How do you deal with undergrads

[cherubie]

Since the last GA left, I kind of took over the role of "managing" the undergrads, and is still actively very involved with them now. In the past, I loved interacting with them (rather than sitting at a computer looking at numbers) and just developing a friendly, but professional, relationship with them in general. I never really had problems, since many of them were hard-working and tended to catch onto things pretty fast. Well, students come and go, so we took on a new batch of students since then. For some reason, I'm usually dissatisfied about their work ethics now with the new ones. They either lie about their hours, half-a*s their work, or simply are just....not very intelligent and don't get things. Usually, the grad students (not to mention the researchers) don't give a hoots about undergrads. They're seen as free work forces to do the grunt work of the lab. Anything that is time consuming, tedious, and boring and really has nothing to do with research gets pushed to them. We put them through this application and interview process as if they're getting an important job, but then the lab sees them more as robots. It's THEIR job to shine through.

So I guess that's where I come in. I'm not used to that. I went to a huge research university, and was NEVER treated in any way less than a part of a lab. I was always assigned ACTUAL projects and honestly have never done any database entry or grunt work until I got here. Granted, this is a human subjects lab vs. a microbio lab but still. So I try my best to incorporate them into things that will actually be worthwhile, and try to teach them skills so they can take away something from this experience being in the lab. But lately, it's been bothering me since I feel like I'm going above and beyond my job to help THEM and they're kind of taking it for granted. I'm not asking them to kiss the ground I walk on, or even be my friend, but at least TRY to get what I'm saying, TRY to remember what I teach. There's one kid who doesn't take notes when I teach him something, and doesn't seem to remember what I say either. I'm at the brink of just stop teaching him anything and relegating him to just database entry. But then I feel bad, because I feel like they're volunteering THEIR time for FREE, they should be treated better.

Okay, now after my rant. How are undergrads treated at other labs? Nobody else seems to have any qualms with treating them this way, only I do it seems. Is it worth it for me to try to help them?

[InquilineKea]

Well, http://www.phdcomics...php?comicid=508 (and following comics) describe the situation pretty well.

I honestly have no idea (the field I'm in has no gruntwork), although I'm very curious about the issue (since I'm currently advising a few 16-year olds on getting research that has gruntwork). The one thing is that a lot of undergrads don't really want to do research but want to have something to put on their applications for jobs/med school, and we might just be in the position where we can just use them as free labor just because they're forced to go through undergrad first and need some grunt work on their applications.

One suggestion, maybe, is to try to video-record instructions you're giving to undergrads? (or set up a webpage for instructions?) That way, maybe you don't have to repeat instructions whenever you get new students. And then it won't exhaust you as much, so then you can help them on the non-repetitive non-draining tasks. But of course, that's making a major assumption - the assumption that they'll actually follow the instructions on their own.

Edited June 15, 2011 by InquilineKea

[Eigen]

I feel for you! I'm working to move two students from working directly with me onto projects of their own.

The transition is always hard, but really depends on the undergrads, their personality, etc. I don't want to stick mine washing glasswaree, but at the same time don't want them flying solo on half million dollar instruments, or working with chemicals that will kill them/blow up the lab if they mess up... So the projects they get aren't always the most interesting. But I do try to give them solo projects that they can do, and possibly publish, mostly on their own- I feel that's really valuable to develop them as researchers.

It's really time consuming, and at times soul-consuming but I want to teach... I like to teach! So I keep trying new things.

For me, it's mostly balancing the time spent on their projects and training them vs. the time spent working on my own projects.. It all takes longer to do while explaining it to them or trying to come up with steps they can do.

[cherubie]

Sadly, we don't really get our own "projects" per se. We basically leech of mountain of collected data, do a bunch of data mining and see who can come up with what.

[gellert]

In the labs I work in, undergrads are put on a hierarchy of sorts. Most start out with data entry (a few exceptions being those of us recommended directly to the PI by a certain professor) and then work up to tasks requiring more responsibility, with the holy grail being an independent project honors thesis. I work primarily in a sublab of the main group and there's never more than 10 undergrads at once, which makes things a lot more manageable. I'm really fortunate that the grad student I work with takes care to teach us about the foundation of our research every lab meeting, and a lot of our honors theses are projects we came up with and designed ourselves instead of assigned ones. I know this isn't a typical format, and it's not even typical at my university, but I am extremely grateful that I've been able to have the opportunities I have to learn and grow as a researcher.

I think it works pretty well, though -- starting people out at data entry or various other tasks of low responsibility, and then promoting them based on how long they've been in the lab, accumulated knowledge, and level of responsibility. That way the serious students get to have a fantastic lab experience, and those that are just there to pad their med school resumes can keep on doing data entry without you having to waste your time teaching people who don't want to listen. (Caveat: sometimes, of course, students aren't interested UNTIL they've had a chance to actually learn about something more in-depth, so I wouldn't write anyone off too quickly, but there are always those hopeless cases.)

Edited June 16, 2011 by gellert

[InquilineKea]

Can someone please describe what's involved in data entry? (and what people input in data entry?) And also, if an undergrad is doing data entry, can he say that he's doing research? Or is a possible LOR the only benefit? (a benefit that he entirely loses if he drops out midway through?)

I'm quite curious. In the department I'm in, even the freshmen generally do higher-level stuff (see http://www.astro.washington.edu/users/premap/projects.php).

[Eigen]

It's a part of research just alike any other. The data has to be entered into a computer program once it's been collected, assuming it wasn't collected on a computer in the first place. Either way, it must be digitized and categorized before you can do any further workup or analysis on it. If the undergrads don't do it than one of the grad students or the professor will have to.

Most of the labs with a lot of "data entry" would be social sciences, I would think... Most natural sciences/engineering don't have as much.

I prefer do do all the analysis and data entry myself so I'm sure it's correct... I'd prefer to give the students working for me some more general data collection work.

[cherubie]

It's a part of research just alike any other. The data has to be entered into a computer program once it's been collected, assuming it wasn't collected on a computer in the first place. Either way, it must be digitized and categorized before you can do any further workup or analysis on it. If the undergrads don't do it than one of the grad students or the professor will have to.

Most of the labs with a lot of "data entry" would be social sciences, I would think... Most natural sciences/engineering don't have as much.

I prefer do do all the analysis and data entry myself so I'm sure it's correct... I'd prefer to give the students working for me some more general data collection work.

I think this is the case too. I've always "heard" of data entry but never had to do one (again, even as a high school student working in an oncology lab) until I got to my current lab. The difference is that my current lab is a social science lab, whereas the other ones were more microbio labs. I'm not sure about engineering labs though. Overall, data entry is literally entering data, usually numbers, into the computer. To me, it's not really research at all...it's just free labor. But apparently, I'm the only one who thinks so. However, coming from a hard science background, my opinion is not the same as those coming from a social science/psychology background. They think that data entry is kind of the right of passage for these students. In order to get your foot in the door, you NEED to accept the fact that you're going to be doing mundane non-research tasks before you can given something else. When there are no undergrads around, I or the grad students would need to do the data entry, but we are not expected to do it.

[singlecell]

In the labs I work in, undergrads are put on a hierarchy of sorts. Most start out with data entry (a few exceptions being those of us recommended directly to the PI by a certain professor) and then work up to tasks requiring more responsibility, with the holy grail being an independent project honors thesis. I work primarily in a sublab of the main group and there's never more than 10 undergrads at once, which makes things a lot more manageable. I'm really fortunate that the grad student I work with takes care to teach us about the foundation of our research every lab meeting, and a lot of our honors theses are projects we came up with and designed ourselves instead of assigned ones. I know this isn't a typical format, and it's not even typical at my university, but I am extremely grateful that I've been able to have the opportunities I have to learn and grow as a researcher.

I think it works pretty well, though -- starting people out at data entry or various other tasks of low responsibility, and then promoting them based on how long they've been in the lab, accumulated knowledge, and level of responsibility. That way the serious students get to have a fantastic lab experience, and those that are just there to pad their med school resumes can keep on doing data entry without you having to waste your time teaching people who don't want to listen. (Caveat: sometimes, of course, students aren't interested UNTIL they've had a chance to actually learn about something more in-depth, so I wouldn't write anyone off too quickly, but there are always those hopeless cases.)

I highly agree with undergrads starting out doing grunt work, paying their dues so to speak. I also believe the cream will rise to the top, and even doing menial tasks you can recognize those with the skill and motivation to take on more responsibility. I also agree with whoever mentioned in the sciences, we get a lot of people who just want to do research to pad their application to medical school/professional school. After a couple of weeks working around someone you can tell if they truly love the lab environment or if they're going through the motions as a means to an end.

My frame of reference is that I have done 2 years undergrad research and became a full researching member of the lab. I even train other undergrads, one of whom also became a full lab member. I am eager to see how undergrads are dealt with in graduate school.

[spunkrag]

I hear from the undergrads all the time, every day, all day. It never ends. Long weekends over summer are the worst. Things get going on Friday afternoon and don't stop until Monday at 11p.

[ktel]

I think the undergrad research experience is so different depending on what field you're in.

Speaking from the engineering side, I know the professors at my school really wanted undergrads in their lab, so they go out of their way to give you meaningful projects and get you interested in research. This is how they attempt to recruit the engineering undergrads into grad school. Most of my peers think that grad school is a waste of time and would much rather enter the work force.

When you get into some of the sciences, where you almost need to do a Master's or PhD, I would imagine it's much more competitive to get a worthwhile undergrad research placement, hence the tendency for more data entry and grunt work jobs.