Update the School or Nah?

[Fishy fish]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I recently got a research assistant position at an ivy league school. I'll be doing some pretty cool work. Is it worth submitting an update to my top schools to let them know about this? Or won't make much of a difference?

 

[Goro]

I recently got a research assistant position at an ivy league school. I'll be doing some pretty cool work. Is it worth submitting an update to my top schools to let them know about this? Or won't make much of a difference?

Nah.

Please spread the word things that you have just started aren't worthy of updates.

 

[Fishy fish]

Nah.

Please spread the word things that you have just started aren't worthy of updates.

Ok, thank you!

 

[getdown]

nah. Not update worthy.

 

[xnnsx1]

Nah.

Please spread the word things that you have just started aren't worthy of updates.

Hi Goro,

What if we just started americorp?
I did write in some secondaries my plans for my gap year. Is it worth it to update when I start?

 

[DokterMom]

I recently got a research assistant position at an ivy league school. I'll be doing some pretty cool work. Is it worth submitting an update to my top schools to let them know about this? Or won't make much of a difference?

You might need (OK - desperately want) to update schools later in the cycle to prompt another look at your application if you haven't heard from them and you'll need something to say. Save it for then, and you can update about the work you actually did.

Edited to add:
Readers, take this advice generically. Many of you will find yourselves in a similar situation where you're hoping to prompt another look at your application. For most schools, it's OK to send one, maybe two updates - any more makes you look neurotic. So start planning NOW what you can say that will:

1. mitigate the weakest portions of your application (strong grades if your GPA is low or turnaround, ECs if those are weak, new MCAT score, etc),
2. show something new or interesting about you, especially if you're cookie-cutter,
   
3. demonstrate why this school is the one for you (only effective if you have another acceptance)

Also plan your update timing to hit a week or two before the next flurry of activity and have your goal clearly in mind. Think of it as a marketing campaign, because that's exactly what it is.

 

[Fishy fish]

You might need (OK - desperately want) to update schools later in the cycle to prompt another look at your application if you haven't heard from them and you'll need something to say. Save it for then, and you can update about the work you actually did.

Sounds good. Thanks!

 

[Hi_I'mPaul]

Going to ask my question here and play off of Fishy fish's question. If I just finished my grad program and finished the last 8 credits to complete it with a 4.0..... Should I update the schools that I already submitted to now and include that I got a job as a scribe? Then send a second update in a few months with what I have done as a scribe? (my app is somewhat weak hours-wise in clinical experience) @Goro thx.

 

[gyngyn]

Going to ask my question here and play off of Fishy fish's question. If I just finished my grad program and finished the last 8 credits to complete it with a 4.0..... Should I update the schools that I already submitted to now and include that I got a job as a scribe? Then send a second update in a few months with what I have done as a scribe? (my app is somewhat weak hours-wise in clinical experience) @Goro thx.

No, at least not at MD schools.

 

[Hi_I'mPaul]

No, at least not at MD schools.

So just update them with my grades/job in a few months then? Thanks!! Yes, I am only applying MD

 

[Goro]

Hi Goro,

What if we just started americorp?
I did write in some secondaries my plans for my gap year. Is it worth it to update when I start?

Also worthless. You could quit next week.

Words are easy. Doing is harder.

 

[toedrag]

Also worthless. You could quit next week.

Words are easy. Doing is harder.

Similar question here. I'm in the final stage of interviewing for 2 clinical research coordinator positions in Boston. Dozens of my secondaries have the "What are you doing in your gap year question?" while others have the "What are you planning to do in your gap year?"

It's going to be another week or 2 until I find out but I don't want that decision to delay my secondaries. For the former question, would it be okay to just explain my situation and say that I am interviewing for a full time CRC position?

 

[gyngyn]

So just update them with my grades/job in a few months then? Thanks!! Yes, I am only applying MD

Such updates are not likely to have any effect on a strong (or weak) application.

 

[Goro]

Similar question here. I'm in the final stage of interviewing for 2 clinical research coordinator positions in Boston. Dozens of my secondaries have the "What are you doing in your gap year question?" while others have the "What are you planning to do in your gap year?"

It's going to be another week or 2 until I find out but I don't want that decision to delay my secondaries. For the former question, would it be okay to just explain my situation and say that I am interviewing for a full time CRC position?

You guys really need to read this thread:
New Job- How to Update Schools

and pay attention to the wise Mimelim's words:
You should never be 'letting people know' that something is in process or undergoing revisions. Once something is accepted/published, that is absolutely something that you should let schools know. In the research realm, publications are binary. They are either published or they aren't. You don't get partial credit because that is impossible to appreciate and the DEFAULT is for things to not get published. If you say, "This is submitted, I'm waiting on XYZ." The likelihood of that going on to publication (depending on the field) is potentially <30%. Why would we put any stock in that? Again, something that ANYONE can claim truthfully with zero/minimal effort is not something that you should be bragging about. It looks desperate.

 

[Robin-jay]

You guys really need to read this thread:
New Job- How to Update Schools

and pay attention to the wise Mimelim's words:
You should never be 'letting people know' that something is in process or undergoing revisions. Once something is accepted/published, that is absolutely something that you should let schools know. In the research realm, publications are binary. They are either published or they aren't. You don't get partial credit because that is impossible to appreciate and the DEFAULT is for things to not get published. If you say, "This is submitted, I'm waiting on XYZ." The likelihood of that going on to publication (depending on the field) is potentially <30%. Why would we put any stock in that? Again, something that ANYONE can claim truthfully with zero/minimal effort is not something that you should be bragging about. It looks desperate.

You can be promised a publication and an author spot. My adviser did this all the time. If a student who doesn't collaborate much with their PI just decides to run questionable data to publishing mills, then I guess it could be <30%, but usually it appeared to be more straightforward with research I've seen.

You either have publishable data or not, so it being submitted should mean the PI accepted it and already knows the outcome.

The "type" of journal may be up for discussion, but it should be published somewhere.

 

[Goro]

You can be promised a publication and an author spot. My adviser did this all the time. If a student who doesn't collaborate much with their PI just decides to run questionable data to publishing mills, then I guess it could be <30%, but usually it appeared to be more straightforward with research I've seen.

You either have publishable data or not, so it being submitted should mean the PI accepted it and already knows the outcome.

The "type" of journal may be up for discussion, but it should be published somewhere.

One never knows the outcome once a manuscript is submitted. There's a reason why NIH Biosketches are not allowed to include "submitted.

 

[Robin-jay]

One never knows the outcome once a manuscript is submitted. There's a reason why NIH Biosketches are not allowed to include "submitted.

For example, if someone in a total synthesis organic chemistry lab optimizes a new reaction, its publishable data. I don't know how that's too debatable. Will it be published in Nature, or something like JOC? That's the only question.

 

[Goro]

For example, if someone in a total synthesis organic chemistry lab optimizes a new reaction, its publishable data. I don't know how that's too debatable. Will it be published in Nature, or something like JOC? That's the only question.

Adcoms don't don't know this.

I don't know why it's so hard for you to accept that "MS submitted" is not worthy of an update.

 

[Robin-jay]

Adcoms don't don't know this.

I don't know why it's so hard for you to accept that "MS submitted" is not worthy of an update.

I don't know if its worthy of an update or not, all I know is that from experience "submitted" and "accepted" were always kind of the same because the PI would never allow something non-publishable to be submitted.

 

[Med Ed]

I don't know if its worthy of an update or not, all I know is that from experience "submitted" and "accepted" were always kind of the same because the PI would never allow something non-publishable to be submitted.

Other beings likely exist outside your sphere of personal experience.

 

[Robin-jay]

Other beings likely exist outside your sphere of personal experience.

And the risk is if you list or update a school with this info and, for whatever reason, it doesnt get accepted, not only will you look like a fool when asked about itat an interview. Even more so, the question may then put you off your game or set the tone for the rest of your interview.

Look at this way. Which is better at an interview:

-Having to defend/explain why something you listed or update didnt happen?
OR
-Being able to give a new positive update at the interview?

I agree! I think the student should never say "accepted" when talking about a submission".

I guess I was just shocked when Mimelim said <30% of those submitted are published. I don't know any PI's that wouldn't make sure their students data is publishable before sending it to be published. I'm shocked at that number, as I have many friends gather research data and say "i hope this gets published in Nature", but even if its not Nature, a highly reputable journal will still take it.

 

[Goro]

I agree! I think the student should never say "accepted" when talking about a submission".

I guess I was just shocked when Mimelim said <30% of those submitted are published. I don't know any PI's that wouldn't make sure their students data is publishable before sending it to be published. I'm shocked at that number, as I have many friends gather research data and say "i hope this gets published in Nature", but even if its not Nature, a highly reputable journal will still take it.

Robin, I'm trying to say this in the nicest possible way, but you have lived in a very sheltered research world.

A co-author of mine once told me that he submitted a MS online and got a rejection notice within something like 10 minutes.

 

[Robin-jay]

Robin, I'm trying to say this in the nicest possible way, but you have lived in a very sheltered research world.

A co-author of mine once told me that he submitted a MS online and got a rejection notice within something like 10 minutes.

I suppose I would have to sheltered more than the PI's, as I was a grad. student. But in my field, any new chemistry reaction optimized is essentially a publication with no push back.

If you were to synthesize a molecule in 12 less steps than the most recent optimized reaction for it, then its going to be published.

I'm sure that being a grad. student and being a PI would have very different struggles though. So I was sheltered in the fact the guidance I had from the PI was phenomenal, but still think its strange that publications get denied if its publishable data. And the PI's should know if its publishable data or not...

 

[getdown]

I suppose I would have to sheltered more than the PI's, as I was a grad. student. But in my field, any new chemistry reaction optimized is essentially a publication with no push back.

If you were to synthesize a molecule in 12 less steps than the most recent optimized reaction for it, then its going to be published.

I'm sure that being a grad. student and being a PI would have very different struggles though. So I was sheltered in the fact the guidance I had from the PI was phenomenal, but still think its strange that publications get denied if its publishable data. And the PI's should know if its publishable data or not...

Maybe in chemistry that's the case but not so in other fields. Most of the data you obtain is useless and not publishable and even if it was it's very hard to get published in high impact journals.

 

[Detective SnowBucket]

Should you update schools if you have something that will potentially make you defer? Eg Fulbright finalist this January?

 

[Cheenghee Koh]

I am somewhat torn on this topic though....

At the one hand, I totally agree from the bottom of my heart that submission never equates to, actually it even doesn't come close to, being accepted for publications. There is too much uncertainty. At least in my field or adjacent fields, although we may have some general ideas where we may be able to submit the manuscripts to (and even tailor our writings toward the targeted audience), most of time it feels like lottery, despite that we feel like the manuscripts are close to perfection and we feel sick even by looking at them for 1 more minute. My colleagues and I have some interesting experiences: for one manuscript, we all thought it was going to nowhere. But we just sent it out to a very nice journal just to see how it go. Then, we got an Reject & Resubmit, and it got accepted very soon after we sent in our revision. However, there are a lot more times when we got some exciting new findings and spent lot of time on writing up and polishing manuscripts, it turned out that we had a hard time finding them a home. Usually, it takes about 6-12 months for our manuscripts to get accepted after we send out our drafts for review for the first time. (So, yes. that means, when you read our articles, even when there are only "in print"/"epub ahead of print", the findings are already almost 1 year old. We may be writing up new stuff now.)

At the other hand, I think even the manuscripts got rejected, perhaps the rejection itself is a very good topic to talk during the interview(?): what you have learned from this whole process? What do you think about the reviewers' comments? Are they reasonable? Are the problems raised by reviewers really major that kill the paper? Or just minor but the editors still decide to kill the paper? If the problems are major, what do you think you can do differently to improve the study designs? How other more senior team members handle rejection? What do they think about the reviewers' comments and the editors' decisions? How are they going to approach the problems? What are the next steps your team come up with? Redo some of the studies? Or if not, where are you going to submit to, and why?

Oh, just some personal experiences: some reviewers could be very nasty and not helpful at all (and sometime it feels like they are attacking you, not your evidence/arguments). If you get those trashy comments, try not to take them personal. Talk to your research mentor and get some social support. Also, if you get rejection, please remember it is very natural and you should expect that as the default. Even your professors still get a lot of rejections even they may be in this game for decades.

Good luck for your research!