Research question..

[exoslimjim]

---

Members do not see this ad.

..just for the sake of argument, and because i like finding exceptions (although I don't know why i'm arguing or really what i'm arguing against..)...

i don't get your point there. I've funded and designed experiments, and am writing one up right now.

i never intended to attack anyone, or even say that there were no exceptions. Grants from large traditional funding bodies and many institutes require a doctoral degree, previous publishing track, and references. Very very very few UGs have all 3 (and if they did are not actually UGs). I'm also certain your institute's space committe would not give a room to an UG either.

I never said ug students did not or could not think. But I don't know of any UGs who have been awarded independent investigator research grants simply because they don't meet the requirements. I'm sure if an UG got an R01 we would all know about it. The easiest way to figure out if you are an independent investigator and may take complete ownership of your research is if every co-author is paid by you or is your collaborator.

By the way, I'm not talking about UG research grants or small foundation, venture grants. Those generally already require a sponsoring PI or institute which means you arn't independent.

I'm curious orgghead, if I personally spoke to your PI and asked about his contribution to "your" research, would he give himself the same amount of credit you give to him? You must have been taught by someone, which means that you were not thinking "completely" by yourself. It is easy to marginalize the contributions of others, especially when you only have to worry about your research (a PI is also an administrator).

You're right, I don't know you but it was not my intent to discount the achievements of anyone. And there are many different ways to train scientists as there are for any profession. It would be ignorant to suggest one way over another as neither research or science is concerned with relative quality of research or researchers. Every scientist, including UG researchers, plays a role. And if you get a nobel or lasker, i'll admit maybe you contributed a little bit more... don't forget though that research projects are like building blocks.

jef, publishing was never a prereq for MD/PhD. Find a lab you think you can stay in for a year and stick to it. If you walk out loving it, you are probably walking away with something better than any publication.

 

[orrghead16]

i never intended to attack anyone, or even say that there were no exceptions. Grants from large traditional funding bodies and many institutes require a doctoral degree, previous publishing track, and references. Very very very few UGs have all 3 (and if they did are not actually UGs). I'm also certain your institute's space committe would not give a room to an UG either.

I never said ug students did not or could not think. But I don't know of any UGs who have been awarded independent investigator research grants simply because they don't meet the requirements. I'm sure if an UG got an R01 we would all know about it. The easiest way to figure out if you are an independent investigator and may take complete ownership of your research is if every co-author is paid by you or is your collaborator.

By the way, I'm not talking about UG research grants or small foundation, venture grants. Those generally already require a sponsoring PI or institute which means you arn't independent.

I'm curious orgghead, if I personally spoke to your PI and asked about his contribution to "your" research, would he give himself the same amount of credit you give to him? You must have been taught by someone, which means that you were not thinking "completely" by yourself. It is easy to marginalize the contributions of others, especially when you only have to worry about your research (a PI is also an administrator).

You're right, I don't know you but it was not my intent to discount the achievements of anyone. And there are many different ways to train scientists as there are for any profession. It would be ignorant to suggest one way over another as neither research or science is concerned with relative quality of research or researchers. Every scientist, including UG researchers, plays a role. And if you get a nobel or lasker, i'll admit maybe you contributed a little bit more... don't forget though that research projects are like building blocks.

jef, publishing was never a prereq for MD/PhD. Find a lab you think you can stay in for a year and stick to it. If you walk out loving it, you are probably walking away with something better than any publication.

My point was that your original comment was belittling, no one ever said that UGs are completely independent, fully funded, fully trained scientists, etc. Your original comment seemed so.

Of course the PI helps us out, often immensely. But you don't have to make it seem like every undergrad is simply a machine at the whim of an operative PI. At the same time, I didn't mean to make it sound like I or others are UGs capable of running a lab, getting funding, etc. We are not truely independent, but UGs can and do have plenty of independent moments, so to speak. Moreover, I would never go so far as to understimate how much my PI has helped me (immensely), trained me, and so on. I have more respect for the fella than about anyone else, because of the respect he shows me and others.

I think we are basically arguing over millimeters.

 

[exoslimjim]

i'm sorry for my tone. It was not my intent to belittle anyone. heavens knows i'm nothing like anyone here.
I've just had very diverse and some regrettable experiences.

 

[xnfs93hy]

Realistically, yes.

Is there any truth to this?