earsnbrains

Does someone from Vanderbilt create this group or do we have to make it? Would love to start getting to know everyone/working on finding a roommate? 

hi guys! I just committed to the neuro phd program at vanderbilt, but i've been doing speech and language neuroscience work for the past year and plan on moving into sensory/auditory neuroscience for my PhD research. I know its kinda early since it isn't even April 15th yet, but I've been browsing apartments (I'm a think ahead planner kinda person and the whole idea of moving across the country is starting to get to me) and realized that while 1 bedrooms/studios close to campus are more affordable than most places (under $1,200 a month), having at least 1 roommate makes a HUGE difference (rent goes down to like, $500-$850 a month each person). If anyone is interested in the possibility of being roommates and moving in somewhere August 1st, feel free to DM me here or on twitter (@adriana_et_al). I was planning on looking around Hillsboro, the Gulch, West End, Midtown, and Music Row areas (but Hillsboro seems super cute so I feel like that might be the most ideal). 

Do you just HAVE to apply straight out of undergrad? You could take a year to get more significant research experience.

If  it is not Harvard, it does not matter.

I feel like this will be very dependent on your field. 

I think most schools offer this, but word it differently. Berkeley says "This offer includes full guaranteed support for the entire duration of the program for all students in good academic standing" which im assuming means the same thing? Good question- definitely something I'd ask for clarification about from your other offers.

Bruce Carter said they're meeting this Tuesday 

Seeing rejections on the results and not having heard anything is stressing me out. Is anyone else still waiting on Vanderbilt NGP?

When I was looking for a technician job I used university websites and because I needed a job quick, I emailed the PIs directly with my CV explaining why I was interested to work in their labs and I ended up finding a good position within weeks. It's definitely hard to find positions but not impossible you just have to put yourself out there! 

It definitely is not the case for all institutions! It depends on your programs of interest but I had an entirely different interview experience at both of my interviews (one ivy league-waiting on response, another one-got accepted). Professors at both programs were friendly and passionate about their research and wanted to see if you were the same. Of course the general questions, "Why Neuroscience, why graduate school, why now?" all came up in conversation but it came off as a more casual probing because they didn't want you to be nervous. You still needed to give good answers, though. Make sure you channel your nerves into excitement for your research. Have a clear direction of what you want to study and where you want to be. You are not expected to know everything about your field, and be honest but inquisitive when you don't. My personal tip that I think got me my acceptance: read a paper of the professor's in advance and prepare very thoughtful questions that show you can think about the scientific process, see the bigger picture of research, while simultaneously allowing them to talk about themselves. You'll ask other questions as the natural conversation flows along, but have some prepared, with a pen and paper, for each interviewer. Avoid empty silence at all costs. They want someone that they can see themselves interacting with for ~5-6 years. Both interviews I ended up over-preparing, but that's not a bad thing.

Oh man 10 interviews sounds rough. I would say that the experience you had at that interview is not typical of most interviews.
I have had four interviews thus far and interviewed with 5 faculty at each-- all of which were very much more on the candid conversation end of things. The general format at all of these interviews was:
1) talk about your own research experience thus far. Some professors will ask you more in depth questions about this than others, but it was never them trying to trip me up on details, just a legitimate curiosity about the work. Questions are definitely a little more technical if you're talking to profs who are right in the same subfield that your research has been.
2) prof will tell you a little about their own work. Usually they don't expect you to know really in-depth about their stuff, but make sure you pay attention and ask questions. I think maybe a couple of the profs I interviewed with would ask me a question or two as part of this to make sure I was following and extrapolating off of what they were working on-- but for the most part they really just want to tell you about what they're doing and see that you're excited about it.
3) most of the profs will ask something about your long-term career goals. both "what do you want to be studying in grad school" and "what are your goals after grad school" type questions.
4) a surprising number of the interviewers wanted to give advice about choosing a graduate program and a lab and lots of perspective on how to know if a particular program is right for you (and often a bit of a pitch for their program). 
In summary, don't be afraid of the interviews. Just make sure you know your own research and a little bit about what the people you interview with do. The vast majority of them are not trying to quiz you or trip you up and just want to hear about/talk about cool science and make sure you're not a total whacko. 
As a bit of a disclaimer, I do neurodevelopment work, but am not applying to specifically neuro programs- but I have interviewed with many profs doing neuro work.

Ahahahah I'm accepted by Harvard PiN :)))))) So happy

Same Here. I truly care less now that I know how long ago interviews were sent out. It's more of an "about time" feeling at this point!

I got a lab job after undergrad, and I've worked at the NIH with IRTA post-baccs. It seems to me that they're really the same thing.
It probably depends what kind of lab job you get, but I was an RA and my lab really had me focusing on research and my own projects. Got a bunch of publications, first authorship in the works, 2 conference posters, went to a ton of talks. My PI knew I wanted to go to grad school and guided my time in her lab toward it.
As far as postbacc programs, if they're just research, no classes, they're pretty much a poorly paid RAship. I think some have perks like free GRE classes and the likes, though. The IRTA program isn't actually much more selective than applying for a job - PIs essentially get a list of applicants and pick out the people they like (I've been told it's literally an "add to cart" situation).
As far as how admissions committees see them, they're no different. The admissions committees are interested in the work you did and what you accomplished, not what your job title or program title was. Figure out what you want for you. Working at the NIH has its own perks (name recognition, PI networking, resources), and a job/RA/tech position could mean get a foot in a school you're interested in attending, or not having to move from where you live now, and probably getting paid more.

I would love it if UPENN would get around to sending my rejection letter so I could move on from my unrealistic fantasies. Sorry though, I hope you hear good news elsewhere

As someone who got a job in a lab instead of a post-bac program, I feel like the experience (and how it translates/looks on apps) highly depends on the lab. In my lab, we don't have any grad students and its pretty much just me, the PI, and another investigator whos on our grant; so I pretty much do everything a grad student would do, plus some lab managery/lab tech stuff. I have my own projects that I've presented at conferences. I even get classes at harvard extension school (harvard classes but at night and basically anyone can take them) free or extremely discounted, much like in a post-bac program. My PI knows I'm applying to grad school and makes sure to tell me about talks and events that I should go to. I'm writing 2 publications right now. I have other friends who are employees in labs as well who have been incredibly involved in projects at the same level as me, and others that are truly more of an assistant. The main tiny qualm I have sometimes is that because my PI is technically my boss, you have to consider that they have final say on anything. I had a problem with the paradigm we were using once and when I expressed that, he listened and in the end decided to go with what he preferred despite concerns I expressed, and I had to execute that. Not a super common occurrence, but there is that sense of being an employee sometimes that I don't love. But then again, I have the advantage of saying "I can't stay late tonight" when I want to (with exceptions of course).   
Obviously, doing a program like PREP or NIH post-bac looks really good because you have to be admitted and PIs have a clear idea of how involved you were rather than having to be told by you. Definitely worth applying to. But also look at jobs. They usually pay better, and in the right lab, you can get basically the same experience; and as long as you can explain that to PIs and have things like LORs and poster presentations to back up, its basically as impressive as doing a program. But finding that kind of lab might be a little harder than just applying to a program, so you really need to try both.
And if it counts for anything, most PIs have referred to being an RA/tech/coordinator for a couple years between as post-bac research. Thats what I've been told to call what I'm doing by people in my field. Obviously not the same as a program, but I think that speaks to how similarly regarded they are by professors. 

As someone who got a job in a lab instead of a post-bac program, I feel like the experience (and how it translates/looks on apps) highly depends on the lab. In my lab, we don't have any grad students and its pretty much just me, the PI, and another investigator whos on our grant; so I pretty much do everything a grad student would do, plus some lab managery/lab tech stuff. I have my own projects that I've presented at conferences. I even get classes at harvard extension school (harvard classes but at night and basically anyone can take them) free or extremely discounted, much like in a post-bac program. My PI knows I'm applying to grad school and makes sure to tell me about talks and events that I should go to. I'm writing 2 publications right now. I have other friends who are employees in labs as well who have been incredibly involved in projects at the same level as me, and others that are truly more of an assistant. The main tiny qualm I have sometimes is that because my PI is technically my boss, you have to consider that they have final say on anything. I had a problem with the paradigm we were using once and when I expressed that, he listened and in the end decided to go with what he preferred despite concerns I expressed, and I had to execute that. Not a super common occurrence, but there is that sense of being an employee sometimes that I don't love. But then again, I have the advantage of saying "I can't stay late tonight" when I want to (with exceptions of course).   
Obviously, doing a program like PREP or NIH post-bac looks really good because you have to be admitted and PIs have a clear idea of how involved you were rather than having to be told by you. Definitely worth applying to. But also look at jobs. They usually pay better, and in the right lab, you can get basically the same experience; and as long as you can explain that to PIs and have things like LORs and poster presentations to back up, its basically as impressive as doing a program. But finding that kind of lab might be a little harder than just applying to a program, so you really need to try both.
And if it counts for anything, most PIs have referred to being an RA/tech/coordinator for a couple years between as post-bac research. Thats what I've been told to call what I'm doing by people in my field. Obviously not the same as a program, but I think that speaks to how similarly regarded they are by professors. 

As someone who got a job in a lab instead of a post-bac program, I feel like the experience (and how it translates/looks on apps) highly depends on the lab. In my lab, we don't have any grad students and its pretty much just me, the PI, and another investigator whos on our grant; so I pretty much do everything a grad student would do, plus some lab managery/lab tech stuff. I have my own projects that I've presented at conferences. I even get classes at harvard extension school (harvard classes but at night and basically anyone can take them) free or extremely discounted, much like in a post-bac program. My PI knows I'm applying to grad school and makes sure to tell me about talks and events that I should go to. I'm writing 2 publications right now. I have other friends who are employees in labs as well who have been incredibly involved in projects at the same level as me, and others that are truly more of an assistant. The main tiny qualm I have sometimes is that because my PI is technically my boss, you have to consider that they have final say on anything. I had a problem with the paradigm we were using once and when I expressed that, he listened and in the end decided to go with what he preferred despite concerns I expressed, and I had to execute that. Not a super common occurrence, but there is that sense of being an employee sometimes that I don't love. But then again, I have the advantage of saying "I can't stay late tonight" when I want to (with exceptions of course).   
Obviously, doing a program like PREP or NIH post-bac looks really good because you have to be admitted and PIs have a clear idea of how involved you were rather than having to be told by you. Definitely worth applying to. But also look at jobs. They usually pay better, and in the right lab, you can get basically the same experience; and as long as you can explain that to PIs and have things like LORs and poster presentations to back up, its basically as impressive as doing a program. But finding that kind of lab might be a little harder than just applying to a program, so you really need to try both.
And if it counts for anything, most PIs have referred to being an RA/tech/coordinator for a couple years between as post-bac research. Thats what I've been told to call what I'm doing by people in my field. Obviously not the same as a program, but I think that speaks to how similarly regarded they are by professors. 

As someone who got a job in a lab instead of a post-bac program, I feel like the experience (and how it translates/looks on apps) highly depends on the lab. In my lab, we don't have any grad students and its pretty much just me, the PI, and another investigator whos on our grant; so I pretty much do everything a grad student would do, plus some lab managery/lab tech stuff. I have my own projects that I've presented at conferences. I even get classes at harvard extension school (harvard classes but at night and basically anyone can take them) free or extremely discounted, much like in a post-bac program. My PI knows I'm applying to grad school and makes sure to tell me about talks and events that I should go to. I'm writing 2 publications right now. I have other friends who are employees in labs as well who have been incredibly involved in projects at the same level as me, and others that are truly more of an assistant. The main tiny qualm I have sometimes is that because my PI is technically my boss, you have to consider that they have final say on anything. I had a problem with the paradigm we were using once and when I expressed that, he listened and in the end decided to go with what he preferred despite concerns I expressed, and I had to execute that. Not a super common occurrence, but there is that sense of being an employee sometimes that I don't love. But then again, I have the advantage of saying "I can't stay late tonight" when I want to (with exceptions of course).   
Obviously, doing a program like PREP or NIH post-bac looks really good because you have to be admitted and PIs have a clear idea of how involved you were rather than having to be told by you. Definitely worth applying to. But also look at jobs. They usually pay better, and in the right lab, you can get basically the same experience; and as long as you can explain that to PIs and have things like LORs and poster presentations to back up, its basically as impressive as doing a program. But finding that kind of lab might be a little harder than just applying to a program, so you really need to try both.
And if it counts for anything, most PIs have referred to being an RA/tech/coordinator for a couple years between as post-bac research. Thats what I've been told to call what I'm doing by people in my field. Obviously not the same as a program, but I think that speaks to how similarly regarded they are by professors. 

As someone who got a job in a lab instead of a post-bac program, I feel like the experience (and how it translates/looks on apps) highly depends on the lab. In my lab, we don't have any grad students and its pretty much just me, the PI, and another investigator whos on our grant; so I pretty much do everything a grad student would do, plus some lab managery/lab tech stuff. I have my own projects that I've presented at conferences. I even get classes at harvard extension school (harvard classes but at night and basically anyone can take them) free or extremely discounted, much like in a post-bac program. My PI knows I'm applying to grad school and makes sure to tell me about talks and events that I should go to. I'm writing 2 publications right now. I have other friends who are employees in labs as well who have been incredibly involved in projects at the same level as me, and others that are truly more of an assistant. The main tiny qualm I have sometimes is that because my PI is technically my boss, you have to consider that they have final say on anything. I had a problem with the paradigm we were using once and when I expressed that, he listened and in the end decided to go with what he preferred despite concerns I expressed, and I had to execute that. Not a super common occurrence, but there is that sense of being an employee sometimes that I don't love. But then again, I have the advantage of saying "I can't stay late tonight" when I want to (with exceptions of course).   
Obviously, doing a program like PREP or NIH post-bac looks really good because you have to be admitted and PIs have a clear idea of how involved you were rather than having to be told by you. Definitely worth applying to. But also look at jobs. They usually pay better, and in the right lab, you can get basically the same experience; and as long as you can explain that to PIs and have things like LORs and poster presentations to back up, its basically as impressive as doing a program. But finding that kind of lab might be a little harder than just applying to a program, so you really need to try both.
And if it counts for anything, most PIs have referred to being an RA/tech/coordinator for a couple years between as post-bac research. Thats what I've been told to call what I'm doing by people in my field. Obviously not the same as a program, but I think that speaks to how similarly regarded they are by professors. 

Thanks so much! I will DM you. 

Congrats! I also noticed that you got interviews from UR BCS and Tufts/Jax. My undergrad was at UR BCS and I was highly involved in the department (in addition, my undergrad PI is dept chair), and my best friend started her phd at Tufts/Jax last year, so if you have any questions related to either of those programs or lift in rochester and bar harbor feel free to reach out! I know due to recent controversies people tend to have a lot of questions about UR BCS. 

Einstein hasn't sent out all their invites yet so don't lose all hope for them yet!

Preference is usually given to the strongest applicants whose interests best align with that program. Its well known/common place that programs can refer exceptional applicants to other departments of similar interests. Especially programs that are so close like Behavioral Neuroscience and Graduate Neuroscience...
It might be useful to ask the programs if it is necessary to apply to both-and if they refer applicants to the other one. Might’ve saved you time, money, and disappointment. 

Hey, It's me you're talking about. I haven't fully clarified the situation, but the short explanation is yes I applied to OHSU NGP, was invited for an interview with Behav Neuro, and waitlisted by NGP. 
The long explanation is... longer. I spent a hugely long time on the phone with directors of both NGP and Behav Neuro, talking about which program is more applicable to my interests, because I didn't want to pay both application fees. On multiple days at SfN, I spent a long time at OHSU's booths, talking to current students and faculty about which program to apply to, and subsequently getting my name in their door. I invited members of both admissions committees to come to my poster, to see what my research interests were, and further discuss what program I should be applying to. So even though I ended up only applying to the NGP, I had huge amounts of contact with Behav Neuro, who probably were interested in my application and offered to review it when the NGP made their decision. 
The reason I share this is because it shows that the personal aspect of the application process... through my personal interactions with these people, I was able to secure an interview. I would really advise against "making a stink" about it, since this alone has shown how much your personal interactions can influence the decisions.