biotechie

Hi Meaningless, I applied there, but rejected their interview. They wanted to bring me out for a whole weekend for a poster session, interviews, and skiing. They have tons of faculty with active labs, I think over 100 of them in the program, and it looks like lots are immunology-based. I was more interested in the epigenetics faculty. I think that their program would be fairly laid back, but that you would still get the experience and experience enough of the competitiveness to do well after graduation. I don't know how they will look at your GPA, but if your GRE, letters, and PS are good, maybe they'll overlook it as long as you can explain. Research experience was what got me in, though my GPA was higher. Publications help; I only had one! As far as your PS goes, that's going to vary from person to person. I keep telling people this, but you have to look at admissions like they're a super intelligent cranky monkey that needs a beer and a cigarette. You've got to get them interested and make them want to learn more about you within the first paragraph. They need to remember your application, and to be memorable, you really need to put your all into it. I talked about why I am passionate about science and the things that make me cut out for a career in research... and I talked about the people who got me here and how I have evolved into what I am. I showed them passion and that I have a strong interest in education and research. Mine made my PI cry; you obviously don't have to do that or might not want to. But make sure they can see who you are when you write it. Don't put up a facade; if they don't catch it when you interview, they'll catch it when you start to try to progress in their program.

We have a small Cell Biology department, 12-15 students. When one of us defends, our department plus Biochem, Micro, Chem, and Plant Bio usually shows up, even though we're mammalian molecular bio based... so you're talking 50-200 students and faculty depending on summer or during the semester. Most of us don't have friends or family come; since my friends are mostly outside my field and think it is another language, they won't be there. Plus the defenses are notorious for being followed with brutal Q & A sessions.

Persimmony, I didn't apply to UCSF for similar reasons (and because I didn't like their program!). As far as publications go, I have one, and it isn't even in my field (it was about cephalopod DNA). My research experience and being able to talk about my projects was what made up for that, as well as what my PIs had in their letters. If you can, get permission from your PI to take some copies of slides from a presentation you've done (that maybe have been published already) just to have in your portfolio at interviews so you don't have to draw pictures! Try applying to: WashU (Ranked somewhere in the top 20, but getting better ranked every year) University of Florida Interdisciplinary Biomedical Sciences (Ranked 50-something) University of Utah Molecular Cell Biology (Fairly low ranked, but have some good Epigenetics people) I turned down an interview at UCSD off of the wait list even though they're more highly ranked than the school I ultimately picked. I'd been to their campus before, and I just didn't see myself as successful there as I think I will be at my new school, which will be at Baylor. UCSD's application system is a little annoying since the system doesn't e-mail you, but e-mails you to tell you to log into the application to read the e-mail. >.< The cool thing about WUSTL's umbrella program is it is in the middle of a giant Med Center in St. Louis, and there are at least 3 universities right there with different programs. It is also interinstitutional, so you can take courses at other universities. Faculty can come from any department. Classes, equipment, etc will be open to use. I found when I interviewed at UF that a lot of the students were from Florida, and that I outnumbered nearly all of them with the amount of research experience. I think about a year or so was the average for those students. I didn't interview anywhere else because the other interviews were offered after I went to these, and I didn't like the others as much. If you apply this year, just make sure you cast a larger net. Maybe go for one or two "reach" schools where you think you could be happy/successful, and then apply to other schools that you feel you have a good chance at. Go for at least 6 schools you think you've got a chance at! I know being close to home is nice, but PhD is also a chance to get out there and live somewhere you may never live, again. I don't think I will LIKE living in a city, but I can't diss it until I've done it.

The articles is still reviewed before publication: http://www.plosone.org/static/reviewerGuidelines;jsessionid=52CEE2CCDEDA2E71292F7C38C04144F5 Lots of people publish to PlosOne, and that's it. The article is published. I'm not sure why you would submit an already published article to be published again? My lab has two articles in PlosOne, and they've been cited 5 times more often in the 4 months they've been there than my other article in a more well-known journal that has been available for more than a year. I've got probably 20 articles in my citations list for my thesis from there. I like PlosOne because it IS open access... it isn't going to be behind a pay wall, and I'm going to be able to access the papers. My professor is actually standing behind me jabbering about how he prefers PlosOne. More and more people from within my field are publishing there, and some of them are previously well published in really highly ranked journals. I guess I should also mention that these are all medical research based articles for my field... and we can be a kindof picky bunch as far as how delicately we treat our research and how proud we are of it. We think our stuff is the best just like everyone else. Now, if I had something incredibly ground-breaking? I'd go for Nature or a high ranked journal. If I have something that extends my current research, say, I've identified a new protein partner or something similar, I'm happy with PlosOne... and I feel like more people gain access.

Hi persimmony! I just finished my application cycle for admission for Fall 2013, and I applied to 6 umbrella Biomedical Science programs. I was invited to interview at 4, and turned two down. The two I was rejected at were WashU St. Louis DBBS (they had a ton of applicants) and UWashington Immunology (only accepting 3 students this year with over 400 applications). In my humble opinion, research experience is incredibly important, but at least a year of good, hands-on research should be sufficient. If you feel like you can spare the cash, go ahead and apply this year and cast a large net. You can always get more experience and apply next year if you don't get the program you want. I know students who have gotten in the first application cycle after their undergrad with about a year of experience and the same GPA, though I don't know the rank of their schools. My UG GPA was a 3.68, and my masters will be the same. GRE was above average, higher than 70th percentile. I'm positive that what got me into the program was my research experience. I will have 6 years experience to the day when I defend my thesis (4 years undergrad, 2 years masters) and I come from a school that isn't well known. Professors at my interviews had things to discuss with me because of the experience, and I was able to demonstrate a broad knowledge-set... My SOP, Research Statement, CV, and probably my letters of rec were all oozing research experience. For you, I think a large part of it is going to be how you portray yourself on paper for starters. You need to make sure that they can see you're passionate about science and whatever area it is that you like within the biomedical sciences, and even though we're going into highly specialized fields, that you're well rounded; apparently seeing Marching Band and Leadership on my resume were welcome sights for them. I've said this before other places, but you want your SOP to reel them in so they remember your application. I was taught to think of admissions committees as monkeys in desperate need of a cigarette and a beer, and you're supposed to make them forget that and want to keep reading within the first paragraph. I would start drafting ideas for that, now. Make sure you talk about being the only technician in the lab, and how that has been important for your scientific development. Pick your letter writers, wisely, and early. Baylor College of Medicine allows 4 letters, but most only allow three. Three of mine were research advisors, and the fourth from someone not in science. I had my letters for my schools by November for the December deadlines. Make sure your CV has some of the things you do in the lab listed. Mine has a "Relevant Skills" section where I have everything listed, "Western Blot, DNA extraction, Chromatin IP, Etc." I think... you'll be fine.

I definitely would not do that. In my opinion, that is extremely disrespectful and dishonest, and I'm sure many share that sentiment. As an incoming student, I don't think I would be as accepting of a student from another school that had done what you propose to do, so you may find the work environment uncomfortable if you do end up doing as you propose. Schools want students who are hard working, honest, and will stay in for the degree that they're funded to pursue. Not only will it hinder your chances as the others have mentioned, but you're also taking a master's studies spot away from a student who could really want it and need it to be successful, and you're running the risk of really hurting a professor's research projects by leaving things unfinished (we all know that when someone tries to pick up someone else's project, it does NOT go well). If I were you, I would do one of two things: 1. Choose not to even start the masters program. Take some time to do some research work to strengthen your application. Perhaps take a couple of postbacc classes to raise your GPA. Make sure that you actually know what you want to do, and can approach your applications in an honest manner that will show them that not only do you know what you want to do, but you've taken the time to be sure of it, participating in X activities in your time away from school. 2. Do the masters program through to completion. Thesis, defense, publication, the whole shebang for whatever the requirements are for your field. That'll look great on your resume, to be honest. I'm defending my masters next week, and the experience I gained from these studies (namely the research experience) is probably what got me into my PhD program. This also demonstrates that you're serious about your studies. You survived a masters, and you're still coming back for more!

I think you could mention that you think that is cool, but also make it clear that though you really like that area, that you also have broader interests in "A, B, and C" that you look forward to exploring as well. I think it is important to show them you have interests, but also that you're flexible in those interests (if you truly are) and excited about what their program has to offer. Some students mention research similar to that of specific PIs at the school, or even mention the PIs themselves, but I did not do that in my Statement of Purpose.

Demonstrating comprehension, originality, and execution by written argument. or Demonstrating valid arguments via comprehension and organized writing.

One thing you can do is go here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed Type in the professor's full name, and it will list any publication with the professor's name on it, and you should be able to get an idea of how active the lab is by number of publications with the professor listed either first or last author. If they haven't had many (less than 3-5) in the past 5 years, be cautious. If they haven't had any, I'd avoid the lab. Since you're searching them via PubMed, you'll also be able to at least read abstracts of their papers, if not the whole thing. People who are straight microbiology might not be as searchable in this forum. I personally don't know how to see if they have tons of grant money or not, and that might not be something searchable for us. Odds are, if they are publishing often, they're funded. Be careful about wanting to choose your interest when you do rotations... your professor is right. You should have an idea... but you can get that idea based on the research areas and projects these professors are working on that you can look up right now.

I don't think you need to narrow your interests down, really. I went into my application cycle with an interest in general cell physiology and immunology, with specific interests in epigenetics, transcriptional regulation, cancer, and autoimmune disorders. I'm more cell physiology than immunology, and that's a wide net of interests for that field. What is going to be important is that you show them that you DO have a wide set of interests because not only will that show them that it is likely that you'll be able to find a lab to work in (rather than having interests that are too specific and finding nobody) but also that you should be able to adapt and learn in many lab environments. I don't think that is a terrible problem to have unless it makes you indecisive when it comes to selecting a lab. You've mentioned a few areas of immunology. That may seem broad to you, but it is going to help you in the labs that you'll ultimately be vetting for a place in. Each university is going to have a different sortof "set" of professors. Go into the websites for these schools, and see what the research profile looks like for these professors. Can you find 3 or more that you think you could work under? Do you look at their research and think it is interesting? If you can find that, then keep the school on the list. Then go through the requirements for classes, stipend, living expenses, teaching requirements, location etc. Anything that you can find. Maybe, like me, you don't want to have to worry about classes for more than two years or not getting to take prelims until year 3 of PhD. That might make you think twice about applying to a school. You should be able to rank the schools this way from "best" to "worst" via your own system and independent of the ranking system everyone and the schools will keep telling you about. While going to a "top-ranked" school looks good on your resume, your fit in a program and with the PI you'll ultimately study under is going to have a larger impact on your success. Becoming a good scientist working under an expert in your research area at a #35 school will make you more likely to succeed and get into a good post-doc than going to a #10 school in a lab that doesn't publish or do much. If you can't find a good environment for yourself to work in, rank isn't going to matter. So... I guess what I'm trying to say is rank is a little important, but make sure that you're in the right fit, or you may find yourself struggling. Ideally, you'll end up with a list of at least 6 schools that you still want to apply to. None of them are going to perfectly conform to your list of wants and what you perceive now as needs. You'll realize once you get there that your needs aren't quite what you think they would be, but your school still should fit. The school I'm going to attend has only one year of classes and prelims, then straight into candidacy. The only thing I don't like is that it is in the city (Houston), but I think I will still be happy there. Good luck! Let me know if you want any info on the following, though I might not know about Immuno Specifically: WashU St. Louis (DBBS) UW, Seattle (Immuno) UCSD (Biomed) Baylor College of Medicine (Cell Bio/Immuno) University of Florida (IDP Immuno and Cell Bio) University of Utah (Molecular Bio)

I guess I should have mentioned that I meant research funding, not your stipend by funding. If the research funding climate of the school is weak, just tread lightly on making your choice. If there is no money and the PIs aren't bringing in grants, the research won't be sustained for long. That's not going to be an issue at a top 50 or top 100 school, but I was cautious when I made my choice because I'm from a region where the stipends don't stretch (even for PhD students) and research funding is scarce. I second the whole, "Talk to as many students as you can" thing. There was a get-together where all but one of the 1st though 4th years showed up, and probably the worst thing that I heard was that so-and-so was a tough grader or that if you rotate in a specific professor's lab, prepare to be quizzed every time he walks in the door. We spent a whole two days past our interview exploring the city and meeting up with different students and professors. That's incredibly important... The other program I interviewed at had probably 1/3 of their students that we met throughout the weekend, and then several others we saw at the bars. Not only were they unhappy to be there, but we also had a hard time getting anything positive out of them about the program. It was very surprising. I've totally been one of the students that our prospective students meet at my current program, and I feel like it is kindof obvious when someone is intentionally talking up their program. I personally can't say anything that talks up my program more than it deserves. I love it, here, but honesty is going to help the student make the right choice. Hopefully you meet honest students like aberrant. My new school won't have undergrads and has no teaching requirement. I'll admit I'm actually bummed about that. I love teaching. I like that our lists demonstrate how different the requirements students use to make their decisions can be.

My current school is fairly low ranked, and everyone is friendly and works together. If I need an antibody that I can't get because the company is out, I can go down the hall and borrow one from the kid I'm teaching western or the post-doc I'm teaching ChIP. I've loved it here. It was the perfect environment for me to learn, and the faculty are actually amazing and publish often in at least mid-ranked journals. My PIs are gone right now while I'm prepping my thesis, and one of my committee members stepped up and keeps checking in with me; he is my sub-advisor of sorts, and he is amazing. My new school is ranked in the top 30 in the nation for molecular biology. I wasn't originally going to go that route because I was scared, like Eigen, that it would be too cut-throat. I thought that when I visited, the students wouldn't be engaging and that professors would brush me off (and I DID experience that at a couple of top schools). My visit to the school I'm ultimately attending completely changed my view, moving it from my last choice to my first. The particular department seems to be very similar to the one from which I will be coming as far as the faculty and student interactions (but with better research and more funding), and they seem to get together at the end of the week quite often for beer and going out. The mentors that I've spoken to and been corresponding with seem like they will be directly involved in my studies rather than missing for weeks at a time while I flounder through. Most importantly, the students are excited about research, and they're more than happy to sit and have a 30 minute conversation about their protein of interest or the current football standings interchangeably. These are the things that are important to my happiness. This is going to vary from person to person... but a lot of these will hopefully help you! 1. A mentor who is frequently in contact with me and involved in my project. One who works with me rather than simply over me, but also gives enough space for me to learn on my own. My current masters PIs contact probably a little too much, 2-3 times per day, but I'd be happy with 2-3 times per week in the beginning with less as I get into things. The perfect PI would spend some time in the lab every once in a while, maybe running an experiment or two or showing me a new protocol, but I'm not getting my hopes up, there. 2. Student camaraderie. If the students can't get together to have fun, and if they can't help each other out (peer-to-peer mentoring of sorts), I know it isn't the place for me. Sometimes we learn better from other students. One of the schools I interviewed at, none of the students got along, and they seemed so unhappy. I knew I wouldn't go there before I even go to the interview. 3. Faculty involvement. Professors are busy, yes, but we can't always learn new protocols well from just other students. Some of these professors are the top experts of their fields. If they can make a little time to help us work though new things that our PI might not be an expert in, not only are they amazing, but it allows us a greater pool of knowledge to gain from and thus (hopefully) better research and perhaps more/better publications. 4. Research. Are there projects you're interested or new research areas you know you would be happy in? If there is only one PI that you like, and you don't get into that lab, you could be miserable, even in a good fit. 5. Funding. How are they ranked as far as finding goes? Are the PIs that you're interested in funded? How likely is it that they will stay that way? 6. Classes that aren't forever. I'm almost done with a masters. I don't want to be in a program that has 3 years of classes before candidacy! (My program is only a year of classes!). 7. There must be good places for me to blow off steam/have a little fun. Those opportunities will be few and far between, but it makes me happier knowing that if I decided I wanted to go to see a play, there would be one! 8. Money. I don't need to make a ton, and as a grad student, I probably won't, but my stress is greatly reduced when I don't have to worry if I'll make rent or not! Try to make sure that the funding provided is enough for you to live fairly comfortably. 9. How does the school feel? I felt at home at this new school, something I didn't feel anywhere else. 10. Weather. I thought it wouldn't be an issue for me... but now that I've picked my school (in Texas), I'm finding I'm really happy I chose it over a school where it snows 6 months out of the year. Since I tend to get the winter blues, I feel like the choice of a southern school was a good one. I didn't actually consider this until after I'd made my choice, so don't let it weigh heavily on your decision.

I'm glad you posted this. I'm selling/giving away all of my furniture. We'll see how much I can fit in my little car, but I know my books won't fit. Media mail it is!

I might hang out here a little bit to offer advice since somehow I was successful this year. There are.... a few things I wish I'd known going into things. Maybe I can come back in a few weeks and post them. I look forward to seeing where all of you go!

I agree. Backups are the best. Had I not backed up to my external hard drive right before my hard drive crashed a couple of days ago, I would have lost my thesis. Have two backups on externals. One with just the files I need, and one with my entire system. Luckily I had the second because I don't think I could have gotten all of my programs back the other way, and I'd lost my OSX boot disk. I don't back up the cloud, but I make sure to have a couple of backup copies on externals. I also send copies to myself via e-mail and copies of data and my writing to my professors. I also keep a copy of linux around; I've had to go in and get friends' data a few times. Luckily I haven't had to do that with mine! Start backing up from the first day you put things on your computer. You will be happy you did one day!

Good idea... I probably will always use an external to back up a computer, though, since my last PC actually caught on fire (long story, but that plus my dislike of Vista switched me to Mac). I don't really like having my data out on the cloud; it is sortof sensitive data that I wouldn't want others to get. But once again, it is personal preference.

My two cents: Yes, I am a mac user, however, I also like Windows 7 (but not Windows 8). I'll be getting a new mac for my PhD studies since most of the software I use to get my data lined up and analyzed is mac-based, potentially a retina display since I'm not buying (yay!) and I work with a lot of fluorescent cell images. Plus I now seem to be more proficient in Unix (and I play with Linux, too) for programs that require coded commands. I pick 'em based on how well they work out for me. My current macbook pro has lasted me over 4 years... until two nights ago. You won't hear me telling you to go one way or the other, though. I think it is really a matter of preference, type of workload requirements, or what you can afford. Something all of you need to get that shouldn't even be questioned is a really great external hard drive. I'm writing my masters thesis, and had I not backed up the night before my hard drive failed, I would have lost all of my data and my entire thesis. I was able to directly restore my system from Time Machine (and there are some great PC programs/external drives that do the same sortof backup) with no hassle onto my new hard drive. So my thesis is saved!!! I'd been backing up once per week. During writing or major data analysis, please back up once or twice per day. I also have a partition of my external that I put straight data and files on with no system info. Just make sure you partition right when you get it rather than waiting until you put things on it. When I get my new computer, I'll be upgrading most of my apps, so I'll be able to start (and hopefully keep) a clean system by just puling the files from the external without the whole system migration. I'll be getting a new external, as well. My current one is just a 500GB USB version, but I'll be getting a 1 TB version that I can plug in and is not powered by my computer. The USB powered drives can be purchased for pretty cheap; mine was $50. The ones that don't pull power from your computer are a little more expensive, but worth it in my opinion.

I would say that you would need scores better than mine. Research experience is also incredibly important, and can help you if your GPA/GRE isn't quite up to snuff. I'm fairly sure my 6 years of research experience are the only reason I was considered at WashU. I was waitlisted at UCSD and at WashU St. Louis (which was the top in the nation in my program). To get an idea based on me, and once again, I don't think I would have gotten interviews without my research: Undergrad GPA: 3.67 Masters GPA: 3.8 GRE Quant: 73rd percentile GRE Verbal: 73rd percentile GRE Analytical Writing: 4.5 Interviewed and accepted at Baylor College of Medicine and University of Florida (both interdisciplinary in the top 35 schools), invited and declined interview to University of Utah (cell, molec), rejected from UWashington (Immunology only taking 3 students and over 100 applicants), waitlisted at UCSD and WashU St. Louis ( Number 16 and number 1 in biomedical sciences; UCSD called me for an interview from the waitlist after I accepted my other school). Getting the interview also depends on how you portray yourself and how your Letters of Rec portray you. If you had a 4.0 and high GRE but wrote a really lazy, uninformative, and uninteresting personal statement and research statement, you probably would get passed over for the 3.7 student who expresses themselves well and shows their passion for research. Your personal statement and research statements are your chance to draw them in and make them remember you. Make sure your LoR writers know you well and can give you a thoughtful and positive recommendation. Honestly, you need to worry a ton more about research fit and how you will feel at the school rather than just the name. I know I'm going to get an awesome education, and I'll still be working with people at the top of my field. Don't pick a school based only on the name. Pick somewhere where you can be happy.

Wait... you never heard back from Baylor? Which program did you apply to? The other girl in my current program finally heard back that she was rejected on April 12 from physiology and immunology. I would imagine if you got into WashU that they wouldn't have thrown your application out at Baylor...