|
I am about to enter a state flagship university with the intention of pursuing a BS in biochemistry. I plan on attending a top graduate school for my PhD in biochemistry or a related field. I was originally intending on attending for three or four years and then directly applying to PhD programs during my last year. However, I came up with a novel idea today with regards to my undergraduate education.
I could easily graduate with my degree in two years without even having to take a particularly difficult courseload due to my enormous number of AP credits. Indeed, I am fairly confident that my GPA will be at least 3.8, especially considering that the vast majority of high school seniors at or above my level of intelligence and academic ability will be heading off to different, more highly ranked institutions. Therefore, it seems to be that a possible course of action would be to graduate as quickly as possible and then spend the next one or two years continuing and focusing exclusively upon the research which I began during my undergraduate years. That, in turn, would increase my number of publications and total research experience to a level far greater than that of a typical four year graduate, and could potentially make my graduate school application exceptionally strong, considering that research experience is essentially the most important factor in PhD admissions. Indeed, I practically feel as though my application could end up much stronger than the typical PhD application from a four year graduate of an elite university (HYPSM, etc.) simply due to my massive advantage in research experience.
Does anyone have any suggestions or comments? I am not too well informed regarding the subject of graduate admissions, so any feedback would be greatly appreciated.
 
|
nvm nothing helpful here 
|
Russian Federation3631 Posts
The sense that I got from doing my chemistry PhD prospective visits was that indeed, research advisor(s) recommendation letters are pretty much what make or break your admission (faculty that you meet with will ask you who your advisor was, so I suspect if you had zero research experience you'd be pretty hosed).
Its good that you're planning to actively pursue research opportunities early -- that said, I managed to juggle undergrad research + coursework during the last 2 years of my 4 year program relatively fine. I'm not convinced you need to rush through your graduation requirements, and in any case, it doesn't hurt to have a couple of graduate-level classes on your application (helps for recommendations as well -- I took grad classes from 2 of the 3 professors that wrote my letters).
FWIW, I went to a state school and got into all 5 of the grad schools I applied for, so I definitely don't think that going to an institution that lacks ~eliteness~ is really that much of a disadvantage.
Anyways, you're welcome to PM me if you have any specific questions ~
|
Planning for the future is great. A lot of people fail to look very far ahead, and end up squandering a lot of their precious four years in college. That being said, college is usually a time of pretty major change in people's interests, and your plans may have to adapt pretty rapidly. I'd say there is plenty of time for you to focus on your undergraduate experience first, then on things that will make you a strong graduate school candidate.
I have a friend who entered college as a pre-med student, switched to bio engineering, and ended up earning her degree in electrical engineering and computer science, so just because you enter college with a plan doesn't mean you need to stick with it!
Also, even with a more focused approach to research opportunities compared to your peers in more "elite" institutions, there is simply more opportunities to participate in research at HYPSM per student than in public schools. The best advice I can give you is simply to get friendly with your professors. You seem to have a passion for biochemistry if you're ready to even think about devoting eight years of your life to the subject. Visit their office hours, ask them questions, they enjoy genuine and enthusiastic attention. Then they'll be pretty likely to offer you (or say yes when you ask for) opportunities for research.
Lastly, have some fun in college! Meet new people! Limit your starcraft time =]
|
There are a number of things that will make you application to graduate school more competitive (I was accepted into Yale biochem, Duke structural biochem, and UCSD biochem in 2005 so I know a bit about the field).
Your initial idea is quite correct. Research at your university or at internships outside of your university will be the number one application booster over other applicants.
The second biggest influence is that your recommendation letter comes from someone from the university you are applying to (I doubt I would have be accepted to Yale if one of my recommendations was not also from there). If you know where you want to go, then you should try to do research with a professor from that university for a good recommendation letter.
There are a few things you need to be on the lookout for though. Having a high GPA won't matter much if you don't do well on the standardized tests. I don't know how much things have changed, but scoring well on the Math and Essay portion of the GRE (verbal doesn't really matter), Biochemistry GRE, and if you're university prepares you for it, the ACT subject tests (math, chemistry, biology, and physics) will all give you a stronger resume and these things take time to learn. Different schools all have different minimum and average acceptable scores on these tests so you need to do close to average if your school is not highly regarded.
I will say it is highly unusual for undergraduates to make publications doing a research project in biochemistry (medicinal chemistry is a different story) so you will need to be very straightforward with whoever you are working with that you expect to publish from the start (and expect a lot of rejection for it). That being said, publications are not required to get into most Ph.D. programs.
My advice would be to contact the head of the biochemistry department at your school and ask them if your plan is even possible (a lot of undergraduate programs require a minimum number of credits to graduate and this is often more than it is possible to complete in two years, three years is a much more reasonable time frame). Biochemsitry in particular often requires more courses than just Biology, Chemistry, or Physics. You will be taking most of the mid level courses for both biology and chemistry as well as some advanced courses that require multivariate calculus as well as linear algebra (a separate math course that is required or at least advised for physical chemistry).
As soon as you get to the university, find out every single course you have to take including the general education requirements. Find out which courses have pre-requisites and how many you can opt out of with your AP credits (some of them may not count). Find out how many total credits you will need for your degree. If it is possible to plan to complete your degree in 2 years then it is your option to do so, but I think it is unlikely. You will probably need a minimum of 80+ credit hours for your degree and many universities restrict the number of credit hours you can take per semester to less than 25 (and you will need special permission to take more than 20). **These are just sample numbers I am using from my undergraduate university.
It sounds like you are really motivated, but don't burn yourself out. What you want to do is highly unusual because most people can't do it. Don't lose all of your college years to academics and research. You might get to where you want to be, but you won't be happy without the support of your friends and family. Being good at what you do requires more than just knowledge and work hours so make sure to keep your work and life balanced. Good luck, have fun.
|
Other than meeting the school's admission requirements, the top two things you need to do are to find a professor to supervise you, and secure funding for your research.
You'll find that many professors will prefer students that come to them at least partially funded.
|
It will be easier to get involved in research at your school if you are a student there. Do a light courseload your 3rd/4th year and do hardcore research. Try to get involved in research after you get settled in so after 1st quarter/mid-1st semester of your 1st year.
|
It would be very easy for me to complete the degree in two years. To clarify, by no means would I be speeding through the degree. Rather, based on the coursework which I have already completed and the AP credits which I have already accumulated, completing my biochemistry degree in two years would essentially be the normal route from here onwards; to stay at university for three or four years would require me to deliberately slow down the progression of my degree (and I don't know to what extent that will be possible, as the university frowns on people who accumulate a massive number of credits but don't graduate). I have well over 90 credit-hours from AP and local community college credits alone (1 year corresponds to 45 credit-hours).
|
How do you know you can complete it in 2 years? Have you actually talked to an academic advisor at your university? Did you check to see if all of your AP/CC units transfer over completely? A lot of schools strongly recommend not to use AP credits (for example, in your case, do not use it for freshman bio and chem).
Furthermore, what is your motivation for getting a PhD and why in biochemistry? Grad schools will ask you this as a part of the admission process (in your personal statement) and it is a very important aspect of your application.
|
I have obviously done the requisite research and made the proper inquiries; I have been planning this out for over two years now. My motivation is irrelevant to the topic at hand.
|
On April 19 2012 05:21 meguca wrote:
It would be very easy for me to complete the degree in two years. To clarify, by no means would I be speeding through the degree. Rather, based on the coursework which I have already completed and the AP credits which I have already accumulated, completing my biochemistry degree in two years would essentially be the normal route from here onwards; to stay at university for three or four years would require me to deliberately slow down the progression of my degree (and I don't know to what extent that will be possible, as the university frowns on people who accumulate a massive number of credits but don't graduate). I have well over 90 credit-hours from AP and local community college credits alone (1 year corresponds to 45 credit-hours).
I'm glad you see motivated to take this on, but you also need to keep a few things in perspective. With so many credit hours coming in you're bound to be in upper level classes immediately. This is good since you're technically at that level, but for someone without University experience the change from high school curricula to college is large. Now you're probably thinking "I have community college credit and handled that just fine". Community college is meant to prepare you for a 4 year University, not take its place. Also factor in that you will probably move away from home and find more freedom and control than you've ever had. I trust that you are decently prepared, but as an RA for honors freshman students I saw MANY students struggle when the reality was thrust upon them.
Unless your University uses a different credit system I'm having a hard time believing that one year corresponds to 45 credit hours. All the public university's I've ever heard of have a minimum of 12 hours (about 4 classes) to be considered full time while 15 hours/semester raised your grade level each year (making roughly 30 credit hours to reach the next "class status"). Honestly, the "class status" only applies to the progression of your major (official class standing with the university only really affects your financial aid). I trust that you'll be entering as a Junior anyway and I would HIGHLY recommend you start with the minimum course load. The problem with taking 5-6 upper level science classes is that you're literally doing nothing but studying and homework (I'm a chemical engineer - been there, done that, NOT fun!). Oftentimes you need to choose which courses are not going to be studied one night in favor of getting all your work done on minimal (if any sleep). With that being said, I wouldn't recommend you to take a lot of 300+ level classes until you're sure you can handle it, especially if you're working part time in a research lab.
On to grad school - I'm a second year grad student myself and most of the advice thus far has been spot-on. Look into the research project' the professors at your school are working on and approach those you find most interesting. It's important that you get general lab experience and training (experimental) or help with coding and simulations (computational), so the project shouldn't matter as much so long as the experience is good. Getting your name on publications is your best ticket to grad school, but you need to make sure the professor will add it. If you're in the lab running a grad student's tests then you may not get on the paper because you did not contribute anything but lab results. Having an independent project looks fantastic on an application, but most of these projects go to grad students. Also look into Research Experience for Undergrads (REU) - they're summer jobs at different University's working exclusively on research.
Your plan to stay longer and do research may or may not be feasible, so you'd need to hammer out the details with your department.
Standardized testing and GPA are secondary to research experience, but if you're applying to an elite University they're going to expect a good Math GRE score and a GPA above 3.5.
|
I doubt that a high GPA will be particularly difficult. Grading is all relative, and I do not expect that I will have trouble outscoring most of my classmates; indeed, the vast majority of the people capable of scoring higher than me will be going to higher-ranked universities. Indeed, many of my acquaintances who attended my current high school and went on to attend this particular state university report that they are actually finding the university to be easier in terms of academics; thus, I do not anticipate much difficulty, since I am more intelligent than any of the aforementioned acquaintances and, at any rate, I will have an abundance of available time for studying. Moreover, I will be living at home and commuting to school. Finally, to ensure that my GPA will be satisfactory, I plan on self-studying linear algebra, general chemistry, organic chemistry, and physical chemistry over the summer so that the classes will simply be like a review.
My university uses a quarter system where each standard quarter corresponds to 15 credit-hours. A standard year of classes is composed of three standard quarters and an optional summer quarter. Thus, each year comprises 45 credit-hours' worth of classes. I will be entering with junior class status and will reach senior class status in one or two quarters. At any rate, I only intend on taking four classes first quarter (18 credit-hours), all of which I will be self-studying over the summer anyway.
I will also begin GRE preparation over the summer.
Will respond more later; I am going to sleep.
|
On April 19 2012 06:55 meguca wrote:
I doubt that a high GPA will be particularly difficult. Grading is all relative, and I do not expect that I will have trouble outscoring most of my classmates; indeed, the vast majority of the people capable of scoring higher than me will be going to higher-ranked universities. Indeed, many of my acquaintances who attended my current high school and went on to attend this particular state university report that they are actually finding the university to be easier in terms of academics; thus, I do not anticipate much difficulty, since I am more intelligent than any of the aforementioned acquaintances and, at any rate, I will have an abundance of available time for studying. Moreover, I will be living at home and commuting to school. Finally, to ensure that my GPA will be satisfactory, I plan on self-studying linear algebra, general chemistry, organic chemistry, and physical chemistry over the summer so that the classes will simply be like a review.
My university uses a quarter system where each standard quarter corresponds to 15 credit-hours. A standard year of classes is composed of three standard quarters and an optional summer quarter. Thus, each year comprises 45 credit-hours' worth of classes. I will be entering with junior class status and will reach senior class status in one or two quarters. At any rate, I only intend on taking four classes first quarter (18 credit-hours), all of which I will be self-studying over the summer anyway.
I will also begin GRE preparation over the summer.
Will respond more later; I am going to sleep.
I figured you were probably commuting to school. With that much stress I doubt you'd last long without a solid, familiar foundation. Still, the last thing I can tell you is to make sure you have enough stress outlets and have fun every once and a while. Burnout can be delayed as an undergrad but it runs rampant in grad school.
Quarter systems make a lot more sense with the credit load, though the downside is the amount of specific to each subject. If you're going to self-study during break then it may be worth your while to contact the professor and get an old syllabus. This way you're studying topics relevant to the class.
P-Chem is tough. My old professor informed us that we'd need at least three semesters to grasp the core concepts (thermodynamics and quantum theory). I'm sure others could say the same about organic and linear algebra, but trouble with P-Chem seems to be across the board.
If you haven't already, you may as well start reading the seminal literature related to your research area of interest. Reading textbooks gives one the impression that there is a linear-discovery process involved in research when in reality there are mountains of literature gradually homing in on the "generally" accepted truth. Reading older papers shows you how scientists 50+ years ago thought, how they operated without modern technology, and the many ways they were wrong. You could also read the latest papers detailing progress on topic X, but what winds up happening for most people is they start "reference hiking" until they hit a reasonable starting point. If you want a good place to begin I'd advise finding a literature review paper on a topic of interest and once you're done start reading selected references.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
