Being handed a project versus creating your own... Master's in Micro.

[Tubulin]

Hi all.  I've done a forum search already on my question, and I'm still a bit confused on the research process.

 

I'm applying to Master's programs in Microbiology and have already submitted one application (out of four) and have spoken to two potential advisors.  

 

I have research experience through an REU this past summer where my advisor had a project he wanted implemented.  He basically wanted me to follow the methods previously published by one of his past students, so I had no part in coming up with the question or plan of attack.  The most "sciencey" thing I did (besides doing the grunt lab work) was if a particular procedure failed I would make note of it in my lab notebook and search for any modifications to the protocol that may work better.  And even then, I consulted with my advisor on what to do and he had the final say of how I would proceed.  My past advisor had a master's student that seemed to rely on our advisor for direction only a bit less than I did.  For some odd reason... up until a few days ago, I somehow missed the part about grad school where I would do a lit review, find "gaps" in the current research and come up with a question of my own (along with experiments that would answer that question).  I guess I figured it would be more like my summer experience where my advisor would give me a project and I would work on it (albeit more independently than I did as an undergrad) by performing the experiments, research different protocols, and so on.... at least for a Master's.

 

Out of the two potential advisors I spoke to, one had a project in mind that I was excited to work on, but the other seemed more intense in that he expected me to have a much more narrow focus than I currently do.  I knew from the beginning that a PhD is more intense, where you come up with original work, but I always thought the master's was more of a stepping stone into research as a PhD (i.e. you work on a project that your advisor wants you to and get exposed to the field through this work).

 

Can anyone tell me which idea is more correct?  I'm starting to doubt if I'm ready for a master's program now.  I want to learn to think and be a scientist, but honestly, I don't think I have enough learning and experience to successfully identify a meaningful question in the field and create a project out of it.  Any advice?  Should I wait?  Should I get a job as a tech and when I'm more comfortable ask for more independence?  Or am I just experiencing what every new/potential grad student feels?  I'd appreciate any insight... especially from those in the life sciences. :-)

 

EDIT: Also, I may be confusing "project" with "thesis" at some point.  There's a few projects to a thesis? Or one project can mean one thesis?  Ugh... I swear I've done my own research on the subject!

Edited December 29, 2012 by Tubulin

[SymmetryOfImperfection]

in science projects are so big that even PhDs are often just told what to do. This depends on professor. Some professors give students more independence. Some professors will not give you this independence.

Edited December 29, 2012 by SymmetryOfImperfection