<p>Hey guys, for us entering biomedical research program, how should we choose our PI?
I mainly see two types of professors: one is the big name already making achievements so I bet such lab can provide a very high start-level but PI may not directly care you too much because they're quite busy...(postdocs are major force for such labs) Also I bet the fame of big name may to some degree contribute to finding a good lab for postdoc research</p>
<p>While the other type I see is, the young assistant professor who just began to run the lab; but has already done very excellent research with top-notch publications in their postdoc time and seems a potential guy. I hear from others that it would be quite beneficial to be the FIRST or FIRST SEVERAL graduate students because he/she will teach you almost every detail, everything and always discuss together a lot. You would be more like a close friend with your PI and training from such labs would be the best for phd students. More, you can acquire best projects and have good publications. Of course, the only concern is it's a little bit risky because you never know if this young professor would be a big name in future.</p>
<p>So if I feel happy in both types of labs( get on well with PI and other members and enjoy the atmosphere), how should I choose? Appreciate any comments or suggestions.</p>
<p>All of the things you’re saying are absolutely true, although you’re providing the best-case scenario for the young assistant prof and the worst-case scenario for the established big-name professor. There are big shots who care passionately about training and mentoring their graduate students, and who will put their graduate students on big projects that will lead to impressive publication. There are also new assistant professors who are too busy or too hapless to appropriately mentor graduate students, or who never get that first big grant and fold after a year or two.</p>
<p>This isn’t a question with an obvious solution, and it’s one that everybody must answer for him/herself.</p>
<p>You don’t have to decide now- you should rotate with both if you’re interested. It is very very different to be in a small lab vs. a huge lab, irregardless of the fame of the PI.You can succeed in both places, so it should be about where you feel most comfortable, and where you think the science is the most interesting.</p>
<p>I would shy away from simplifying all PI’s into these two categories. My PI is a mid career associate professor who was once in the former category but is headed towards the latter. There are PIs in my department who are in different stages of elderly big shot (close to retirement and packing it in vs still productive) and there are also ambitious and not so ambitious fresh asst profs. Be careful about applying personality characteristics based on somebody’s station in academia.</p>
<p>As a couple other posters have mentioned, there are a couple different factors in play to consider. One is big lab vs. small lab, which is largely independent of the prestige or career-stage of the PI, and probably depends more on subfield. Both have their advantages and disadvantages, and it is mostly a personal decision about whether bigger is better. </p>
<p>Another thing to consider with pre-tenure faculty is how soon their tenure review is coming up. If they’re a fresh assistant professor, you can likely complete your PhD before they have to move up or move out. But if they’re only a few years away from coming up for tenure, it is risky in the sense that you might have to be willing to move institutions if they do not attain tenure. Note that this does not mean in any way that they are a bad researcher or bad mentor. It is just a fact that the majority of junior faculty at top schools will not get tenure, but will likely have to move once or twice before settling somewhere where tenure is likely (either because their accomplishments have piled up or they’ve moved to a slightly less prestigious university). </p>
<p>Probably the most important factors are your enthusiasm for each PI’s research and your personal compatibility with the PI and his/her training style. Beyond that, things like lab size, PI’s prestige, and more are important, but I think those first two are the most crucial.</p>
<p>Agreed with all the above (don’t over generalize). However, I had the chance to experience both types of PI’s as an undergrad, and I also agree with your assessment. With the older PI, I worked in a lab with tons of postdocs, and only ever saw the PI once every 3 or 4 weeks. He had no idea what I was working on and I had to remind him every time. Obviously, there was little in terms of guidance and I got little work done.</p>
<p>With the assistant prof, he was very organized (had a smaller lab though) and took a lot of time to go over with me the concepts and theory behind my project. Although he didn’t help me in the lab directly, he always found or put me in contact with other people who would (postdocs, techs, etc.). I got a lot of work done in a short time.</p>
<p>I guess if I was a real go-getter and really knew my field well and had lots of experience with lab techniques and such, it wouldn’t have gone so badly in the older prof’s lab. But then I’d be called a post-doc, ha! </p>
<p>I’m going into grad school now and will again have to make the decision between assistant prof vs. bigwig prof. I’ll rotate in their labs and see which fits best, keeping an open mind.</p>