microglia

Over the years, I've become a Google Doc fanatic. The main purpose for me is to have a clean and centralized storage location, which may include notes, graphs, papers, etc. If I had drawing abilities, I would strongly consider switching to tablet, but typing has worked incredibly well for me so far. When possible, I also record all lectures. This removes certain pressures from hanging onto every detail, and you can really enjoy and take in the course. Hope this helps!

Just got an invite from UC Berkeley Neuroscience via email!

During undergrad, I asked my postdoc this exact question. His answer was that PhD is a saturated title and that if we called everyone with a PhD by their title, everyone would be calling everyone "Dr. ____" (especially in the lab). Day-to-day interactions aside, I do think people are addressed and address themselves as "Dr. ____". For example, in email exchanges, talks/seminars, and publications and other documents (e.g. LoRs, statements). One other thought is that there is an implied meaning of the title today that refers to medical doctors (MD or DO), so this could be driven by social norms as well!

That makes more sense! Would you mind sharing the reasons why you want to reapply to another program without having started this program yet? Depending on your reasoning and how much the program agrees with it, there may or may not be a negative impact moving forward. Without knowing the context of your thinking, I can say that it's still always best to do what makes you happy. Leaving a program, even in this circumstance, could never be as hurtful as spending 4-6 years in a program that makes you miserable.

For context, I am a Neuroscience PhD applicant. I have consulted many students, postdocs, and professors about this question. The answer I've come to accept is to use "Dr. Full Name" for the first mentioning, followed by "Dr. Last Name" for any additional mentions. The rationale is that a title is almost always well-received, but there are stratifications of professorship rankings (e.g. Associate, Assistant, Full, etc.). It would be awkward to list the exact ranking of each faculty member, but it can be insulting to full professors if you address every member with the same title of "Professor". Again, I received this feedback from a number of STEM graduate students, postdocs, and professors. I hope this helps!

My pleasure, and don't worry about that at all! Some PIs ask for a CV, but you can also give a brief introduction to yourself. Just be genuine. You aren't a piece of paper or simply a collection of your achievements. You're a unique student and person. As people have mentioned before and in other threads, passion is nearly impossible to fake. Be honest about your level of understanding, and ask the questions that naturally come to mind. This is the advantage of an in-person meeting. Do this, and I'm sure you'll have an enjoyable conversation!

I see a couple advantages to contacting PIs: To gather information about their research, lab culture/environment, mentorship style, and perspective on the program. More often than not, lab websites are outdated, and even NIH reporter (funding and detailed project information) can be outdated due to project timelines. Regarding lab culture/environment and mentorship style, I would also recommend reaching out to students/postdocs if you have the time. You'll receive different types and depths of insight into the lab. This advice extends to reaching out to members of another lab (e.g. reach out to members of Lab B about Lab A). If you able to meet over Zoom, the in-person dynamics can also be very helpful for your decisions. To, first and foremost, become acquainted with people who may influence admissions results. Getting the chance to meet with a PI (by phone or video) is essentially an informal interview. Importantly, you also want to make sure your contact is memorable. I would recommend explicitly asking for a Zoom meeting for face-to-face time. If you leave a good impression, they will keep an eye out for your profile within the sea of applications. No matter how compelling your application is, you want to make sure they actually take the time to look through your preparations. I know, unfortunately, how challenging it is for international students to apply for US programs. There are many reasons for this, but funding is definitely a huge factor. PIs have to pay out-of-pocket costs starting your second year for many programs, and the school will also be paying additional fees. Consequently, if a PI is very interested in you and/or is willing to fund you if admitted, your application would become much more competitive. Thus, I strongly encourage you to reach out to PIs if you can. Additional tips: If possible, it is worthwhile to reach out to members of the admissions committee alongside faculty members whose research you're interested in. For professors you feel uncomfortable approaching directly, network with their students/postdocs first (echoing a point from #1). Then, when you eventually email the PI, you can include sentences such as "I had the opportunity to meet with X and Y, and they strongly encouraged me to reach out to you." It is worth noting that many programs also invite senior students to sit on admissions committees, and it is much easier to schedule meetings with students. For context, this is my second time applying for PhD programs. Whereas I was unable to meet with/talk to any PIs my first cycle, I was able to meet with a large number of students/postdocs/PIs through one-on-one Zoom meetings this cycle. This is of course also due to normalization of Zoom meetings over the course of COVID-19. With all of this in mind, there is no need to stress! Connecting with PIs is incredibly helpful for not only receiving an interview, but also to secure an offer. Lastly, take everything with a grain of salt since everyone has differing opinions on situations like this. At the very least, I don't think it will hurt your application to reach out. I hope this helps!

I agree with @Crucial BBQ regarding MBAs vs. PhDs. I don't believe we have reached saturation because the graduate school environment is shifting quite rapidly. From DEI initiatives to advocacy for alternate career paths, individual programs are beginning to transform what graduate school means and offers. Similarly, programs are becoming interdisciplinary and/or increasingly collaborative, which complement the diversification of job opportunities within the marketplace. The main issue regarding the impact of degree saturation on society is the intent/reasoning behind applying. For example, there may be societal impact if many people view PhD training (4-6 year commitment with low pay and intense work hours) as a means to an end (e.g. for job security).

Programs have already begun sending out interview invitations; however, these invitations can continue through January (especially if the actual interview dates are late into the cycle). Unless your program mentions they function on a rolling admissions basis, I don't think there is any disadvantage to applying close to the deadlines (other than running into potential, last-minute technical issues). For rolling admissions, there are arguments to be made for submitting your applications at different times.

As far as I know, the latter. It's helpful to be explicit when doing so, and I have directly asked for Zoom meetings at the end of my emails!

Just to clarify, you used to work in industry, you're currently in a PhD program, and you would like to transfer to another program? If so, could you elaborate on your reason for wanting to do so?