Co-advising from a well-known, but Retiring Professor; Interdisciplinary PhD with JD or MPH

[BlakeNMR]

Hi all. Thanks in advance for reading my post. This forum has already been helpful in the two days that I've known about it.

I am a current senior. I go to a small, no-name liberal arts college, and dreamt of going to a Stanford/Berkeley early in my chemistry career. I'm fortunate in my undergrad experience to do well in my undergraduate program, but I have been in a very supportive and much easier environment than a competitive research university. I chose not to apply to any top, super competitive programs for this reason. I've heard unhappy stories from students who went to or work at those schools. I didn't want to drown when I may barely be able to swim.  

After completing an internship for and receiving letter of recommendation from a PI at a nearby research university (ranked well and respected in all of its programs, but not specifically known for its chemistry), I applied to and received a verbal offer from this school with ~30k stipend/yr. I applied to only this program because it has felt like a good fit, size and culture wise, and it seemed like a better next step than a competitive school. My partner also needs to finish school in the area next year, so this is also convenient for both of us, and I would not want to attend any of the other local schools for a PhD. I would rather wait a year and apply to a better known program that has specific research foci that align with mine. Even though I am interested in public health and environmental policy (which are addressed specifically in the PhD program at some schools like Berkeley), I figure that I can get a PhD first from this school and then get an MPH or JD online, locally, or elsewhere.

The previously mentioned PI is a sort of rock star in a specific area of research. After he verbally and loosely agreed to co-advising me (he has been flirting with retirement for the last 10 years), he recently confirmed that he would retire 2 years into my 5-year track. This means he would mentor me, but not be on my final thesis committee or an official advisor. However, having more work experience with him and receiving mentorship from him I think would be an honor. Additionally, and as much as I hate to say it, having his name as a part of my undergraduate research experience has already opened doors in networking. 

There is another, successful professor who is willing to co-advise with the first professor. I am excited at the prospect of this; although their research methods are not particularly interesting to me, both of their careers and collaborative projects include answering some very cool and relevant research questions. However, some of my peers are telling me that by having co-advisors with one of them retiring is basically shooting myself in the foot. They think co-advising might be messy and that I would be stranded when professor 1 retires. 

Now for my questions:

#1: Do any of you have experience with or know of co-advising situations? How did they go? What do you think I should do? I've already read some posts about co-advising, but they weren't as unique as my situation with a PI being a big name and also retiring mid-PhD. 

#2: Is it a poor idea to go to a not competitive school that doesn't focus on public health or environmental policy when that is my end goal? There is a possible joint JD degree available at this school, and I know I could get a JD or MPH after completing the PhD. I just don't know if people who work in this sort of interdisciplinary field have to go to a school focused on green chemistry or public health to be competitive and effective in the job market and society, respectively. I also figured that if I don't go to a top 10 school that having an interdisciplinary approach would make me more niche and competitive (easing my concerns about not being competitive if I don't go to a Berkeley). I am hoping to use the next 5 years to gain relevant research and networking experience in fields that could relate to public health. 

#3: Will I be unhappy working in a lab that has research techniques that do not particularly interest me, but is using those techniques to answer research questions that I find fascinating? I haven't particularly loved FTIR, NMR, HPLC, etc, but I've always found ways to use them answer questions that interest me during my undergraduate experience.

 

If you made it this far, thank you! I am happy to give back to this forum with advice about what made my application to this program a success.  

Edited January 8, 2017 by BlakeNMR
cleaned up repeats in content

[BlakeNMR]

Could an admin perhaps move this to the research section? Thanks!

[fuzzylogician]

Done (though I'm not sure your post should really be here). 

[rising_star]

Honestly, this doesn't really belong in the research section because your questions aren't really about doing research but okay...The overarching issue here is your own lack of self-confidence and how you're not even willing to put yourself in the best position to have the career you want. I'll get back to that though.

To answer your questions in order:

1) I know of many co-advising situations. It's impossible to generalize them though because a lot is dependent on the personalities of those involved (both professors as well as the student). The real question is whether these two professors work well enough together for this co-advising situation to be a success. One thing you should do is clarify how involved Prof 1 will be after retiring before you commit to this school.

2) Yea, it's a bad idea to go to a school where you can't do the kinds of things you actually want to be doing after graduation. 

3) None of us can tell you what would make you happy.

To me, it seems like your best option at this point would be to go to this school and leave with a master's and full support of Professor 1 as they retire. Then you can apply to PhD programs elsewhere where you can actually study the things you want to study using the techniques which interest you. Right now, you're not putting yourself in the best position for your future career. You're trying to make the best of a bad situation (Prof 1's retirement), letting a relationship influence a decision which will affect your entire career, and not really thinking about your long-term career needs.

[aberrant]

#1 I also know some people with co-advisors. With 1 retiring though, maybe 1 or 2. Typically it ends up doing more of the work for professor 2 (who is still active) than professor 1 (retiring). 'Big name' or not is rather subjective. Being a 'big name' in your field usually doesn't mean much to everybody else (unless that person has been receiving international prizes, I supposed), but it doesn't make your situation more (or less) unique than the other who has 2 advisors with 'small names'. 

#2 It depends. If I understand correctly, you are trading your time for all these degrees that may lead to your dream career. If you must get a PhD first, before your JD / MPH, then your PhD can certainly be acquired from a less / non-competitive program; your idea scenario is to acquire your actual terminal degree (i.e. JD / MPH) from a competitive program.

#3 that is totally up to you. Realistically though, you don't need a PhD for JD / MPH, and if you truly wants a PhD + JD / PhD + MPH, there are schools do that. I personally don't see how your research experience and experimental techniques (i.e.  FTIR, NMR, HPLC, etc.) can vitally help your career that requires JD or MPH. Maybe you can gain some scientific knowledge related to public health or environmental policy, but to my understanding, individuals who went into those fields are MD / MD-MPH / MPH students or biologists/chemists/oceanographers turned to science/environmental policy through postdoctoral scholarships (that's right, you don't need a JD for that). If you have no motivation to do whatever that particular PhD program has to offer, it will be very challenging for you to survive graduate school.

To me, I don't see why OP should even go to a PhD program in Chemistry. I think that the time can better spend elsewhere.

Edited January 10, 2017 by aberrant

[BlakeNMR]

@rising_star @aberrant thank you both for the feedback and constructive criticism. To provide some context, the issue I've had in the past is actually overconfidence when it comes to this sort of stuff. That arrogance has caused me to get blindsided a few times. I've been a big fish in a small pond for a while at my college, and I've seen some intellectually comparable peers go to competitive graduate schools and have a hard time (i.e. flunk out). 

Part of what my post underscores is a concern that my undergraduate education hasn't prepared me well enough for this next experience. I've been doing a lot of reflecting about that, and I guess it really came out in my post.  I witnessed that to some extent when I completed my assistantship last summer, and it was a good wake up call. I should add that this program isn't uncompetitive or lax... it's around 30 in US news for chem specifically but many of its collaborative projects are with top 10 programs, and its med school (which my potential PIs do research in) is always top 10. I don't know if this changes anything about your comments...

I also am feeling a little weird about the JD and MPH tracks right now. i've spent a lot of time researching well ranked and funded programs, and I keep reading posts and news articles about students going in debt for degrees in these areas that they have a hard time finding jobs in. I digress...

[aberrant]

It's 3 am and I'm most definitely getting viral infection in my throat. So I do apologized if I'm repeating myself in the following message...

I think that there are too many reasons why people dropping out of grad schools. So I wouldn't read too much on that.

Whether that program is top 5 or top 500, I think the first and foremost question(s) that you have to ask yourself is/are "can this PhD in Chemistry / <insert a noun for a specific subfield of> Chemistry take me to where I want to be, or what I want to do", and/or the equivalence of "do I need this degree to become <insert a word/line/sentence/description of your ideal career". I was a quasi-traditional grad school applicant, because I took sometime off during my undergraduate studies (not between undergrad and grad but in the middle of undergrad). Now that I am near the end of my grad school training, I still am working towards my career goal that absolutely requires a PhD, which means that I have no other options to begin with (but I enjoy it quite a lot of what I have been doing in grad school, so I'm not really complaining). I can only imagine that most people who are on the same boat would feel the same/similar way, and completely opposite for the ones who went to grad school for 'wrong' reasons (the word 'wrong' is completely subjective here).

I just think that before committing your next 4-6 years in graduate school, which may (or may not) take you steps closer to your career goal, you definitely should consider all the possible options. Would you be happy doing those experiments/research that you are less/not interested in? Would you rather spend 4-6 years in grad school before a 4-year JD / 2-year MPH program, or straight to a 4-year JD / 2-year MPH program? How about spending 7-9 years in a joint PhD-MPH / PhD-JD programs? (Noticed that the game plan here influence on how much of tuition fees you have to pay out-of-pocket / from student loan, assuming that you are not awarding any sorts of scholarships / fellowships. To my understanding, any PhD / joint PhD programs have tuition waivers. I know people who are/were in PhD-MD and PhD-MBA programs do not have to pay 'anything' -- just like many other PhD students -- but either take longer years or have a crazy, fully packed schedule.)

It is also a great start to look into funding opportunities that fund JD / MPH programs (if any). I most definitely understand that possible debt situation that you may get into. Hence the above questions/suggestions that I would guide you towards to. (Don't forget that time can be expensive, too!)

Good luck!

Edited January 11, 2017 by aberrant