<p>I've just started my PhD in Biochemistry and have been in the lab for a few months now. I went straight in after completing my BS in Chemistry. I'm at a mid-range university, mostly because I got on well with the PI and his grad students. In addition, my undergrad credentials weren't completely stellar.
I was initially very excited about the labwork and made this known during all my interviews. The research is intriguing, but it's just not my cup of tea. I've been thinking of dropping the PhD and just obtaining my MS, then starting my PhD elsewhere. I feel I can really boost my overall application package with the MS thesis and credit hours plus I can get into research that I'm more passionate about at a better university. My issues are:
1) How on Earth do I explain this to my PI and the department without backlash?
2) If I apply to another PhD program, how would this be viewed by an admissions committee?
3) Would it be wise to contact prospective universities first to see if I can find another lab to join before I instigate possible exile from the department?</p>
<p>I would give it a little more time. I’m guessing you started in the lab over the summer and are just starting courses now? Do you think your attitude might change after a having some more background under your belt?
As an alternative to switching to an MS, if it is specifically the research of your PI that is not striking your fancy, are there other professors whose research might interest you? Does your grad program offer the option of rotations?</p>
<p>Yes, you’re absolutely correct. I think you have a point about classes, but the PI’s research just isn’t what I thought it would be. I actually came to this university to work with my professor in particular so I didn’t rotate. And honestly, a big part of me is regretting not trying to get into a school with a better reputation. My PI is great but the program here is young and I’m wondering if I shouldn’t have settled. Which brings me to another question. How much does university reputation matter vs advisor reputation for a career in academia?</p>
<p>Whether or not you should leave is dependent upon a lot of factors. If you just started now, though, you have plenty of time to decide - we’re only 2-3 weeks into the academic year. You have at least until the end of the academic year (May/June 2014) to decide whether you want to start talking to PIs at other schools to prepare to apply for other programs.</p>
<p>If you do decide to leave after that point, you just be straightforward. That’s why it’s important to give it your all and really try - so you can be sure it’s a research mismatch and not a early jitters thing. But then I would just explain that you’re not enjoying the research and you want to do something else, and that it’s not as good a fit as you thought it was.</p>
<p>2) It depends. Entirely on you and the committee. I know people who have successfully transferred programs (or, more appropriately, have left one PhD program and then started another - since most of the time they don’t really “transfer” anything but start from the bottom with the other new students) and they were able to do so because they were able to clearly articulate why they wanted to leave, and it was always a research fit-related reason. They also always have at least one year (and in almost every case, more than that) in their home program. That way they can truly say that they tried at their home department but the mismatch made it unwise to continue.</p>
<p>3) Definitely, although I would wait until the spring.</p>
<p>The answer to your last question depends a lot on your field. In my field, both matter; but really what matters most is your productivity. You could be a graduate from Stanford with a top advisor but if you don’t publish anything and have nothing to show for your graduate years, the jobs won’t just be showing up. I would say in my field top program probably matters a little more than top advisor, but how top the program is vs. how top the advisor is really makes the difference too.</p>
<p>Thanks for your advice. When I am getting in contact with PIs at other universities, would it be wise to be honest about starting a PhD or just say that I’m completing a MS? I don’t want to seem like I’m being sketchy, but I also don’t want to come across as having commitment issues.</p>