Decisions!!!

Graduate School
1

<p>Although I have yet to visit the majority of schools, I think it will ultimately come down to UCLA vs. Duke. Here's a quick run-down of the pros and cons of each school.</p>

<p>UCLA
+Funded Ph.D program in Life Sciences (ACCESS), Close to home yet not too close (NorCal), Research experience is in life science despite having an engineering degree (easier coursework, perhaps?)
-Not exactly aligned with my research interests but I'm pretty flexible at this point. Respective program not as highly ranked as Duke's (however, overall prestige is arguably higher)</p>

<p>Duke
+Dream school, the lab I worked in at my undergrad is from Duke and I've heard good things. Research and faculty is outstanding in my primary area of interest.
+Strong program in Biomedical Engineering with emphasis in TE
+Close to girlfriend (SC, East Coast)
-Accepted to M.S. Program, very costly for 1.5 to 2 years
-new environment, further away from home.</p>

<p>Overview
I contacted professors at Duke about funding opportunities for Master's students and my intention of eventually pursuing a PhD. I will be at UCLA this weekend for their recruitment/interview event and will have a better idea of what to expect should I attend here. (Because I've lived in California the majority of my life, I predict there will be no deal-breakers) </p>

<p>Let me know what you think. I kind of feel like UCLA is the most practical choice but it has been very difficult to convince myself to pass up Duke.</p>

2

<p>If you want a Ph.D. eventually, and you have no funding at Duke, the answer is obvious. Go with the funded Ph.D. program at UCLA. There is really no reason to put yourself into debt for a masters degree in biosciences and then have to go somewhere else for a Ph.D. anyway.</p>

<p>By the way, my background is that I am a physics professor who has advised undergraduates going to graduate school for ~30 years and S1 is a Ph.D. student in biology.</p>

3

<p>I had to make a similar decision in my senior year of college. I’m in public health, and I got admitted to my original top-choice MPH program with a 1/2 tuition scholarship. There was a professor there who was doing <em>exactly</em> what I wanted to do at the time, and I was hoping to stay on and earn a PhD there after completing my MPH. It was also within 15 minutes driving distance of my hometown. I also got admitted into a PhD program in my field, whose dual-focus was perfect for me. But the research fit was, at the time, less good. It was in a city in which I always wanted to live, but very far away from home (necessitating a flight). Both programs were in the top 10 so there was no real reputational differences between them.</p>

<p>The biggest difference, of course, is that if I had attended that MPH program I would have had to borrow the other half of the tuition (equivalent to $28,800 total) plus the cost of living expenses (probably around $45,000 total over two years), which would’ve left me in debt about $75,000. On top of my undergrad debt, that would be $85,000 in a field in which I could only expect to make about $40,000-$50,000 in my first job out of my MPH program. Not ridiculously unmanageable debt, but enough to make me struggle for a while. The PhD offer was fully funded.</p>

<p>I also asked a lot of advice from different people and overwhelmingly, they told me if my ultimate goal was to get a PhD that I should take the PhD program offer, and I did. I’m currently nearing the end of that PhD program, and although I’ve had moments of doubt ultimately I’m really glad I took the route I did. I want to be a professor and a researcher and this is the only degree that would get me to that goal. Doing an MPH first would’ve only added unnecessary debt to that goal. Currently my total debt is around $30,000; I did have to borrow a bit in grad school for relocation costs, but nowhere near as much as if I had attended that MPH program.</p>

<p>Oh, and also, I found that I really, really enjoyed the shifted research that I started working on. I thought I wanted to do research on culturally-relevant HIV-prevention programs for African American adolescents, and the effects of media consumption on adolescent sexuality. I’m actually doing research on psychosocial correlates of HIV risk behavior and substance use in young African American adults, and looking at the effects of daily stressors (race-related and neutral) on this population. I love it and I want to make my career out of it. Recently I’ve been looking at postdocs and there’s one at the MPH school I originally wanted to go to, with that professor that is the pioneer in the field I used to want to work in. But I find myself unexcited by it now. Your research interests will change in grad school, and often they will change based upon what you are working on at that time.</p>

<p>My advice is colored by my experiences, but I would say if you are SURE that your end goal is pursuing a PhD, attend that funded sure-thing PhD program!</p>

4

<p>@xraymancs and juillet: thanks so much for the feedback so far!</p>

5

<p>Don’t worry about rankings or prestige, it’s the lab and your output that will matter in the end. Besides, no one is going to look at UCLA v. Duke and think that one is a terrible school compared to the other, they’re both top notch.
If there are a few labs at UCLA that interest you, follow the money. If there is absolute no one doing anything you’re even vaguely interested in, try to force yourself to get interested so you can follow the money. If you are absolutely sure you will become suicidal by going to UCLA, then fine, go to Duke, but you’ll be unhappy when you’re paying off those student loans in the very low-monetary reward field of science.</p>