Genomic Repairman

I am pretty sure most if not all grad schools require LOR's. They have to rely on some outside form of evaluation about you besides your grades, GRE scores, and your SOP. I have honestly never heard of a school that does not require one. I'm sure it would look really bad if you didn't submit one even if they are not required.

Snow someone people just have an inability to let things go in life, whether it be someone cutting them off in traffic or arguments about GRE scores on a message board. It could be application-related stress like Jerry pointed out, or maybe its their character to grasp at straws and argue. Either way its pretty sad.

Uh I've sat on admin committee for a while and we pretty much consider the GRE just a test. Not a measure of commitment or intestinal fortitude. Predications of academic capability on a standardize test are not always certain nor does anyone except those who choose to wax nostalgic over their own score. Actually for a lot of us the GRE is the last time that we will be taking a standardized test, as graduate school and life for that matter is anything but standardized. I know folks with crap GRE scores that are more intelligent, verbose, and greater successes than their counterparts who had more elevated scores While the GRE is a metric to see knowledge, it is just that, a metric and one of many that an admissions committee uses to make their decision. We tend to judge folks more off on interest, experience, positive attitude, and how well they will be a fit with the department and its culture (you know passing on pricks who ramble on about how GRE score correlates with success).

Professors have to document deficiencies of trainees in case the situation gets so bad that they need to cut them loose. Not that this is what your PI is doing, but maybe he is just documenting a deficiency that he sees in you. I know most professors have to fill out periodic evaluations of their trainees, sometimes you get a copy of these and sometimes they are confidential, but they are always evaluating you. Him expressing his disappointment is negative reinforcement of bad behavior, he is not going to pat you on the head and tell you good job if you are moving to slow. You have to work to get better and then you might get some affirmation. And honestly if you want to be a scientist you have to develop a thick skin, and that means being able to take a semi-severe ass chewing session with a PI. Have you broached the topic of what you can do to speed up this particular task? And besides this is not like a long term thing, you only have a year to a year and a half left on your masters right? Just put your head down, get your work done, and get the hell out of there.

If everything is better at Cincy go there, but there might be a stigma cast upon you for leaving your current place. It is pretty uncommon and considered a bad thing when a grad student leaves a program after the 1st year even on good terms. And to get on my soapbox for a minute in reference to rankings. Its all good and well but it is who you work with and more importantly what you do in grad school that determines your future than some number in on list. Another big question is will your coursework transfer or will you have to start back at square one?

Hey guys, I'm in the process of posting an old (circa 1997) BBC documentary on my YouTube channel. Its filmed in a kind of crappy film noir style way but its pretty good. It details the history of the cells, contamination issues, the failed War on Cancer campaign, and the ethical issues of the cell line. Its got some good interviews with good scientists and unfortunately with one shitty one, an evolutionary biologist (and before you bust on me, I've got nothing against evolutionary biologists, just speak on the topic in which you are an expert) who has no experience with molecular or cancer biology rambling about how genetics will never create a solution to cancer. Apparently he has never heard of Gleevec and I surmise that they chose him for the documentary because he would make some controversial statements. Sorry I had to break it into 8 parts but YouTube would only let me post so much at a time. Full run time is 59 minutes.

Sadly my friend even cheating occurs in the hallowed halls of MIT. Granted that case is with undergrads, but it just drives the point home that it can happen at any institution. And don't forget the case of what happened in Baltimore Laboratory at MIT, there are few institutions that do not have some scandal associated with their name. There will always be cheaters and liars, but as long as you are honest and have integrity your words and work will stand up to even the most scrutiny.

Out of the three places you listed, Charleston is by far the most friendly to folks with alternative lifestyles. I'm straight as an arrow, but had many gay friends in Charleston when I was an undergrad and everyone seemed pretty hospitable to them. There are very gay-friendly bars (Dudley's, Vickery's) and even a gay nightclub (Pantheon). I would say a good second choice would be Wilmington but stay the hell out of Columbia.

In most cases that I know of this is done informally. Because your first year are two are spent on course work at your institution and you need those classes to graduate. Some grad schools get pissy with other ones about coursework from other institutions so this may be contributing to the decline in this. From my colleagues and my own perspective here is how it usually goes: Summoned to boss's office at end of the day. Boss tells you to pack your stuff you are headed off to Jamaica State University (fictional place, I think, if not my apologies, go fighting Rastafari!) to work with Prof. X. Usually you are either learning a technique to bring back to your lab or headed off to teach a technique (as was my case) to get them producing data for a collaborative project. Since I was working on such a short time frame, I was putting in 15 hour days, 7 days a week for those 3 months as the technique I bringing into the lab was labor intensive to set up and took a fair amount of time for just the experimental validations. Also you have to be concerned with living arrangements, you can be treated like a pasha like I was and put up in the faculty house (quite the swanky appointments), relegated to a unused dorm room, stay with Prof. X, or worse have to crash on the couch of Prof. X.'s grad student. So simple things like food, laundry, transportation (in some cases) can quickly become an issue. But luckily I visited a place that had a pretty solid night life so it was fairly common for the postdoc and that lab and I to go down to his local for a few pints after we knocked off work in the lab for the night.

This response is fairly limited to the science realm so I'm sure folks in the humanities might have other perspectives. I spent 3 months at another university doing research as a "visiting" grad student doing work with a collaborator. Although no classes or research credit originated from there I list my time there on a CV as a special collaboration project. It's cool to get away and while there I focused hard on getting the work done so that I could get back to my own lab and get back to my other projects at hand. These arrangements should be as short as possible, get your work done there, get home, and get your behind back in your bosses lab. My buddy drew the assignment of having to go to Norway in the winter for a month so keep locale and season in mind when setting these things up.

When I moved 1200 miles for my Ph.D. program I rented a Uhaul trailer and towed it behind my Jeep. Halfway through the trip, the axle on the trailer broke, almost causing me to smash end to a bus load of divinity students surely condemn me to damnation for all eternity. Uhaul brought out a new trailer but made me unload and load my stuff into the new one by myself in the 110 degree heat on the side of the interstate. Roadside assistance my ass.

Good luck to all you folks out there still waiting to here back. I didn't here back until May from my institution so don't lose hope people. In fact we are just cranking up our interviews as I have to take some candidates out to wine and dine them tomorrow night. Best of luck Sincerely your drunkard and resident asshole. The Genomic Repairman

I chose my field because of its rich history, ever expanding boundaries, and it has implications in numerous clinical diseases. Also I have to stretch, I have to be a geneticist, molecular biologist, biochemist, pathologist, immunologist, etc. My work blends so many disciplines and has a good variety of directions that I could head in. All of these opportunities drew me to my field.

Hopefully you still have your textbooks from undergrad MoBio and BioChem. I just did all of the problems in them and looked up a few good reference websites on the web and took it.

One other corollary to add to this matter. Where are folks going after they leave the lab. Good postdoc positions, industry, etc. You want a boss that can help to get you to places that you need to go, unless your prefer teaching intro biology at the community college. Also look at where their postdocs are headed off to as well. A fair number of them in TT positions, good sign. Most of them stuck in another postdoc, bad sign. Note, some of them may be doing another postdoc as this is a crap economy with not enough jobs to go around but if they are all doing second postdocs or languishing around the lab as an instructor for more than a year or two, not good.

Man if your projects aren't working and you are not feeling frustrated then your project is too easy or you aren't working hard enough. Frustrations and being a grad student go hand in hand. It can take for damn ever to get an assay off the ground but once you do it is sweet. Just remember that frustrations cause you to think critically and drive you to become innovative. My best ideas and work have come when my back is to the wall with what to do to solve a problem. The biggest thing is to not let frustration get you down, but also you need to know when to cut your losses. You could take persistence too far and toil endlessly on a project that will go nowhere for too long. I had to cut and run on a project that I spent six months working on full time, it just wasn't going to work.

Oh the oppression! I am being made to shave my beard and go clean shaven for engagement photos. But then its back to stubble time.

Here is a repost of a friend of mines blog about this. She is a professor and here is her take interviews with candidates. http://science-professor.blogspot.com/2010/02/grad-interviews.html There have been several requests lately for a post on interviewing at or visiting grad schools as a prospective student, along the lines of my recent series of posts on faculty interviews. These interviews/visits may vary from field to field, so I hope that readers will contribute additional information, specifying if possible their academic discipline. My philosophy can be summed up quite simply. During my interaction with visiting students, I try to give a clear picture of the research opportunities and dynamics so that, if admitted, they have information to use when making a decision. Those who express an interest in my research field also meet my grad students. When I meet with grad candidates, I don't grill them with aggressive questions. I want to see some degree of focus, but the student doesn't have to know exactly what they want to do for their thesis research. I want to be able to have a conversation about the research possibilities in my research group/department/university, and it's nice if the student asks a question now and then so the conversation isn't a monologue. Many (all?) of the visiting students have or will end up with multiple appealing offers, as they should. For these students, the visit is a mutual checking-out of/by applicant and department. I think that I have quite flexible parameters when it comes to evaluating a visiting grad student -- i.e., in terms of their personality and level of sophistication -- but I do have some limits. For example, I am not perturbed by shyness, although I am not as accepting of someone who considers "What are your interests?" to be an aggressive question. I am not disappointed by an inability to ask brilliant questions, but I do want to see some evidence of an interest in research. I am happy to talk about something other than science and find out about the outside interests of a student, but I think it unwise for a student to skip out on part of the organized group activities to check out the rec center (for example); I recommend finding another time to gaze at the elliptical machines and trail along on the boring lab or campus tour as scheduled. Just as with interviews for a faculty position, I advise grad applicants to BE REAL. Give clear and sincere answers to any questions you are asked, ask any questions you want to ask, and take a careful look around and see if you are visiting a place you would really want to be. **** There was also a request for information on timing of interviews, offers etc. This is going to vary a lot with institution/discipline. Anyone care to comment? I can say that it's likely that, at my institution, the process is going to be more protracted than usual as we deal with economic uncertainties.

We have a weekly student seminar (grad students present their work) and student journal club which we must attend. There are also institutional seminars which are suggested to attend but if you are busy no one is sweating you if you cannot make.

Posted from my blog. This post is in response to several emails that I have gotten lately. This decision is one of the biggest things you do in grad school, it basically primes your career and sets you up (hopefully) for a good postdoc position. So lets run through some factors when helping to determine a lab. 1. Size of the lab. Do you want to work in the megalab where you get no personal face time with the PI except for at lab meeting. You will likely be overseen by a postdoc or research scientist in the lab. This type of lab requires you to be able to work with limited supervisor and really be a self-starter. Medium size labs maybe have around 6-12 folks in them, so you get a little more face time with the boss but you are required to be independent. Small labs are usually around 6 and below. Hell you might even see the PI in the lab working with you. This could be due to personal choice of PI (maybe they are a micromanager), money issues, or a new lab. Folks that need a lot of hand-holding tend to gravitate to these labs as I have seen on numerous occasions. 2. Career stage of your PI. Do you want to get in on the ground floor with a new PI? Things may go slow but you gain immense knowledge on starting up a lab and are pretty much guaranteed a fair amount of personal attention. This can be a boon or bane based on your personal opinion but there is much to say about learning how to setup and trouble shoot equipment to get the lab off of the ground. Labs of mid-career PI's are what most of my grad student cadre fell into as did I, but I had the added benefit of helping get the lab off of the ground since my PI was recruited to the institution about the same time as I was. Older established PI's, these guys and girls are great for letters of rec and have the publications and grants to back up the swagger. They can probably get you placed into a great postdoc thanks to their clout and hopefully your hard work. Soon to retire/forgotten driftwood profs can be good if they have the money for you to finish up your project and are focused on mentoring and not the completion of that lakehouse that they are going to retire in. The driftwood folks are the worst, they are doing old science if any science at all, run a barebones research program if they are running one at all, and its probably just for vanity. 3. Money. I don't have much experience with NSF funding so I'll leave that for someone else to discuss and focus on NIH money. I work in a well funded lab, as my PI was recruited with tenure to my institution we have the beaucoup start up money, an R01, a P01, and an R01 application about to head out the door this summer. Money is a big thing, it determines the limitations of experiments that you can do. Remember everything from the thermocycler to FBS costs money and lots of it. Living hand to mouth is okay for the grad student stipend but not for the lab, and the PI's with limited funds tend to function like accordians expanding and contracting rapidly. Also look to make sure that your PI has consistent funding, you can search on the NIH Reporter. Now I know new PI's may not have lots of funds so this is mainly directed at folks looking for mid-career and later stage PI's. 4. Personality. Is your putative boss an ass? You need someone who will mentor you, not be your drinking buddy. You boss should have more interest in your work than your personal life, but they also should not be aloof to your personal situation. Make sure to ask current graduate students in their lab and more importantly grad students outside of their lab what the PI's reputation is. You are going to get worked like a rented mule regardless but its best to have a slavedriver who has a sunnier disposition when they crack the whip on your ass. 5. Techniques. Make sure you get into a lab that does some cool techniques and has the opportunities to learn others. I have other grad students that are envious of me because I am learning and doing a variety of techniques while some of them will little do nothing but genotype and run westerns until the day they graduate. 6. TTD. This is huge. Time to degree is a big thing. You don't want to be stuck in some lab for 8 years or more doing shit science left to toil while your other friends have moved on to postdoc positions. Find a PI who graduates good folks and fast. Now some labs have a slightly longer TTD but that may be because their students are doing harder projects. Remember folks innovation takes time, especially when you are producing antibodies and knockout mice. The latter is of course a royal pain in the tookus, and can yield nothing (i.e. the mice you spent nearly a year on have no discernable phenotype). 7. Facilities and Equipment. Do you want to spend the next 5 years pipeting with some beater pipets or be forced to share a tissue culture hood with 18 other folks. Hell no. Get a good look at the lab and what you have to work with. 8. Lab Personnel. Last but not least these will be the folks that you will be stuck in the trenches with for a long long damn time. You will interact with these folks in hospitable and sometimes not so hospitable situations. It is best that you get along with your lab mates and especially the lab manager. Do not run afoul of the lab manager, this person will be ordering your stuff, taking care of all the paperwork, and unlike a priest or lawyer is not obliged to keep confidential anything you say, especially if you occasionally bitch about the PI. Oh yeah, and don't piss off the postdocs, these folks are more knowledgeable and better trained than you, they turn out better science and much faster than a lowly grad student. They are not so far removed from being a graduate student and remember what is was like to be in your shoes. Having a good working relationship with these folks are key, they are immediately available sources of technical information, can teach you new and exotic techniques, and can give you guidance and mentoring while the PI is busy or away. Hope this helps

You gotta get an Earthbox, I grew jalapeno peppers, rosemary, thyme in mine. You just add water down the spout every other day and watch the things grow. I have mine on the balcony of my apartment.

Throw the mix tape in the trash, get them, if a guy a nice bottle of alcohol, or if a woman a nice bottle of wine. This would be a very sincere gesture unless you are interviewing at a Baptist school, and in that case just give them CD.

I agree with you I get more out of just listening to classes and taking a few notes rather than the scribbling down every syllable that a prof says like some of my classmates.