Capstone Considered Research?

[bubleeshaark]

I couldn't find another thread with my question so.....

on MSAR some schools (e.g. University of Colorado: Aurora) require research. I was just wondering if what I have done is acceptable?

In a BIOL 270 class, I researched the effects of prenatal vitamins on men's hair growth.
In my capstone (BIOL 490), I researched the effects of the GLP-1 receptor analog Liraglutide (actually a diabetic drug: Victoza), on rats spatial learning, anxiety, appetite and long-term blood glucose levels.

Those were each one quarter (11-week) research classes. Should I enter those in my experiences? Should I apply to schools that require research experience?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

Rule #1: If it was an assignment for a class, it's not research.
Rule #2: If all you did was read and write about what other people have found, it's not research.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but both of the classes you talk about were just normal classes right? Not research credit or thesis writing or anything like that? If so, no, none of that is research and you shouldn't list it unless you want to come across as desperate.

 

[bubleeshaark]

1. I'm not desperate, I just liked Colorado's school.
Rule #1 applies to both of my cases; Rule #2 applies to neither. I actually researched literature, wrote an IACUC form (animal committee), ran the experiment for HOURS, and wrote a paper about it, not submitted for publishing however Anyways....

Thank you for your reply!

I'm having second thoughts now on what I wrote in my PS. Should I take it out?

2. "In my undergraduate studies I was given the opportunity to conduct primary research with a few of my peers and professor's guidance. From that research, I took away a familiarity with writing and reading scientific papers and the ability to interpret the research which I will be able to use to become a better doctor."

Being that some have done 'real' research, this doesn't sound as great anymore, right?

3. Lastly, should I not even bother applying to schools who have 93% of accepted applicants with research (UCSD)?

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

1. I'm not desperate, I just liked Colorado's school.
Rule #1 applies to both of my cases; Rule #2 applies to neither. I actually researched literature, wrote an IACUC form (animal committee), ran the experiment for HOURS, and wrote a paper about it, not submitted for publishing however Anyways....

Thank you for your reply!

I'm having second thoughts now on what I wrote in my PS. Should I take it out?

2. "In my undergraduate studies I was given the opportunity to conduct primary research with a few of my peers and professor’s guidance. From that research, I took away a familiarity with writing and reading scientific papers and the ability to interpret the research which I will be able to use to become a better doctor."

Being that some have done 'real' research, this doesn't sound as great anymore, right?

3. Lastly, should I not even bother applying to schools who have 93% of accepted applicants with research (UCSD)?

1. I didn't say you were desperate, I'm saying that trying to pass off assignments you did for a class as research will make you look desperate. On a side note, I don't know why you put "hours" in all caps. Real experiments often take weeks, if not months, and a project usually calls for multiple such experiments. An experiment that takes hours is more like a procedure, and a short one at that.

2. Get rid of it. You're going to have a hell of a time explaining to interviewers how you're just as familiar with writing scientific papers from the term paper you turned in as the guy who defended a thesis. You'll have a hard time arguing that interpreting the results from your experiment compares to the girl who spent months analyzing data from her project.

3. Unless you've got something that's going to compensate for the lack of research in that school's eyes (an amazing EC or an incredible background), then no.

 

[Domino2178]

.

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

I used my capstone project as a research experience; here's why:

Though it started as an assignment for class, my team got promising results from our experiments. After the class was over, we wrote up a proposal, budget, etc. and submitted to the Dean. He liked our initial work and allowed us to secure funding and lab space. We continued working on our project (no longer for a grade) for three additional months; I put in at least 20 hours per week actually running experiments, analyzing results, writing up findings, and all the other stuff most people do in research labs. We even used our project in a poster competition and beat out a lot of others (though we didn't win).

I figure, if I got something meaningful out of it, what's the harm in writing about it? Just because I wasn't working under a professor or because our idea started as a class assignment, doesn't invalidate what I did or learned. And I don't think there are guidelines that bar classroom experience (though I may be wrong)

There's a big difference between doing what you did and simply doing what was required in class and leaving it at that. What you did shows commitment and passion for research, a strong ability to work independently, initiative, leadership, ability to plan and design a project, and a bunch of other very desirable attributes. While the research you did outside of class may have been relatively brief, what you accomplished is still pretty impressive and definitely worth mentioning in your application.

You're right that there aren't any guidelines that bar classroom experience, but it's just viewed as something that doesn't count. Otherwise every pre-med would be listing intro bio lab as bio research, gen chem and orgo lab as chemistry research, and intro physics lab as physics research. And then you'd have the psychology majors listing their research methods projects as research experience. You get the idea.

It's not just research where you see this view either. If you try to get a job as a software engineer or programmer, for example, companies will trash your job application if your only experience with making software has been for class projects. It doesn't matter that CS projects tend to be pretty impressive feats, the idea is that everyone else has that same level of experience from their own classes and that a failure to program in your own spare time demonstrates a lack of intellectual curiosity in the field and also most likely indicates your skills aren't as developed as they should be. Now replace "CS" with "science" and "program" with "research" and you've got the reason why research you do in class doesn't count either.

 

[bubleeshaark]

1. I didn't say you were desperate, I'm saying that trying to pass off assignments you did for a class as research will make you look desperate. On a side note, I don't know why you put "hours" in all caps. Real experiments often take weeks, if not months, and a project usually calls for multiple such experiments. An experiment that takes hours is more like a procedure, and a short one at that.

2. Get rid of it. You're going to have a hell of a time explaining to interviewers how you're just as familiar with writing scientific papers from the term paper you turned in as the guy who defended a thesis. You'll have a hard time arguing that interpreting the results from your experiment compares to the girl who spent months analyzing data from her project.

3. Unless you've got something that's going to compensate for the lack of research in that school's eyes (an amazing EC or an incredible background), then no.

1. Well we collected data for 3 weeks, but it took the full 11, actually 12 since we finished up finals week, to research, plan, submit, conduct, run statistics, and write a paper. I spent over 250 hours on the project. I'm not saying what I did was a lot for research, because it's not, just saying that it was an actual research project, not some fake thing your professor sets up for you.

2. Thanks, I think I will get rid of it.

3. Thank you again. What do you think about schools that have 70-80%? That seems to be the majority of MD schools.

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

1. Well we collected data for 3 weeks, but it took the full 11, actually 12 since we finished up finals week, to research, plan, submit, conduct, run statistics, and write a paper. I spent over 250 hours on the project. I'm not saying what I did was a lot for research, because it's not, just saying that it was an actual research project, not some fake thing your professor sets up for you.

2. Thanks, I think I will get rid of it.

3. Thank you again. What do you think about schools that have 70-80%? That seems to be the majority of MD schools.

Most pre-meds do research so you're going to see a majority of students having research experience at most schools. However, that doesn't necessarily mean the schools place an emphasis on research. There are plenty of schools that are really only looking for a strong commitment to community service and medicine. If you've got good ECs aside from research, you'll be fine. Assuming you've got good clinical and volunteer experience, look at the mission statements of schools you're thinking about applying to and pick out the ones that talk about wanting to produce compassionate physicians active in their communities and that sort of thing. Avoid the ones that talk about wanting to produce academic physicians since those are the schools that place an emphasis on research.

 

[bubleeshaark]

Very helpful, especially about the mission statement. Thanks OCDx3.