1st author...How?

[inycepoo]

It's just my experience I'm reporting. No need to get offensive here.

You didn't take the time to read my previous post, otherwise you would have noticed the list doesn't represent schools that don't have tons of grad students. The list highlights schools that give their undergraduates the best creative project/undergraduate research opportunities. I simply stated my school doesn't have many graduate students. If you took the time to read the USNWR description of the list, it states that the work generally results in a publication or off-campus presentation. While I agree USNWR is not the best source, it's a decent place to start when looking at what schools offer what. I think this list is better than the general USNWR top schools list because this list is gathered through polling over 1,500 schools' administrators to submit schools they believe offer the best undergraduate research experience.

No offense intended.

However, if you've worked with some school administrators, you'll know that their opinions are as unfounded as yours or mine. USNWR is never good for anything but hearsay, like this list.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[inycepoo]

I think it's funny that a group of people wanting to become doctors think publishing in Peds or NEJM isn't as important as publishing in J. Biol. Chem.

The worst is the superiority complex physics/math researchers have when it comes to talking about engineering publications.

When did I say that? Both are equally important; one is not to be frowned upon by those engaging in the other field.

 

[zippyziggy]

When did I say that? Both are equally important; one is not to be frowned upon by those engaging in the other field.

i think he was agreeing with you, dear. not everything on SDN is meant to be a swipe

 

[SN12357]

well it's less of a huge deal because it's more common, easier to publish, and takes a shorter amount of time to publish. yeah sure it can be more impactful - it wasn't a value judgment at all. i did outcomes research once too, you know, and will do it again this coming year.

I'm baffled by all ya'll saying that it's easier or faster to publish clinical epi papers.

In my experience and the experience of people I know it's easier to get on a basic science paper because it's more common to include research assistants who primarily just do the data collection. It's also easier to turn around smaller, self-contained projects. Whereas, epi research often involves large cohort studies that have HUGE research staffs and it's not at all a given to put RAs onto papers because you'd have to put on everyone And, the analysts are often full-time statisticians.

And maybe turnaround time on reviews is faster or something, but our data collection often takes longer. Granted, once you HAVE your dataset you often can start churning out papers because you've literally just spent 2-3 years building a cohort and can finally reap the benefits. Landing in the research group at the right time makes a huge difference because of that.

I'm in my third year of working in clinical research full-time and finally at the point where I have a high likelihood of multiple publications this year. And we're one of the most highly published groups in our field.

The basic science snobbery can, of course, jump off a cliff.

 

[zippyziggy]

I'm baffled by all ya'll saying that it's easier or faster to publish clinical epi papers.

In my experience and the experience of people I know it's easier to get on a basic science paper because it's more common to include research assistants who primarily just do the data collection. It's also easier to turn around smaller, self-contained projects. Whereas, epi research often involves large cohort studies that have HUGE research staffs and it's not at all a given to put RAs onto papers because you'd have to put on everyone And, the analysts are often full-time statisticians.

And maybe turnaround time on reviews is faster or something, but our data collection often takes longer. Granted, once you HAVE your dataset you often can start churning out papers because you've literally just spent 2-3 years building a cohort and can finally reap the benefits. Landing in the research group at the right time makes a huge difference because of that.

I'm in my third year of working in clinical research full-time and finally at the point where I have a high likelihood of multiple publications this year. And we're one of the most highly published groups in our field.

The basic science snobbery can, of course, jump off a cliff.

yeah i only said that because most premeds don't know what kind of research that entails - you say clinical, or epi, and they think outcomes. none of those three areas are the same. clinical papers are easy to co-author, impossible to get a first authorship on as an undergrad. same with epi - though co-authoring an epi paper is hard for the reasons you list, and not many undergrads do work in epi. outcomes is a different story altogether.

so yeah, out of expediency i made an incorrect statement. my bad.

 

[deleted530324]

Yeah, the real way PIs see it is that they are wasting their money and grad students' time to train you, so you really don't deserve anything unless you end up being somebody who shows passion, can produce data for them, and that they actually like. If you work under a grad student that likes you, they will most likely put you as a lower author on their paper which is pretty damn good for an undergrad. If it's a small lab or you really show true potential you might be able to get a first author, otherwise try and get on a project with somebody who publishes frequently. Use google scholar to look up the names of PIs and grad students to see how many papers they have and how many people they put on the paper. Find a lab that has solid funding. Don't be afraid to change labs if the vibe is negative and/or it's not an environment that you like working in. There are so many BS factors that go into publishing that med schools definitely don't expect it, but if you manage to be that productive as an undergrad or can jump through the hoops to get published, there is really not a lot that you can't do.

Yes.

I have a first author pub in a low-impact journal. This came after three years of research at the same lab. There are five factors that I think contributed to me getting first author on the paper:

1. This was an engineering lab, not a basic science lab. Engineering research tends to be more incremental than basic science, in my opinion, so I think it is easier for undergrads to complete publishable engineering work by themselves.
2. I was the only undergrad in the lab; there wasn't a lot of interest in engineering research at my undergrad institution. It was also a small lab (only five graduate students), so I got plenty of one-on-one time with the PI.
3. I won multiple research grants. They're not that hard to get, really, if you have a good GPA and some aptitude for writing research proposals. The nice thing about undergraduate research grants is that they are usually given for you to pursue a hypothesis of your own choosing. Now in reality, most undergrads aren't knowledgeable enough to be able to come up with a workable hypothesis by themselves. What happens more frequently is that the undergrad will choose a hypothesis in conjunction with his or her PI and then do the requisite background research and write up the research proposal. This is exactly what happened with me.
4. I was initially assigned to work with a grad student, but he was very close to defending his thesis, and as time went on, he started to get busier and busier with preparing for his defense. As a result, I had to work alone on much of the project, and I ended up doing about 75% to 80% of the total work. When it came time to decide who would be first author on the paper, this made me a natural choice.
5. My PI was just nice. I never asked to be first author, and my PI could have easily decided that he wanted the grad student to be first author. I wouldn't have argued.

Yes.

I am doing a research gap-year. I will have a collection of co-authorships and may have a first authorship. I am in a epidemiology/clinical research lab so that makes it ALOT easier.

First authorship really requires PURE knowledge and knowhow. Writing a manuscript is hard. I am writing a paper on data from a former student's project to be published and my PI is being nice and letting me draft it.... It's still crazy.

I know I am rambling but here me out. To those that don't have publications having one is a BIG deal. Having a coauthor in Science/Cell/JAMA/NEJM is a BIG deal. Having a first author as a traditional undergrad in ANY journal is out of this world. If you are a gap year person doing a research gig etc. it is still awesome.

Yes, this is all great advice. I wish I knew all this stuff when I was looking for a lab. I didn't even know what biochemistry was back then, and I was a senior! Late transfers do funky things to careers. But hey, now that I've had to wait a year to apply, I've been researching full time for two years since graduating and I'll have some serious coauthorships. Too bad my first couple are under review right now and it feels wrong to list them as publications on my applications.

Oh man, someone should write an article on how to get involved in research as an undergrad. Publish it on SDN, we could all be coauthor's!

... after I finish my secondaries of course.

 

[Mel Belle]

So my trajectory is MD/PhD. I'll be a sophomore in the fall and have actually been told I have to wait until the spring to do research. (I could only get in with the biochemist, I'm a biochem major anyway, but I need to finish cell/molec bio and orgo 1 to do research with her) During freshman year my adviser kept telling me I'll have to wait until next year. But I'm worried. I plan to apply for summer research internships to do them every summer but... I'm just afraid it's not gonna be "enough" research for someone who will be applying MD/PhD. I really love research, and it's something I do wanna do. Hopefully this isn't too off-topic. But I do have a related on-topic question... How important is publication to getting into an MD/PhD program? Let alone authorship. I am a hardworking individual with a high GPA, so I am just a bit afraid of this situation holding me back.

 

[911 Turbo]

So my trajectory is MD/PhD. I'll be a sophomore in the fall and have actually been told I have to wait until the spring to do research. (I could only get in with the biochemist, I'm a biochem major anyway, but I need to finish cell/molec bio and orgo 1 to do research with her) During freshman year my adviser kept telling me I'll have to wait until next year. But I'm worried. I plan to apply for summer research internships to do them every summer but... I'm just afraid it's not gonna be "enough" research for someone who will be applying MD/PhD. I really love research, and it's something I do wanna do. Hopefully this isn't too off-topic. But I do have a related on-topic question... How important is publication to getting into an MD/PhD program? Let alone authorship. I am a hardworking individual with a high GPA, so I am just a bit afraid of this situation holding me back.

not needed per se but it is very very nice to have from what I hear




so yeah, you pretty much need on if you want to be a very competitive applicant

 

[LuciusVorenus]

So my trajectory is MD/PhD. I'll be a sophomore in the fall and have actually been told I have to wait until the spring to do research. (I could only get in with the biochemist, I'm a biochem major anyway, but I need to finish cell/molec bio and orgo 1 to do research with her) During freshman year my adviser kept telling me I'll have to wait until next year. But I'm worried. I plan to apply for summer research internships to do them every summer but... I'm just afraid it's not gonna be "enough" research for someone who will be applying MD/PhD. I really love research, and it's something I do wanna do. Hopefully this isn't too off-topic. But I do have a related on-topic question... How important is publication to getting into an MD/PhD program? Let alone authorship. I am a hardworking individual with a high GPA, so I am just a bit afraid of this situation holding me back.

I wouldn't say you need one simply because I know a lot of people who went through all the hurdles of research but just ended up unlucky in that their results weren't publishable. I think to some degree adcoms realize there's a lot of luck involved in doing research as an undergrad - especially if they've done research themselves.

If you can show that you really understand the entire research process (background research/data collection/data analysis) it's probably enough. In other words, can you make them believe that given a few extra years you could complete a PhD level project?

Obviously topping it off with a publication is more important in this case than it is for just MD applicants, but I think just doing an independent project/maybe getting funding for it and having a really strong letter of rec from your research mentor might be good enough.

 

[Mel Belle]

Thank you both very much for your input. It's very much appreciated.

 

[boboyahoo]

Try to get out as fast as possible if things are not going good in terms of funding at your lab. This is a constant case with many labs nowadays and I would definitely leave on a nice note just so that you atleast get a LOR out of it. Switch to another lab that is more promising [esp. public health and one that is people related]. You are more bound to receive grants to travel to other places or do research on-site through this research experience which affords both merit and clinical hours.
Luck is HUGE! I tried to switch out of my lab since year 1 and the weirdest part is that I can't. Everytime I contact someone, they either say they are full/'you have too much experience which makes us believe we should pick a more disadvantaged candidate'/too many hours to ask/unpaid/'we don't got funding or a project but I can send this over to the other professors'. As soon as you see an opening MOVE because it could be that that is your lucky chance. I 100% agree with Arbor Vitae that if you don't feel right just get out as soon as you can.It's good experience to see what research is about but if you know it's not for you, take sample experiences elsewhere until you find your right fit. It's a terrible mistake to think that research is not for you if you end up disliking one lab because research is so expansive.

 

[Mel Belle]

Try to get out as fast as possible if things are not going good in terms of funding at your lab. This is a constant case with many labs nowadays and I would definitely leave on a nice note just so that you atleast get a LOR out of it. Switch to another lab that is more promising [esp. public health and one that is people related]. You are more bound to receive grants to travel to other places or do research on-site through this research experience which affords both merit and clinical hours.
Luck is HUGE! I tried to switch out of my lab since year 1 and the weirdest part is that I can't. Everytime I contact someone, they either say they are full/'you have too much experience which makes us believe we should pick a more disadvantaged candidate'/too many hours to ask/unpaid/'we don't got funding or a project but I can send this over to the other professors'. As soon as you see an opening MOVE because it could be that that is your lucky chance. I 100% agree with Arbor Vitae that if you don't feel right just get out as soon as you can.It's good experience to see what research is about but if you know it's not for you, take sample experiences elsewhere until you find your right fit. It's a terrible mistake to think that research is not for you if you end up disliking one lab because research is so expansive.

In the case of someone applying MD/PhD especially, would it look horribly bad to do that? My health careers adviser was saying it's normal for people to change labs each semester to try something new, or something along the lines of that, and that professors don't take it personally at all if you do switch. I'm an underclassman so I wouldn't be surprised if it slipped her mind that my goal is MD/PhD not just getting into med school, so I'm wondering if anyone here can give me a more definitive answer as to if that's even worthwhile.

 

[boboyahoo]

In the case of someone applying MD/PhD especially, would it look horribly bad to do that? My health careers adviser was saying it's normal for people to change labs each semester to try something new, or something along the lines of that, and that professors don't take it personally at all if you do switch. I'm an underclassman so I wouldn't be surprised if it slipped her mind that my goal is MD/PhD not just getting into med school, so I'm wondering if anyone here can give me a more definitive answer as to if that's even worthwhile.

I wouldn't go with your advisor's opinion at all, esp when you consider MD/PHD. This program is possibly 4-6 year commitment with PhD component alone and adcoms will be seeing how focused you will be on 1-2 projects over a long span of time. I think that if you have a good answer like "I wanted to find my fit", then they would understand but don't screw over and try to switch every semester when you know that is not what a dual degree like this is about (I would personally not have that person in the lab no matter how much experience that person has).
What I would do is commit 2 years to one lab and help out the first year as a tech. If you think that your PI gives you more opportunities later on like helping with a real project that has real possibilities of publishing, then stick with the lab. Make sure that you are also set on helping during the summers since that is when most of the work will be done. Otherwise, it can take longer for the PI/grad student to trust you.
In case things don't work out, SWITCH as soon as you can. If you still have some withering hopes of an incomplete project with your first lab, then keep up with it as a part time work and keep good ties with both labs (esp during summer). Otherwise, leave doing some improvement so that it doesn't leave a bad impression that you didn't do anything for the first lab. Either way, I would say that if another lab is more enticing is better in promoting its undergrads just head your way there if they offer you a position. Lots of students will want to do work there of course so you need to articulate why your first lab wasn't as great.
Overall 2 labs over the span of your undergrad are looked good (and try to get atleast a poster presentation in since it shows outcome ---> and outcomes matter a lot when you're headed in research which is why you should do it not for the med committees but for your own practice since you will have something accomplished to begin with).

Otherwise, you can also take 1-2 gap years and try to get something published in between (after all, that's the span of how long it takes to get certain master's degrees, right?).

 

[khrisskhoras]

a first author paper in the big three as an undergrad (or as any premed, for that matter) is as rare as a 45 MCAT.

Idk about that. If I recall, a 45 has never happened, whereas the former has happened once in every few years.

 

[kash money]

45's have happened before

 

[Euxox]

Someone got a 45 this year, supposedly, if you look at the January MCAT thread.

 

[911 Turbo]

Someone got a 45 this year, supposedly, if you look at the January MCAT thread.

lol link?

edit: found it...http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=962002&page=15

he never ended up proving it

 

[TriagePreMed]

There are some labs that publish a lot of papers and are generous with the authorship. Other labs like mine go for quality over quantity, and really work hard to publish very high-quality research, even if that means going a long time without churning out a paper. It is very rare for a premed to be a first-author on a scientific paper. Remember, SDN is not an accurate sample to gauge what most people have accomplished.

Most of SDN is full of ****. People that get 36 on MCAT practice and act like they are failures. There are people with 3-4 first author before junior year, etc. I wouldn't trust anything coming out of SDN.

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

In the case of someone applying MD/PhD especially, would it look horribly bad to do that? My health careers adviser was saying it's normal for people to change labs each semester to try something new, or something along the lines of that, and that professors don't take it personally at all if you do switch. I'm an underclassman so I wouldn't be surprised if it slipped her mind that my goal is MD/PhD not just getting into med school, so I'm wondering if anyone here can give me a more definitive answer as to if that's even worthwhile.

If you keep switching labs you'll never be able to do a long-term project, which is what MD/PhD programs want to see. Some schools explicitly state that summer experiences are nice but won't be enough to make you competitive. You need to show that you can conduct professional level research, which means having your own project, sticking with it from start to finish, being involved every step of the way, and presenting the results to some audience in some shape or form (poster, conference talk, thesis, and/or publication).

Find a lab and stick with it. Only move to another lab if things aren't working out or if you finished your project and want to do something new. Expect to spend at least two years in the same lab. You can be competitive with just two years of research, but four years is better. A lot of MD/PhD applicants take gap years to beef up their CVs before they apply, so don't be too concerned about cramming everything into undergrad. In fact, if you start researching in fall of sophomore year you won't have enough research experience to be competitive to apply as a traditional student anyway, so you're already looking at at least one gap year.

And in regards to your other question, you don't need a publication for MD/PhD admissions, even for top schools. This is a big myth on SDN, and has been debunked countless times. Even at top MD/PhDs half the incoming class is unpublished. Yes, publications are a boost (especially if they're 1st author), but you don't need them provided you can talk knowledgeably about your research and show that despite not publishing you've still had a very productive research career for an undergrad.

 

[MedGrl@2022]

So my trajectory is MD/PhD. I'll be a sophomore in the fall and have actually been told I have to wait until the spring to do research. (I could only get in with the biochemist, I'm a biochem major anyway, but I need to finish cell/molec bio and orgo 1 to do research with her) During freshman year my adviser kept telling me I'll have to wait until next year. But I'm worried. I plan to apply for summer research internships to do them every summer but... I'm just afraid it's not gonna be "enough" research for someone who will be applying MD/PhD. I really love research, and it's something I do wanna do. Hopefully this isn't too off-topic. But I do have a related on-topic question... How important is publication to getting into an MD/PhD program? Let alone authorship. I am a hardworking individual with a high GPA, so I am just a bit afraid of this situation holding me back.

if you don't get a publication in undergrad do the NIH postbac program... not all PIs will let you be on publications here either... but I have seen plenty of friends get published so yeah

 

[Mel Belle]

If you keep switching labs you'll never be able to do a long-term project, which is what MD/PhD programs want to see. Some schools explicitly state that summer experiences are nice but won't be enough to make you competitive. You need to show that you can conduct professional level research, which means having your own project, sticking with it from start to finish, being involved every step of the way, and presenting the results to some audience in some shape or form (poster, conference talk, thesis, and/or publication).

Find a lab and stick with it. Only move to another lab if things aren't working out or if you finished your project and want to do something new. Expect to spend at least two years in the same lab. You can be competitive with just two years of research, but four years is better. A lot of MD/PhD applicants take gap years to beef up their CVs before they apply, so don't be too concerned about cramming everything into undergrad. In fact, if you start researching in fall of sophomore year you won't have enough research experience to be competitive to apply as a traditional student anyway, so you're already looking at at least one gap year.

And in regards to your other question, you don't need a publication for MD/PhD admissions, even for top schools. This is a big myth on SDN, and has been debunked countless times. Even at top MD/PhDs half the incoming class is unpublished. Yes, publications are a boost (especially if they're 1st author), but you don't need them provided you can talk knowledgeably about your research and show that despite not publishing you've still had a very productive research career for an undergrad.

... Are you serious? If that's the case I'm honestly so mad because I wasn't allowed to join any research as a freshman. Upperclassmen get the first pick and all the labs were full. Not to mention, I'm not allowed to start a project in the fall, either, because everyone who is a biochem, bio, or chem (w/ bio minor) major has 19 credits the fall semester of sophomore year. Ugh. I'm not sure what I'm gonna do now. I guess a gap year wouldn't be a huge deal but I'd rather just chug along with school if I can. It mostly irritates me that my advisers just passed it along like it wasn't important to start right away. Idk. I'm just really frustrated right now. Maybe I can forget about that English class that brings me up to 19 credits and take it in the winter or something. My dad's probably not gonna be happy having to pay for that, though. Ugh ugh ugh. What a predicament.

 

[kash money]

... Are you serious? If that's the case I'm honestly so mad because I wasn't allowed to join any research as a freshman. Upperclassmen get the first pick and all the labs were full. Not to mention, I'm not allowed to start a project in the fall, either, because everyone who is a biochem, bio, or chem (w/ bio minor) major has 19 credits the fall semester of sophomore year. Ugh. I'm not sure what I'm gonna do now. I guess a gap year wouldn't be a huge deal but I'd rather just chug along with school if I can. It mostly irritates me that my advisers just passed it along like it wasn't important to start right away. Idk. I'm just really frustrated right now. Maybe I can forget about that English class that brings me up to 19 credits and take it in the winter or something. My dad's probably not gonna be happy having to pay for that, though. Ugh ugh ugh. What a predicament.

You wouldn't have to take a gap year per se if you get lucky enough to join a lab in the beginning the fall semester and stick with that lab for the next two years before you apply. It may not seem like a lot compared to others who work full time in a lab for a year or two before applying, but think about it. If you can average 12-20 hours a week in your lab during the four semesters during school year and then work full time (40 hours or more) during the two summers before your senior year, you'd still have a competitive amount of research experience if you're applying as a traditional student. It depends on how early you can get a research spot and what you make of it once you get it though.

 

[inycepoo]

Stories like these make me feel so extremely fortunate and blessed to be at a research university where there are literally always more spots than students to fill. Also makes me more pissed when people call us out for being elitist and not thankful enough for what we have.

I feel for you, OP. Best of luck.

 

[LuciusVorenus]

45's have happened before

I thought the test was curved so that 44 was the maximum score? As in, they purposely don't give out 45s just like they don't give out anything less than a 3.

 

[inycepoo]

I thought the test was curved so that 44 was the maximum score? As in, they purposely don't give out 45s just like they don't give out anything less than a 3.

????? Where did you get this impression? Also, the MCAT is scaled, not curved.

If you're looking at that chart where they say 0.0% get a 45, it's because they rounded the damn thing to only two sig figs. 45s exist.

 

[LuciusVorenus]

????? Where did you get this impression? Also, the MCAT is scaled, not curved.

If you're looking at that chart where they say 0.0% get a 45, it's because they rounded the damn thing to only two sig figs. 45s exist.

I'm surprised it's not actually curved their curve always ends up looking so normal. But I guess that's what you get with a sample size of 70k or something

Yeah that was the one I was looking at. I wish they would give out frequencies instead of percentages

 

[kash money]

Lol 45's do happen. Maybe not every single year but they do happen

 

[Mel Belle]

You wouldn't have to take a gap year per se if you get lucky enough to join a lab in the beginning the fall semester and stick with that lab for the next two years before you apply. It may not seem like a lot compared to others who work full time in a lab for a year or two before applying, but think about it. If you can average 12-20 hours a week in your lab during the four semesters during school year and then work full time (40 hours or more) during the two summers before your senior year, you'd still have a competitive amount of research experience if you're applying as a traditional student. It depends on how early you can get a research spot and what you make of it once you get it though.

Well, great! Thanks for telling me. I appreciate it.

 

[yehhhboiii]

Lol, I don't really know what a picture will prove since so many of you have already pointed out that it's easy to photo shop everything now a days. But I don't even have experience with photo-shop let alone have it on my computer.

Anyway, I've never posted a picture on here? How do I do so?

i lol'd
takes 2 seconds to post a screenshot

 

[LuciusVorenus]

i lol'd
takes 2 seconds to post a screenshot

Psh even with photoshop there really isn't any identifying details on the score report that you can't easily block out before posting a video. It takes like...10 seconds.

 

[catzzz88]

not to hijack this thread, but i'd just like to briefly note that this is where URM or low SES students are disadvantaged - most people who get pubs in undergrad have parents who are doctors or scientists, have experience with research in high school, and hence have an early start in knowing how to negotiate lab politics and do decent science.

This does not make any sense. Did you read the lists people have made? They include things like: work for a long time in the same lab during undergrad, work with a generous professor, take on a project that has already been started, take initiative, have luck, be competent, work hard to understand the science... all of which I agree with. Nowhere has anyone added to that list: have doctors for parents. If you, personally, are URM or low SES and are making excuses for yourself, please refrain from generalizing to others.

I am from a low SES childhood. My father is a car mechanic and my mother a secretary, they are divorced. First generation college student and all that.... I got my initial research experience by personally applying to REUs that gave stipends.

I also currently have three publications. Two were published during undergrad: one co-first author in a low tier genetics basic science journal, one second author in a German journal where I designed the experiment 100% and collected 4/5 of the data.

If you are REU or low SES, please be proactive and do not allow yourself to feel like you can't do something due to the educational background of your parents. Maybe that was true 20 years ago, but in this technological age, there is no excuse for ignorance. Talk to your pre-med adviser, use SDN wisely, speak with your peers. You might learn that: you can make $3,000 in an REU over the summer, you can sometimes apply for work/study at your school for working in a lab, you can sometimes take "lab research" as a credit in school. With these options, a low SES student would still have time to work outside of school and could to an REU in the summer to earn money (that's what I did). As for a URM, there is no excuse. Since it has nothing to do with the information your parents provide you (internet/take initiative/pre-med adviser), there is no reason that I can think of that a dedicated URM could not do this. It is all about informing yourself and taking initiative!

I just wanted to add my two cents. Please people: do not be discouraged. Remember that this is a learning process and that getting a publication is not a ticket into medical school, nor is it necessary or even common in other applicants.

Do research, learn something, publish if you can, reflect on what you did. Don't let anyone tell you that you can't do 3/4 of those things just because you are URM/low SES.

Best,
C

 

[SN12357]

This does not make any sense. Did you read the lists people have made? They include things like: work for a long time in the same lab during undergrad, work with a generous professor, take on a project that has already been started, take initiative, have luck, be competent, work hard to understand the science... all of which I agree with. Nowhere has anyone added to that list: have doctors for parents. If you, personally, are URM or low SES and are making excuses for yourself, please refrain from generalizing to others.

I am from a low SES childhood. My father is a car mechanic and my mother a secretary, they are divorced. First generation college student and all that.... I got my initial research experience by personally applying to REUs that gave stipends.

I also currently have three publications. Two were published during undergrad: one co-first author in a low tier genetics basic science journal, one second author in a German journal where I designed the experiment 100% and collected 4/5 of the data.

If you are REU or low SES, please be proactive and do not allow yourself to feel like you can't do something due to the educational background of your parents. Maybe that was true 20 years ago, but in this technological age, there is no excuse for ignorance. Talk to your pre-med adviser, use SDN wisely, speak with your peers. You might learn that: you can make $3,000 in an REU over the summer, you can sometimes apply for work/study at your school for working in a lab, you can sometimes take "lab research" as a credit in school. With these options, a low SES student would still have time to work outside of school and could to an REU in the summer to earn money (that's what I did). As for a URM, there is no excuse. Since it has nothing to do with the information your parents provide you (internet/take initiative/pre-med adviser), there is no reason that I can think of that a dedicated URM could not do this. It is all about informing yourself and taking initiative!

I just wanted to add my two cents. Please people: do not be discouraged. Remember that this is a learning process and that getting a publication is not a ticket into medical school, nor is it necessary or even common in other applicants.

Do research, learn something, publish if you can, reflect on what you did. Don't let anyone tell you that you can't do 3/4 of those things just because you are URM/low SES.

Best,
C

Nothing you just said is in conflict with what you just quoted. In fact, your post confirms it. No one said that students from lower SES backgrounds CAN'T do these things. He/she said that they're at a disadvantage. And it's absolutely true.

I went to an Ivy. Rich kids come in with perfect APs, slide right into upper level science and math classes, and go to work right away in labs. Students from less privileged backgrounds often find themselves at sea in the fast-paced intro sciences, and need remediation or tutoring to catch up. None of this reflects poorly on them personally, but it absolutely slows them down in terms of getting involved in labs and working on independent research.

 

[inycepoo]

Nothing you just said is in conflict with what you just quoted. In fact, your post confirms it. No one said that students from lower SES backgrounds CAN'T do these things. He/she said that they're at a disadvantage. And it's absolutely true.

I went to an Ivy. Rich kids come in with perfect APs, slide right into upper level science and math classes, and go to work right away in labs. Students from less privileged backgrounds often find themselves at sea in the fast-paced intro sciences, and need remediation or tutoring to catch up. None of this reflects poorly on them personally, but it absolutely slows them down in terms of getting involved in labs and working on independent research.

I go to HYP, and just as many poor kids do the same as the "rich kids" as you said above, like me. (I'm an FAP-eligible kind of low SES.) Grades and academic performance don't really factor into getting a lab gig. Maybe it's because we're richer than most other Ivies, as if they weren't already rich enough.

But suffice to say we aren't the best representation of the current landscape for low SES kids, but we're not quite as disadvantaged at school as we're led to believe ITT.

 

[zippyziggy]

This does not make any sense. Did you read the lists people have made? They include things like: work for a long time in the same lab during undergrad, work with a generous professor, take on a project that has already been started, take initiative, have luck, be competent, work hard to understand the science... all of which I agree with. Nowhere has anyone added to that list: have doctors for parents. If you, personally, are URM or low SES and are making excuses for yourself, please refrain from generalizing to others.

eh, yeah i'm kinda over this thread. but i'll just say a couple of things: you should probably read the back and forths i've had with other people to get the context. i'm not making excuses, i'm explaining. i have a lot of experience with research. i've worked in the field for probably, oh, 6.5 years, maybe 8 years depending on what you count as research. i know, at least a little, what i'm talking about.

Rich kids come in with perfect APs, slide right into upper level science and math classes, and go to work right away in labs. Students from less privileged backgrounds often find themselves at sea in the fast-paced intro sciences, and need remediation or tutoring to catch up. None of this reflects poorly on them personally, but it absolutely slows them down in terms of getting involved in labs and working on independent research.

yup, this is absolutely right. it's difficult to explain social context, and i can't do it justice here. but there's a lot of catching up to do. low SES kids don't really know what's required to get into med school. i didn't even know what research was until maybe junior year. perhaps catz is the exception, and that's great, but i know, at least from my school, the vast majority of low SES kids were in similar situations.

I go to HYP, and just as many poor kids do the same as the "rich kids" as you said above, like me.

mm, no, they don't. again, maybe at your school, sure, but statistics show that they don't. consider this article in the NYT that summarizes some of the research, but you can just do a google search. there's a lot of storytelling in there, but take note of the research done by Reardon, Duncan, Murnane, and Chingos, and I'll add Martha Bailey and Sue Dynarski to the list.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/e...a-greater-role-in-success.html?pagewanted=all

 

[inycepoo]

Um, did I not say it was only at my school?

 

[zippyziggy]

Um, did I not say it was only at my school?

oh, i didn't make that assumption. i thought you were going from the specific to the general. my bad

 

[inycepoo]

Hot off the NYT press:

http://nytimes.com/2013/08/04/educa...-student-striving-to-inspire-black-youth.html

 

[inycepoo]

The accompanying poem:

http://nytimes.com/2013/08/04/education/edlife/travis-reginals-poetic-tribute-to-his-mother.html