Stick With Current Lab OR Find New Lab

[yjkimnada]

Most of the SDN posts regarding this dilemma have to do with posters who were not too happy with their first lab. I, however, am completely happy with my first lab. The PI and are on a first-name basis and he has given me two opportunities to write first-author publications. The postdoc and I are also very tight. I'm currently a sophomore and have been in this lab since high school for almost 5 years now. If I didn't have to leave, I wouldn't as I see no reason to.

Here is the problem. I may be applying to either MD or MD-PhD and I know for the latter, I need 2-3 research letters. I, unfortunately, only have one since I've been in only one lab. Rather than ask my postdoc for a letter, I would rather start a whole new lab experience and explore a new field. What are your thoughts?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[21Rush12]

I would try your absolute best to find a way to get multiple letters from this lab experience. Are there colleagues who are collaborating that would be able to write for you?

I am by no means an expert in this area, just don’t want to see someone throw away such a great ‘bird in the hand’ opportunity that you have without exhausting all other options.

 

[yjkimnada]

I too have looked around for collaborating PIs but I'm really just stuck with my postdoc. And truthfully I don't want to have him write a letter without meaning any disrespect.

I mean I'm not afraid of starting a new experience. I just want to know what other MDPhD applicants who only did one long experience end up doing for their research letters.

 

[aldol16]

You can try applying for summer research internships elsewhere. It sounds like you've been productive so you sound like a competitive applicant. You can then spend a summer or two away exploring new fields. It sounds counterproductive to leave a lab in which you've been productive and given opportunities in for the unknown just for the sake of securing another research letter.

 

[yjkimnada]

You can try applying for summer research internships elsewhere. It sounds like you've been productive so you sound like a competitive applicant. You can then spend a summer or two away exploring new fields. It sounds counterproductive to leave a lab in which you've been productive and given opportunities in for the unknown just for the sake of securing another research letter.

Is it truly possible to obtain a good letter with ten weeks of commitment over the summer? I feel like that's so short. Have other applicants done this with success?

 

[Shirafune]

Most of the SDN posts regarding this dilemma have to do with posters who were not too happy with their first lab. I, however, am completely happy with my first lab. The PI and are on a first-name basis and he has given me two opportunities to write first-author publications. The postdoc and I are also very tight. I'm currently a sophomore and have been in this lab since high school for almost 5 years now. If I didn't have to leave, I wouldn't as I see no reason to.

Here is the problem. I may be applying to either MD or MD-PhD and I know for the latter, I need 2-3 research letters. I, unfortunately, only have one since I've been in only one lab. Rather than ask my postdoc for a letter, I would rather start a whole new lab experience and explore a new field. What are your thoughts?

Have you talked to your PI about your concern? Your postdoc may write your current letter and have the PI co-sign/sign it. Perhaps your PI is collaborating with another PI and could send you over to their lab for a bit.

My most practical advice would be to applying to summer research opportunities at other institutions, like the 10-week stints suggested here. Tell your post-doc/PI that you want to explore other fields, but would still like to return in the Fall. Given your experience in the lab, it should be a more than reasonable request.

 

[mcdocky]

Is it truly possible to obtain a good letter with ten weeks of commitment over the summer? I feel like that's so short. Have other applicants done this with success?

Productivity, multiple first author pubs, 1 really good research letter, 2 average research letters >>> 2-3 different labs, 3 different good letters, less productivity, less publications. From my chats with adcoms, it seems that at many schools letters of recommendations are nice but don't really shift much in your direction. They're just used as confirmation that you've done the work. This is usually because letters all recommend applicants, that's kind of their job. What differentiates a good letter from a decent one is probably a small line that says "this applicant is in top 5% of the students under me" vs one that doesn't include that line.

 

[yjkimnada]

Have you talked to your PI about your concern? Your postdoc may write your current letter and have the PI co-sign/sign it. Perhaps your PI is collaborating with another PI and could send you over to their lab for a bit.

My most practical advice would be to applying to summer research opportunities at other institutions, like the 10-week stints suggested here. Tell your post-doc/PI that you want to explore other fields, but would still like to return in the Fall. Given your experience in the lab, it should be a more than reasonable request.

why did i not think of this... my PI is head of MSTP admission for Weill-Cornell haha. I will indeed ask him about my concerns. As for the summer programs, I'm trying to apply for the PI's whom my PI has worked with extensively and co-published, but this is no guarantee. It seems that the consensus is to not leave the lab and just spend a summer elsewhere and hope to land a good letter there. In the case that my summer stint doesn't work out, what are your thoughts on obtaining a letter from a science faculty at my school whom I haven't done research with. Is this not a valid substitute?

Productivity, multiple first author pubs, 1 really good research letter, 2 average research letters >>> 2-3 different labs, 3 different good letters, less productivity, less publications. From my chats with adcoms, it seems that at many schools letters of recommendations are nice but don't really shift much in your direction. They're just used as confirmation that you've done the work. This is usually because letters all recommend applicants, that's kind of their job. What differentiates a good letter from a decent one is probably a small line that says "this applicant is in top 5% of the students under me" vs one that doesn't include that line.

I see so I'm guessing other applicants who have only done one long research experience have gone through this same trouble. As long as I'm able to push out good projects and publications in my original lab I'm hoping that should serve me well. In the meantime, I should really try to get a summer research experience down as my secondary, but it's unfortunate that it is no guarantee my summer will work out well...

 

[Shirafune]

why did i not think of this... my PI is head of MSTP admission for Weill-Cornell haha. I will indeed ask him about my concerns. As for the summer programs, I'm trying to apply for the PI's whom my PI has worked with extensively and co-published, but this is no guarantee. It seems that the consensus is to not leave the lab and just spend a summer elsewhere and hope to land a good letter there. In the case that my summer stint doesn't work out, what are your thoughts on obtaining a letter from a science faculty at my school whom I haven't done research with. Is this not a valid substitute?

You should research this on your own and clarify with your PI, but my understanding is that MSTP programs explicitly require LORs from science faculty. Of course, the assumption is that many of these LORs are going to come with individuals with whom you have had strong research experience. Similarly, there is going to be an implicit requirement for letters from all substantial research experiences. Otherwise, I think a letter from your current PI and any other strong science faculty at your school will suffice.

 

[yjkimnada]

You should research this on your own and clarify with your PI, but my understanding is that MSTP programs explicitly require LORs from science faculty. Of course, the assumption is that many of these LORs are going to come with individuals with whom you have had strong research experience. Similarly, there is going to be an implicit requirement for letters from all substantial research experiences. Otherwise, I think a letter from your current PI and any other strong science faculty at your school will suffice.

So MY PI is not affiliated with my university, but with a major research hospital in the city. In that case, I was hoping to receive a letter from him and also from science faculty whom I've taken classes with but really haven't done much research.

 

[Shirafune]

So MY PI is not affiliated with my university, but with a major research hospital in the city. In that case, I was hoping to receive a letter from him and also from science faculty whom I've taken classes with but really haven't done much research.

Yes that sounds like a good plan.

 

[yjkimnada]

Thank you for being so helpful and patient. Really appreciate it

 

[aldol16]

Is it truly possible to obtain a good letter with ten weeks of commitment over the summer? I feel like that's so short. Have other applicants done this with success?

Many applicants have summer experiences that they have LORs from. The idea of a LOR isn't to show that you've been productive - hopefully your application will show that. It's to show that you have academic and research potential, which somebody can easily discern. For example, if you go into the summer and just do all the grunt work, you're not going to get an excellent letter. But if you go into the summer and take the initiative and show that you can think, then you will get a good letter. That skill doesn't change whether you've been in a lab three months or three years. You either have it or you don't.

why did i not think of this... my PI is head of MSTP admission for Weill-Cornell haha. I will indeed ask him about my concerns. As for the summer programs, I'm trying to apply for the PI's whom my PI has worked with extensively and co-published, but this is no guarantee. It seems that the consensus is to not leave the lab and just spend a summer elsewhere and hope to land a good letter there. In the case that my summer stint doesn't work out, what are your thoughts on obtaining a letter from a science faculty at my school whom I haven't done research with. Is this not a valid substitute?

You might want to edit out some details for privacy.

 

[Microbug]

Do summer research away.

 

[pewpew95]

I mean I'm not afraid of starting a new experience. I just want to know what other MDPhD applicants who only did one long experience end up doing for their research letters.

The only two MSTP applicants I know got 2 research letters because they had one from their undergrad lab, and the second ones from NIH fellowships they did after graduation.

 

[yjkimnada]

The only two MSTP applicants I know got 2 research letters because they had one from their undergrad lab, and the second ones from NIH fellowships they did after graduation.

Wait but aren't all MSTP applicants required to have multiple research letters? Or am I misinformed?

 

[pewpew95]

Wait but aren't all MSTP applicants required to have multiple research letters? Or am I misinformed?

You said 2-3 letters in one of your other posts so I was telling you how others got 2 research letters

 

[yjkimnada]

You said 2-3 letters in one of your other posts so I was telling you how others got 2 research letters

Oh I'm stupid... I read it as "only two of the MSTP applicants I know had 2 letters" my apologies

 

[pewpew95]

Oh I'm stupid... I read it as "only two of the MSTP applicants I know had 2 letters" my apologies

No worries I should have worded it better