Three things overwhelmed the aftermath of the decision-making process:

.

1) I hope that it is uncommon for recruits to feel like they have lead programs on.  Some of the interactions with and feedback I received from faculty were so encouraging and genuine that I felt guilty for turning down the offers from their institutions.

2) How feasible is this, really?  Are cost of living, accessibility of health insurance, and the job market for my husband really sustainable in this new environment?

3) Am I going to regret taking this risk?

.

The first issue, I am slowly getting over as I correspond with jilted faculty about future collaboration, travel grants to learn a new technique from them during my pre doc, and potential post doc positions.  This is most comforting fluff, as no one knows where things will be in six years.

The second set of concerns is unique to the individual.  I have a husband and a chronic health condition, both of which weighed in on which programs I applied to in the first place.  However, you think about the actual repercussions of choosing an institution a little differently during and after you choose it.  For us, it’s worth it.  The sacrifice to benefit ratio is mutual between us.  Now, it’s all happening.  Now, the possibilities are real.  Now, there are a lot of phone calls to make.

After lunch with a dear friend, this third question seemed a little silly.  There should be no regret in leaving something behind if you have the option to come back to it later – what are post docs and faculty positions for?  “Regret comes from not taking risks,” I was reminded. “You are far more likely to regret not taking advantage of this opportunity than to second-guess leaving safety and familiarity behind here.”  And I think she was right.

.

Natalie Goldberg is a Neuroscience and Chemistry addict in pursuit of a PhD.  Since 2008, she has worked as a research assistant at the Portland VA Medical Center rescuing the world from the throes of neurodegenerative movement disorders.  Her musings and experiences in science can be found in her blog.

.

.

Want to see the rest of Natalie’s grad school decision process?

Graduate School by the Numbers: Interviews

Graduate School by the Numbers: Mastering the Interview Process

.

.

Any other concerns you faced after your decision?

.

.

In stark contrast to my first year of applying to graduate school, I was accepted this round to all of my programs of interest.  As encouraging as it is to be wanted, I somewhat wish that I was left with fewer options.  After a bit of grueling rumination, the decision came down to two programs.

In one corner, weighing in at second most prestigious program in the nation (by NRC) with several exciting opportunities for scientific growth (read: big names with big techniques) in a new environment, but somewhat uncertain project funding scenarios and almost guaranteed housing in a large closet for the next six years: Super-Fancy Program.  In the other corner, weighing in at guaranteed funding in a lab of interest with the ability to maintain my current momentum (read: several first author fairly high-impact papers published in the last year and two more in review), and which would allow cost-effective progression of my married life (read: buying a house): Somewhat-Prestigious Program (my current institution of employ).

Prestige over productivity?  New and uncertain over safe and familiar?  Delayed building a home over immediate?  After a weekend of sulking and pining, I did choose the former over the latter.  Here is what shaped my decision:

1)   Although Somewhat-Prestigious Program would allow the continuation and development of projects on which I am working now, I have already been working on them on and off for four years. Super-Fancy Program provides entirely new direction and opportunity, but what PhD student publishes 1.5 manuscripts a year anyway?

2)   It is difficult to grow when one is surrounded by the safe and familiar.  Development is fomented by a challenging environment.  Though it is certainly not uncommon to earn a PhD at an institution where one has worked in a lab as a technician or undergraduate, these cases tend to work out best when institutions are large.  Somewhat-Prestigious Program, where I am now, is on the smaller end, which would make it harder for me to find new opportunities.  In this case, a different institution would make me more attractive for post doc positions in the future.

3)    The environment of Super-Fancy Program will not only be a new city and state, but a new kind of institution.  I attended a small liberal arts university for undergrad, and have been working at a teaching hospital with no internal undergraduate population since (although there are several universities around the city).  Since a teaching requirement is important to me, and specifically one built into the program that allows autonomy over one’s own course, an on-site undergraduate population is ideal.  Testimonials have convinced me that hunting down one’s own external teaching opportunities is a significant burden during a pre doc.  Earning my PhD at a school with an undergraduate, graduate and medical demographic will be a new and exciting adventure.

4)   Regarding the house — a dream of mine — once I find one, I will not want to get up and leave in six years to go find a post doc.  And it is almost always the case that one is more attractive having gone elsewhere for a post doc.  My husband and I have decided that it is worth waiting six years to buy a house if I am likely to get a post doc at an institution in which I will want to remain long-term (for me, this has become the plan of attack).

5)   Having a transplantable partner is ideal for this kind of decision.  I am exceedingly fortunate that my husband will be able to find work in the city of Super-Fancy Program.  His support has been phenomenal, which is part of the reason I changed my name for publications.

.

Natalie Goldberg is a Neuroscience and Chemistry addict in pursuit of a PhD.  Since 2008, she has worked as a research assistant at the Portland VA Medical Center rescuing the world from the throes of neurodegenerative movement disorders.  Her musings and experiences in science can be found in her blog.

.

.

Check out the previous article in the Graduate School by the Numbers Series:

Mastering the Interview Process

.

.

Any other factors influence your graduate school decision?

.

.

In preparation for my four consecutive recruitment “weekends” (read: 15 days, 27 interviews, 2 committee meetings, 3 states, 6 flights), I scoured the interwebs for guidance.  My favorite resources were Philip Guo and Neurotypical.  And in the real world, I was fortunate to have the invaluable advice of my boss, our post doc, and the handfuls of graduate students currently enrolled in my programs of interest.  As is my nature, and that of many type-A research personalities, I over-prepared [read: way over-prepared].  In hindsight, it came down to three things:

.

1)   Be versed in your own research experience. If you have none, or are coming straight out of undergrad, be versed in your aspirations for research to come.  If you have publications, bring copies.  If you have pretty figures, be prepared to show them off.

2) Love science, but make sure your enthusiasm is somewhat focused.

3) Interview them. Read some papers from your labs of interest and have questions about the direction of current projects and grants.  Ask PI’s about their mentorship philosophy, and program chairs/advisors about travel/conference support and where students go after earning their PhD.  There are PI’s who will spend your whole interview talking about how great they are: find a way to get a word in edgewise and leave them with an impression of you.

.

You may learn that a graduate program is not all it was dressed up to be.  This was the case at one of my recruitments: despite my enthusiasm for two particular labs, the program dynamic fell short of my expectations, and the communication between faculty was somewhat disjointed, whereas I was looking for a strong collaborative atmosphere.

On the other hand, you may find that the legendary PI’s who were intimidating from afar are actually quite approachable and invested in developing your career.  I, for one, was totally star struck during a few of my graduate school interviews, but it seems that I managed to put on a good show of my own.

.

Natalie Goldberg is a Neuroscience and Chemistry addict in pursuit of a PhD.  Since 2008, she has worked as a research assistant at the Portland VA Medical Center rescuing the world from the throes of neurodegenerative movement disorders.  Her musings and experiences in science can be found in her blog.

.

.

.

Have any other tips for navigating graduate school interviews?

.

.

An easy-going man who never faulted in his schooling or professional practice – through the gleaming eyes of his daughter — my father made college and graduate school seem like the natural steps toward my future, into which I would flow seamlessly.

My first confrontation with this ideology came in high school, when my counselor told me not to apply to a particular university because my grades would preclude me from acceptance (I finished high school with a 3.8).  Heartbroken but defiant, I applied anyway, was waitlisted, interpreted this as a rejection and ended up going to a different university.  This is one of very few instances in my life where misconception has worked in my favor.

The liberal arts environment fed my passion for science from every angle, as I was able to integrate psychology, philosophy, chemistry and biology into my major.  I worked hard, pursued unique basic science and clinical opportunities and discovered that I was actually made for what I loved.

Once I discovered that a PhD in Neuroscience was my calling, I expected that a fit into the program of my choice would come as the natural next step after college.  Professors, peers and advisors became cheerleaders for moving straight on to graduate school.  This was an indication of being fit for the field, they said.

And I, with my preconceived notions of transient transition from undergraduate to PhD candidate, began to believe that this was how I would know that I could be great in the field.

To my great fortune, I had begun a project in a research lab the previous summer, and had been offered a research assistant position to continue the work.  This was an outstanding opportunity, which I took as an indication that graduate school could wait.  I felt that I was just getting started, and had much more that I wanted to learn before beginning my own PhD work; research assistantships were portrayed as the gateway positions to graduate school.

Two years later, I have helped acquire a funded grant, published two first author manuscripts with others in press or in the works, taught students ranging from high school interns to physician research fellows, experienced myriad tests of my creativity and trouble-shooting skills, and have just submitted my second round of applications to graduate school.  Although fortuitous for my productivity, and though I planned to defer my admission for a year even if I was accepted, my first applications were denied and my concept of the seamless transition further convoluted.

Over the last two years, I have watched my peers enter veterinary school, law school and MD-PhD programs; though some continue to flourish, I have seen some of them wonder how and why they got there and drop out.  This had me utterly baffled for some time.  Why had these brilliant minds and souls who had succeeded in transitioning directly into graduate programs found themselves not fitting quite right?  I began to feel as though my choice to take the road more hesitantly traveled was truly the right one for me.  I am more passionate about, and confident in my pursuits now than I have ever been.

In my interaction with collaborators and graduate students of other Neuroscience PhD programs, I have met students who entered graduate school directly out of college and been happy and successful, and many who decided to finish with a Masters degree instead or change career directions altogether.  What they have all told me is that if you love research, you will find the struggle not only bearable but deeply rewarding.

Despite the framework laid by my preconceptions, teachers and professors, my road to graduate school has been the one best suited to me.  It has been frustrated and tested by rejection and uncertainty, and inspired by passion and commitment.  And now, I am ready.

.

Natalie Goldberg is a Neuroscience and Chemistry addict in pursuit of a PhD.  Since 2008, she has worked as a research assistant at the Portland VA Medical Center rescuing the world from the throes of neurodegenerative movement disorders.  Her musings and experiences in science can be found in her blog.

.

.

.

.