Do you automatically get to be with your top choice POI/lab?

[quanto]

I have no idea how this works, and it will play a big role in what school I choose. USC has only a couple POIs for me. They're doing really cool stuff Id love to be a part of. But no one else there interested me at all. What are the chances I'll end up with one of these two POIs? If a POI is interviewing you, does that mean they definitely are taking in new students? Will I automatically get to be with my top choice POI? How is this decided.

It could be really devastating to choose a certain school and not get your top POI, then be left with only choices that you're not interested in at all. So I'm really curious as to how the assignment of an adviser works. And how do you go about choosing your research topic. How close to the advisers work does it have to be? If you end up with an adviser whose research is uninteresting, can you just start doing your own thing even if its very different from their expertise?

[TakeruK]

This depends wildly on each program. It is something you should ask each POI directly (whether they are taking new students) and you should ask the program itself on how new students are matched to faculty. After hearing the official answer, you should also talk to current graduate students and ask how it works from their perspective too. A good time to find out all of this information would be when you visit the school (if a visit is arranged).

Note: Be aware that some POIs are immensely popular. At the Chem department in my school, there is a faculty member that literally half of the incoming class wants to work with and they only have a few spots each year. The current grad students warn all incoming students about this fact each year but of course, most people will still come here hoping to work for this guy since they all think that they will be the special one that will stand out against the rest. The ones that don't make it aren't bad, but when there's that much interest and not a lot of space, some people don't get to work with who they want. So, when you are visiting, try to find out from the current students whether or not people generally get to work with their top choice POI. And talk to the students about the particular POI you have in mind---how popular are they? how many people are interested / how many get a spot?

And finally, some programs do match up students and POI before admission---i.e. you are admitted directly to someone's lab, not through a rotation process. In this case, I would secure a spot in someone's lab before I accepted the offer, if that was possible (this is generally how my field operates, not 100% sure how others do it).

[St Andrews Lynx]

15 hours ago, quanto said:

 

@EigenSo if I were to end up with a not-so-ideal PI, how screwed would I be? How much time would I spend working on their projects? Just my first year or two right? Then I move onto my own research I thought... And when I pick my own research topic, is it necessary for it to be very closely related to the PI's research?

I'd be surprised if you got total freedom to do your own research project in Chemistry. The best-case, most likely scenario I can think of would be "hey, I saw based upon my preliminary results that X happens. Maybe we could extend it to Y and then use it to solve problem Z?" But this would all be in the context of what your PI's research interests are. If they specialise in DNA repair your research has to come under that umbrella. It will be your PI's equipment, lab space & reagents that you are using, so in the practical sense it also needs to be aligned with what the PI is doing. 

The "how screwed" part? Well, that really depends on why the PI is less than ideal. It might be that their research doesn't excite you as much...but you still learn a lot, get publications and do well on the job market once you graduate. If the PI is bad from a personality/lab management style/funding standpoint then you could be miserable. 

My advice is to be open-minded. Both in terms of research and PIs. The grad students who spend their entire rotation period adamant that they must work with Professor A or in Subfield B often get badly disappointed.

[Eigen]

My suggested rule of thumb is: Don't go somewhere there aren't at least 3 people you'd be happy working for. 

Lots of things happen- you might have competition for your favorite lab, funding might drop through, the person you want to work with may be an immense jerk, or they might leave/die/get sick/take a leave of absence. 

So having at least 3 leaves you some wiggle room, and chances are the other two will serve on your committee/be people you work with along the way. 

Some Chem programs, you don't even get a final choice- you rank your top 3 lab choices, the faculty meet and divide up students. 

Some are rotation based, some you know who you're working for before you even get there. 

[quanto]

Thanks for the help guys!

@Eigen So if I were to end up with a not-so-ideal PI, how screwed would I be? How much time would I spend working on their projects? Just my first year or two right? Then I move onto my own research I thought... And when I pick my own research topic, is it necessary for it to be very closely related to the PI's research?

[Eigen]

You will always be working on your PI's projects in a Chemistry PhD program. 

You have some leeway, depending on the advisor, in how those projects progress. But they are all under the umbrella of funding (and direction) or the PI, which is how you can get paid off of their grants. 

The way you describe things is how it works in some social science/humanities fields, and some non-bench STEM sciences. But "bench" STEM fields, you work on the projects your PI gives you. Labs tend to function like a small business, really. 

You don't mention subfield- if you're in a computational/theoretical field, you might have a bit more flexibility, but even then projects are going to be under the direction of your PI. 

That said, you can do a PhD on a topic that doesn't immensely interest you, and then go on to make your career around a topic that does, so it's not like you get locked into your doctoral work.

[quanto]

7 hours ago, Eigen said:

You will always be working on your PI's projects in a Chemistry PhD program. 

You have some leeway, depending on the advisor, in how those projects progress. But they are all under the umbrella of funding (and direction) or the PI, which is how you can get paid off of their grants. 

The way you describe things is how it works in some social science/humanities fields, and some non-bench STEM sciences. But "bench" STEM fields, you work on the projects your PI gives you. Labs tend to function like a small business, really. 

You don't mention subfield- if you're in a computational/theoretical field, you might have a bit more flexibility, but even then projects are going to be under the direction of your PI. 

That said, you can do a PhD on a topic that doesn't immensely interest you, and then go on to make your career around a topic that does, so it's not like you get locked into your doctoral work.

Wow, that comes as a huge surprise. I thought you pick your own research topic and that's what you write your thesis about... My subfield is chemical biology.

[quanto]

48 minutes ago, St Andrews Lynx said:

I'd be surprised if you got total freedom to do your own research project in Chemistry. The best-case, most likely scenario I can think of would be "hey, I saw based upon my preliminary results that X happens. Maybe we could extend it to Y and then use it to solve problem Z?" But this would all be in the context of what your PI's research interests are. If they specialise in DNA repair your research has to come under that umbrella. It will be your PI's equipment, lab space & reagents that you are using, so in the practical sense it also needs to be aligned with what the PI is doing. 

The "how screwed" part? Well, that really depends on why the PI is less than ideal. It might be that their research doesn't excite you as much...but you still learn a lot, get publications and do well on the job market once you graduate. If the PI is bad from a personality/lab management style/funding standpoint then you could be miserable. 

My advice is to be open-minded. Both in terms of research and PIs. The grad students who spend their entire rotation period adamant that they must work with Professor A or in Subfield B often get badly disappointed.

I'll keep that in mind. And yeah, it really makes sense when you put it into practical terms - such as using the PI's equipment and reagents - that I'd need to be aligned with their research to a large degree. I guess I need to make sure there are several PI's I'm interested in in order to avoid this becoming a problem.

[Eigen]

IMO, Chemical Biology is also one of the most restrictive in terms of needing to follow the PIs lead. Material costs are expensive, and publishable work often spans multiple graduate students/post-docs. 

That means the PI is general coordinating all of the research to join into one grant application/progress report/publication, and it restricts how much overall freedom you have. 

It's usually all about grants: The materials you are using are coming from a grant that had specific aims to do X, Y and Z. Each year, the PI has to justify how the money that went to you in a stipend and to the materials you used was moving forward X, Y and Z aims of the project. 

Else, the grant gets pulled for insufficient progress. 

You have more freedom if you have external funding (fellowships, scholarships, grants), but it still needs to contribute towards the grant aims and objectives, usually. 

Larger groups will have more grants and more possible areas to work in, but you won't get to do whatever you want, for sure.