When should I start research?

[DrFreshMeat]

---

Members don't see this ad.

so should I start research my 2nd semester freshmen year or wait until sophomore year? also, what type of research should i tried to get involved in..thanks

 

[Coffee Machine]

As far as which will look better, I don't think it matters. I would say that it helps if you have at least some basic courses out of the way so that you have some background. I didn't get involved in research until after freshman year specifically because I didn't want to overwhelm myself during my first year of college.

You should research something that you're genuinely interested in, in a lab that is not only productive, but that has ample grad students/post docs to help you along. Or you can join the lab of a junior faculty member (assistant professor), since they generally spend more time actually in the lab and can help you out. Their letters might not carry as much weight, but you're not ready as a freshman to go it alone. You need someone there to give you a LOT of guidance. But if you don't like what you're researching or don't like the people in the lab, you will be absolutely miserable and probably unproductive to boot.

 

[DrFreshMeat]

As far as which will look better, I don't think it matters. I would say that it helps if you have at least some basic courses out of the way so that you have some background. I didn't get involved in research until after freshman year specifically because I didn't want to overwhelm myself during my first year of college.

You should research something that you're genuinely interested in, in a lab that is not only productive, but that has ample grad students/post docs to help you along. Or you can join the lab of a junior faculty member (assistant professor), since they generally spend more time actually in the lab and can help you out. Their letters might not carry as much weight, but you're not ready as a freshman to go it alone. You need someone there to give you a LOT of guidance. But if you don't like what you're researching or don't like the people in the lab, you will be absolutely miserable and probably unproductive to boot.

good advice thanks..just reading on SDN makes me feel as if i should try to get ahead as fast as I can but I think im gonna wait until next year to get involved..

can you explain what exactly research is though? how was ur experience as an undergrad?

 

[asw98]

In my opinion, the best time to start research is the summer after your freshmen year. You'll have a college transcript and will have taken the basic science courses, which will make it easier to get into a lab. You learn a lot more doing research over the summer versus during the school year, because you can spend 8 hours a day in the lab instead of 2 hours.

As for what research is, that really varies depending on the subject. At my first lab, I was studying the binding of agonists to channel receptors and now I am studying the effect of different molecules on leukemia. I personally love research. I plan on pursuing MD/PhD. However, research isn't for everyone. It can get a bit repetitive and frustrating.

 

[DrFreshMeat]

In my opinion, the best time to start research is the summer after your freshmen year. You'll have a college transcript and will have taken the basic science courses, which will make it easier to get into a lab. You learn a lot more doing research over the summer versus during the school year, because you can spend 8 hours a day in the lab instead of 2 hours.

As for what research is, that really varies depending on the subject. At my first lab, I was studying the binding of agonists to channel receptors and now I am studying the effect of different molecules on leukemia. I personally love research. I plan on pursuing MD/PhD. However, research isn't for everyone. It can get a bit repetitive and frustrating.

i plan on going back home after my freshmen year, so doing research over the summer isnt an option unfortunately

 

[asw98]

Are there universities nearby? You might want to consider that option as well.

 

[Mr Avante]

good advice thanks..just reading on SDN makes me feel as if i should try to get ahead as fast as I can but I think im gonna wait until next year to get involved..

can you explain what exactly research is though? how was ur experience as an undergrad?

Don't do research if you aren't into it.

 

[jeghaber]

good advice thanks..just reading on SDN makes me feel as if i should try to get ahead as fast as I can but I think im gonna wait until next year to get involved..

can you explain what exactly research is though? how was ur experience as an undergrad?

At first, regardless of when you join, you're most likely going to be doing so scut work. The nature of this scut work depends on whether you're in a wet lab (clean glassware) or in a dry lab (calling and scheduling participants), but even this can be informative in figuring out what the research process is all about -- it's a lot like trying to catch a Scyther in the Safari zone; lots of tedium with rare moments of excitement that make it all worth it in the end.

That being said, I don't think you need to rush. My first research experience was during the spring of my sophomore year, cold-calling parents to convince them to come in so we could "play some games" with their kids in the name of science. Since then, I've spent some time in a few more labs and gained more hands-on experience in the thinking process and I don't feel like I'm "behind" any other applicants in terms of research experience, in both quantity and quality. At the same time, after your first foray into research, you might decide that research really isn't for you and choose to invest your time in some other activity -- and that's fine too. Chanseys take just as much work and can be just as valuable.

 

[kyamh]

it's a lot like trying to catch a Scyther in the Safari zone; lots of tedium with rare moments of excitement that make it all worth it in the end...
Chanseys take just as much work and can be just as valuable.

😀 👍

OP, first figure out if you even want to do research. Even research-heavy top schools say that only 70-80% of their students have any research experience. Sure, that's a lot, but if you aren't into researching you could be spending all that time doing amazing things that will make you stand out in other ways.

I say this as a full time tech who sees pre-meds file through the lab who clearly have no interest in the science. It's clear to me, it's clear to the PI, it's clear to the post-docs and we are all very annoyed that you are wasting our time (and your time too). Pre-meds who aren't interested in research for anything other than a CV boost typically get crappy letters of recommendation (even if you think the PI likes you because he is nice to you) and don't accomplish anything very productive (no posters other than the school sponsored ones, no publications). You have to want to be at your activities for the sake of that activity. This means that you need to first figure out what you want.

Bottom like advice: go shadow in a few labs, see what the people are going and whether you are interested in the work. If you are, that's great, pre-meds come with great minds that can be assets to labs. But don't be one of the many pre-meds that PI dread having to let into their labs.

 

[Aerus]

At first, regardless of when you join, you're most likely going to be doing so scut work. The nature of this scut work depends on whether you're in a wet lab (clean glassware) or in a dry lab (calling and scheduling participants), but even this can be informative in figuring out what the research process is all about -- it's a lot like trying to catch a Scyther in the Safari zone; lots of tedium with rare moments of excitement that make it all worth it in the end.

That being said, I don't think you need to rush. My first research experience was during the spring of my sophomore year, cold-calling parents to convince them to come in so we could "play some games" with their kids in the name of science. Since then, I've spent some time in a few more labs and gained more hands-on experience in the thinking process and I don't feel like I'm "behind" any other applicants in terms of research experience, in both quantity and quality. At the same time, after your first foray into research, you might decide that research really isn't for you and choose to invest your time in some other activity -- and that's fine too. Chanseys take just as much work and can be just as valuable.

I disagree. Cleaning glassware is a technician's job, not a research assistant's job. When applying, just make it clear you want to do research and not simply "work in the lab". I've worked in two wet labs so far and I started out running gels, doing PCR's/Mini-preps, and digesting with enzymes in both labs.

For me, I say start research as early as possible. For wet labs, you want to master all the lab techniques and protocols before you start your own project and this takes anywhere between 6 months to a year to master. Why not get this out of the way earlier since you won't have the classes to give you background anyways? Why waste your third and fourth year getting used to the lab when you can be running your own experiments and actually contributing data to the lab.

You'll have a higher chance at being productive in the lab (posters, presentations, publications) during your undergraduate years if you start earlier and get the "adapting to research" phase out of the way earlier.

 

[jeghaber]

I disagree. Cleaning glassware is a technician's job, not a research assistant's job. When applying, just make it clear you want to do research and not simply "work in the lab". I've worked in two wet labs so far and I started out running gels, doing PCR's/Mini-preps, and digesting with enzymes in both labs.

For me, I say start research as early as possible. For wet labs, you want to master all the lab techniques and protocols before you start your own project and this takes anywhere between 6 months to a year to master. Why not get this out of the way earlier since you won't have the classes to give you background anyways? Why waste your third and fourth year getting used to the lab when you can be running your own experiments and actually contributing data to the lab.

You'll have a higher chance at being productive in the lab (posters, presentations, publications) during your undergraduate years if you start earlier and get the "adapting to research" phase out of the way earlier.

Sorry, I should have been clearer. This is what I consider "advanced scut work." I was just trying to make the point that you'll most likely start off having to learn the ins and outs of the lab. Of course it often takes months to master these techniques and protocols, but like you said, it is still the stepping stone to being able to contribute intellectually.

For what it's worth, many students at my school win undergraduate research grants the summer before senior year with no prior lab experience, run their projects, and write senior theses. My closest friend started research the fall of her junior year and has a secondary author publication accepted, another in preparation and is now working at Harvard as an RA. Another one of my friends started his research the summer after his junior year and is now on a Fulbright to continue that research in France. You're absolutely right in that the earlier you get involved, the higher chance you have of having concrete accomplishments to show (posters, publications, etc). However, it is not a necessity for everyone. Take my anecdotal evidence as you will, but if you're already engaged in other meaningful activities and don't necessarily have the time (or want to make the time) to commit to research quite yet, I don't think there's a huge, huge rush to get involved.

Side Note: I think SDN has the tendency to over-value research and publications 🙂eek: blasphemy, right? ). Obviously, I'm just an applicant, but my impression is that medical schools and adcoms really just want you to have exposed yourself to research and its thought processes. Research can teach you a lot beyond the techniques themselves; by being involved first-hand, whether as an extra hand or as a contributing member, you learn about the patience, perspective and rigor needed in research. Unfortunately, I think the race to publications can overshadow these learning experiences sometimes and make research another check-box. In an ideal world, everyone would try out research because they're truly interested in what it has to offer, not because they feel like they have to, but I understand that's not the easiest when admissions seems like a game to play rather than a logical next step.

 

[DrFreshMeat]

Are there universities nearby? You might want to consider that option as well.

no, there's no well known universities near by...

i think im going to wait until sophomore year to start research though..i don't even know if im that interested in it also. like jeghaber said, sdn made me interested in research and it might be overvalued in some eyes

 

[kyamh]

Side Note: I think SDN has the tendency to over-value research and publications 🙂eek: blasphemy, right? ). Obviously, I'm just an applicant, but my impression is that medical schools and adcoms really just want you to have exposed yourself to research and its thought processes. Research can teach you a lot beyond the techniques themselves; by being involved first-hand, whether as an extra hand or as a contributing member, you learn about the patience, perspective and rigor needed in research. Unfortunately, I think the race to publications can overshadow these learning experiences sometimes and make research another check-box. In an ideal world, everyone would try out research because they're truly interested in what it has to offer, not because they feel like they have to, but I understand that's not the easiest when admissions seems like a game to play rather than a logical next step.

👍 🙂

 

[DrFreshMeat]

well, i just want some research before I apply to see if im interested in it or not...If i start sophomore year it doesn't mean im going to continue until the end of senior year..i just want to find out what research actually is..

 

[DrEnderW]

Don't do research if you aren't into it.

I respectfully disagree. There is no way to know if you are or aren't into research freshman year. I came in as a recruited athlete only caring about sports and ended up leaving with multiple pubs and presentations that totally changed the course of my career.

You may know you aren't going to be a bench scientist for the next 50 years, but I think it's very important to get your hands on some research. Who knows, you might like it. Even if you do try it out and realize it's not for you, you've had valuable insight into what it is like to be working toward scientific advances. As a physician, I think it's important to know the labor behind these efforts. The fact of the matter is that research is beneficial down the road for your future medical career. Is it a requirement? No. However, research begets more research and networking opportunities. If turns out it is something you like... what a great way to work towards something important and benefit your personal career.

Moral of the story is... try it out as soon as possible. If you don't like the subject field, switch it up. If you hate it after trying it out then it's great to say it's something you've tried your hand in.

 

[Mr Avante]

I respectfully disagree. There is no way to know if you are or aren't into research freshman year. I came in as a recruited athlete only caring about sports and ended up leaving with multiple pubs and presentations that totally changed the course of my career.

You may know you aren't going to be a bench scientist for the next 50 years, but I think it's very important to get your hands on some research. Who knows, you might like it. Even if you do try it out and realize it's not for you, you've had valuable insight into what it is like to be working toward scientific advances. As a physician, I think it's important to know the labor behind these efforts. The fact of the matter is that research is beneficial down the road for your future medical career. Is it a requirement? No. However, research begets more research and networking opportunities. If turns out it is something you like... what a great way to work towards something important and benefit your personal career.

Moral of the story is... try it out as soon as possible. If you don't like the subject field, switch it up. If you hate it after trying it out then it's great to say it's something you've tried your hand in.

I strongly concur with you; I was just merely remarking the fact of not using research just as a resume-filler. However, I deficiently worded my statement.
Nice catch!

 

[Aerus]

Sorry, I should have been clearer. This is what I consider "advanced scut work." I was just trying to make the point that you'll most likely start off having to learn the ins and outs of the lab. Of course it often takes months to master these techniques and protocols, but like you said, it is still the stepping stone to being able to contribute intellectually.

Technically, anything not contributing towards the progress of the lab is considered some type of "scut work". But the difference is that you don't clean glassware when running your own experiments. You will still need to do PCR's, do mini preps, and do these mindless protocols whether you're an undergrad or a post doc. Learning these "advanced scut work" protocols is essential for a lot of wet lab research.

For what it's worth, many students at my school win undergraduate research grants the summer before senior year with no prior lab experience, run their projects, and write senior theses. My closest friend started research the fall of her junior year and has a secondary author publication accepted, another in preparation and is now working at Harvard as an RA. Another one of my friends started his research the summer after his junior year and is now on a Fulbright to continue that research in France. You're absolutely right in that the earlier you get involved, the higher chance you have of having concrete accomplishments to show (posters, publications, etc). However, it is not a necessity for everyone. Take my anecdotal evidence as you will, but if you're already engaged in other meaningful activities and don't necessarily have the time (or want to make the time) to commit to research quite yet, I don't think there's a huge, huge rush to get involved.

Anecdotal evidence isn't useful because it can bring people from all over the spectrum into consideration. The average person would not publish within a year of starting in a lab. Your friends either published post-graduation or were not your everyday researchers.

Side Note: I think SDN has the tendency to over-value research and publications 🙂eek: blasphemy, right? ). Obviously, I'm just an applicant, but my impression is that medical schools and adcoms really just want you to have exposed yourself to research and its thought processes. Research can teach you a lot beyond the techniques themselves; by being involved first-hand, whether as an extra hand or as a contributing member, you learn about the patience, perspective and rigor needed in research. Unfortunately, I think the race to publications can overshadow these learning experiences sometimes and make research another check-box. In an ideal world, everyone would try out research because they're truly interested in what it has to offer, not because they feel like they have to, but I understand that's not the easiest when admissions seems like a game to play rather than a logical next step.

This last part seems a bit redundant since I don't see anywhere in this thread that someone mentions that one must race to get publications and that it is more important than the actual experience. Nonetheless, I completely agree with this.

 

[DrFreshMeat]

Moral of the story is... try it out as soon as possible. If you don't like the subject field, switch it up. If you hate it after trying it out then it's great to say it's something you've tried your hand in.

yup..might as well try it out before judging