blc073
-
Posts
186 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
6
Posts posted by blc073
-
-
On 10/30/2016 at 6:59 PM, Pinot Meow said:
So, I want to continue in my field of research (which is relatively narrow), so I asked my PI for recommendations. The schools I've listed have labs of interest that are accepting students for Fall 2017.
Comments, critiques, concerns? Thanks!
Undergrad Institution: State school
Major(s): Microbiology
Minor(s):
GPA in Major:
Overall GPA: 3.81
Position in Class: Not sure, probably towards top
Type of Student: Female minority
GRE Scores (revised/old version):
Q: 158 (70%)
V: 164 (94%)
W: 5.0 (93%)
Research Experience:3 years in one lab
- one project with two poster presentations and I'll be an author on a pub this spring
- one project for honors thesis with one poster presentation
- miscellaneous projects here and there
Summer intern at Albert Einstein College of Medicine
6 months in another lab, more of my entry into research than anything else
Awards/Honors/Recognitions:Departmental scholarships
LSAMP Scholar
Pertinent Activities or Jobs:Lab assistant for yet another lab
Any Miscellaneous Accomplishments that Might Help:
Special Bonus Points:
My field is pretty small, so my PI's name has weight, which I hope will come in handy.
Applied for GRFP
Lots of experience with anaerobic growth, necessary for aforementioned narrow field
Any Other Info That Shows Up On Your App and Might Matter:
I don't think there's much other than a lack of pubs.
Applying to Where:(I was submission-happy this week after the GRFP and already to applied to University of Oklahoma - Microbiology and University of Arkansas - Cell and Molecular Bio.)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign - Molecular and Cell Bio
Duke University - Genetics and Genomics
Are you from Oklahoma? That's the only explanation I can think of for why you would apply to OU...
-
20 hours ago, CanadianNomad said:
It's not, but as mentioned above I have some connections at the two NYC programs I'm applying to that would be keen on me doing collaborative work here in Boston as well
I'm definitely applying to Harvard BBS and MIT, and have recently added Tufts to my list, thanks for the suggestions! I'm being picky about more than just location, though, and BU, Northeastern, etc don't check some critical boxes that I'm looking for. But I really appreciate the suggestions My girlfriend, a doctoral student in neuroscience at BU, said you would say that, and I think that is just outstanding.
Good luck with the process!
-
19 hours ago, CanadianNomad said:
biochemgirl67, thank you for your input
I very much hear you on Brown as a whole, I do indeed have a personal attachment/reason for applying there. I would love to be able to apply to the schools you mentioned, but my fiance is in residency in the Boston area so I'm trying to stick close by (Columbia and Rockefeller each have a few PIs that would be happy for me to collaborate in my Boston lab for part of my degree if I was able to get into these programs). Thank you, though, for your suggestions!
I don't feel like NYC is exactly close to Boston. Why not stick with any of the eleven programs in Boston? Harvard BBS, Harvard MCO, BU-GMS, BU, Tufts-Sackler, Tufts, MIT, Northeastern, BC, Brandeis, or UMass-Boston?
-
5 minutes ago, Born-to-pipette said:
Did you happen to receive offers of admission from all 6 programs you interviewed with? Seems like interview offers are where 80% of applicants are weeded out, with only half of those who interview get an offer.
I received an offer from Harvard before I interviewed anywhere else, so I did not exactly put a lot of effort into my other interviews. I was only offered a position at one other university (UChicago). I think most places could tell that I was not interested.
-
3 hours ago, DGD4L said:
@blc073, I saw you are in the BBS at Harvard and @Bioenchilada , you are at UPenn. I'm looking into both of your programs for acceptance in the Fall 2017. I was wondering if you could tell me a little bit about what your stats were as undergrads when you were applying to these programs!
I'm trying to determine my chances at these places so I can narrow my application choices.
I had an average GPA (3.5) and an average GRE (310), but I can write well, I had four amazing LORs, and I had seven semesters and four summers of research experience.
-
28 minutes ago, Born-to-pipette said:
Thank you -- this is definitely a helpful perspective! I'm trying not to stress terribly much about how well I know the schools -- just trying to get the basics and waiting for the interviews to get to know the programs in more depth
I had to double take when you said the research fit at Harvard is "just okay." What are you considering a good fit for research?
In your initial evaluation, you should look at location, research fit (are there five or so faculty with whom you can see yourself working?), and funding (are you guaranteed funding for the duration of your PhD?). Make your list based on those criteria. When you interview, you will find the right place for you. Also, I would honestly cap it at eight applications. I did eight applications, which led to six interviews, and the six consecutive weeks of traveling was incredibly exhausting. I cancelled interviews because I could not see myself traveling for eight weeks in a row.
-
20 minutes ago, Bioenchilada said:
Are you only applying to those four schools? Also, you have two Master's?
I don't think your stats are bad, but they're also not stellar. Your GRE could be a bit better, but I don't think that'll really matter in the grander scheme. Do you only have two years of research experience though? As in, did you get that from your Master's? Like, if you've spent a significant amount of time in school and academia and only have two years of experience, it might raise some eyebrows. Do you only have one letter that is coming from a PI? I feel like having someone that knows you but hasn't really supervised your research can't really provide much accurate information about YOUR skills as a scientist.
The fact that you did Master's level research might help you, especially if it was full time, since it obviously shows your commitment to science, which is excellent. However, if you've only been in one lab, that might come back to bite you when writing your SOP and with your LORs. I don't think it's impossible for you to get into the schools you're applying to, but those are very little options and very competitive programs.
Yeah, these stats raise so many questions!
@BioCat02 Why are you applying to those schools in particular?
-
I'm late to the party on this one, but I'm surprised nobody mentioned Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.
-
18 hours ago, biotechie said:
You're not really giving us a lot to go off of, here. There are a lot more factors that matter. Given that a research internship is generally not a large period of time and that your GPA is a little low, my guess is that you would not be a strong candidate for UCSF. I was not, and I had a higher GPA with six years of research experience. You should plant to apply to at least 5 schools, and pick schools that you're truly interested in with several scientists that seem interesting.
I highly recommend looking over this thread to see where others are applying and what their profiles look like. You can post your updated profile there, too:
A 3.6 GPA is NOT low for top tier schools. More information is needed to fully grade how successful your application may be, but a 3.6 GPA WILL NOT play a big role.
I would like to know more about your research experience, your LORs, and your individual GRE scores.
-
23 hours ago, somino42 said:
So I have decided not to apply this year, but instead wait another year. I am so nervous about my GPA preventing me from getting interviews anywhere. Is there anything else I should work on for this year that could help me out besides continuing to work in my lab?
I am am also considering adding NYU to my list, as there is a PI I am very interested in who had great contacts with my current lab.
Wait, why aren't you applying this year?
-
16 minutes ago, biochemgirl67 said:
If you view anything under the top schools you've chosen as "settling" for your PhD, go get your master's or spend some time in industry.
I fundamentally disagree with this, and this quote is completely antithetical to the rest of your comment.
The advice here is to realistically evaluate oneself, then apply to a variety of schools within a realistic framework, i.e., if an individual has a below average GPA and less than average experience, that individual should not apply to eight top tier programs and one second tier. Settling here is simply appreciating a situation and pursuing a path that will lead to the best graduate school experience without wasting time.
-
@bkim346 I would apply broadly this year and maybe include a few post-bacc applications.
The real question: are you willing to settle? You have your eyes set on top tier schools, but will you be happy at a second tier school? It gets difficult at this point.
Example: Let's say you apply to five schools and a post-bacc. The five schools are two top tiers, two second tiers, and a smaller school that might be considered a safety. You are offered a position at one of the second tier schools, the smaller school, and a post-bacc. Will you choose the second tier school or even the smaller school over the post-bacc? If you choose the second tier school or the smaller school, you are in a PhD program and on your way to a career. If you choose a post-bacc, your time might put you in the running for a top tier position, or nothing will change and you will be two years behind in a PhD program.
A post-bacc should either be an opportunity to decide if a PhD is what you want to do or a holding pattern after an unsuccessful application cycle. I would not use a post-bacc as a way to get into a "better" program.
If you are certain you want to do a PhD, apply broadly to only schools at which you can see yourself spending five or so years. Then matriculate wherever you are admitted. Don't waste time under the assumption that a post-bacc automatically guarantees a position at a top program.
-
30 minutes ago, VirologyPhDinTraining said:
Yes, quoted the wrong person. My laptop, unlike my PC, lags even using chrome browser. Apparently I miss clicked. Right now I won't say in public, though, in my area of virology I am with the top person in my field at the university he just moved to. If you really want to know I am more than willing to share in PM.
Just curious, why won't you say your institution in "public"?
-
27 minutes ago, ballwera said:
I feel like it at least has to be addressed because it will definitely come up during interviews.
I'm not sure it will come up in interviews. Committees only care about an individual's ability to do good science. There are plenty of reasons to take time off, and I do not think individual interviewers will dig.
@myhairtiebroke I would not mention it. Make your SOP about your research experience and why you are a good fit for the program. If a weird interviewers tries to bring it up, you can easily say something like, "I had a personal reason to take a gap year, but I am eager to begin graduate school now."
- biotechie and Bioenchilada
-
2
-
11 hours ago, ITISRED said:
Thanks everyone!
I didn't think about the importance of the postdoc. I'm good at networking, so I think I have a fair chance of getting a good one. Besides, I'm not 100% sure I want to go into academia. Right now that's my preference, but government (ideally the CDC, USAMRIID, or someplace similar) may be the way for me. I don't think I'd need a postdoc for that. Do you know biotechie?
I was talking to my potential future PI at UOregon today and as we were hanging up, he said that the most important thing is the fit. I guess he was getting at the same thing that you are, bioenchilada. That's definitely going to be a big factor.
Honestly, just go to the best school to which you are admitted. Everything else will fall in place. Interests change, so you shouldn't pick a program based on whether or not they have the exact research you want.
You all can split hairs all day about rankings and what advice you have been given, but at the end of the day, the best programs place graduates into the best post-docs which place graduates into the best jobs. If you are going to do good research, you are going to do good research, regardless of where you do it. Why not do that good research at the best school within reach?
-
7 minutes ago, Bioenchilada said:
I don't think you need a postdoc for government positions, maybe if it's a research branch (?). They are mainly needed for academic positions. And yeah, research and personal fit with the institution trumps everything.
I'm just answering the question shortly. Does name matter for job prospects? Yes, especially for academia. I'm not saying anything about the amount of networking you can do at your school, I'm saying that at top institutions, GENERALLY, you'll be exposed to a LOT of people that are very well known and might be able to give you an advantage when it's your turn to look for a job, including a post doc. Coming from a school that was not regarded as a top school for my field for undergrad, I can feel a REALLY BIG difference in the opportunities that I had there vs. my current institution. Even if I were a master at networking, the inevitable fact is that it is easier to be exposed to people that are regarded as brilliant scientists at my current institution.
Also, I don't know about you, but when I talk about my particular field when I address my school's reputation, not it's overall prestige. Field specific rankings are a thing that exist, and that's what people should use if they wanted to gauge their school's reputation. Rankings tend to be very subject and variable so they should only be taken as a grain of salt, and many sources should be used before reaching a consensus. Again, I am by no means saying that a decision to go to grad school should be based on name alone, fit and prospective happiness are key when determining where to attend and are more important than prestige.
I chose my grad school based on prestige alone. Did I goof!? ?
-
2 hours ago, ITISRED said:
Hello,
I am applying to 4 programs to study disease ecology. I want to list the pros and cons of each of them to try and determine my top choice. My main question is about how important the prestige of the school and professor is. Please take a look and let me know what you think.
Princeton
Pros: highly prestigious university, well regarded professor will take me into his lab, his research is exactly what I want to do
Cons: professor is very busy and won't be available for much help, I worry I'll get burnt out at an ivy, I don't think I'd like living there
Stanford
Pros: prestigious university, very friendly and welcoming mentor that is very hands on and will meet with me at least twice a month, would like to live there
Cons: great research but a little bit away from my interests, associate professor there is not really known yet but she's very promising (I guess this isn't really a pro or con), extraordinarily high cost of living
UCLA
Pros: well regarded school, would like to live in LA, incredibly welcoming and enthusiastic potential mentor, would always be available to help me
Cons: research is only tangentially related to my interests, potential mentor is a complete unknown as she is just beginning her career, high cost of living
UOregon
Pros: fantastic professor that is very friendly and will meet with me twice a week (once independently and once in a lab meeting), want to live there, low cost of living, research is phenomenal, program would prep me well to become a professor, professor is relatively well known though not nearly as much as the one at Princeton
Cons: school doesn't really have any prestige
So, UOregon and Princeton are my top choices and UCLA is my last choice. How important is the prestige of the school and professor for a career in academia? In government? Princeton certainly wins on both counts and both do fantastic research, but I think UOregon may be a better fit in terms of personality of mentor and location.
How is one to decide?! (Also I know I'm totally putting the cart before the horse since I haven't actually gotten in anywhere yet.)
I would focus on making a list of schools to which you will apply. Once you know your options, you can consider these questions.
To your point, the work you do is more important than who your PI is. The goal of graduate school is to be well trained. Save prestige for your post-doc.
-
On 9/29/2016 at 0:23 AM, simplybetter said:
Hi, everyone. I hope that each of you is doing well. Here is my question. I am almost graduating from a college in South Korea, and I suddenly I understood that I want to go to Ph.D to study diseases like cancer or neurology. The thing is that I don't have any prerequisites. I have to complete some courses that will make me to stay in college for one or one and half year. That means. Also, I love doing Computer Science and there is a high probability I will also like doing job in my area and that I will get a good job offer with good salary. I have thought what if I work for 2-3 years in my area and then how can go to a graduate school for PhD program to study neurology? Is there any premed one or two year courses that are accredited within the United States. Actually I would love to aim at good med schools. I just wonder isn't there ANY WAYS to do this? My friend has the same dream but he is already working and he doesn't want to go to ungergrad college to study for 4-5 years. I hope that there are some people who can help me out. Thanks everyone! Have a nice day!
I do believe there are programs in the US that allow students to do research and take courses for a couple of years before applying to graduate school. I am not sure if they are open to international students.
Since I am not an international student, I am not familiar with that process. Perhaps you could contact graduate programs directly to ask for advice? You might also post in the international student section of this site.
Good luck!
-
@bioapplerobot No Harvard, huh? I see how it is.
-
If you can get into one program, you will likely be able to get into the other. The real question is which program is right for you. The MCO program caters to basic scientists, and the program is housed in Cambridge. Your core courses will have a basic science focus and you will encounter more basic scientists on a day-to-day basis. BBS has a biomedical focus, so will be in Longwood near all of the teaching hospitals. If you want to study disease, BBS is the better option.
It's also important to consider size. MCO is a small program while BBS is large. If you are looking for small classes and a tight community, MCO might be better. That's not to say there aren't small classes and a sense of community in BBS.
I'm not completely sure, but I believe MCO students are limited to the sixty or so MCO faculty. BBS students can rotate in over 800 labs, including the MCO labs. As far as courses go, anyone at Harvard or MIT can take pretty much any courses at Harvard or MIT. I do know of a few courses in Longwood that are limited to BBS students, but that's rare.
I would consider what the two programs offer, then apply to the program that matches your interests and goals.
Good luck!
-
17 minutes ago, MCF10A said:
Undergrad Institution: top liberal arts college (good reputation in undergrad education, but not known in research field)
Major(s):Honors in biology
GPA in Major:3.8
Overall GPA:3.7
Position in Class: don't know exactly, should be top 10-20%ish(GPA deflation in my school)
Type of Student: international student finished college in US (how much would being international hurt my chances?)
GRE Scores (revised/old version):
Q:163(92%)
V:170(97%)
W:4.0(60%)
B: Still deciding. I'm pretty comfortable with my V&Q, but the W is kinda low percentile-wise. Would it be worth retaking to get a 4.5+W?
TOEFL Total: Waived
Research Experience:
2 years in a cancer lab @ big public research university (1 mid-author pub)
1 summer (freshmen summer) in a cancer lab @ big public research university (another mid-author pub)
2 summers in a top cancer research institute , currently work there as full-time RA finishing up my own projects (2 conference posters, 1 mid-author pub under review, plan to submit my own first author pub early next year, but will be too late for application tho)
Awards/Honors/Recognitions: (Within your school or outside?)
Best undergrad poster award in a national conference
Several awards/scholarships/Dean Lists in my school
Pertinent Activities or Jobs: (Such as tutor, TA, SPS officer etc...)
TA for 3 courses, Hospital volunteer(100+ hours, used to be pre-med), leadership position in several school clubs, co-founder of a startup
Any Miscellaneous Accomplishments that Might Help:
Special Bonus Points: (Such as connections, grad classes, famous recommenders, female or minority status etc...)
I should be able to get 3 very solid SOPs (1 college prof who knows me really well, 2 research mentors both well-known in cancer field)
Applying to Where:
(A giant list right now, plan to pick up 8-10 to apply out of this)
MIT Biology
Harvard BBS
Sloan Kettering
Yale BMS
Stanford Cancer Bio
Weill Cornell
Rockefeller
Penn BGS
Uchicago Cancer Bio
Duke Molecular Cancer Bio
NYU Sackler
Berkeley MCB/UCSF BMS/UCSD BMS (I heard that those UC schools are not friendly to intl students, should I even bother trying?)
All my previous research experience is in cancer research and I like this field so far. But I don't mind trying out new fields in grad school tho, and that's why I think big umbrella programs are ideal. For those schools do not have an umbrella program, I will apply to cancer bio programs. Also I really want to go to school in urban settings.
I would really appreciate any advices/inputs on finalizing my school list. Also please let me know if any program on my list is particularly friendly/unfriendly to intl students. Thanks a lot!
On paper, you look look great. Your success will depend on your LORs and your SOP. Harvard BBS treats international students the same as domestic students.
-
1 hour ago, cumulina said:
How do you feel about your programs now that you're on the other side?
I know research fit is very important, but putting that aside, is doing research in a different city really all that different? do you think you'd be able to get a similar educational experience elsewhere?
Please and thank you!
I absolutely love my program. PM me if you want to know more about how great Harvard is.
I did undergraduate at a small school in Oklahoma. I was able to get work done, but in general, research there es un chiste. Moving to Boston for graduate school was a big change in pace. The environment here is unreal. We have a high number of PhDs per capita, and a quarter of the population is college students. It really is an intellectual hub. The collaboration here is also phenomenal. Harvard uses BU facilities, Tufts works with MIT, and everything in between. Harvard is affiliated with a bunch of hospitals (MGH, Brigham, Beth Israel, Dana Farber, etc.) so there is essentially an unlimited amount of resources. My favorite part of all of it is cross-registration with MIT. As a student at HMS, I can take courses at MIT, so I am currently taking a course in which two Nobel Laureates give lectures (Phil Sharp and Bob Horvitz).
As far as research training, I think other schools are comparable. As far as resources and networking, I think Harvard and Boston are unparalleled.
-
On 9/14/2016 at 3:14 PM, LoveMysterious said:
Thanks for creating this thread! I was wondering if I should be reaching out to PIs of interest regarding research opportunities for graduate students in their labs. Or is it more appropriate to wait until I am admitted to a program? How important is networking?
Secondly, I took a medical leave of absence in college, which will show up on my transcript. I would like to briefly mention my chronic illness, as it is why I have chosen to pursue a career in biomedical research, and it catalyzed my love for science. I know that admissions boards don't care for a personal narrative and I certainly don't want to make an excuse - we've all got challenges in our lives. I would appreciate any advice on how to tactfully acknowledge my condition in a way that will benefit my application rather than hinder it.
I don't think there is anything wrong with reaching out to PIs. It is important to remember that your relationship with a PI will likely not affect your admissions. With that being said, it is very important to be familiar with the PIs at the university. Mention names in your SOP. Networking is important for your scientific career, but again, it probably won't affect admissions.
I would either use one sentence in the first paragraph or the last paragraph to mention your condition. "While in college, I took a medical leave of absence [for this reason], which opened my eyes to the importance of biomedical research and is the reason why I am so passionate about this field." Contrary to popular belief, admissions committees do not care about your personal life. They want to see that you can think and write like a scientist. That's it.
-
1 hour ago, tottenham said:
Thanks for your response!
That is definitely an advantage applicants with multiple research experiences do have in regards to having more to write about in their SOP.
I plan on having my Biochemistry professor write one for me as I have had him in class for 2 semesters (Biochemistry I and II) and am currently a TA for his Biochemistry I course. The other will be coming from a Molecular Biology professor who has also taught me Immunology. I expect both to be good recommendation letters despite the fact that neither has ever been my PI. My main PI, however, has significant insight into my research capabilities since I will have worked with him for 2 years by graduation, but I do understand the advantage in having 3 PI's with different insights and perspectives. Unfortunately, there is not much I can do about that -- and quite frankly, I am very satisfied with the research experience I have had and do not have many regrets.
I had a total of four research experiences when I applied, but the majority of my SOP focused on just one of the experiences. I only briefly mentioned the other three. Regarding your SOP, you should really get into the details of your research. Discuss what you did, the role you played in designing the hypothesis and the experiments. Discuss any struggles you had and how you overcame them. Talk about how you grew as a scientist and how the experience prepared you for graduate school. Finally, explain your results and what they mean for you, your project, and for the field. That can easily be two pages without sounding repetitive. Committees want to see that you know how to do science and that you will still love research even when your work is failing. The best way to test that last part is to do a long term project. One meaningful project is better than ten short projects.
You might be in trouble if two of your recommendations are from professors who do not know about your research. Have you given presentations at your school or discussed ideas with another PI? Honestly, a PI with whom you discussed ideas and experiments is a better recommendation than a class professor.
I don't know about international students, but I would apply similarly to any other student. Pick a couple of big state schools (University of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Colorado, Washington, etc.) and a few top schools (Penn, Yale, Duke, etc.). You are probably right about funding, so limit yourself to private schools with too much money and large public research schools.
2017 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results
in Biology
Posted
I'm from Oklahoma too!
I would advise you to apply broadly to programs in places you actually want to be for five or so years. One lab isn't enough to stay in Oklahoma (fifty labs isn't enough to stay in Oklahoma).
Apply to some top programs and apply to some programs in random places you've always wanted to visit. If you do not have anything tying you down to a single location, then this is your time to explore! Go West (or East), young [woman]! Explore what the country has to offer!
Feel free to PM me. As fellow Oklahomies, I'm sure we share similar experiences.