- Joined
- Dec 24, 2015
- Messages
- 15
- Reaction score
- 1
Hi guys,
Thanks in advance for reading and replying! I'd really love your input, if only to the short version
Here's the short of it: I've got two degrees -- one in Neuroscience, and one in music (a self-designed major in Psychomusicology from a top music school). While the topic of my music degree reflects my desire to be a physician scientist in the field of neuroscience, music is qualitative, not quantitative; it shows I've got diverse interests and skills, but it doesn't necessarily demonstrate my potential for success as a physician scientist.
As I'm getting ready to apply this coming cycle, for Fall 2017 matriculation (fingers crossed), I'm not sure how to best walk that line between "look at my diverse accomplishments" and "I'm really focused on being a physician scientist."
Here's the long of it: I attended a dual-degree program, and earned a B.A. in Neuroscience with a 3.7 science GPA. I also earned a Bachelor's of Music in Psychomusicology, with a curriculum I designed myself. This major was equal parts ethnomusicology/anthropology, music composition, and computer science.
For my "Capstone" music project (the music conservatory equivalent to my Neuroscience senior seminar, or independent research) I created an interactive audiovisual program that utilizes data from a cheap, commercial, one-electrode EEG headband. I extracted steady-state raw data from the headband's single frontal electrode, and used this data to generate a colorful and musical immersive environment that responds to changes in the user's general "mental state".
Of course, while this uses my experience in EEG research, this isn't scientific -- it's artistic! More than anything, it was an art project designed to explore the disconnect we experience between our "selves" and our "brains." This is the age of pop science, especially neuroscience; everyone wants to know what their brain activity means. This project doesn't give any scientific answers, but looks for an artistic way to express the continual brain activity that underlies our conscious selves.
I also had the chance to interact with a fellow student who is autistic and severely symptomatic (non-verbal, wheelchair-confined, normal intelligence, amazing writer). He said he's always looking for ways to express himself, although he's limited by his inability to use his hands and voice. He's often turned to multimedia, and feels that music and art technology have the untapped capacity to facilitate artistic expression in autistic people. Obviously, my program isn't a therapeutic tool; but there are so many parents of autistic children who spend ridiculous amounts of money trying out any therapy they can find, including "biofeedback therapy" and "art therapy." I'm intrigued by the idea that an $80 piece of hardware could supplement some of these activities, lightening the financial load while allowing autistic users to "paint pictures" and "create music" just by wearing a headband. It's not medical -- I repeat, I know it's NOT therapy -- but it could improve the quality of life for those who are nonverbal and have poor hand coordination, as I believe that creativity is an essential aspect of a happy life.
But again... This isn't quantitative research. This is just my passion. In the years since graduation, while working full-time as an EMT and preparing for the MCAT, I've continued developing the program, but strictly as a hobby. Occasionally I have a gallery show, where people can come in and wear the headband, and explore how the program responds as they interact with others in the gallery.
Here's my question: How do I talk about this in my essays and interviews (assuming I get invited)?
I don't want to make it sound like I see this as "scientific research," since it's really an artistic and social pursuit. While it does reflect my strong conviction that artistic devices should be developed for disabled users, there's no science backing this up.
On top of that, I am largely a self-taught programmer, with this hobby of mine being the primary driving force to code. That driving force, and my subsequent development of strong programming skills, has led me to two research experiences that involve programming: EEG analysis that required creating custom Python programs from scratch; and a summer research experience exploring different measures of network clustering in spike train data, again from scratch. The EEG project is my "primary" research experience; I took that work to SfN in 2014 as first author and poster presenter.
Since I don't really have the academic background of a programmer, I feel like my music pursuits could be an effective way to demonstrate that I'm a solid coder and a dedicated self-learner. They demonstrate two HUGE aspects that I feel like MSTP programs look for: passion and dedication, and the ability to learn and adapt quickly, with little supervision.
All told: I feel like this experience could really make me stand out as an applicant if I present it in the right way. I'm just not sure what the "right way" to present it is!
If I throw around words like "steady-state" and "EEG" and "autism therapies," they might think I'm just some nut who thinks she's doing quantitative therapeutic research on her own. Which I'm not; this is my music, and my secondary passion. I don't want a career as an artist; I want a career as a physician scientist in clinical neuroimaging research. How to best demonstrate the relevance of my music background?
Thanks for reading.... I'd love to hear your (totally unedited) thoughts and impressions.
Peace,
DocOctopus
Thanks in advance for reading and replying! I'd really love your input, if only to the short version
Here's the short of it: I've got two degrees -- one in Neuroscience, and one in music (a self-designed major in Psychomusicology from a top music school). While the topic of my music degree reflects my desire to be a physician scientist in the field of neuroscience, music is qualitative, not quantitative; it shows I've got diverse interests and skills, but it doesn't necessarily demonstrate my potential for success as a physician scientist.
As I'm getting ready to apply this coming cycle, for Fall 2017 matriculation (fingers crossed), I'm not sure how to best walk that line between "look at my diverse accomplishments" and "I'm really focused on being a physician scientist."
Here's the long of it: I attended a dual-degree program, and earned a B.A. in Neuroscience with a 3.7 science GPA. I also earned a Bachelor's of Music in Psychomusicology, with a curriculum I designed myself. This major was equal parts ethnomusicology/anthropology, music composition, and computer science.
For my "Capstone" music project (the music conservatory equivalent to my Neuroscience senior seminar, or independent research) I created an interactive audiovisual program that utilizes data from a cheap, commercial, one-electrode EEG headband. I extracted steady-state raw data from the headband's single frontal electrode, and used this data to generate a colorful and musical immersive environment that responds to changes in the user's general "mental state".
Of course, while this uses my experience in EEG research, this isn't scientific -- it's artistic! More than anything, it was an art project designed to explore the disconnect we experience between our "selves" and our "brains." This is the age of pop science, especially neuroscience; everyone wants to know what their brain activity means. This project doesn't give any scientific answers, but looks for an artistic way to express the continual brain activity that underlies our conscious selves.
I also had the chance to interact with a fellow student who is autistic and severely symptomatic (non-verbal, wheelchair-confined, normal intelligence, amazing writer). He said he's always looking for ways to express himself, although he's limited by his inability to use his hands and voice. He's often turned to multimedia, and feels that music and art technology have the untapped capacity to facilitate artistic expression in autistic people. Obviously, my program isn't a therapeutic tool; but there are so many parents of autistic children who spend ridiculous amounts of money trying out any therapy they can find, including "biofeedback therapy" and "art therapy." I'm intrigued by the idea that an $80 piece of hardware could supplement some of these activities, lightening the financial load while allowing autistic users to "paint pictures" and "create music" just by wearing a headband. It's not medical -- I repeat, I know it's NOT therapy -- but it could improve the quality of life for those who are nonverbal and have poor hand coordination, as I believe that creativity is an essential aspect of a happy life.
But again... This isn't quantitative research. This is just my passion. In the years since graduation, while working full-time as an EMT and preparing for the MCAT, I've continued developing the program, but strictly as a hobby. Occasionally I have a gallery show, where people can come in and wear the headband, and explore how the program responds as they interact with others in the gallery.
Here's my question: How do I talk about this in my essays and interviews (assuming I get invited)?
I don't want to make it sound like I see this as "scientific research," since it's really an artistic and social pursuit. While it does reflect my strong conviction that artistic devices should be developed for disabled users, there's no science backing this up.
On top of that, I am largely a self-taught programmer, with this hobby of mine being the primary driving force to code. That driving force, and my subsequent development of strong programming skills, has led me to two research experiences that involve programming: EEG analysis that required creating custom Python programs from scratch; and a summer research experience exploring different measures of network clustering in spike train data, again from scratch. The EEG project is my "primary" research experience; I took that work to SfN in 2014 as first author and poster presenter.
Since I don't really have the academic background of a programmer, I feel like my music pursuits could be an effective way to demonstrate that I'm a solid coder and a dedicated self-learner. They demonstrate two HUGE aspects that I feel like MSTP programs look for: passion and dedication, and the ability to learn and adapt quickly, with little supervision.
All told: I feel like this experience could really make me stand out as an applicant if I present it in the right way. I'm just not sure what the "right way" to present it is!
If I throw around words like "steady-state" and "EEG" and "autism therapies," they might think I'm just some nut who thinks she's doing quantitative therapeutic research on her own. Which I'm not; this is my music, and my secondary passion. I don't want a career as an artist; I want a career as a physician scientist in clinical neuroimaging research. How to best demonstrate the relevance of my music background?
Thanks for reading.... I'd love to hear your (totally unedited) thoughts and impressions.
Peace,
DocOctopus
Last edited:
