undergrad research area and eventual research area

[CMVpromoter]

How significant is the correlation between's undergrad research area and the eventual research area taken during the PhD years? Do people commonly change?

I ask, because although I find my current undergrad area exciting, I don't plan to stay in it forever.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Neuronix]

Yes it is common to switch. As an undergrad you take what you can get. As a grad student you have much more opportunity to pick and choose. Pick the lab now that provides you opportunity and fulfillment.

 

[JHopRevisit]

I would say most people switch.

Except the neuroscientists. They like the brain and nothing else.

 

[GliaGirl]

Except the neuroscientists. They like the brain and nothing else.

Truth. We're like zombies.

 

[Red Leader]

Do adcoms expect you to know what field you're going into if you've done research for 4 years? I think if I go into an interview and act wishy-washy about my grad research area it will make me seem really indecisive and short-sighted. I guess my question is, is there a period during the MD or PhD phase where you can rotate through labs to find which labs are cool and which ones are not because let's face it, do they really expect me to look up a dozen labs from EACH of the schools I plan to apply to and pick out 2 or 3 I'm interested in?

 

[StIGMA]

Completely anecdotally, the interviews that I went on and said I was dead-set on a certain area (ie: gene therapy) all rejected me outright, while the schools where I expressed a broad interest (schools without gene therapy programs as it were) either accepted or waitlisted me.

The point is that you do not need to know what field you are going into. You DO need an understanding of many fields, trends in those fields, and to have narrowed an interest within broad areas of science.

Do you want to work in a physical chemistry lab, do imaging, neuroscience, cancer, cell signalling, anything molec bio, work with animals, cell culture, yeast, worms, yada yada... demonstrate that you have thought about it and that you know that X Y and Z areas are strong at their school.

do they really expect me to look up a dozen labs from EACH of the schools I plan to apply to and pick out 2 or 3 I'm interested in?

For interviews, I hope you would lookup >50-100 labs... and then send them 5-10 you are interested in.

 

[Kickback]

Hrmm, do you know if this applies to the engineering side of things as well? I would assume not nearly as much, as bioengineering is so diverse in studies (e.g. medical imaging, tissue engineering, biomechanics, fluid mechanics/hematology) that you really have to know what you want to get into.

 

[StIGMA]

Hrmm, do you know if this applies to the engineering side of things as well? I would assume not nearly as much, as bioengineering is so diverse in studies (e.g. medical imaging, tissue engineering, biomechanics, fluid mechanics/hematology) that you really have to know what you want to get into.

The point is that you do not need to know what subfield you are going into. You DO need an understanding of many subfields, trends and investigations within those subfields, and to have narrowed an interest within broad areas of bioengineering/biomedical engineering.

Do you want to do medical imaging, tissue engineering, biomechanics, fluid mechanics/hematology yada yada... demonstrate that you have thought about it and that you know that X Y and Z areas are strong within their program.

 

[GliaGirl]

Agreed. You don't really need to know what subarea you're going into, and you can always change later, but they like to see that you have interests. You can say something like "my current research is in ___, but I think I would want to focus more on another area of biochem/molecular/neuro for my PhD work." For me, I currently do stroke stuff, but would prefer to do research pertinant to pediatric neurological conditions, since that is my current area of medical interest as well. And yes, you get to rotate through labs during the summers to find a good fit for you (most programs require it). However, there is only time for 2-3 rotations in most programs, so you should have a pretty good idea ahead of time what you want. You can always do a "reading course" with a professor if you want to see if their research interests you, which is when the prof will send you some papers to read, and then you'll meet up to talk about current and future research in that area.

 

[JHopRevisit]

Hrmm, do you know if this applies to the engineering side of things as well? I would assume not nearly as much, as bioengineering is so diverse in studies (e.g. medical imaging, tissue engineering, biomechanics, fluid mechanics/hematology) that you really have to know what you want to get into.

I was a biomedical engineer (drug delivery and materials science) in undergrad, am now an immunologist, flirted with all sorts of things along the way. Then again, we also had a kid in my class that was an electrical engineer and essentially stayed in the field as a BME with an interest in device design. It's very individual.

 

[QofQuimica]

How significant is the correlation between's undergrad research area and the eventual research area taken during the PhD years? Do people commonly change?

I ask, because although I find my current undergrad area exciting, I don't plan to stay in it forever.

I started out in agricultural science as an UG and did organic synthesis for my PhD. No worries if you want to switch fields. Some people even do post docs in different fields.

 

[bd4727]

No one expects any applicant to know what field they want to go into. If someone does know what they want to go into, they say fine and talk about that a little bit in an attempt to sell the program to the applicant. If you don't have a particular area, you just need to be able to talk about areas you are interested in and why and what sorts of things make you interested in them so that they interviewers can get a sense that you understand the research enterprise.

For example, "I am not sure exactly what area I am interested in, but I really like the idea of looking at epigenetic regulation of differentiation events. I think I can figure out exactly where this would fit in best with my clinical interests later, but I think it is an area that would apply a lot of my basic science interests to discover disease mechanisms and possible new avenues for therapeutic approaches."

This shows you are simply unsure about what you will like after having done medical school, but you know enough and have enough forsight to see where some of your interests could be applicable to medicine. That is all anyone wants to see so don't stress over this. On the other hand if you have wanted to study the kidney since the day you were born then whatever just go with that, no one will care either way, IMO.

 

[gbwillner]

Completely anecdotally, the interviews that I went on and said I was dead-set on a certain area (ie: gene therapy) all rejected me outright, while the schools where I expressed a broad interest (schools without gene therapy programs as it were) either accepted or waitlisted me.

Ha ha.... That's pretty much what I said when I applied 10 years ago. Everyone was very dissapointed then with the whole notion of Gene therapy... and with good reason. I'm sure there really is a future for it, but it will only be applicable in very special circumstances. I would advise any incoming student to stay away from Gene Therapy projects in grad school. trust me.

Also of interest- during my interviews I talked about some of my work with DNA microarrays... most interviewers dismissed the technique and said it would NEVER work. I was on a project really just peripherally and several interviewers harrassed me about it and told me it would never go anywhere and it was a waste of time. Some were actually furious about it, and i think it affected some of my interviews, especially one I remember vividly at Yale.

 

[anemone2]

Also of interest- during my interviews I talked about some of my work with DNA microarrays... most interviewers dismissed the technique and said it would NEVER work.

lol!! That sounds all too familiar. A part of my project also involved microarray analysis, and I've run into several interviewers who're very..uhm, critical of this approach. One guy flat out told me it sucks (even after I pointed out studies published in Neuron and Cell that used microarrays quite successfully..). I so did not get accepted into that school

 

[Red Leader]

lol!! That sounds all too familiar. A part of my project also involved microarray analysis, and I've run into several interviewers who're very..uhm, critical of this approach. One guy flat out told me it sucks (even after I pointed out studies published in Neuron and Cell that used microarrays quite successfully..). I so did not get accepted into that school

Which school is this if you don't mind me asking? But beyond that I don't think you can attribute your rejection to you using microarrays and him not liking them.

As for gbwillner, I remmeber reading about some gene therapy clinical trial that was done years ago and the patient died. But again that was years ago and I do gene therapy research so uh...I'm not sure what I will talk about if not that. Aren't the interviewers supposed ot be people who work in your field? I'm so confused now.

 

[CMVpromoter]

its funny you say that JHop.

I'm working in neuroscience right now, but my interests have shifted. I still like neuroscience but I think that I will aim for infectious diseases later on.

Is it a problem to the interviewers if I state this? I want to stay in my current neuroscience lab because I've done so much work in it already and a publication is probable.

 

[CMVpromoter]

You DO need an understanding of many fields, trends in those fields,

Also, how much should we know about the other fields? Generally, what level of detail? I guess this is a hard question to answer, but can you give me a specific example? For example, what is the trend right now in neuroscience?

 

[StIGMA]

Just keep up to do date with science, nature, and/or cell, and you will be able to talk about a recent study in that area. If you are only interested in molec bio, dont worry about chemical synthesis research... have an understanding of broader research within your interests.

 

[anemone2]

Which school is this if you don't mind me asking? But beyond that I don't think you can attribute your rejection to you using microarrays and him not liking them

This happened to be at Pitt (really liked the school aside from this one guy), and you're right, I'm sure I wasn't rejected based on this incident alone, but my interviewer was on the admissions committee, so I think it did matter. Also, I was a dejected, nervous wreck for the remainder of my interviews that day, which I'm sure didn't help either. Oh well..

 

[Red Leader]

This happened to be at Pitt (really liked the school aside from this one guy), and you're right, I'm sure I wasn't rejected based on this incident alone, but my interviewer was on the admissions committee, so I think it did matter. Also, I was a dejected, nervous wreck for the remainder of my interviews that day, which I'm sure didn't help either. Oh well..

Sorry to hear that...bad luck of the draw I guess.

Hopefully you have better luck this cycle

edit: hmm already accepted to wash u/NU/etc. no luck needed