Having notes and a small figure to represent research experiment during interview

[Dr.TonySoprano]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I've noticed that when I speak about my research experience with interviewers, all of the information I'm presenting to them may be confusing. I'm thinking of having a pre-written paper with some notes and a small figure and walk them through what I'm doing...good idea?

 

[ChrisMack390]

Bad idea.

If you can't verbally explain it, they are going to assume you don't understand it.

 

[Slave to the Game]

Depends how lengthy the explanation will be. There's a good quote that goes something like "if you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough". Figures and props are a great tool if it will help them understand your research better.

 

[mimelim]

I've noticed that when I speak about my research experience with interviewers, all of the information I'm presenting to them may be confusing. I'm thinking of having a pre-written paper with some notes and a small figure and walk them through what I'm doing...good idea?

There are very few people that perform research in undergrad that adcoms actually care about. We are adding you to our class because of your potential to become a good physician (of which research is a component), not because of your previous specific research accomplishments. We want to know what YOU got out of doing research. What did you learn about developing a hypothesis. What did you learn about the scientific method. What did you learn about trouble shooting experiments and solving difficult problems. Etc.

To this end, props/papers are not helpful. Leave them at home.

 

[Dr.TonySoprano]

Ok all your responses are very much appreciated

 

[DokterMom]

Plus, it would make you look over-prepared. You could do a quick sketch on the spot to illustrate if required, but a prepared document would not do what you're hoping for.

 

[22031 Alum]

It makes you look like you need the notes to remember/understand what your research was about. Not recommended.

 

[Catalystik]

Agree with the above comments. Leave the props at home and be sure you can explain what your research entails so a lay person can understand it, too, not just other scientists in that discipline. You might try practicing on an older relative.

 

[MrLogan13]

You don't need to bring figures to an interview, you need to figure out a way to explain your research experience in a simple way that encompasses what you did and what you got out of it. How would you explain to a layperson?

 

[22031 Alum]

You don't need to bring figures to an interview, you need to figure out a way to explain your research experience in a simple way that encompasses what you did and what you got out of it. How would you explain to a layperson?

This ability to "translate" is something I look for and value very highly in my med students. Knowing your stuff is one thing. Knowing it so well you can make a layperson understand it is next level.

 

[Goro]

No. First of all, JD Watson (of DNA structure fame) said that "any scientist should be able to explain what he does to a six year old, or he doesn't know what he's talking about". I'm a firm believer in this.

Second, we Adcoms hate show and tell.

I've noticed that when I speak about my research experience with interviewers, all of the information I'm presenting to them may be confusing. I'm thinking of having a pre-written paper with some notes and a small figure and walk them through what I'm doing...good idea?

 

[Doug Underhill]

Some guy on SDN was told to prove that his publication was real at an interview a few weeks ago. Bringing along the paper could be an answer to that, although you shouldn't display it if unprompted.

 

[mehc012]

Some guy on SDN was told to prove that his publication was real at an interview a few weeks ago. Bringing along the paper could be an answer to that, although you shouldn't display it if unprompted.

PubMed search...if they're gonna ask for proof, it's up to them to have a computer. I don't show up with my birth certificate or passport either; if they're going to ambush me they can either wait for me to send something later or expect some form of verification that could be accessed via their resources, on the spot.

 

[Goro]

I agree on this one. It's quite easy to whip out your cell phone and show them a PUBMED search result.

But if the paper is not in Pubmed, then it's on the interviewee to prove it.

PubMed search...if they're gonna ask for proof, it's up to them to have a computer. I don't show up with my birth certificate or passport either; if they're going to ambush me they can either wait for me to send something later or expect some form of verification that could be accessed via their resources, on the spot.

 

[Shirafune]

There are very few people that perform research in undergrad that adcoms actually care about. We are adding you to our class because of your potential to become a good physician (of which research is a component), not because of your previous specific research accomplishments. We want to know what YOU got out of doing research. What did you learn about developing a hypothesis. What did you learn about the scientific method. What did you learn about trouble shooting experiments and solving difficult problems. Etc.

To this end, props/papers are not helpful. Leave them at home.

Things work and then don't. And when you fix your assay, the results aren't what you were hoping for. Sums up a lot of my time spent in research haha, but I guess this is the reality of bench work.

 

[mimelim]

Things work and then don't. And when you fix your assay, the results aren't what you were hoping for. Sums up a lot of my time spent in research haha, but I guess this is the reality of bench work.

That is exactly why what happened with your research is far less important than the experience.

 

[blackroses]

I've noticed that when I speak about my research experience with interviewers, all of the information I'm presenting to them may be confusing. I'm thinking of having a pre-written paper with some notes and a small figure and walk them through what I'm doing...good idea?

Here is how my PI explained his research to me the first time we talked: "Basically, I take an organic molecule, stick a lithium on it, and see what it does." Your explanation does not need to be complex. You should be able to explain it a little more in-depth than my PI did at that moment, but the point is this: your explanation should not require notes or a figure. If it does, you're explaining it wrong!

 

[MrTaco92]

I've never gotten any detailed questions about my research projects yet. Whenever I explain the overall theme of my lab and the normal functions of the proteins we study, my interviewer understands after about a minute long explanation and that's just about where it ends as far as concepts go. What I have been asked about however was my experiences with people I found difficult to work with, how I've dealt with drama/trouble in the workplace, the roles I've played on a team, etc, which I can easily draw from my lab experience. That's what my interviewers seemed to have been more interested in, so I think @mimelim is pretty on point with his post.