Pre-MSTP Research/Gap Year(s)

[runsbikehike]

Hi All,

I have decided that a gap year or two will probably be necessary in order for me to rack up the research experiences expected by top MSTP programs, and study for/ take the MCAT.

I am trying to iron our my graduation dates and gap year plans before (hopefully) applying/starting an MSTP or MD/PhD program and I am hoping that some of you might be able to offer me some advice on which to pursue.

Stats-ish:
- 3.85 cGPA (hope to improve)
- MCAT not taken, planning on taking after graduation (might take earlier)
- UGrad is a pretty unknown directional uni
- 2 semesters of teaching experience as a TA
- researching in a genetics lab (15-30 hrs/wk over the past year) 2 poster presentations this year, possible (IF 3-4) first author publication by the end of the summer
- Moderate volunteering experience (one of them is clinically relevant)
- recently hired as a clinical research assistant
- Good potential LOR's from (1)Current PI/ScienceTeacher, (1)Volunteer Coordinator, (1)NonScienceTeacher

A) Graduate Next Summer (end of) *2 semesters early
1) 1-year researching full-time @ NIH/other
Pros: Fastest route to MSTP (1 Gap but graduate in 3 yrs)
Cons: Only 1 year in the lab (weaker LOR from PI, smaller contribution by interview time)
2) 2-years researching full-time @ NIH/other
Pros: lots of time to consider rsrch career, time to develop relationship w/ lab & contribute,
potentially more impressive on app
Cons: Longer option (sets me back 1-year considering earliest graduation but additional 2 years)
B) Graduate Next Fall (end of) *1 semester early
**This option would involve me taking next summer off to pursue an undergrad research or a pre-MSTP experience at a large research institution**
1) 6 months researching full time @ a research institution near my uni
Pros: Equally as fast as A-1, 2 additional Labs so 2 additional PI LOR's, Widest variety of lab exposure
Cons: Least time to get to know the 2 PI's / contribute. Will be fresh to lab by interviews
2) 1.5 years researching full time @ a research institution near my uni (flexible w/ 1.5 yr v 1 or 2)
Pros: 2 additional labs, 2 new LORs from PI's, variety of lab experiences, time to contribute before apps/interviews
Cons: Time consuming, fewer options as far as full-time labs,

Will having experience in 3 different labs be significantly more helpful than 1 or 2? Is it even worth doing additional research if I am only going to be there for 6 months? Does taking 1.5 or 2.0 years off as opposed to 0.5 or 1.0 have the potential to help my application significantly?

Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Microbug]

As long as you will have all your pre-req requirements met for matriculation, I vote option A2.

 

[shadow522]

As long as you will have all your pre-req requirements met for matriculation, I vote option A2.

i also vote for option A2.
and i dont think having experiences in many labs is helpful. if anything i think it kinda hurts. adcoms and faculty constantly mentioned how they liked seeing me in the same lab for 4 yrs. (i did 1 yr in a lab during HS senior yr though so it wasn't like i have only had one research experience ever). they like the continuity.
NIH/other prestigious postbacc for 2 yrs will give you that continuity and you should be much more established in that lab by the time youre 1-1.5 yrs into the commitment and interviewing for mstps. the LOR you get will also be definitively better.

 

[grizzly1093]

I also vote A2.

Most of the successful applicants I've seen this year have at least one substantial (>2 year) research experience in addition to other smaller experiences. Especially at top MSTPs (like you're shooting for), this typically included a significant gap after graduation--so you wouldn't be alone, and you'd be able to compete alongside all of the other "gap-takers". In my own experience, a 2-year postbac gave me a chance to "live and breathe" in a particular field, to truly understand and participate in my lab's work, and to see how labs operate, cooperate, and compete. This ended up being the work that interviewers were most interested in and that I could speak most knowledgeably about.

I also think the 2-year postbac helps MSTP adcoms answer one of their most important questions: "Does this person have realistic expectations, commitment, and a desire to do research?" i.e. "Does this person actually want to do the MSTP?" i.e. "Will this student not drop out to do MD only?"

For me, it always felt like my career and life couldn't begin until I finished all of my schooling--I wanted to get the show on the road, but things didn't work out the way that I wanted them to in my first application cycle (2015-2016). Now I'm incredibly thankful that someone directed me to a postbac program. It's been an important part of my career (and my life), it's given me the experiences to go where I want to go (my 2017-2018 cycle has been surprisingly successful), and I've actually enjoyed working full-time in the lab, which is a good sign!