Choosing Programs Dilemma: Reputation vs. Research vs. Location

[leverp2000]

I have been lucky enough to have a few great MSTP acceptances (Michigan, Columbia, and Pitt) and I’m having a tough time choosing between them. There are several advantages to each program and I’m having a hard time balancing my priorities of reputation, research, and location.

To preface, here’s some background info:
I’m a UM undergrad and lived in Michigan for most of my life.
I’m interested in vision research and specializing in ophthalmology and my background is in chemistry/biochemistry.

These are my concerns:
1. Location:

My favorite location of the three has to be Pittsburgh. It’s the perfect balance between a big city and a small town. Cheap, easy to live, and has plenty to offer.

New York City has a huge draw because of the vast cultural opportunities and just has so much to offer. The only issues are that it’s a bit pricey, though the Columbia stipend should be more than adequate. Also, it would be a big adjustment from Ann Arbor.

Ann Arbor is great town. Its close to home, which has some distinct advantage … but 11-12 years in Ann Arbor might be too much. I would love to have a change of scenery, and also move to a bigger city.

Advantage: Pittsburgh

2. Research:

At Columbia and Michigan, there are a number of people with whom I would like to work. The ophthalmology departments are both great, and there are numerous people doing interesting things. At Pittsburgh, the research was a little weaker, but there is still a lot of good quality research.

There is one particular person at Michigan that I really liked and matches my interests and background very well. However, I don’t want to put all my eggs in one basket, as I’m not sure what’ll happen two years from now.

My one concern is also with graduate departments. I’m not sure if I should stay with the molecular biology or shift into neuroscience. I’m leaning towards moving more towards the neuroscience direction, in which Columbia has the edge. The ophtho researchers at UM have more of a genetics/mol bio slant. But, the PhD is really about your mentor and project, so I’m wondering if graduate department strength will factor into the program strength.

Advantage: Michigan.

3. Reputation:

For a competitive field like ophthalmology, and especially academic ophtho, reputation can’t be discounted. Michigan and Columbia both have great reputations in this regard. However, I would really like to leave Michigan for at least once in my life and go to the East Coast (if not for MD/PhD, then for residency). In this case, the Columbia name is much more likely to give me an opportunity at a costal residency. The reputation of Pittsburgh unfortunately hasn’t yet lived up to the wonderful things that they’re doing at the school.

Advantage: Columbia.

So with these three factors in mind, I’m torn between the three schools. I was wondering if anyone had advice about which of these factors are the most important and how to weigh them. I’ll be revisiting Columbia in a few weeks, so hopefully that will clear up any questions about location/research. To that end, does anyone have any advice about what to look for during the revisit?

Thank you very much for your help and sorry for the longwinded post 😳.

Leverp2000

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[abeanatrice]

Fortunately for me, I don't think my choice will be that hard, but I wanted to highlight your point about Pitt's reputation not having lived up to its quality yet, and ask other people what they thought. I mean, US News ranks Pitt 15th in the country, but why is it that no one even seems to think about it as being a really good school? I know when I was thinking about places to apply, Pitt was some weird place that I never thought about until I heard a lot of people applied there as a "safety school." But when I went to visit, I was incredibly impressed with the medical school, the MST program and the quality of research.

So, after blabbering, my main question is: Pitt has a lot of money going into it right now. Is it going to remain on the up and up, or is it bound to kind of hover in the distance? I know I shouldn't be as concerned about repuation as an MSTP since my PhD will help me immensely, but I just wonder if Pitt will ever break through to the point that people will think of it as a high powered institution. Perhaps a Pitt student could be answer this, I know there's at least one or two on the board...

And sorry I can't help you lev. 🙂 Good luck to everyone making their tough decisions, and if anyone wants to drop their UCLA acceptance, go on ahead cause I've just been granted my first waitlist.

I have been lucky enough to have a few great MSTP acceptances (Michigan, Columbia, and Pitt) and I’m having a tough time choosing between them. There are several advantages to each program and I’m having a hard time balancing my priorities of reputation, research, and location.

To preface, here’s some background info:
I’m a UM undergrad and lived in Michigan for most of my life.
I’m interested in vision research and specializing in ophthalmology and my background is in chemistry/biochemistry.

These are my concerns:
1. Location:

My favorite location of the three has to be Pittsburgh. It’s the perfect balance between a big city and a small town. Cheap, easy to live, and has plenty to offer.

New York City has a huge draw because of the vast cultural opportunities and just has so much to offer. The only issues are that it’s a bit pricey, though the Columbia stipend should be more than adequate. Also, it would be a big adjustment from Ann Arbor.

Ann Arbor is great town. Its close to home, which has some distinct advantage … but 11-12 years in Ann Arbor might be too much. I would love to have a change of scenery, and also move to a bigger city.

Advantage: Pittsburgh

2. Research:

At Columbia and Michigan, there are a number of people with whom I would like to work. The ophthalmology departments are both great, and there are numerous people doing interesting things. At Pittsburgh, the research was a little weaker, but there is still a lot of good quality research.

There is one particular person at Michigan that I really liked and matches my interests and background very well. However, I don’t want to put all my eggs in one basket, as I’m not sure what’ll happen two years from now.

My one concern is also with graduate departments. I’m not sure if I should stay with the molecular biology or shift into neuroscience. I’m leaning towards moving more towards the neuroscience direction, in which Columbia has the edge. The ophtho researchers at UM have more of a genetics/mol bio slant. But, the PhD is really about your mentor and project, so I’m wondering if graduate department strength will factor into the program strength.

Advantage: Michigan.

3. Reputation:

For a competitive field like ophthalmology, and especially academic ophtho, reputation can’t be discounted. Michigan and Columbia both have great reputations in this regard. However, I would really like to leave Michigan for at least once in my life and go to the East Coast (if not for MD/PhD, then for residency). In this case, the Columbia name is much more likely to give me an opportunity at a costal residency. The reputation of Pittsburgh unfortunately hasn’t yet lived up to the wonderful things that they’re doing at the school.

Advantage: Columbia.

So with these three factors in mind, I’m torn between the three schools. I was wondering if anyone had advice about which of these factors are the most important and how to weigh them. I’ll be revisiting Columbia in a few weeks, so hopefully that will clear up any questions about location/research. To that end, does anyone have any advice about what to look for during the revisit?

Thank you very much for your help and sorry for the longwinded post 😳.

Leverp2000

 

[bluegrass_druid]

I've always been a big proponent of location, because I really believe you need to enjoy where you are to most effectively focus on what you are doing. From this standpoint, Michigan has a huge disadvantage, since you seem to be ready to go. It seems like Columbia has the edge in reputation and research over Pitt, not to mention the benefits of the city (where I live now), but this can be a tough (and very expensive) place for certain people. I would also caution you against giving UM faculty so much credit...remember, that you know them the best. Leaving will help you build other connnections to other very intelligent and inspiring researchers. I have worked at two universities and have always been pleased with the faculty...in short, you really can't lose, but don't be afraid to try something new.

Congrats on 3 (top-notch) acceptances! You are in an enviable position. Good luck with your decision.

I hope that helps.

 

[jjmack]

First of all congrats. I think you should really base your decision on research and location. Reputation does play a part, but all of your choices are excellent and I think during the application process we all sometimes forget that coming out of almost ANY MSTP you can do whatever you want. Granted coming out of a very top program will help you get into the most competitive selective programs but if you are good coming out of any program won't really hurt you. I think it's what you do more than where you are from--however a great pedigree never hurts. In terms of where you would be the most happy I can't make that decision for you, but I think at least for MSTP it's very important to like the location or else you aren't going to be happy no matter how great the research meshes with your interests. Best of luck with your decision.

 

[tedrik]

I know I've already expressed my opinions about this to you through PM, so I thought I would just reiterate and lend some support.

First off, considering that you are younger than most people in this process I'd say that you've done an incredible job at convincing the adcoms that you are mature, dedicated, and that you've really thought this whole MD/PhD thing through. Not that I'm that old, but when I was your age I didn't know there was a difference between graduate and medical school...seriously. So good job on your success 👍 .

If I were in your position, I would want to leave my hometown. UMich is a great school (understatement), but unless it's perfect for you I would suggest going to new surroundings.

That would leave things between Pitt and Columbia. I know that location is playing a role because you really like Pittsburgh, but I would also factor in the people you will be going to school with. Not just the students, but the administration and faculty as well. I had a great time with the students at both schools, but they were definitely different crowds. The people I met at Pittsburgh gave me a much more "Midwest" feel while the people I met in New York gave me a much more "New York" feel (duh). Hopefully you know what I mean. You'll have to choose which is right for you. The faculty that I met in Pittsburgh actually seemed a bit nicer, friendlier, more collegial, and more welcoming. After my interview, I received email after email from the administration and faculty at Pittsburgh while Columbia didn't send me a single thing, not even a reply to any of my 4 or 5 thank you emails. This, of course, has a lot to do with which school needs to recruit more aggressively, but it also says something about how you will be treated once you are there.

Except for my being from California instead of Michigan, I was faced with the exact same decision as you. The deciding factors for me were that I wanted to be in a big city where I could really experience my 20's and I also felt that I would get along better with the New York crowd. I didn't choose based on reputation or which school had the most/strongest faculty in my area of interest. In fact, I would have gone to NYU over Pitt or UMich. All of these schools have great researchers in neuroscience, so I was much more concerned with where I would be happy.

It's not going to be easy, but I know that you'll be happy at any of these institutions. But I hope to see you at P&S in the fall!!

 

[b&ierstiefel]

First of all leverp2000, it was great meeting you when you interviewed here and hats off to you on a wonderful achievement. Being able to choose between 3 superb MSTP programs is something to be very thankful for. I agree with you in that the decision making process is quite difficult--you'll have to live with this decision for the next 7-8 years of your life.

Going to any of the three schools, and given that you will have an MD/PhD after your name when you finish, competitiveness for residency should not be a problem. So set reputation aside.

Now let's focus on location and research. Given your choices here, I think these two factors should be the most important. I am all for diversifying the location of training so I think spending another 7-8 years in your home state may be pushing it. NYC is somewhat of an intimidating city (for me, at least) but from reading your post, you might actually like NYC so perhaps Columbia is a good choice. But then you really really liked Pittsburgh. I visit a good friend of mine who is doing his residency there everytime I make the trip back to my home state from Ann Arbor. It's a nice and cozy city...nothing like NYC.

When I was in your shoes many years ago, I was faced with a similar dilemma having been accepted to Cornell, UCSF, Emory, Michigan, Vanderbilt, etc. The reputations of these institutions were similar in that MD/PhD's typically have their pick of residencies (no MD/PhD is gonna be faulted for going to the #10, #30, or #50 institution as selected by some stupid computer algorithm devised by USNews & World Report). So I too put reputation aside for the most part. For me, my decision came down to research and location. Research-wise I was interested in signal transduction and Michigan and Vandy won hands down. Location-wise, I didn't wanna live in a city...hence Michigan, Emory, and Vandy. I didn't want to live in the South...so Michigan was the clear winner.

Weigh the research strengths at Columbia and Pitt very carefully. Keep in mind that there is faculty turnover at all institutions. Cast a relatively wide research-interest net into both seas and see how you like the two institutions then. Again, don't underestimate the importance of location. You will have a better chance of flourishing intellectually in an environment you are comfortable in.

Best of luck...PM me if you want more help in making a decision. I tend to be a bit more blunt and to the point in PMs anyway since the stuff is private.

 

[Oak]

I have been lucky enough to have a few great MSTP acceptances (Michigan, Columbia, and Pitt) and I’m having a tough time choosing between them. There are several advantages to each program and I’m having a hard time balancing my priorities of reputation, research, and location. . . . .So with these three factors in mind, I’m torn between the three schools. I was wondering if anyone had advice about which of these factors are the most important and how to weigh them. I’ll be revisiting Columbia in a few weeks, so hopefully that will clear up any questions about location/research. To that end, does anyone have any advice about what to look for during the revisit?

Thank you very much for your help and sorry for the longwinded post 😳.

Leverp2000

Well, you're not alone - I'm in a very similar position: Trying to choose between my undergrad institution (WashU (and hometown)) and the possiblity of moving on to a different location (Columbia).

Perhaps this is clouded reasoning, but I've been de-emphasizing the medschool part as it seems that your education covers more or less the same material at any of the top schools. Additionally, working at WUSM for the past 4 years, i've heard it said numerous times that it's the students themselves that make the school good - not the profs or curriculum.

Location, on the other hand, has been playing a big role in my thinking. Not really being that much of a "city boy" i'm a bit concerned about NYC - but it could be an amazing experience. In STL, on the other hand, I could live like a king on my stipend - but king of what? (Don't get me wrong, I love the area, but it only has so much to offer after 22 years.)

So far, I'm considering research to be the most important determinant of choosing a school (only slightly over location). I figure, if I intend to spend 70%+ of my time as a scientist, then my scientific training matters more than anything else for my future career. Because I'm interested in DevNeuro, Columbia has the edge here - Although WUSM has a very good neuro department even if we have lost a few people over the past two years.

Well, I doubt that this post will really inform anyone in my situation - Guess it ultimately comes down to the enigmatic "gut feel" at re-visits and determining if you can leave a place that you're comfortable in for parts unknown.

 

[leverp2000]

Thank you all for your great responses. I really appreciate all of the comments and they've been very helpful.

It seems that most of you recommend that I leave Michigan for diversity of training. I was just wondering if this was a large issue, given that I'm taking a rather large turn in research direction, so I would be around different faculty members. I would definitely like to experience something outside of Ann Arbor and Michigan in general, but proximity to family and my experiences make it the safe choice, though not necessarily the best choice.

The famous Kenny Bania and Jerry conversation sums it up best:
"Bania: For our next meal, do you think we should come here ... or
should we go someplace else? You know it has it's pros and cons. On the
one hand, here, you're guaranteed a great meal. On the other hand --
Jerry: (Interrupting Bania) Yeah, yeah I know. This would be good, but
it would be the same. But if we go some place else, it would be
different, but it might not be as good. It's a gamble. I get it."

Pittsburgh seems like a very liveable and cheap city, and it still has a good amount to offer. NYC has a huge upside, but not having lived there for an extended period (I've just visited a few times), I don't really know what daily life is like. That is my only major concern with NYC. If it is liveable, affordable, and safe, then I would love to go there. My problem is determining liveability in just a few short visits.

As far as location, is this an important factor for residency placement for MD/PhD? I would love to open up as many options for myself as possible in terms of residency location (midwest and east coast at least).

Also, for residencies and beyond, do people tend to stick with a similar research topic or area; or are there huge shifts at this point? Each of the ophthalmology departments seems to have a huge focus on either retina, cornea, gene therapy, neuro-ophtho, genetics of diseases etc. There are some differences in the approaches (be it virology, neuroscience, genetics, or biochemistry), so a switch from certain areas to others may take a some work.

Additionally, is it too narrow to just look at vision research? Should I broaden to include neurosciences in general (I'm leaning towards a PhD in neuro, unless my future advisor doesn't have an appointment in neuro).

Again, thank you all for your great comments.

leverp2000

 

[b&ierstiefel]

OK dude, check your PM inbox.

 

[leverp2000]

Well, you're not alone - I'm in a very similar position: Trying to choose between my undergrad institution (WashU (and hometown)) and the possiblity of moving on to a different location (Columbia).

Perhaps this is clouded reasoning, but I've been de-emphasizing the medschool part as it seems that your education covers more or less the same material at any of the top schools. Additionally, working at WUSM for the past 4 years, i've heard it said numerous times that it's the students themselves that make the school good - not the profs or curriculum.

Good to know that I'm not the only one at least. As you said, the medschool curriculum and training do not seem that important. This is mainly because it is very hard to distinguish the quality of training at these schools. All will give top notch training, so its tough to use this factor in deciding.

Location, on the other hand, has been playing a big role in my thinking. Not really being that much of a "city boy" i'm a bit concerned about NYC - but it could be an amazing experience. In STL, on the other hand, I could live like a king on my stipend - but king of what? (Don't get me wrong, I love the area, but it only has so much to offer after 22 years.)

So far, I'm considering research to be the most important determinant of choosing a school (only slightly over location). I figure, if I intend to spend 70%+ of my time as a scientist, then my scientific training matters more than anything else for my future career. Because I'm interested in DevNeuro, Columbia has the edge here - Although WUSM has a very good neuro department even if we have lost a few people over the past two years.

Yeah, I'm in a similar situation with the city. I loved the summer I spent in DC, but NYC is like a whole country 😳.

As far as research, for me its a tough call, given that all have pretty good researchers in my area.

Well, I doubt that this post will really inform anyone in my situation - Guess it ultimately comes down to the enigmatic "gut feel" at re-visits and determining if you can leave a place that you're comfortable in for parts unknown.

Yeah, I think it'll come down to a "gut-feeling," but I'm a bit skeptical about basing the next 7-8 years of my life on the "gut feel."

leverp2000

 

[milliardo_L]

I completely understand what you are going through; I am in a similar situation too. I had no idea it was going to be so hard to decide between programs. I am trying to decide between WashU, UWash and Harvard. The worst part is that I do not have the “gut feeling” that everyone mentions. Research-wise, Harvard (with the help MIT-HST) would be the better choice for me, since I am interested in bioengineering/systems biology. Next best would be UWash, and last WashU. I wonder why so many top professors are leaving WashU?

However, I do not like the idea of spending 10+ yrs doing the MD/PhD at Harvard. They made some changes recently so current classes will be the guinea pigs to see if the improvements worked. The other 2 programs seem more efficient in this matter. Also, I felt a little bit of attitude at Harvard. At WashU for example, they acted as if it was an honor to them to be selected by the student, while Harvard is more like you are lucky to be chosen as part of the elite.

In summary, I have to decide if the research component of the decision is the most important one. I guess it should be, but in my case I’m just not sure. Location is not much of an issue, since I am from Puerto Rico so the experience of moving to a different place will be similar in many ways. Lifestyle is another thing, as Oak said you could live like a very well at STL, while needing good personal finances skills at Boston. I am a bit inclined to UWash, they have good research, efficient program, interesting city and decent cost of living but it has a disadvantage, I’ve worked on the other two during summers. Therefore Seattle is an unknown city to me, while I am more familiar with STL and Boston.

Sorry if I ramble too much, guess it shows the state of my thinking on this matter. If anyone has any comments about this please PM me.

 

[tedrik]

OK dude, check your PM inbox.

uh-oooh....leverp got in trouble!!!

 

[b&ierstiefel]

Nah...it was nothing like that. I just shared my honest opinion on the matter; something better kept in a private message.

See, when you go out on a limb and express an opinion on these message boards, you risk getting flamed. Then you have to defend your opinion to the folks you pissed off. Then it becomes a flame war. And I can think of better ways to spend my time than arguing over the internet.

 

[uproarhz]

I completely understand what you are going through; I am in a similar situation too. I had no idea it was going to be so hard to decide between programs.

I totally agree with this. I guess I always thought the programs will drop me before I would have to drop them. Plus, going through interviews I imagined that I would just find the ever so famous "gut feeling" everyone talked about. But I was just left with many pros and cons for every school. Now it's hard to figure out which of those pros and cons are gonna have a more significant effect on my future. I am sure all of us fortunate enough to have multiple acceptances are gonna deal with some of the same issues of proximity to home vs. diversified experience, small town with comfortable lifstyle vs. big city with lots to do and so on.

On that note, just out of curiosity, for those currently in the program, how has proximity to family or being away affected you? I mean when I started the program I was rather excited about the idea of actually going away from home, especially that I went to college right near home. But during the interviews I met many people who either said their decision was in a large part due to proximity to family and that they are really happy they did that, or that they hadn't taken that factor into consideration when picking schools and now that a family emergency or something has come up they hugely regret it. After all this program is 7-10 years long and lots of things can happen. So I was just curious to see if the trend of proximity to family becoming a bigger issue in the later years is a more common thing or I just happened to hear about the few examples where that was the case?
I don't know if I make any sense... 😳
Thanks everyone... and good luck to all making a decision! I think neither of you guys can go wrong with either of your choices.

 

[perpetualstuden]

.

 

[b&ierstiefel]

Just a quick word about reputation. Reputation is a tricky issue in that the academic community's assessment of a particular institution's reputation does not change quickly. It's kinda like old habits that die hard. Places with a great tradition will always be seen as great for a long long time (unless something major happens like the institution blows up or something). Then you have the "up and coming" places...it will take a long time for these kind of places to gain recognition. Change, like evolution, happens slowly.

 

[kermitdfrog]

I did my undergrad at UWash plus a year of full time research there (I will be heading to the Northeast this August), so I can comment a little on Seattle. It can be a fun city, especially if you are into going to restaurants, and there are several other things to do here. The research is great, but I'm sure it is at least equally as great at the schools you're considering, and really depends on the lab and PI. I'm sure when you interviewed you noticed that UW, was located a little outside of the downtown area, which can be a plus and negative. Fall-Spring, the stereotype of overcast Seattle is fairly true, but Summers here are amazing, which is great if you like boating or water sports, and we're fairly close to the mountains if skiing is your thing (however, in years like this with little snow you can forget that). I've paid rents from $300-700, just depending on if you want roomates or not, and how many. For example with two roomates, living three miles from campus I pay $375/month now. The transportation system here is fairly good especially around the Udistrict so a car isn't essential, I did perfectly fine without one for three years (and you save a ton on money on parking as there is hardly any parking near UW that won't cost you an arm and a leg, or have you walking two miles to get to the science section of campus). To get a better perspective and to talk with some people that could be your classmates at UW I would suggest looking at some of the UW threads, as with UW's admissions requirement for residency (MD only) ensures that most of the people on those threads have a good clue of the Seattle area and could fill you in more if you have further questions.

I completely understand what you are going through; I am in a similar situation too. I had no idea it was going to be so hard to decide between programs. I am trying to decide between WashU, UWash and Harvard. The worst part is that I do not have the “gut feeling” that everyone mentions. Research-wise, Harvard (with the help MIT-HST) would be the better choice for me, since I am interested in bioengineering/systems biology. Next best would be UWash, and last WashU. I wonder why so many top professors are leaving WashU?

However, I do not like the idea of spending 10+ yrs doing the MD/PhD at Harvard. They made some changes recently so current classes will be the guinea pigs to see if the improvements worked. The other 2 programs seem more efficient in this matter. Also, I felt a little bit of attitude at Harvard. At WashU for example, they acted as if it was an honor to them to be selected by the student, while Harvard is more like you are lucky to be chosen as part of the elite.

In summary, I have to decide if the research component of the decision is the most important one. I guess it should be, but in my case I’m just not sure. Location is not much of an issue, since I am from Puerto Rico so the experience of moving to a different place will be similar in many ways. Lifestyle is another thing, as Oak said you could live like a very well at STL, while needing good personal finances skills at Boston. I am a bit inclined to UWash, they have good research, efficient program, interesting city and decent cost of living but it has a disadvantage, I’ve worked on the other two during summers. Therefore Seattle is an unknown city to me, while I am more familiar with STL and Boston.

Sorry if I ramble too much, guess it shows the state of my thinking on this matter. If anyone has any comments about this please PM me.