How specific research focus should be before starting biology PhD

Graduate School
1

One daughter has a bachelor’s degree in biology, with a focus on cellular biology. She did quite a bit of research as an undergraduate student, most of which was focused on cancer research. Quite a bit of this was of the form “grow cancer cells, study the impact that a specific type of chemicals have on them”. Her bachelor’s thesis is in this area.

She is currently working as a research associate in biotech on potential treatments for a particular genetic disease. This involves a lot of lab work. Since they are trying to do something that has never been done before, lab results are not always precisely what they intended or had hoped for. She is involved in discussions of what happened, why, and what they should do different next time.

Her GPA for undergrad was excellent and her references should be excellent. She has not yet taken the GRE but has done well on past standardized tests. These parts of any graduate application should be strong.

She is interested in going on for probably a PhD, possibly a master’s, focused on cancer research. She is particularly interested in techniques that use the immune system to fight cancer. However, she has never worked on approaches that use the immune system specifically to fight cancer.

Does this matter when applying to graduate programs? Should she be looking for a job that is directly in immunology, or is it fine that she is working on a different type of biotech research?

My wife and I are under the impression that the first couple of years of a PhD involves taking courses in a number of closely related areas (in this case cellular biology). Thus we are under the impression that she does not need to decide whether or not using immunology for fighting cancer is her focus until after a couple of years of taking graduate courses. Is this correct?

2

At one point my daughter was thinking of going for her PhD. If I understood her correctly (and maybe I didn’t), it seems you need to have research experience and an understanding in the area that you wish to obtain the PhD. You also need to contact labs that have your area of interest, and connect with faculty from those labs. It’s a matter of finding the right lab to suit your interest, if I understood her correctly. I would imagine that different labs/programs have different requirements in terms of experience (but I do not know)? Some may have more leeway.

I think that some PhD programs have you join a lab right away, while others allow you to join later on. It depends on the program. My daughter has friends from college who went straight into their PhD program. Both of them had specific research interests and experience during undergrad.

I think these programs are quite competitive. I also seem to remember her telling me that gpa is not what is most important.

Is there somebody at your daughter’s job who has a PhD? That person might be a good resource. She can reach out on her own to specific programs and ask questions. Another possibility is to get a masters in clinical research.

2 Likes
3

This is the latest, hottest topic in cancer research. I don’t know if you’ve heard about it, but an mRNA vaccine against a person’s own pancreatic cancer cells has preliminarily shown 50% efficacy (meaning no relapse at 18 months in 50% of the people treated), which is a HUGE response, when you consider that current treatments have a less than 5% success rate, and most people are dead within a year of diagnosis.

I would say that she should apply wherever she wants. She has the academic credentials and the references. She has already demonstrated that she is a capable bench researcher. If her current interest is cancer-fighting immunology, she should get a job in a lab doing that, if at all possible, but I don’t think that it would be held against her that her current biotech research job does not exactly match her PhD interest.

1 Like
4

There are a few, and my daughter has been talking to a couple of them.

I have heard this also. This might be a pity in my daughter’s case, but is nonetheless probably the right thing.

My daughter knows someone who left her current employer, and went to a different company to work on immunology applied to cancer research. The tradeoff seems to be between staying at a job where she likes the job, likes the people and where they are trying to solve a problem that would be a really big deal should they succeed, versus moving to a different company that is working in an area that she wants to understand better.

Perhaps I as a dad should remember that she is young. There is plenty of time to see how the current research effort plays out over time, and then switch to a different research effort.

I am excited and maybe a bit impatient about getting the results for both research efforts. However, patience seems to be a requirement for researchers (and perhaps parents of researchers), as is keeping in mind that any particular research effort might fail.

This is indeed huge, and very good news for people who have cancer. It might be particularly good news for those of us whose cancer is so slow that we have the time to wait for more research results.

5

When does she want to apply?

6

She has been thinking about some top schools. She lives and works relatively close to Harvard. She and I have signed up to attend a talk on cancer research at MIT which is connected to the upcoming alumni events. She also has legacy status at Stanford and Columbia (both of which apparently do look at legacy at least a little bit for graduate programs).

Otherwise I do not think that she has figured out where she wants to apply. She has dual US/Canadian citizenship which might help a bit with McGill and/or Toronto but she has not talked about either.

My understanding is that when applying to graduate programs either “get a job” or “keep working at your current job” is in many cases the safety. Given what she is currently working on, continuing to work for another year or two seems like a very reasonable option (assuming that funding continues).

7

It seems to me that she is in a good place right now. She can continue working at her current job while researching PhD programs and getting her questions answered. Best wishes!

1 Like
8

Given the research she is currently involved in, would she consider getting a PhD in genetics?

1 Like
9

I do not think that either she or I quite know what a person does with a PhD in genetics. While she has been working on gene related illnesses (with the understanding that cancer is generally gene-related) I think that work at the cellular level to treat illnesses is her primary interest.

10

Your daughter is more than qualified for a top tier PhD program. The way most programs work is that she will do 3 rotations and take classes in year 1. After that, she will pick a lab and do another year of classes and research to formulate a thesis hypothesis.
The key is to find labs that she is interested in with space to accommodate students. Top labs working in the field of immunology might not have openings.
My humble suggestion is to look beyond what is “hot” now. While one cannot read tea leaves, the next hot area IMO will be tissue engineering.

2 Likes
11

Some grad programs require students to do rotations through different labs in their first year. If a student is choosing a program to work with a particular professor, then the student should make contact with that professor to make sure that they are accepting students. Many profs only have lab space for a finite number of people to work.
Knowing a particular set of techniques isn’t critical, since it’s also common for lab workers to go work in a particular lab for a short time in order to train on a technique. Often newbies are assigned to somebody - research staff, a postdoc, a senior grad student - who gets them settled in the lab and shows them how to do things. Even a person experienced in a particular technique needs to be shown how to do it in a new setting - the equipment may be different, or the shared stock solutions are made at different concentrations. You can make everything to be what you are accustomed to, but it’s sometimes easier to just adapt to the norm for that lab. There are often many ways to do the same thing.
Also, the best faculty for a particular field are not necessarily found at the most elite schools. There is fantastic research at those schools, but for any given field the leader might be at a state U. If she’s set on a particular area of research, she should find a couple of different places where people are doing that work and then find out if they have space for students. Even if she is sure of what she wants to do, she may still need to do rotations. But, if she only wants to work with a particular faculty member, she doesn’t want to get to a school and then find that there isn’t an opening for her. Rotations are awesome for students who are more undecided, though. Often the first year of grad school involves hearing presentations from faculty and more senior students so that first-years can get a good idea of all of the research being done in the department.

2 Likes
12

No they don’t, not even a bit, at least for a PhD program. In fact, mentioning it is likely to be a minus.

The people who decide whether to accept a student to a PhD program are a committee made up of faculty and grad students. The only thing that they are looking for is whether this person can be a good researcher. The fact that the person’s father attended that college for their undergraduate is about as relevant as the weather patterns on Mars.

However, they do look at the reputation of the undergraduate program, as well as at who is writing the LoRs.

Admissions to PhD programs in biological sciences are almost, but not entirely, polar opposites of undergraduate admissions.

GPA is generally used as a gateway, but a 3.97 is no better than a 3.89. Same for GRE, for programs which care about GREs (which do not include any of those on your list).

Nobody cares about an ECs that are not directly related to research in your field.

What they care about:
Resume - experience in the field, research-related accomplishments, from internships at labs to presentations and publications.

LoRs - these should come from the most well-known people in the field who can provide an opinion. So people who were her instructor (especially in lab courses) or for whom she worked. The bigger the name, the better it is. The undergraduate advisor is only good if they are an active faculty member, not if this is a job for a staff member.

Cover letter - this is not an essay, and the applicant is not trying to demonstrate that they are a great person. This is where an applicant demonstrates that they know what a good amount about their field of interest, and that they know what research in their field entails.

Undergraduate program - reputation is important in academia, however, it is not seen the same as it is on CC. It’s not based on prestige, but on the reputation the programs has within the field. this is generally used as a proxy for whether the student has a strong background in the field.

Again, the most important information that these are trying to convey is that this person has the ability to produce original research, and to see it through to the end.

Finally, reaching out to potential advisors is not only acceptable, it is hands-down the best way to increase chances of being accepted to a program. When the applications come in, and the first cull has happened, faculty can look through applications and say “I want that student”. Since that means that the faculty member is willing to support the student and take responsibility for the student, the student is generally fast-tracked for acceptance. Even if the faculty member mentions to the committee “hey, I spoke/emailed/etc with DTG Junior, and she seems to really be smart, motivated, and knowledgeable”, that will pull her to the top of the pile.

I absolutely agree with this. That is why I spent the time putting together the megillah above. If your daughter wants to do a PhD, she should, and she is qualified for any PhD program. Your daughter seems to have all the elements required to be an attractive applicant for a PhD program.

She should speak with any professor with whom she had a good relationship during undergraduate, so that they can help her put together the application.

It will help more than a little. Non-Canadian students are not eligible for much of the financial support that the Canadian government provides for training graduate students. So faculty who accept non-Canadians have to look for other ways to financially support these students (their research grants are smaller than those provided by NSF and NIH), so they are sometimes reluctant to do so.

4 Likes
13

Generally agree with some of @MWolf 's comments above. The LORs should come from her PI or lab managers that are most familiar with her work. They will be very important. The faculty will want to know if the applicant is an experimentalist: someone who understands how to design a sound experimental system to test an idea. They will also want to know if she has a curious mind and whether she’s capable of self-direction. She should have experience with common molecular genetics techniques, but if she hasn’t worked specifically with immune cell cultures it won’t be a deal breaker. That stuff can be learned and the right person is eminently trainable.

Most serious PhD applicants have already done a deep dive into the faculty of the department(s) to which they are applying. They’ve read their papers and know the work of the PIs that interest them. Many have already been in contact with the PI and discussed a research area they might pursue - I did, and that was years ago before the internet! PhD programs are limited by the number of students the department can support financially, so the faculty want to know they’re bringing on board students that will thrive in their research programs.

3 Likes
14

Some additional unsolicited commentary:

Tell your daughter to carefully consider the opportunity costs of a PhD in this field. After the 5-6 years to complete the PhD, she’ll have to do a postdoc - probably two (2-6 additional years). This is kind of the academic equivalent of a medical residency, but she’ll make even less money than the MDs. Tell her to look carefully into the job market. There are too many PhDs in this field right now. In the academic market, professors don’t retire -you have to wait for them to die. In the private sector, you really have to fit a very specific niche to get in the door. Sadly, when you do, it’s more often than not the PhDs that get canned when a project gets cancelled. The techs can usually move to another lab.

3 Likes
15

A PhD does seem like something that you do if you want to do it and if you can afford to do it, and not because it will improve your financial situation.

I struggled with whether or not to get a PhD many decades ago, and decided not to. This was not an easy decision back then and does not appear to have gotten any easier.

There is also the option of going for a master’s degree, or continuing to work and not get any second degree.

Apparently the research associate with a bachelor’s degree who is doing the lab work might also move to another project with ongoing funding, while her boss with a PhD gets laid off. My daughter already saw this happen in her first year on the job.

Getting a PhD does not seem like something to rush into. Taking a few years to think about it and to research options seems like a good idea. Patience wins again!

And thanks to everyone for the comments. I think that there are many very good and helpful comments on this thread.

16

Wouldn’t hurt to apply for a NSF GRFP. It sounds like she’d be a strong candidate. Awarding of the fellowship is considered an extremely strong signal by PhD admissions committees.

17

Yes. These are the ‘techs’ I was referring to. Maybe I’m showing my age - the researchers used to have titles like ‘Technician Level 1, 2, or 3’, etc. based on degrees and experience. Good luck to your daughter. It’s a tough decision.

1 Like
18

What would she get a masters in, if she went that route instead of a phd?

19

Most likely cellular biology.

1 Like