full time Lab tech/assistant job without previous experience?

[donnie_dlewis]

i'd like to work in a research laboratory as a technician or assistant when i graduate this may with a molecular biology bachelor's. if i've had no previous lab experience, will it be tremendously difficult to secure a position with just my bachelor's to most relevantly attest to my qualifications? i think it would be one of the best ways to gain research experience for a year and help offset application costs. i'd highly appreciate some feedback from those in the know. Thanks!!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[big_smiles]

Doesn't hurt to apply. You probably know techniques from a molecular bio background. All you need is a bachelor's for a tech job and it would be good experience.

 

[donnie_dlewis]

Doesn't hurt to apply. You probably know techniques from a molecular bio background. All you need is a bachelor's for a tech job and it would be good experience.

sure, i believe that as well. but i suspect it would also be asking a lot of a given lab to hire a new graduate with no previous experience, since it would require much more investment on their part in the form of training. i'm of course definitely going to apply and hope for the best, but i was hoping there'd be at least a few SDNers out there who've been in similar situations, but nevertheless were able to come through with a position. i'd appreciate hearing from such folks!

 

[big_smiles]

Well, I was accepted to a summer research program without any lab experience. At the time I was a nursing major and had virtually no labs. I also did not even know how to use a pipet at the time. But they trained me, and two of the techs were straight out of college too. I asked about working after I graduate and they told me it's common, you don't need a med tech degree, just a bachelors in a science field and a desire to learn. Start looking at a close academic medical center or research institute. It could be a great experience for you!

 

[big_smiles]

BY the way, focus on the skills you have acquired in your undergrad curriculum. You don't necessarily need research experience to learn. You draw from your past skills. WIth a molecular biology background, you've learned a lot of methodology. With a background, you will be faster to adapt. Good luck!

 

[donnie_dlewis]

BY the way, focus on the skills you have acquired in your undergrad curriculum. You don't necessarily need research experience to learn. You draw from your past skills. WIth a molecular biology background, you've learned a lot of methodology. With a background, you will be faster to adapt. Good luck!

Hey, many thanks!! Good luck in your medical school career.

 

[NapeSpikes]

i'm of course definitely going to apply and hope for the best, but i was hoping there'd be at least a few SDNers out there who've been in similar situations, but nevertheless were able to come through with a position. i'd appreciate hearing from such folks!

It can be done--I didn't even have a science degree, let alone research experience, but I got a full-time paying job. But be prepared to do b1tch work. Hey, we all gotta start somewhere.

 

[gary5]

My suggestion is that you find a clinical researcher and request to do a 1-year project where you'll publish and be a co-author. Pick a field of medicine that you're interested in and offer to do the whole thing for no pay or ask if they can get you some money (probably won't be much). It's great experience and will help you with med school apps.

 

[JDWflash44]

I got a post-bacc research position at NIH (www.training.nih.gov) with absolutely no research experience. Though I did have a year of work in an ortho clinic and it was arthritis research.

Jim

 

[snobored18]

the pre-IRTA fellowships at the NIH are a great way to go...working as a tech won't be as felxible and honestly unless you go get a job in a small lab with a young PI you will do nothing but bitch work and you will hate your life and take nothing from the experience except a hatred of science...the IRTA positions are actually there to encourage people with minimal research experience to give it a shot for a year and see how they like it...in addition they are expecting you to be applying to medical or graduate school so scheduling your interviews won't be a problem with your PI...I know some people who did this with tech jobs and ended up having to resign (or got fired) because they had to choose the interviews over work and their boss wasn't accomodating. If you want to do IRTA start contacting a bunch of PI's ASAP...this program is pretty informal and you really have to take the initiative if you want to loand a spot...simply submitting the application won't garner many responses as only a few PI's really check the database...look through the faculty research profiles and find people who have work you'd like to do, and just e-mail away there is minimal cost to each lab for hosting you and some labs will be very happy to hear of your interest...this is my two cents but I'd stay away from tech jobs if you really want experience...i mean you might get lucky but chances are you will end up counting the days til freedom...

 

[donnie_dlewis]

... But be prepared to do b1tch work. Hey, we all gotta start somewhere.

yeah, that'll most likely be very true. i'm not expecting to do anything glamorous in the lab. my main motivations are practical in nature. aside from gaining some experience in a research setting for a year during the application cycle, i'll at least be getting paid something to help defray application costs. i'd be happy to break even by the time summer of '07 rolls around. but hopefully, i'll land with a group of people i could really respect and enjoy working with on a daily basis despite the menial tasks i'll be doing. and one other practical advantage of obtaining a full time position in an academic setting will be the healthcare benefits that i should be able access. i think i may need to get my wisdom teeth extracted in the near future, so i'd love to get as much of the costs offset with my own insurance. i had a few questions along this line, about managing one's financial situation during their year in-between graduating and starting med school, maybe i'll start a new thread about it. but anyhow, i'm expecting to live a bare-bones mode of existence during the in-betweeen year, and i'm somehow looking forward to it. call me crazy. thanks for the replies so far.

 

[Mutt]

I've been down this road.

Depending on how quickly you learn, you might have a shot at doing something stimulating. What happens in academia and in industry are two different things. The latter being more focused on getting things done within a specific (and usually very tight,) time frame. With no experience they will have to train you and that will be an investment that they will hope goes quickly in either situation, although academia is a little more forgiving because there tends to be a lot more "farting around" taking place.

If you do land a job, be sure to take notes when you are being trained to a certain detail so that you don't have to ask questions about little things (like where reagents are located). Also, make an effort to go over whatever process you undertake (like visualize each step) - you'll get good quickly.

 

[snobored18]

I can't stress this enough if you are dead set on being a tech...be careful what kind of lab you select...you want a younger PI and a less established lab...they will be more forgiving and more likely to get you stimulating work and stay away from anything and I repeat anything involving maintaining transgenic mouse colonies for a lab...you will hate your life...there are lots of openings for these kind of positions for a reason they suck donkey dick...no one wants to do them so they really kind of look for people they can burn out (ie someone who clearly isn't looking to be a tech for more than a year)...

 

[gluon999]

I've been down this road.

Depending on how quickly you learn, you might have a shot at doing something stimulating. What happens in academia and in industry are two different things. The latter being more focused on getting things done within a specific (and usually very tight,) time frame. With no experience they will have to train you and that will be an investment that they will hope goes quickly in either situation, although academia is a little more forgiving because there tends to be a lot more "farting around" taking place.

If you do land a job, be sure to take notes when you are being trained to a certain detail so that you don't have to ask questions about little things (like where reagents are located). Also, make an effort to go over whatever process you undertake (like visualize each step) - you'll get good quickly.

Good advice! I got a job as a lab-tech in the industry sector, and man, it sucks, compared to the academic setting, which was much more laid back. Also, there is a big difference between being a research lab tech vs. being a industrial lab tech. I enjoyed research a lot more than industry.

One important question you should ask at the interview is what is the attrition rate? If there is a high turnaround, chances are pretty good that the techs aren't happy.

 

[donnie_dlewis]

I can't stress this enough if you are dead set on being a tech...be careful what kind of lab you select...you want a younger PI and a less established lab...they will be more forgiving and more likely to get you stimulating work and stay away from anything and I repeat anything involving maintaining transgenic mouse colonies for a lab...you will hate your life...there are lots of openings for these kind of positions for a reason they suck donkey dick...no one wants to do them so they really kind of look for people they can burn out (ie someone who clearly isn't looking to be a tech for more than a year)...

yeah, i could see what you're saying -- it's no too hard to believe. of course, i'll do my best to secure a position at a lab doing work that i'd be truly interested in investing my time with, but i've got a question: for those type of openings where the hired individual wouldn't necessary be expected to work longer than a year, what are the prospects for obtaining a quality LOR at the end of one's time at such a lab? if nothing else is available, that type of position would still provide some practical advantages, such as healthcare benefits, steady employment, and experience in a research setting. moreover, i think an individual's particular personality will be the most important factor in deciding how much and what kinds of benefit one could derive from such a position, regardless of how menial the tasks are. but like i've said, i'm aiming nothing less than to work in a lab i'd truly be interested to work in, so my question hopefully stems from hypothetical curiosity at most. Thanks!!