 18th, BC (x5)
  • Letter Received: Feb. 18th, London, ON
  • People in BC, if more of you begin receiving your letters, would you mind posting that? Mail delivery in my building is unreliable so I need to be able to tell when it's a good time to track this down with Canada Post. :D Thanks.
  • Letter received: Feb 19, Vancouver Island, BC

Feb 22: Still no letter in the mail (BC). Would it be possible for those of you who already received their letters in the mail to let those of us without letters yet know if there is any time-sensitive issue or deadline we need to be aware of? Thanks!

  • The deadline to accept offers is March 11th, 2016

Results received (successful)[]

  • FORMAT: Score. Discipline. Selection Committee (eg, 3/7563, 6/7566). Location: (eg, Canada, US). Status: (eg, ABD, 1yr, 2yr). Qualifications: (eg, pubs, presentations).
  • Score: 4.83/6 (4.7, 4.8, 4.9). Discipline: Philosophy. Committee: 7562. Location of Tenure: UK. Status when applied: ABD at Ontario University. Qualifications: 2 peer reviwed articles, numerous refereed conferences, some published translations. 3 previous SSHRC awards and other scholarships. Good luck everyone!
  • Score:5.25/6 (challenge 5.05/6, feasibility 5.17/6, capability 5.38): Discipline Geography, to be held at McGill. PhD in 2014, worked as a post doc since then at UdEM. 18 peer review papers, two books and more than five papers on review. Previous SSHRC doctoral award.Award from FRQSC and numerous other awards.Good luck all....
  • Score: 4.71/6 (challenge 3.95/6, feasibility 4.27/6, capability 5.27/6): Discipline Geography, tenure at Windsor. PhD in 2014, worked as postdoc since then at two universities. 10 peer reviewed papers, 15+ conference presentations, SSHRC doctotal award (declined), Other awards from conferences and graduate studies. Good luck everyone!
  • Score: 4.18/6 (challenge 3.80/6, feasibility 3.90/6, capability 4.50/6): Discipline: History, tenure at U of T. ABD from a B.C. university. Several peer reviewed papers, a couple of book chapters, 14 grants, awards and fellowships (none from SSHRC). Going to decline. Good luck!
  • Score: 4.48/6 (challenge 4.4/6 ; feasibility 4.5/6 ; capability 4.5/6). Selection Committee 3. Discipline: Public Policy, tenure at UVIC. ABD at UBC. 3 peer reviewed papers, many policy papers and presentations, lots of relevant professional experience, also worked as a sessional. SSHRCs for MA and PhD, plus a few other awards. Good luck to all! Also, thanks for participating in this wiki - I really appreciated the support through this process!
  • Score: 4.6/6 (challenge 4.42/6 ; feasibility 4.5/6 ; capability 4.74/6). Selection Committee 3. Discipline: Rural sociology, tenure at UVIC. PhD in Holland. 8+ peer reviewed papers, 9+ conference papers, several work reports and policy briefs, professional experience before PhD, applying from U.S.. Several fellowships. Good luck everyone!
  • Score: 4.8/6 (challenge 4.55/6; feasibility 4.85/6; capability 4.85/6) Discipline: Education, tenure at University of Calgary. ABD at University of Alberta.  5 book chapters, 19 peer reviewed papers and several conferences. SSHRC for PhD plus other awards. Good luck to all.
  • Score 5.39 (5.13, 5.13, 5.65) Discipline: Musicology, tenure in US. Canadian PhD awarded in 2015. 2 articles, one in preparation at time of application (now in review); 1 book chapter (co-authoured), 2 forthcoming; encyclopedia entries forthcoming; 5 book reviews. Fairly prestigious external dissertation award, Bombardier (PhD and MA), several other awards, fellowships, and prizes. Many US & Canadian conferences. (Really relieved this came through, as I have had zero luck on the job market since finishing)
  • Score: 5.28/6 (5.25; 4.77; 5.59). Letter received in France. Discipline: Musicology. Canadian PhD 2013; FRQ-SC postdoc in UK; postdoc to be held in Montréal. Several peer-reviewed articles, forthcoming book with major press, co-edited special issue of a journal, book chapter, book reviews, etc. I have two young kids, and successfully argued for an extension of my eligibility due to mat leave. I'm so happy and relieved; I was almost ready to hand in the towel.
  • Score. 4.14/6 (4.38; 4.47; 3.85). Anthropology. Committee 3. Location: Ontario. Status: less than 1yr. Canadian PhD. Qualifications: 2 single-authored articles and a few review essays. Many conference presentations (20+) and some public lectures. A handful of internal scholarships and grants. I knew capability score would be an issue considering how my peers have stronger track records (look at you people here!) and my work involving more community-based work. So I put in a lot of time polishing my program of work--especially the methodology and procedure sections and the discussion of scholarly impacts throughout. Glad it paid off this time (this was my second attempt). Good luck to you all!

Results received (waitlisted)[]

  • FORMAT: Score. Discipline. Selection Committee (eg, 3/7563, 6/7566). Location: (eg, Canada, US). Status: (eg, ABD, 1yr, 2yr). Qualifications: (eg, pubs, presentations).
  • Score: 4.21/6 (4.45; 4.40; 4.00). Political Science. Selection Committee 4. Location: Ontario ABD and applied for in Ontario as well. Qualifications: 1 chapter in edited volume (Routledge), 2 very recent R&Rs from top tier journals (1 single author, 1 co-authored), 20+ conference/invited presentations, and only limited previous funding (2 years OGS and smaller awards/grants).  I am not entirely surprised at the results, although disappointed - I will give it a shot next year with more publications and hope for the best with this lotto.  But, I am curious what the score threshold was for an offer of support, given that 4.21 did not make the cut this year and seems higher than some/most of the waitlisted scores for last year. Thanks for any info! My letter was dated February 12, 2016 and arrived (Southern Ontario) February 16, 2016 by the way. EDIT: If people are interested, here is some info for Committee 5.
  • Committee 5. Number of applications evaluated: 131. Minimum score that qualified for funding: 4.34. Maximum rank that qualified for funding: 25th 
  • Score 4.16/6. History: Committee 2. Applying 1 year out. PhD in Canada and to hold in Canada. 2 Peer-review articles in top field journals; multiple conference presentations; multiple pieces in popular press; and at the time of application, I had secured a book contract for my PhD dissertation, which is now in peer-review. SSHRCs for both PhD (CGS) and MA. Similar project and same tenure place as last year; score is close (I assume) to the funding line, but for those who have yet to see their letter, the competititon gave out quite a bit less awards this year. Last year, it was around a 22% success rate, and this year it was an 18.5% rate (156/841). For those on the bubble, this likely means the difference. UPDATE: I got in touch with SSHRC, and I obtained my committee (2) data. Here it is:
  • Committee 2 : Number of applications evaluated: 83. Minimum score that qualified for funding: 4.18. Maximum rank that qualified for funding: 15th· Your rank: 17th.
  • My hope is for a bump up, because last year a couple people got bumped up from the #2/3 waiting spot, as did one of my colleagues.
  • Who did you contact to find out the committee information? The helpdesk email?
  • Just received the results: 4.18/6 (history); looks like I am the 15th. I'm going to decline (have a better postdoc), so you are one position closer to getting it!
  • Score: 3.95/6 (3.8;3.8;4.1). English Literature. Selection Committee: 1 (Humanities and Arts). Location: Canada ABD, applied to hold fellowship in US. Qualifications: 1 major journal publication, 1 submitted; a half-dozen conference papers; SSHRC CGS and multiple OGS awards. Not suprised, but disappointed - might move into non-academic pursuits since I'm not that portable and sessional life doesn't appeal. Letter arrived Feb 16. 
  • Score: 3.90/6 (4.00; 3.75; 3.95). Communication. Committee 6 (7566). Location: USA currently, applied to Canada. Status: ABD 4yr. Qualifications: 3 edited special issue journals (pretty good journals), 6 solo author pubs (okish journals), 3 proceedings/reports, 1 book chapter (open access), 4 book reviews (pretty good journals), 28 conference presentations, 2 fellowships (non-SSHRC), and a bunch of small bursaries/awards. [UPDATE 1: I also got in touch with SSHRC and obtained my committee (6) data. Find it below.] [UPDATE 2: Just an FYI, most profs I've talked to say they don't imagine the qualifying rank reaching higher than 25th (the first 5 people on the wait list), so everyone below that (including me) shouldn't be holding their breath.]
  • Committee 6 : Number of applications evaluated: 109· Minimum score that qualified for funding: 4.24. Maximum rank that qualified for funding: 20th. Your rank: 31st.
  • Score: 3.84/6 (3.7; 3.75; 3.95). History. Location: Canada. Status: 1yr. Qualifications: 2 pubs in mediocre PR journals; 4 pubs forthcoming; 17 conference papers; MA and PhD SSHRCs.  Sessional for hire!
  • Score: 3.51/6 (3.9; 3.85; 3.15). Political Science. Location: Canada ABD, applied to hold in US. Qualifications: 1 co-authored journal; 2 R&Rs; 5 conference papers; OGS and other awards. Letter arrived Feb. 16.
  • Score 3.25 (3; 3; 3.5). Sociology. Location: Applying from Canada to US. Status: ABD. Qualifications: 4 co-authored peer-reviewed journals, multiple book chapters, book reviews, encyclopedia articles; 14 conference presentations; previous doctoral SSHRC and multiple OGS. Pretty disappointed since the scholars in my field were so excited about this project!
  • Committee 3. Number of applications evaluated: 135. Minimum score that qualified for funding: 4.07. Maximum rank that qualified for funding: 25th.
  • Score: 3.7 (3.8; 3.8; 3.6). Sociology. Location: Canada ABD, applied to hold in Canada. Qualifications: 1 first-author in decent journal. 1 co-authored chapter. 2 policy reports. Several book reviews. ~8 conference presentations. Multiple OGS/external policy-research grants.  
  • Score: 3.18 (Challenge 3.25; Feasibility 3.00; Capability 3.25). Art History. ABD McGill, applying to Toronto. At the time of application: 1 peer-reviewed article; 1 peer-reviewed article accepted; another under review + 1 chapter in an edited volume; 20+ conference and workshop papers. PhD fully funded throughout, though not by SSHRC. 
  • Score: 3.63/6 (Challenge: 3.55; Feasibility: 4.55, Ca[pability: 3.10). Politics Science. ABD Southern Ontario. Applying to be in Ontario. At the time of application: 1 book chapter, several prestigious national and international conference papers; non-SSHRC PhD fellowship and various smaller SSHRC and instituional awards.
  • Score: 3.28/6 (Challenge: 3.85; Feasibility: 3.2; Capability: 3.09). English Literature. ABD at University of British Columbia, applying to McMaster University. Qualifications: 2 peer-reviewed articles, 1 under review; 15 conference papers. Fully-funded PhD, received 1 year of a SSHRC doctoral fellowship. [UPDATED w/ Committee InformationCommittee 1: Number of applications evaluated: 147 . score that qualified for funding:4.02. . Maximum rank that qualified for funding: 27 . Your rank:61] - looks like I'll be finding other plans for the next year or so...
  • Score: 3.57/6 (Challenge: 3.85; Feasibility: 3.75; Capability: 3.57). English Literature. ABD at University of British Columbia, applying to Guelph University. Qualifications: 3 peer-reviewed articles, 2 book chapters; 20 conference papers; Fully-funded PhD, no SSHRC, but numerous insitutional and private awards.
  • Score 4.33/6 (Challenge: 4.2; Feasibility: 4.75; Capability: 4). Political Science. ABD. To be held at McGill. Qualifications: 1 peer-reviewed publication, 2 under review at the time of application. 8 conference presentations in four countries. Many "non-academics" pieces. SSHRC funding (for PhD), plus internal funding (declined). Three internal (dept; university) research awards, plus scholarships to study at summer programs abroad (US, Germany). Not surprised, but obviously disappoited. I'll give it a shot next year.
  • ^ You might want to contact SSHRC, because if you can infer from other postings here, you might be very close to the top of your committee waitlist. Someone noted above that 4.34 is the lowest poli sci committee winner, and I don't think there are ties, which means that you might be the first person on the list.
  • Thanks, I did contact SSHRC, and I ranked 26 (they gave post-docs to the top 25). So I should be first. But still haven't heard back, and it's well past the March deadline to accept/decline (May 24th, 2016).
  • - Score 4.23/6 (Challenge: 4.2, Feasibility: 4.3, Capability: 4.2). Psychology (Section 4). ABD from McGill, to be held at U Waterloo. Qualifications: 4 peer-reviewed publications, 2 under review at the time of application (and 4 in preparation), 20+ conference presentations (in Canada, US, Italy, Germany, Hungary). PhD funded by NSERC. I emailed to get information for the Committee 4 cut-off, and here it is below:
  • Committee 4: Number of applications evaluated: 155. Minimum score that qualified for funding: 4.28. Maximum rank that qualified for funding: 29th. My rank is 31st. Hope this information helps!

Results received (unsuccessful)[]

  • FORMAT: Score. Discipline. Selection Committee (eg, 3/7563, 6/7566). Location: (eg, Canada, US). Status: (eg, ABD, 1yr, 2yr). Qualifications: (eg, pubs, presentations).
  • Score: Challenge 3.45/6, feasabilility 3.45/6, capability 2.35/6 with a total score of 2.9/6. Location: was to have been taken up in the US at a not-for-profit with ties to Princeton. Status: ABD. Qualifications: doctoral Bombardier, several OGS throughout grad school, master's thesis nominated for dissertation award, 8 pubs in fairly prestigious journals, four of which were first authored, 20+ conference presentations, and a book chapter.
  • Frankly, I have no idea what happened here. Score 2.44/6 (Challenge - 2.25/6, Feasibility 2.55/6, Capability 2.45/6). Clinical psychology. Location: Canada, to be held at Cambridge University (England). Status: 2yr). Qualifications: 11 peer-reviewed publications (4 first authors, one sole author), 6 encyclopedia entries, 19 conference presentations, Master's SSHRC, doctoral SSHRC, 3 OGS (2 declined). 
  • Well, here it goes. Pretty stunned by my awful score. 2.35/6 (Challenge - 2.2/6, Feasibility 2.45/6, Capability 2.35/6). Fine Arts. Location: Canada (U.S. PhD). Status: PhD in 2014. Qualifications: 2 articles in good journals (1 was in press at time of application), 13 conference presentations, decent funding record (no prev. SSHRC)
  • Also surprised and disappointed by my low score. 2.71/6 (Challenge- 2.58/6, Feasibility 2.65/6, Capability 2.80/6). Gender and Women's Studies. Committee 3. Location: Canada. Status: ABD. Qualifications: 1 article, 5 book chapters, 2 co-edited volumes, 1 sole edited volume, various conferences and guest lectures (no prev. SSHRC).  
  • Fucking stunned, and frankly enraged, at my score, for a project that continues a funded fellowship i am currently on, wherein the proposal was read OVER AND OVER and EDITED AND EDITED FOR MONTHS by a Canada Research Chair, and with 6 peer reviewed articles, two book chapters, Bombardier AND a Fulbright during grad school and i got 2.6/6 for capability. Sorry but that's nonsense. I'm out. Academia is a cesspool, not to mention a sinking ship. Med school, here I come. good luck to everyone else.
  • My sympathies with everyone who posted above, especially as everyone seems to have a solid record. The evaluation of the proposals can be very subjective, as we all know that there are biases as to what constitutes valuable research. But it's the capability score that's really enraging, isn't it? We all sound damn capable. My recond has made me competitive on the job market this year, but according to SSHRC I'm not satisfactory. 
  • I think there is something patently wrong with the SSHRC process. I recieved a score of 1.8/6 - oh, and by the way, I was awarded a Banting with the exact same proposal, to be held at the same institution, and referees.
  • Agree: I was awarded a Banting with very solid scores (12/162 in social sciences with 24 awarded fellowships), and with exactly the same proposal at the same institution barely made it in the SSHRC competition in history (15/83 with 15 awarded fellowships).
  • Second time around and it turns out I'm even less capable than I was last year! Overall score 2.89/6. Demography in Canada, to hold in US. 2 peer-reviewed papers (great journals), one under review, one policy paper, 20+ international competitive conference presentations, SSHRC doctoral plus many competitive internal and external awards, funded research by an international NGO. There aren't actually any demographers serving on Committee 6, so there's that. I'm getting out of academia.
  • Same here -- apparently I am *less* capable than last year despite now having a book in press with a major academic press! On a positive note, this year I have a non-academic job which has turned out to be pretty awesome and I probably would not have taken the award anyway. Just saying this for the benefit of everyone who feels disappointed with the results and that they are getting screwed by academia and by SSHRC in particular... There are other cool things out there. Good luck!
  • Not surprised, but disappointed with the outcome. Wish I had squeezed more into the research contributions page! 2.85/6 (Challenge: 3.25, Feasibility: 3.25, Capability: 2.45. Psychology. Committee 4. Location: U of T. Status: ABD. Qualifications: 3 peer-reviewed in good journals (co-author), Master's and PhD SSHRCs and other awards, I probably fit about 20 conference presentations on the contribution list.
  • Score: 3.22/6. Discipline: Anthropology. Selection Committee: 3. Location: outside Canada. Status: ABD. Qualifications: several peer reviewed articles and book chapters, conference presentations, previous SSHCR funding. :(


  • Anyone else have trouble with the application form this evening? I tried to verify a few minutes before 8pm and the verify button had disappeared. Does anyone have any experience with this? 
  • Hi there. Can the same individual send two post doc fellowship applications for the same academic year, one for SSHRC and the other for CIHR? Thanks for the feedback..!
  • Plan B - What is everyone doing if they don't get this? I plan on avoiding sessional work like the plague (currently ABD). Got a decent government research gig/visiting research position lined up. Not sure what else I will do with myself.
  • I'll go the sessional route, supplemented with non-profit contracts...
  • Hey, your view of sessional teaching may change once you finish your PhD and find yourself in a very crowded and very competitive job market. Mine did. I am less than a year out, and am pretty happy to be teaching right now, while I wait for these results.
  • Luckily, my specialization lends itself/has already produced alternative opportunities. If it keeps doing so, I will continue to avoid sessional work. It is grossly underpaid, undervalued and time consuming. Ever heard of the sessional trap?
    • Yes, of course I have. Thankfully my results were successful, so I can enjoy teaching for the rest of this term and switch gears after. 
  • An offer of a Banting Fellowship came on Thursday (Feb 4).
  • Congrats! I was rejected a Banting on Thursday.  If I may, can I ask your "Results Received" information like is asked for above, for this award?
  • Thanks! Overall average score: 7.67 (8+8+7). History. Canada. ABD (still have to defend the thing). Qualifications: quite a bunch of publications + professional experience before the PhD programme.
  • Feb. 16 - Can anyone confirm whether these committees are from the current competition? I just came across this page, but am surprised SSHRC would make these commitee lists available so soon. I am unclear what "October 2015 competiton" refers to. Ie, applications received in September 2015?  - * At the bottom of that site it says date modiefie: 2015-10-26, so those are the committees for an old competition, not this year's. [this not necessarily true, see below]
  • It's quite possible since the names were released after the application deadline. SSHRC is quite active on Twitter so I'm sure they'd let you know if this is correct if you tweet at them. 
  • You're right, my mistake, it's perfectly possible those are the names of the committee members for this year's competition given the date. Although in the past details like this are usually only released after the results of teh competition are. In any case, as the previous post says, the best bet would be to ask SSHRC.
  • Honestly, the committees do not change significantly from year to year - you can easily see previous years' committees and they're often composed of the same group of people. It's unfortunate, as some committees are so multidiscplinary and do not have a member that covers each of the disciplines.
  • For those of you who had many research contributions, how did you fit them within the 2-page limit? I don't have my results yet, but I'm wondering if I should have had a line that said something like "Plus X additional conference presentations between 2008-2015." I only added the word "Selected" to my headings when they wouldn't all fit. :S
  • Small font, small margins, little space between lines :-) 
  • Darn, I could have sworn that I read that there were font, margin, and spacing restrictions. Can't find them now, but that's why I didn't try those tactics. Still don't have my results yet, but if I don't get it I know what I'll be doing next time around (if there is a next time)!
  • actually I don't think this is allowed. I would just select the most relevant ones and leave conferences out.
  • Who are people contacting at SSHRC to get information about their committee/ranking, etc?
  • I'd also be interested to know this, particularly as I'm in limbo since SSHRC sent my results to the wrong address (one that wasn't listed *anywhere* on my 2016 application, and appears to be a holdover from my (unsuccessful) application last year!) When given the committee details, are people also told where they stand within the rankings? Or is this information derived from the award letter? Congrats to anyone not spending the weekend in a holding pattern! ;)
  • if you emailed them with your application number, they'll forward your case to an officer and that person can tell you your rank within the committee you sent your application to
  • the info isn't on the sheet. All that is on the sheet is your score and the overal awards given and applications made. If you email SSHRC's fellowship section, they should give you your committee ranking, which tells you what award/applicant ratio was for your committee, what the minimum winning score was, and where you sit on rankings. 
  • Did anyone in political science get a Banting and a SSHRC?
  • Committee 3. Number of applications evaluated: 135. Minimum score that qualified for funding: 4.07. Maximum rank that qualified for funding: 25th.
  • Is anyone going to start applying in their first year of the fellowship? Any ideas how the SSHRC reacts when if you want to stop your fellowship after the first year
  • good question; my impression is that the purpose of the fellowship is to make you more competitive on the job market and give you some more time to find a TT position; they should be fine with you stopping in order to take a TT or AP job.
  • Does anyone know the likelihood of getting funding the second time around? And does it work to change the proposal and place of tenure, or can one keep everything pretty much the same? Does the committee members change every year I suppose? Advice? Thoughts?
  • A lot of us have been unsuccessful twice (or three times) in a row - some have even done worse the second time. Having previously applied really has no bearing on your current application, as the committee doesn't have your past attempts to compare to. The committees basically stay exactly the same year after year (you can view previous years' on SSHRC's website) but unless your project is particularly memorable they likely wouldn't remember your past application. In my experience, I changed the research questions and switched my expert referee for a better one, but with the same data and place of tenure. I did worse on my second attempt. Whether I would have done better if I had kept everything the same or if I had changed my proposal even more drastically is anyone's guess. There's not a lot of rhyme or reason to the decision-making process.
  • It's open to luck then, nothing really objective to grab onto... Thank you for your thoughts. I think I'll apply again, but since this is how things are... I might not change even a word to this year's application. :D I'll check the composition of the committee in the previous years as well. It seems to me that this year's committee 3 and 1 were the hardest. I don't know if there's a pattern to that... Still, it would be good to have some idea as to how the committee members go about assigning a score for Challenge. I see my own application, and I had the chance to see previous funded applications, and frankly, I don't quite get what "challenge" means?
  • Some thoughs and ideas on your question. First, I want to say that the wiki sshrc community has been great during these trying times of anticipation, rejection, etc. I am grateful to all for your support and for contributing to this forum. I was waitlisted the first year when I applied and I got it the second time around. My circumstances and proposal didn't radically change but here's some of the changes that I implemented. First, I read as many successful proposals as I could in my field. The one thing in common that they all had was that the writers tried to make their program of research relevant to the current Canadian political and cultural climate. I know that this is not always possible but if there's a way to align your proposal with SSHRC's top three priorities listed in their talent section: it can help. Second, I made certain that my referees' letters, the letters of support from the institution and my proposal overalapped and the gist of my proposed project and its importance was clear throughout my application. Having said all this, please keep in mind that this process is still a lottery and there's only so much we can do to make our applications better. Best of luck to all!

Waitlist Discussion[]

  • March 15th, 2016: Does anyone know the likelihood of someone on the waitlist being awarded funding? I'm 2nd on the waitlist, and am wondering what the stats are on this...
  • March 19th 2016: I too would like more information on the waitlist. I'm 1st in my section and wondering if anyone has insights into the process by which SSHRC begins offering awards to waitlisted applicants. Also, if anyone waitlisted is offered an award, please share that info on this forum!! 
  • I am also fairly high on a wait list (2nd) and am curious about other results. I know from speaking to people that they do use the wait list. I have an inkling that they contact people moving off the wait list in a bunch regardless of when declines come in. If you look at the group for last year's contest, multiple people found out on the same day in September. One of my colleagues also found out in mid September. Perhaps they are following a similar timeline?
  • I heared that if additional offers will be made to waitlisted candidates, they would be contacted in the late fall, whatever that means.
  • Has anyone who was waitlisted heard anything?
  • I contacted them and they said that they hadn't heard anything about the list, but that it could still be potentially accessed until March of 2017
  • Re: movement on the waitlist: I contacted SSHRC in September and was told that any movement from the waitlist to funded would be communicated in October. No word yet. Fingers crossed.
  • ^Thanks very much for the news. It seems there is a general consistency in the messaging, but specifics about if/when news is out differs.