<p>My letters were from a PostDoc, PI and MD Fellow all from the same lab, and no one seemed to care. </p>
<p>And, don’t take this the wrong way, but it seems like you’ve picked really just the top programs in the US. Is this because there are specific researchers there whose work you’re intrigued by? Or is it because they’re big name programs? I agree that you shouldn’t apply to programs you wouldn’t realistically go to if they were the only one to accept you, but I wonder if there aren’t non-top-20 programs that could have researchers who you’d enjoy working with. </p>
<p>Can’t comment on the GRE Bio, since I didn’t take it. Good luck!!</p>
<p>Well I didn’t pick just the top programs. Otherwise, you would see Duke, Stanford, Harvard, UWash, Caltech, and a few others in the list. Initially, I had a list of all the schools I was aware of at the time. My process went like this–I took notice of schools that seemed to be referenced in papers that interested me. I developed a list of about ~16 schools and then started eliminating schools based on location and other factors. I did take a serious look at who is doing research where. However, I am not some one who has a VERY specific idea of what he wants to do. I would probably enjoy research in many different subfields so finding those 2 or 3 PIs I would kill to work for just isn’t for me. However, each school has a few interesting labs. As far as I know, a significant portion of PhDs finish in a lab doing research they weren’t thinking about when they started their PhD so that whole initial process of finding a lab you would love to work in sort of seems like a waste of time. I’d rather just go with the flow.</p>
<p>Care to explain kryptonsa36? What do you mean uninformative? They want 3 LORs and I’m assuming not all applicants (I would wager most don’t) have LORs from 3 PIs. If you worked with the Postdoc extensively, how can they say it is an uninformative LOR?</p>
<p>I mean I’ve heard of people using professors who they claim to know well and who have taught many of their courses.</p>
<p>I mean 2 seperate PIs and one post doc from one of the two labs. As long as the LORs are solid, why would it matter that one of them is a Postdoc?</p>
<p>First of all, a postdoc isn’t an established researcher - they have little recognition in the field and thus will not have highly valued judgements. Secondly, a letter from someone else in the same research group will likely not add anything new to the range of skills described in your LORs. I would reckon that a letter coming from a postdoc that is stronger than the professor’s would even hurt, as it would suggest you didn’t make enough of an impression on the PI.</p>
<p>
I would wager most do. Graduate schools imply that all your letters come from faculty (if not, then from employers or head supervisors). Therefore, you might have to take initiative to make an imprint on those one or two PIs who do not already know you through research or advising. My third LOR is coming from a professor whom I made a conscious effort to interact frequently with both in and outside of her class.</p>
<p>I think your best bet is either to see if your PI and postdoc can co-write & co-sign your letter or if the postdoc can simply contribute extra information to the PI’s letter. This does not solve your “3 LORs” problem, but getting separate letters from the PI and postdoc is really not a good option.</p>
<p>You make some very valid points. This puts me in a tricky situation. I can’t really think of a solid PI other than a proff teaching one of my seminar classes. I will have to make an impression on him and ask for a reference in mid-Novemeber. I also have another PI I might consider asking for a reference. </p>
<p>However, it would be sort of humiliating starting my applications and finding out later on that I can’t secure a 3rd LOR. This is exactly why I should have bothered engaging with professors and going to department seminars as an undergrad.</p>
<p>Kryptonsa - Well those 3 letters got me interviewed at CSHL and into Weill Cornell, so clearly they weren’t that off-putting for some top programs. And some post-docs (especially, I find, European ones) ARE established researchers, with many top publications and book chapters.</p>
<p>For LORs: My academic advisor pretty much disappeared when it was time for me to collect references, so I had two from PIs, one from a post-doc (so two recs from one lab, one from another). I don’t think it hurt in the least (I got in everywhere I applied). I think the post-doc was able to provide more of an insight on my personality, what it’s like to actually work with me and my passion for the subject, as he knew me on a different level than my PI. I think this is a useful sort of recommendation to have; I remember one Stanford PI who interviewed me recalled from the post-doc’s letter that I like to bring baked goods when I present at lab meetings…it’s a trivial little thing but I think it may give the committee a better sense of you as a person.</p>
<p>Even if you don’t bake and your post-doc doesn’t mention those sorts of personal details in the letter, I certainly don’t think it can hurt.</p>
<p>There is no evidence those letters did not hurt. My hypothesis is that the strength of your applications simply didn’t allow for their negative effect to be visibly demonstrated. No admissions council will tell you, when the option of getting good letters either from a professor or a postdoc presents itself, that going with the postdoc is the appropriate choice. I’ve seen some programs’ admission info even explicitly state that “Professor” should be the title of all your recommenders. Most of them also go further in saying that, between three equally good letters, the well-known/full professor’s is preferable to the less well-known/assistant professor’s is preferable to the probably not well-known postdoc’s.</p>
<p>
Of course it is. But there is nothing barring you from letting your professor get to know you on the same level as your postdoc did, so why didn’t you?</p>
<p>
That’s a rather customary action. The bringing of goods, anyway, if not necessarily the baking of them.</p>
<p>Realistically, a professor will never know you as well as someone such as a post-doc who is working alongside you at the bench. All of the PIs I’ve worked with spend the vast majority of the day in their office and therefore you will have a lot less interaction with them, especially as an undergraduate. In general, likely for any job, your co-workers will get to know you much better than your boss ever will.</p>
<p>But it’s the job of your co-workers to bring important information to the boss’ attention when it’s time to write a letter of recommendation. In the lab I’m in for graduate school, the postdoc would draft the letter and the PI would revise and sign it.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure I submitted the application a week or so after my GRE (July 29th). I received an email from UCSD on August 25th. So I’d say 2-3 weeks.</p>
<p>Thanks, thats relieving because I finished my pre-app last week and I was getting worried why I haven’t received their application yet, but i guess it makes sense since they probably screen applicants and this takes some time.</p>