How to decide on a lab position?

[robertson]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hello everyone, here's a little bit about me. I am doing undergrad in 3 yrs and I want to do research the next 2 yrs before med school. I have yet to take the mcat. I have several offers for a research assistant position (not a tech) and I need to choose one. I've narrowed it down to two jobs and I'm have no idea which to choose. My app is solid (minus the MCAT) so this research is just to further improve my app, not make up for anything. There is a very tiny chance I will apply md/phd.

position 1:
It is in a field I'm not familiar with, but is very very cool translational research.
The PI has extremely high expectations of the students and I really don't know if I could live up to them (i don't really have much experience and I'm not that smart). So I'm thinking I will inevitably end up with a bad LOR from her? Or I will have to work incredibly hard and have no time to study for the mcat.

position 2:
The subject matches well with my previous experiences and stated interests. PI is super cool and laid back as are other lab members. She has very low expectations and I could easily impress her.
PI went out of her way to get funding for me.
The negative is that this is not as cool a project and no clinical experience available.

Am I just being paranoid, or would the PI not write me a good letter if I'm not as good as the other students? It sounds like I want to choose a lab based on the LOR I expect and I think that is logical, right? Maybe it's just my expectations that are wrong...

 

[d1ony5u5]

Ok, assuming your judgment is accurate, I'd go with position 2.

LoRs are subjective at least in part. I've been told AdComs are specially keen on looking at some ranking ("I put this person within the top 5% of other pre-meds" or something like that) that will make their decisions easier.

Another consideration would be ability to relax a little. In option 2 you said you'd likely be less stressed out. Plenty of time to stress in medschool.

By the way, you don't have to combine research and clinical experience in one activity. You can easily split it. As a matter of fact, splitting it may give you certain advantages...

Oh, lastly, whatever you choose, just do a good job. Getting a publication would really help... sounds to me like this might be easier to achieve in #2, as well!

 

[Yips]

Sounds like you are more enthusiastic about position 2. Go with what you will enjoy doing the most.

 

[robertson]

Well, the research topic in the first is an incredible opportunity that is much more interesting than #2. All my previous research experience was in immunology, which is #2, but #1 is something different that i have no experience with, although it's very interesting. So the only thing I'm worried about #1 is not getting a good lor...

Can anyone provide some input on what I should look for in the lab and the PI. And also, how much weight I should give to each factor

PI
size of lab
ability to work with other lab members

 

[robertson]

bump...

I need to make a decision quickly and I need all the advice I can get. Please help!!

 

[NickNaylor]

1) Do whichever you find more personally interesting. This might make the research enjoyable rather than very painful.

2) If you want to get publications, go to the lab that publishes tons of papers. You'll have a better chance of working on a project that eventually gets published.

 

[robertson]

1) Do whichever you find more personally interesting. This might make the research enjoyable rather than very painful.

2) If you want to get publications, go to the lab that publishes tons of papers. You'll have a better chance of working on a project that eventually gets published.

Well both are very interesting to me and both have the same chance for pubs. I just don't know how much I should take into account the lab environment and how demanding the PI is.

If the PI has extremely high expectations for students, would it be easy to disappoint and get a bad lor?

 

[boaz]

Have you spoken with someone who has already worked with her and gotten an LOR? That might shed some light on your decision.

 

[wishfor]

Def go for option 2.

Hello everyone, here's a little bit about me. I am doing undergrad in 3 yrs and I want to do research the next 2 yrs before med school. I have yet to take the mcat. I have several offers for a research assistant position (not a tech) and I need to choose one. I've narrowed it down to two jobs and I'm have no idea which to choose. My app is solid (minus the MCAT) so this research is just to further improve my app, not make up for anything. There is a very tiny chance I will apply md/phd.

position 1:
It is in a field I'm not familiar with, but is very very cool translational research.
The PI has extremely high expectations of the students and I really don't know if I could live up to them (i don't really have much experience and I'm not that smart). So I'm thinking I will inevitably end up with a bad LOR from her? Or I will have to work incredibly hard and have no time to study for the mcat.

position 2:
The subject matches well with my previous experiences and stated interests. PI is super cool and laid back as are other lab members. She has very low expectations and I could easily impress her.
PI went out of her way to get funding for me.
The negative is that this is not as cool a project and no clinical experience available.

Am I just being paranoid, or would the PI not write me a good letter if I'm not as good as the other students? It sounds like I want to choose a lab based on the LOR I expect and I think that is logical, right? Maybe it's just my expectations that are wrong...

 

[robertson]

Def go for option 2.

Can you elaborate. The first PI is really geared towards teaching students and with that has high expectations. So I don't know what to think.

 

[robertson]

Have you spoken with someone who has already worked with her and gotten an LOR? That might shed some light on your decision.

No I don't have any contact info and I would ask for it but I need to make a decision and PI is too busy to respond to other emails...

 

[Cancer p53]

If you're truly interested in the research, I'd lean towards #1. I can't imagine any PI would ever assume that an incoming student without much experience would be all that competent. You need to be trained first no matter what your experience is. If you're willing to work hard I'm sure you can live up to whatever expectations #1 might have. You have no idea what your PI is going to write in the LOR at this point so don't worry about it. So, I guess I would say your worries about the LOR aren't all that logical. Do something you think you will love and work hard at it. What will impress the adcoms in the end is if you can intelligently discuss what you did and show that you are excited about your research (in your app and interview). Even if you get a great LOR from #2, if you aren't excited about the research itself, it will show in your interview even if that LOR was good enough to get you there.

On a side note, confidence is key... even if you don't think you're that smart, don't say it. If you are at all thinking about MD/PhD you absolutely need to be smart or at least able to convince the adcoms of it.

 

[robertson]

If you're truly interested in the research, I'd lean towards #1. I can't imagine any PI would ever assume that an incoming student without much experience would be all that competent. You need to be trained first no matter what your experience is. If you're willing to work hard I'm sure you can live up to whatever expectations #1 might have. You have no idea what your PI is going to write in the LOR at this point so don't worry about it. So, I guess I would say your worries about the LOR aren't all that logical. Do something you think you will love and work hard at it. What will impress the adcoms in the end is if you can intelligently discuss what you did and show that you are excited about your research (in your app and interview). Even if you get a great LOR from #2, if you aren't excited about the research itself, it will show in your interview even if that LOR was good enough to get you there.

On a side note, confidence is key... even if you don't think you're that smart, don't say it. If you are at all thinking about MD/PhD you absolutely need to be smart or at least able to convince the adcoms of it.

Thanks a lot for the input. Do you think hard work can compensate for others areas I may be lacking in intelligence (in terms of being able to ask the right questions, troubleshoot, etc.)? I think the PI expects students to figure out how to make things work on your own and I've never really done too much of that.

 

[Cancer p53]

Hard work trumps intelligence nearly always. Intelligence merely facilitates the hard work... as long as you meet the threshold of intelligence required of science/medicine you are fine.

You're what, a sophomore undergrad? Any PI who expects you to be able to troubleshoot protocols or know what questions to ask as far as the research is concerned is ridiculous. Independence in research is something that you develop. I've been involved in research since my freshman year, and I'm just now becoming an independent fully functional researcher. It just takes experience. The key for you as an incoming student to a research group is to be enthusiastic, ask good questions of appropriate people (don't bother the PI about something your fellow students could answer), keep meticulous notes, and DO NOT be afraid to admit if you are unsure of something. I would rather my undergrads ask for help than screw up a protocol that could lose an entire day/week/month of work for me. (although, asking the same questions over and over gets annoying after a while so pay attention when you're given answers)

Also, do yourself a favor and go into either position having read up on the recent research of whichever PI you choose to work for. I realize that fully understanding primary literature is tough for someone without experience, but it will impress the PI/your lab mates if you have at least some clue of what's going on before you get there... If you put in the time to do some background reading on your own it will probably make your life easier as well.

 

[robertson]

Hard work trumps intelligence nearly always. Intelligence merely facilitates the hard work... as long as you meet the threshold of intelligence required of science/medicine you are fine.

You're what, a sophomore undergrad? Any PI who expects you to be able to troubleshoot protocols or know what questions to ask as far as the research is concerned is ridiculous. Independence in research is something that you develop. I've been involved in research since my freshman year, and I'm just now becoming an independent fully functional researcher. It just takes experience. The key for you as an incoming student to a research group is to be enthusiastic, ask good questions of appropriate people (don't bother the PI about something your fellow students could answer), keep meticulous notes, and DO NOT be afraid to admit if you are unsure of something. I would rather my undergrads ask for help than screw up a protocol that could lose an entire day/week/month of work for me. (although, asking the same questions over and over gets annoying after a while so pay attention when you're given answers)

Also, do yourself a favor and go into either position having read up on the recent research of whichever PI you choose to work for. I realize that fully understanding primary literature is tough for someone without experience, but it will impress the PI/your lab mates if you have at least some clue of what's going on before you get there... If you put in the time to do some background reading on your own it will probably make your life easier as well.

Well, I'm in my third and final year of undergrad. I have about 3 semesters of semi-independent research and I think the PI will expect a little more than that out of me since he interviewed about ten different applicants and offerred me the job... I honestly don't know why he chose me because I have absolutely no experience in his field. He talked about how one of his students can figure out how to make experiments work by googling and stuff...