<p>As I browse the 2013 biosciences admittance thread, I can't help but feel nervous about my research experience: Research Intern for one semester at my undergrad in an Immunology lab (not what I want to pursue), and for the past 1 year I've been a full-time research tech at a stem cell lab, which I do want to pursue. </p>
<p>We are submitting a paper for publication tomorrow which I will be 3rd author. I have a first author paper in the works, but it will not be submitted by the time I apply. No presentations or poster session experience. </p>
<p>GPA is 3.6, GRE scores are Q 75% V 87% A 4.0 so I'm good on the stats. I'm applying to:
CU Denver BMSP
CU Boulder MCDB
UW-Madison CMB
Duke CMB
UC Irvine CMB
Cornell BCMB
BU PIBS</p>
<p>If anybody has some insight of my chances for admittance or has any "safe" schools to recommend, I'd love to hear it. Thanks.</p>
<p>There are no “safe” schools for PhD admissions since each one of them is competitive. And even if there were, you don’t want to go to a “safe” program - you want to go to the best PhD program you can get into for your subfield and research interests.</p>
<p>That said, whether 1.5 years of research experience is enough really depends on a lot of factors. I will say that often, competitive applicants have more (2-3 years). But your personal statement and letters of recommendation also come into play. If you show exceptional poise and forethought as an applicant - and are pretty focused on a particular area of research - and your letter writers describe you as an outstanding and promising young research scholar, then 1.5 years might be more than enough. But even 4 years wouldn’t be enough if your recommenders are lukewarm about you and you’re unfocused.</p>
<p>So basically, there’s no way to tell. Just apply!</p>