2017 Applicant Profiles and Admissions Results

[AGradStudentHasNoName]

2 minutes ago, Epigenetics said:

I don't have anything to prove, I was just trying to provide information I have. Good luck, you'll be missed at the genome sciences interviews!

Thanks for the sentiment. I still expect we will cross paths eventually.

[Kaede]

 

9 minutes ago, Epigenetics said:

As someone who's spent two years now in a high-power Harvard Medical School lab, I can tell you like by definition if you get two first-author papers they graduate you, it can even only take one, that's a remarkably high rate to anticipate.

Doesn't it also depend on program flexibility/PIs though? Perhaps not at Harvard, but the PI I did research for over the summer would not let you graduate unless you had 3 first-author publications and one review.

[Dragon_ChemBio]

34 minutes ago, pepmochaa said:

I applied too! No word yet, but it looks like it past years interviews weren't released until January. 

I just got an interview offer from them today, which was really surprising. I wasn't expecting any news until January, especially since I submitted my app a day before it was due.

Regardless, I think they have yet to send out the vast majority of interview offers. Hope you get an invite!

 

Edited December 22, 2016 by Dragon_ChemBio

[Epigenetics]

11 minutes ago, Kaede said:

 

Doesn't it also depend on program flexibility/PIs though? Perhaps not at Harvard, but the PI I did research for over the summer would not let you graduate unless you had 3 first-author publications and one review.

I mean there are a lot of mitigating factors. Your PI doesn't really decide when you graduate, your DAC does, but some professors are more willing to get you through faster than others. Also to a certain extent it depends on how much you actually did and how high-quality and rigorous the work is. But my experience with people in several different Harvard programs is once you have one or two first author papers accepted that's when you're able to graduate if you want. 

My point was not that it is literally impossible to have four papers in four years. I'm actually a bad person to talk to about this, since I have four papers (submitted or in preparation) that I'm (co-)first author on from the past 18 months. However, I'm in a fortunate position since I didn't have to collect any of the data like I would've had to for a PhD, so it would've taken a lot longer to do those other steps. Fields also vary on this to be sure, but PhD students tend to take a while to get their sea legs, and review is a bitch, so there are common mitigating factors.

So there are of course mitigating factors, but the likely combination is some version of either (a) you graduate in 3-4 years when the first couple papers are accepted or (b) you graduate whenever you get the first one accepted after however many years that is. Outliers exist, my point was that it's not common or really expected.

Edited December 22, 2016 by Epigenetics

[Kaede]

3 minutes ago, Epigenetics said:

I mean there are a lot of mitigating factors. Your PI doesn't really decide when you graduate, your DAC does, but some professors are more willing to get you through faster than others. Also to a certain extent it depends on how much you actually did and how high-quality and rigorous the work is. But my experience with people in several different Harvard programs is once you have one or two first author papers accepted that's when you're able to graduate if you want. 

My point was not that it is literally impossible to have four papers in four years. I'm actually a bad person to talk to about this, since I have four papers I'm (co-)first author on from the past 18 months. However, I'm in a fortunate position since I didn't have to collect any of the data like I would've had to for a PhD, so it would've taken a lot longer to do those other steps. Fields also vary on this to be sure, but PhD students tend to take a while to get their sea legs, and review is a bitch, so there are common mitigating factors.

So there are of course mitigating factors, but the likely combination is some version of either (a) you graduate in 3-4 years when the first couple papers are accepted or (b) you graduate whenever you get the first one accepted after however many years that is. Outliers exist, my point was that it's not common or really expected.

Great, thank you for the clarification!

[Bioenchilada]

15 minutes ago, AGradStudentHasNoName said:

Thanks for the sentiment. I still expect we will cross paths eventually.

Hopefully your attitude is not reflected on your SOP, because you are sounding kind of mean and bratty. Not only that but you sound kind of entitled...

[Epigenetics]

2 minutes ago, Kaede said:

Great, thank you for the clarification!

On that note do ask programs how long it takes for people to graduate, and ask professors as well before you actually join their lab during your PhD. I have friends who didn't realize everyone in their lab takes 6-7 years to graduate because the projects are so labor-intensive and difficult, and now regret it.

[blueyellow]

Hello! I was just wondering if anyone knows anything about Duke MGM results? also curious if anyone on here knows much about Brown Pathobiology--I have an interview there and am super excited but I don't know very much about the school itself, mostly just the program. I'd love to hear any opinions/ stories!  

[AGradStudentHasNoName]

25 minutes ago, Epigenetics said:

I mean there are a lot of mitigating factors. Your PI doesn't really decide when you graduate, your DAC does, but some professors are more willing to get you through faster than others. Also to a certain extent it depends on how much you actually did and how high-quality and rigorous the work is. But my experience with people in several different Harvard programs is once you have one or two first author papers accepted that's when you're able to graduate if you want. 

My point was not that it is literally impossible to have four papers in four years. I'm actually a bad person to talk to about this, since I have four papers (submitted or in preparation) that I'm (co-)first author on from the past 18 months. However, I'm in a fortunate position since I didn't have to collect any of the data like I would've had to for a PhD, so it would've taken a lot longer to do those other steps. Fields also vary on this to be sure, but PhD students tend to take a while to get their sea legs, and review is a bitch, so there are common mitigating factors.

So there are of course mitigating factors, but the likely combination is some version of either (a) you graduate in 3-4 years when the first couple papers are accepted or (b) you graduate whenever you get the first one accepted after however many years that is. Outliers exist, my point was that it's not common or really expected.

I don't plan on collecting any data if at all possible. I have selected my programs and labs such that they have excellent data generation resources, people generating that data, and loads of existing data that they own. This has been a primary concern of mine. I've done wet lab work in the distant past. No thanks! (no offense to the many wet lab researchers here, please collab with me lol)

[myhairtiebroke]

3 minutes ago, AGradStudentHasNoName said:

I've done wet lab work in the distant past. No thanks! (no offense to the many wet lab researchers here, please collab with me lol)

Did you mention this sentiment in your SOPs? Because that seems like a boner killer for adcoms. Additionally, expecting your program/lab to generate, or already have, data for you is an incredibly entitled mindset.

[sivis]

5 minutes ago, AGradStudentHasNoName said:

I don't plan on collecting any data if at all possible. I have selected my programs and labs such that they have excellent data generation resources, people generating that data, and loads of existing data that they own. This has been a primary concern of mine. I've done wet lab work in the distant past. No thanks! (no offense to the many wet lab researchers here, please collab with me lol)

I don't know that much about comp bio programs or labs, but if this was a primary concern of yours and something you specifically talked about throughout your applications, this may have played against you? It seems like you should at least be open to generating some data even if you have a wealth of established data from your lab...

[pepmochaa]

1 minute ago, myhairtiebroke said:

Did you mention this sentiment in your SOPs? Because that seems like a boner killer for adcoms. Additionally, expecting your program/lab to generate, or already have, data for you is an incredibly entitled mindset.

Really? As someone who does benchwork, I didn't feel like AGradStudentHasNoName came off as entitled. Many labs at my institution hire a biocomp individual to help analyze data after benchwork is complete. Having someone specialize in just data analysis really makes the process more efficient and increases the likelihood of the analysis being correct since thats their specialty. Plus, they can work more on the data analysis since they aren't generating. Just my two cents!

[sivis]

2 minutes ago, pepmochaa said:

Really? As someone who does benchwork, I didn't feel like AGradStudentHasNoName came off as entitled. Many labs at my institution hire a biocomp individual to help analyze data after benchwork is complete. Having someone specialize in just data analysis really makes the process more efficient and increases the likelihood of the analysis being correct since thats their specialty. Plus, they can work more on the data analysis since they aren't generating. Just my two cents!

That's something I definitely see across all the labs I've been in, but they would be doing that as a PhD student and not as someone who has been hired. I'm not sure how that would translate to authorship, especially primary authorship that many programs require for graduation.

[AGradStudentHasNoName]

8 minutes ago, myhairtiebroke said:

Did you mention this sentiment in your SOPs? Because that seems like a boner killer for adcoms. Additionally, expecting your program/lab to generate, or already have, data for you is an incredibly entitled mindset.

No. I didn't mention this in my sop or anywhere else in my application. I didn't highlight my wet lab work because its not what I expect to be doing in grad school. I'm not sure why it is entitled. There are many public data sources upon which we can create new computational methods and publish research. It is easier if the data is private as fewer people have had the chance to analyze that data. If the methods used to analyze the data constitute novel research then great, that is a paper.

3 minutes ago, sivis said:

That's something I definitely see across all the labs I've been in, but they would be doing that as a PhD student and not as someone who has been hired. I'm not sure how that would translate to authorship, especially primary authorship that many programs require for graduation.

This is dealt with in many labs. It depends on whether the novel aspect is the biology/hypothesis or the computational methods used. If the answer is one or the other, the first authorship is easy to figure out. If it is both, sometimes there are dual first authors (increasingly common) and sometimes there are 2 papers one focusing on the method and one focusing on the results.

[Kaede]

Is a long skirt/long sleeved shirt too casual to wear to interviews? I'm not a huge fan of the usual slacks/blouse combo.

[Epigenetics]

31 minutes ago, pepmochaa said:

Really? As someone who does benchwork, I didn't feel like AGradStudentHasNoName came off as entitled. Many labs at my institution hire a biocomp individual to help analyze data after benchwork is complete. Having someone specialize in just data analysis really makes the process more efficient and increases the likelihood of the analysis being correct since thats their specialty. Plus, they can work more on the data analysis since they aren't generating. Just my two cents!

There's again a fine line here. There are projects with large data sets (looking at shRNA screens, TCGA exome data, GWAS data sets) where the data collection isn't the project. But there are also many projects like what I do which is cell line work that requires someone to spend a lot of time doing the wet lab work to collect the data. If you want to be a biostat person and are in a dry lab analyzing common data sets, that's one thing. But it's very difficult to lead a project where you're not responsible for actually doing the experiments. 

Also @pepmochaa that is literally my role in my lab, so it's not uncommon, but those tend to be staff scientists if they only do the bioinformatics. Most grad students/postdocs in cell line work generate their own data for the projects they lead, in addition to assisting on other projects. It is more efficient, that's why I don't do wet lab work right now, but the criteria for lab efficiency and independent research in pursuit of a PhD are rather different.

[PRR]

I was too slow at responding to Michigan's PIBS interview invite and the weekend that I don't have a conflict on is already full...

Do you think they will be willing to squeeze a few people into a full weekend?

Edited December 22, 2016 by PRR

[geneticginger]

I have a dilemma that I'm trying to parse out. I received an interview invitation from Emory and I need to let them know by the 29th if I accept the interview. Emory only has one interview weekend and that weekend falls the same time as one of Duke's interview weekends and one of UNC's interview weekends. I don't know if I'll get into either program but I likely won't know until after the 29th. Should I decline Emory and wait to hear from Duke and UNC and potentially shoot myself in the foot? Or keep Emory and not be able to interview with Duke or UNC? UNC may have another interview weekend but Duke's other interview weekend is when I have an interview with another school. 

[sivis]

4 minutes ago, geneticginger said:

I have a dilemma that I'm trying to parse out. I received an interview invitation from Emory and I need to let them know by the 29th if I accept the interview. Emory only has one interview weekend and that weekend falls the same time as one of Duke's interview weekends and one of UNC's interview weekends. I don't know if I'll get into either program but I likely won't know until after the 29th. Should I decline Emory and wait to hear from Duke and UNC and potentially shoot myself in the foot? Or keep Emory and not be able to interview with Duke or UNC? UNC may have another interview weekend but Duke's other interview weekend is when I have an interview with another school. 

I think that depends on how you prioritize the programs according to your own interests. You can ask to extend the timeframe, but a few people already ran into weekends getting full. For my UNC interview, they gave me two choices, but they were in conflict with two other interview weekends of mine. I asked if they had any others, they gave me a third option and that's the one I switched to. There's no harm in asking if there's other options, especially if you're really interested in the Emory and Duke programs. 

[Yeast]

7 hours ago, MoreInformation said:

I emailed the program; all Harvard BBS invitations were sent by email on December 16. 

Have been fortunate to receive interviews at Hopkins, Yale, Berkeley, and UCSF, but this is definitely disappointing. 

Wait, so Harvard BBS is done sending out all the invites?

[myhairtiebroke]

38 minutes ago, PRR said:

I was too slow at responding to Michigan's PIBS interview invite and the weekend that I don't have a conflict on is already full...

Do you think they will be willing to squeeze a few people into a full weekened?

No harm in asking. I'm sure they have experience with situations like yours.

[Bioenchilada]

21 minutes ago, RachanaDS said:

Wait, so Harvard BBS is done sending out all the invites?

Yes

[EmpireStateofPanic]

If this helps in any way...

As of Monday:

Applied: Columbia GSAS, Pitt IBGP, Miami, Loyola Chicago, Case Western, Mount Sinai, Thomas Jefferson, NYU Sackler, GWU, Northwestern DGP, BU PiBS.

**Interviewing

[PRR]

2 minutes ago, EmpireStateofPanic said:

If this helps in any way...

As of Monday:

Applied: Columbia GSAS, Pitt IBGP, Miami, Loyola Chicago, Case Western, Mount Sinai, Thomas Jefferson, NYU Sackler, GWU, Northwestern DGP, BU PiBS.

**Interviewing

Which interview weekend did you get for Pitt?

[Yeast]

9 minutes ago, Bioenchilada said:

Yes

Crap! This is not good. Do you think emailing the program coordinator will be the right thing to do? Or maybe, I should wait. I just want to make I am not being hopeful when I don't really have any chances.