Assess and Answer my questions about my PhD path

Graduate School
1

<p>Hello,</p>

<p>As of now, I just wanted to ask about my ambition to become an academic in neuroscience. I know it’s a long process, but I am willing to focus and adapt to it all. I have a few questions about this path.</p>

<p>I have just graduated from HS (yeah I know it’s early but I know this is what I want to do). I will be attending Drexel University with a BS in Biomedical Engineering and a concentration in Neuroengineering. I will reapply to the BS MS accelerated program so I could get my masters sooner. So first question is: Is it better to have a Master’s sooner or later when applying for PhD Candidacy? </p>

<p>What about the fact that I would have an engineering degree applying for a neuroscience doctoral degree? Does that affect admission or career prospects in any way? I think ultimately I want to lecture and research in Neuroscience topics. Drexel has been my top choice since I was a little girl for undergrad thanks to the co-op, and they didn’t have a neuroscience degree. However, I think an engineering degree would be great to fall back on if this doesn’t ultimately work out.</p>

<p>What about starting a family or getting married during the path? I know I can’t dictate it right now, but I want to hear about past experiences. </p>

<p>I also heard that getting a PhD from the school you did undergrad in is frowned upon. I personally think I want to try to attain my PhD at another school for networking and to get new ideas. </p>

<p>If anyone can answer my questions that would be great. Advice about securing spots and being the best I can be is welcomed as well. Thanks as always.</p>

2

<p>You don’t have to have an MS to apply for PhD programs. A lot of people go straight into PhD programs from undergrad if they have good grades and research experience and know that’s what they want to do.</p>

<p>I’m going the opposite way as you - from a BS in neurosicence to a PhD in possibly BME. Switching is not necessarily problematic, provided that you meet the requirements of the programs you are applying to. Take a look at some neuroscience grad programs and look at what they list as requirements. You will probably get most if not all of the coursework from your BME requirements. You will also need relevant research experience, but it doesn’t have to be exactly in the area you want to go into; grad schools want to see that you know what you are getting into and are capable in a research setting.</p>

<p>As you said, you have tons of time. At this point, focus on getting good grades and getting involved in research.</p>

3

<p>^The above - you don’t need to have an MS to get into a PhD program in neuroscience, so one isn’t necessarily better than the other. You don’t have to reapply for the BS/MS program if you are content where you are.</p>

<p>I’m personally not sure about the engineering -> neuroscience path because that’s not my field. I think that as long as you have the prerequisite knowledge and a clear idea of your research interests, it shouldn’t affect you too much. If you are interested in something at the intersection of engineering and neuroscience, that would be a bonus.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I got married at the beginning of my fifth year of a PhD program. It’s rough, but rough in the same sense that being married as a management consultant or investment banker or high-powered attorney is rough. Spending the time required to maintain a strong, healthy relationship is really difficult when you are expected to be thinking about research and science all day long. My husband jokes that I was in a dissertation “fog” for the past year or so, and it does feel that way - half my brain was on my dissertation most of the time. (I’m finished now and defending in 2 weeks, so now less of my brain is on it and eventually 0% of my brain will be.)</p>

<p>On the other hand, I think it can make you a healthier person. I was forced to wrench myself away from my work from time to time to cook for my family and spend time with my husband, and that stopped me from becoming an odd, antisocial person. He also encourages me to take care of myself.</p>

<p>I know people who have had children during their PhD programs as well - lots of people in all kinds of fields. Again, it’s not really much different from having a child when you are in some other all-consuming kind of job. You and your spouse make it work. The dissertation phase might be a good time to have children since your time is really flexible.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>This isn’t universally true in all fields, and it really has a lot of qualifiers attached to it.</p>

<p>If your undergraduate university is the best place for you to do a PhD, then nobody will frown upon you for staying there. For example, the University of Michigan is a top-ranked program in both of my fields, and a person who went there for undergrad and stayed for her PhD would not be looked down upon. It’s literally a top 5 program, so we know she didn’t just stay because it was easy to get into; she stayed because it’s a great department and she probably had excellent mentorship and a great research fit. Even if a program is mid-ranked, if it’s the best place in your sub-area or has a famous professor under which you will work, it will be fine in many fields.</p>

<p>In some fields, the best undergrad and grad departments are so concentrated that many people stay where they are. Philosophy is one of those fields; I think math may be another one (although someone in math please correct me if I’m wrong).</p>

<p>Where staying where you are becomes a problem is if 1) your program isn’t very well-reputed, 2) your program isn’t a good fit for you and thus 3) it becomes clear that you stayed where you were out of comfort and not fit.</p>

4

<p>Neuroscience programs tend to draw people from a wide variety of backgrounds - everything from psychology to physics, sometimes. A lot of programs even point this out on their websites.</p>

5

<p>Thanks for your input so far. </p>

<p>A few more questions - If I apply for a faculty spot at a school that I applied to in Undergrad, and I know the professors there (I went for a summer camp, and still keep in touch with the professors), does that work in my favor? I have a feeling they won’t likely remember me.</p>

<p>Also, what exactly does post-doctoral fellowships entail? Could you do teaching and research at the same time as this? Is it necessary?</p>

<p>Finally, how hard exactly is it to apply for a faculty position at this particular school? Any tips or advice? Thanks as always :)</p>

6

<p>1) A faculty position? You are getting way ahead of yourself. The answer is - probably not. Faculty positions are incredibly competitive, and a summer camp from high school won’t necessarily give you better chances at getting a faculty position.</p>

<p>2) Post-doctoral fellowships are basically a transitional period between the PhD - they give PhD holders an opportunity to enhance their CVs and their chances at faculty and research positions. These days, the expectations for new assistant professors are so high (particularly in STEM fields) that new PhDs are practically expected to do 1-2 postdocs after grad school before securing a full-time, tenure-track faculty position (or a research position at a prestigious lab or industry job, in some cases). This gives you time to get publications and perhaps some grant funding on your CV.</p>

<p>The primary task for a postdoc is research of some kind. There are different types of postdocs - some are training programs that are focused primarily on helping you transition to being an independent scholar. They set aside time for you to work on turning your dissertation into publications, and you often work with an advisor on their research projects and are encouraged to write grants. Some postdocs are basically research scientist positions - an established professor needs a PhD-level scientist to work on a grant that they have, and so they advertise that position. You might be their project manager or a technical expert or basically the second-hand man in the lab. In exchange for these services, you get paid and also some level of mentorship from the professor - although how much depends on the professor themselves. In these postdocs it is sometimes more difficult to carve out time to work on your own projects, so it’s often best to only apply if the work is very similar to your own.</p>

<p>Some postdocs allow you to teach, and some don’t. There are a few postdocs (like the FIRST fellowships) that blend teaching and research together, and still fewer (like the Center for Faculty Diversity) that are primarily teaching postdocs. But since research and publications are generally what gets you a job, the vast majority of postdocs are focused on research.</p>

<p>Are they necessary? Eh. Some people are able to step right into faculty positions right away, but I think most people need to do at least one postdoc before securing a good faculty position, especially at a top research institution. They’re also getting longer - so while in the past a good postdoc was 1-2 years, nowadays it’s not uncommon to see people postdocing for 3-5 years at a time.</p>

<p>3) At what school? Faculty positions are generally very competitive, and faculty positions at top research universities like Drexel are more competitive still. It wouldn’t be surprisingly to know that up to around 200 people applied for a single faculty position at a place like Drexel.</p>

7

<p>Thanks @juillet‌ For anyone else that could answer my questions, what about a faculty position at a liberal arts college?</p>

<p>Also, does the profession allow for creativity when dictating what kind of research you want to? I’ve heard a variety of answers. @juillet Do you know?</p>

8

<p>Also, while I’m doing undergrad at Drexel, is it possible to get a research opportunity in a neuroscience (only offered through graduate level) lab? Thanks.</p>

9

<p>

</p>

<p>In theory, yes. You can decide to do research on whatever you want. Nobody is going to force you to do research you don’t want to do, and one of the commonly cited perks of academia is getting to select your own research questions.</p>

<p>In practice, the research you do will be driven by a whole lot of factors. During your graduate career, it’ll be driven by the resources available at your graduate institution and the kind of work that your advisor does. Ideally, you’d work with an advisor and in a research lab that does work that is very well aligned with your own interests - but it might not be a 100% perfect fit, and thus your research interests may change slightly and/or you may have to work on projects that are a little afield of your own interests. (For example, I wanted to do research on school-based HIV prevention programs with adolescents 14-18. But I was flexible, and it turned out that the mentor who was perfect for me actually primarily does HIV prevention research with young adults 18-30, although he does have access to samples of adolescents 12-25. So I started to work with both samples, and in the course of doing so I found I actually prefer research with emerging adults now.)</p>

<p>During your research career, your research will be partially driven by funding availability and what’s “hot” at the time. Like, in my own field, let’s say I’m interested in stress and HIV disease progression. The current “hot” field is using biomarkers of stress (like cortisol levels and HPA axis activation - biological signals that a person is stressed) to measure stress levels, so my research is trending in that direction because that’s where the funding is. Another trending thing is longitudinal research.</p>

<p>In every field, there are things that are new and innovative and the big granting agencies (primarily NIH and NSF, but there are many others) want to give money to research that’s cutting-edge and not to research that’s a rehash of what’s already been done. If your granting agency has a particular mission, you might be guided into doing research on that in particular. Like, let’s say you’re doing brain research in 20 years and Google offers you money to study how its Google Glass changes brain connections or something - maybe you’ll do that. Or if you want Department of Defense money, you’ll maybe do research on how traumatic brain injury change neuronal connections. If you are an academic researcher, your university will pressure you (subtly or hard) to do research that is going to win the university grant funding and recognition. You may even be expected to fund a significant portion of your salary out of your grants (at my university, it’s 80%).</p>

<p>If you’re at a think tank or national lab, your research will be directed by that organization’s mission and outside contracts. They’ll contract with outside orgs (often the government) to do research and you, as their scientist, will do it. Now you may have some say in the contracts they take on and will have control over how the research is done, but you’ll have less say than if you were an academic.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Depends on the kind of SLAC. Top SLACs can be just as competitive as some research universities. Like if you wanted to work at Swarthmore, Amherst, Williams, etc. - I’ve browsed CVs and talked to some professors there, and they have generally done postdocs as well (usually just 1, though). They seem to have, on average, a few fewer publications than someone who went to Michigan or Harvard, for example. But many top SLAC professors could have successfully competed for positions at top research universities. They also have the added pressure of having to demonstrate a commitment to teaching. Many of them have sole-taught their own class. Many have not, but they have extensive teaching assistant experience and show an enthusiasm for working with undergrads. If you want to teach at a SLAC, then you should try to get experience mentoring undergrads in grad school in the lab.</p>

<p>Mid-tier SLACs have heavier teaching loads, and they want to be sure that if they hire you, you won’t fly away at the first hint of an R1 job. So they like to see more teaching experience, evidence that you really like teaching, and perhaps fewer publications. I have heard professors at mid-range SLACs say that they tend to be more wary of people who come from top-tier graduate institutions - kind of like a “why are you applying here?” thing - but most, I feel, understand that the job market is rough AND that some people just really want that kind of environment.</p>

10

<p>Thanks for the information, because I realized that I’d rather teach at a school without a graduate program, and that UPenn (and, really, a couple more schools on my list) would not be out of place to apply to, given my application in its current state.</p>

<p>If I’m not mistaken, in physics, depts without a graduate program prefer to hire professors whose research does not require costly start-up (this effectively rules out many, if not most, experimental condensed matter, plasma or biophysics research projects) although they can still conduct research to the tune of undergraduate capstone projects and, less frequently, summer research internships (are these eligible for work-study? Or is summer funding separate from WS for undergraduate financial aid purposes?)</p>

<p>And is it true that departments without a graduate program exert less pressure on faculty to publish and get grants than departments with a graduate program? If so, how much less?</p>

<p>It’s often tempting to say that teaching at a physics department without a graduate program is the same as teaching that stuff at a LAC… but that isn’t always the case. (The first such department I’ve ever heard about is Villanova)</p>

11

<p>The startup packages at undergraduate-only institutions are generally smaller than at research universities but that does not mean that research and publishing is totally excluded from the tenure decision. Each university has its own tenure criteria and when you interview for a position, you need to understand what they are and whether they are likely to change during your probationary period.</p>