on chosing a rotation

[ChocoCowie]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Hey all,
I'm meeting with a bunch of faculty this week to find a candiate for my next rotation, besides the research related questions, any advice on what questions I can ask to get a better feel of the lab/person/funding etc without insulting the professors?
Thanks! 🙂
Cow

 

[gbwillner]

Hey all,
I'm meeting with a bunch of faculty this week to find a candiate for my next rotation, besides the research related questions, any advice on what questions I can ask to get a better feel of the lab/person/funding etc without insulting the professors?
Thanks! 🙂
Cow

YES!!!! This is a very important topic- one that can dictate the terms of the quality of your training and the quantity of years of training.

Although choosing a rotation is not a big deal, choosing a lab is, so take it seriously. The biggest mistake first year PhD students make is make a choice on the type of research conducted in the lab. You are there to get a PhD, not cure cancer. If you get anything from this post, that should be it. I know many 6th year PhD students (and higher) who still don't have a thesis project because they chose their lab poorly, not because they are dumb or lazy.

The most important things to consider when choosing a lab are: 1. Personality (do you get along WELL with the PI and his/her mentorship style? what about the post-Docs you will be working with?) 2. Funding- nothing worse than getting kicked out of lab because your PI can no longer afford you. This is probably not a big deal for most MSTPs, because we tend to choose well-funded and respected PIs. There is nothing wrong with asking about $$$. 3. type of project you will get- Nothing worse than being handed a fishing expedition for a project which may develop into a thesis project, and have that never develop. You should come up with a hypothesis-driven thesis within a year of your training in that lab, otherwise you may spin wheels forever. The best situation is where someone has done all the thinking for you and set up a project for you. You may lose some power over your PhD (and mybe some respect) but you will have a quick, high quality PhD. You may even want to propose ideas to the PI during the interview, assuming you are well-aquainted with their work. 4. Publication record- does your lab churn out papers? If so, this is good- you will be in them and your committee will get you out quicker. 5. and maybe here, because I can't think of more advice- is the type of research the lab conducts. How willing is the PI to let you wander away from the lab focus?

Other questions you may want to ask: Does the PI have any intentions to leave the institution in the next 5 years, are they planning a sabbatical? These are seldom mentioned and can ruin graduate school for many. If I think of more I will post again.

Cheers!

 

[Ultra7]

gbwillner is spot on, especially with points 1-4.
I think he is also very correct in saying "You are there to get a PhD, not cure cancer." I think it is a mistake to limit yourself to labs that study X based on some preconceived romanticized notion about the importance of X. I think that ALL science can be interesting given the right perspective and right PI (well, maybe with some exceptions...)
One more consideration I would add is, what are the other grad students and post docs in the lab like, and what do they have to say about the PI? Before joining a lab, talk to a few people in the lab one-on-one. Ask them what they love about the PI. Ask them what they hate. People will almost always tell you, but only if you ask.

 

[solitude]

Good thread, even for those of us who have a few years before this predicament. 👍

 

[tbo]

Agreed. Great post, gbwillner. 👍

 

[gbwillner]

One more, very important point-

Perhaps more important than questions you will ask the PI are the questions you should ask other graduate students in that lab.

PIs have a way of romanticizing/selling their lab/work. They WANT graduate students- they are cheaper and better than technicians. Basically, we are slaves. They may say anything to get you, or they have a very egocentric view of what's going on in their lab.

You need to seek out other grad students in the lab. Ask them what they think of it. What are the good and bad things about it? Are they happy? Would they choose another lab if they could start over? You'd be surprised at the number of people who would say yes to that last question.

It's also OK to seek advice from students outside the lab, based on the PI's reputation. If you are considering a lab and an older grad student says not to join a lab, there is probably a VERY good reason they are saying that. Many first year PhD students think they know what's best for them, but let me tell you now they do NOT. Also, you may want to avoid new faculty. You will have little to judge them by, and they may heavily rely on you, thus not let you go when it's time.

Hope that helps.

 

[gbwillner]

gbwillner is spot on, especially with points 1-4.
I think he is also very correct in saying "You are there to get a PhD, not cure cancer." I think it is a mistake to limit yourself to labs that study X based on some preconceived romanticized notion about the importance of X. I think that ALL science can be interesting given the right perspective and right PI (well, maybe with some exceptions...)
One more consideration I would add is, what are the other grad students and post docs in the lab like, and what do they have to say about the PI? Before joining a lab, talk to a few people in the lab one-on-one. Ask them what they love about the PI. Ask them what they hate. People will almost always tell you, but only if you ask.

Sorry, didn't see that you had basically beaten me to the punch.