hidden

Zooming In: The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on PhD Interviews

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought significant changes to multiple layers of academia, including the biological and biomedical sciences PhD admissions process in the United States. Typically, prospective applicants are selected to interview in-person at the destination campus not only as a part of the evaluation process, but also as an opportunity for the applicants to gauge program fit. The travel disruptions caused by the pandemic put this opportunity on hold in 2020, and for many programs, lasted into the 2021 admissions cycle. As such, many programs opted for virtual interviews instead.

 

Rama Alhariri, a PhD student in the Human Genetics and Molecular Biology program at Johns Hopkins University, was unable to visit the universities she applied to when she was choosing PhD programs in 2020. All her interview processes took place virtually. Although there was slight variation in the format, she had an opportunity to talk to current students and faculty members about their research interests and the PhD program in general. In addition to the interviews, her virtual programs included sessions introduce applicants to the university and the city itself, such as a panel session about things to do in the area and a live virtual tour of the program. However, this experience did not quite resemble the in-person visits.

“I would’ve liked a higher quality of the tour of facilities as some programs lacked that altogether or it was a little unclear. Additionally, I would’ve liked a greater interaction with other interviewees without the presence of upper-class students or faculty so that we can get to know one another better, the way we might if we were in an in-person interview. It is unfortunate because it’s these interactions that also shape how well you might integrate with other students,” she added.

When asked about how she gauged the fit of the PhD program, Alhariri said that she tried to focus on her interactions with the students, faculty, and other interviewees. From these conversations, she was able to get a glimpse into the campus culture and the overall level of formality and professionalism among the faculty members and students.

“Ultimately the program I chose, while it was also the highest ranking one, was the one in which I felt most comfortable with the upper-class students as well as those that could potentially be within my cohort. I sought an environment with a good balance between professional and somewhat relaxed, which would be the best fit for me.”

Although virtual interviews have become more common in the PhD admissions process in the past two year, they are not new. International students who reside in other countries, for example, typically have limited opportunities to travel due to visa issues and a lack of financial reimbursement for long-distance travel. When I was choosing a PhD program to commit to in 2018, I was finishing up my undergraduate studies outside of the United States. Because of that, my campus visits were limited to places that I could afford flying to. Additionally, my virtual interviews were limited to conversations with faculty members, which was not enough to give me a comprehensive picture.

Alhariri shared a few tips for current applicants who are unable to visit campuses in-person, “It’s hard to make a decision on what program you want to choose based off limited virtual interactions. I say trust your gut and try to support your intuition with evidence. I obtained information about living in the city through online searching. Because faith is important to me, I also checked social media sites of the Muslim student faith group – I wanted to know that there was a large enough Muslim community within the city and even within the university at large, not limited to just my program.”

Ultimately, completing a PhD is a long-term commitment, and the decision making to commit to a program looks different from person to person. Self-introspection can help a lot in this case: what is important for you? Will the environment nurture your academic curiosity? Do you like the idea of living in the area for several years? Based on my own experience of interviewing virtually, I would suggest doing the following things. First, try to talk to as many people in the PhD program as you can. Do not hesitate to ask to be connected to faculty members you are interested in working with and current students to get more information about the culture of the university. Second, try to connect with previous applicants who ended up choosing a different program to understand their perspectives and add information to your decision making. Lastly, if you are moving to a new environment, do some research about the area itself – including cost of living and things to do beyond academic work – to ensure that you will adapt well.

“The views, opinions and positions expressed within this blog are those of the author(s) alone and do not represent those of the American Heart Association. The accuracy, completeness and validity of any statements made within this article are not guaranteed. We accept no liability for any errors, omissions or representations. The copyright of this content belongs to the author and any liability with regards to infringement of intellectual property rights remains with them. The Early Career Voice blog is not intended to provide medical advice or treatment. Only your healthcare provider can provide that. The American Heart Association recommends that you consult your healthcare provider regarding your personal health matters. If you think you are having a heart attack, stroke or another emergency, please call 911 immediately.”

 

hidden

An MD or PHD, what is the best path for you?

On the American Heart Association Research Committee, you can see 9 of 30 members marked having a Ph.D. Furthermore, you’ll see that all programs the committee members are affiliated with have some medical association.

This example of the committee brings the question “Can an MD do what Ph.D. does?” The short answer is yes. Ph.D.’s may not necessarily have all the training an MD has, so the profession cannot provide exactly the same opportunities. So does the difference lies with patient care? Many PhDs work with MDs, so maybe a Ph.D. can have a similar clinical care experience.

How do people with an MD (Doctor of Medicine) differ from those with Ph.D. (Doctor of Philosophy)? The most common answers are likely:

  • “MDs make more money.”
  • “MDs prescribe medications.”
  • “They’re the real doctors”

Some Differences and Similarities:

PhDs:

  • On average, about 4-6 years to complete the degree
  • Purpose – to develop original work
  • Considered an academic degree
  • Contribute new theory and knowledge to the field

MDs:

  • On average, about 4 years to complete the degree, not including residency
  • Purpose – trained to give patient care
  • Considered a professional degree
  • Apply the existing theories and knowledge practically.

Both:

  • Referred to as Doctors
  • Both can specialize in fields.
  • Both perform research and apply for funding

The foundational difference may be related to assuming that Ph.D.s advance knowledge and MDs apply existing knowledge. It is not required for MDs to produce original research, whereas PhDs write up a dissertation (includes original work).

Okay, so obviously the training for doctor degrees are different. But, who is more up-to-date on cutting edge knowledge? Maybe, this sways your opinion?

PhDs are required to do original work, so wouldn’t they be?  What about MDs that conduct clinical trials? Do they use cutting edge knowledge?

It begins to get cloudy when you look past the path of earning your MD or Ph.D. Both professions can conduct clinical trials. Both professions can conduct translational related work.  Which route is better for you? How do you choose?

The path to the degree prepares you for what is ahead in your career. Hence the obvious difference of original work vs patient-related work. This is how many view it. However, the cloudiness between which path to choose increases when ideas like a specialty in biomedical research come to mind. Acceptance into MD/PhD program absorbs expectations into a research-oriented career. The program is expecting you to make medical advances through your training as a researcher.

Ask yourself  “What is the next step after obtaining my terminal degree (MD and Ph.D.)? “

You can pursue research opportunities with just an MD degree. This can occur through a fellowship type of training. Sort of similar to post-doctoral training, an option after completion of a Ph.D.

Overall the training and mentorship past your terminal degree will maximize your opportunities. There is a lot to mull over for choosing a path. Make a Pros and Cons list? Or better yet, maybe just go observe both types of professions?  Find a lab to work in or do some volunteering over the summer, Maybe get involved in a big project. Do something that is even just solely preparing materials for a particular procedure. See if you like the environment. I suggest looking beyond obtaining the terminal degree. Look for people you admire and learn their stories. Keep your eyes up to see all the open doors.

 

“The views, opinions and positions expressed within this blog are those of the author(s) alone and do not represent those of the American Heart Association. The accuracy, completeness and validity of any statements made within this article are not guaranteed. We accept no liability for any errors, omissions or representations. The copyright of this content belongs to the author and any liability with regards to infringement of intellectual property rights remains with them. The Early Career Voice blog is not intended to provide medical advice or treatment. Only your healthcare provider can provide that. The American Heart Association recommends that you consult your healthcare provider regarding your personal health matters. If you think you are having a heart attack, stroke or another emergency, please call 911 immediately.”

hidden

5 Things To Consider Before Choosing Your Dissertation Topic

As I am inching towards, what I hope would be my final year of PhD research, I have been thinking and analyzing a lot of my actions in retrospect. I thought of putting together a list of things I learned and things I wish I had considered in my first year.

 

1) Finding the “right” mentor.

We spend a lot of time in deciding the right lab or the best PhD supervisor. A lot has been said and done about finding the right fit. One thing I have learned is that apart from the usual parameters we set in finding the best supervisor for us personally, sometimes we forget to consider if the supervisor is right for the project. Sometimes the project may expand in an area beyond your and your mentor’s expertise. In such cases, it is important to consider whether your mentor will make the right resources available to you. Putting together a good research advisory committee, scientists who would have expertise in that specific topic, will come in handy. Research can be quite daunting and grad students deal with intense pressure and stress on a daily basis. Your time should be spent researching and not trying to find the right instrument in the cheapest core facility and definitely NOT YouTubing the workings of a new technique. Make sure to find someone to train you, attend workshops, shadow a technician and make sure your supervisor makes these available to you when needed. A mark of a good mentor is when they don’t hesitate to seek consultation or advise from an external or senior scientist who is an expert in the field.

 

2) Is this a good career investment?

Turns out most students forget about the crucial thing about spending years in grad school – landing the job! Most of us don’t think about job search or the next move until our final year, which I think is too late. While choosing a topic, you may want to consider things like job market, skill requirement, funding agencies and so on. For example, researching therapeutic drug targets for a disease that has no cure is far better than investing in a project discovering drug targets for a disease with multiple FDA approved drugs. Weigh the pros and cons carefully. Will your project help you acquire technical skills that are translatable to the industry? If you live in a city or country that is in dire need of science policy advisors or climate crisis advocates or good science communicators, will your PhD program give you enough skills to apply to these jobs?

 

3) Is there scope for collaborations?

Collaborations are a unique way to expand into different research topics in your field, whether it’s a collaboration within your group or research with a different research group altogether. This lets you become more versatile, get a flavor of how other researchers approach their science and if nothing else, learn a new scientific topic up-close. A productive collaboration is one which will take your expertise and enhance another project, without taking too much time away from your project. Inter-lab collaborations are a great way to demonstrate your negotiating, team management and interpersonal skills. Oh, and did I mention it’s good for networking? So finding aims in your proposal early on, that are good for teaming up with other groups is a good idea, especially while conferencing.

 

4) Will it help you AND your science grow?

I will start with the science part first. Obviously, we all want to learn and become an expert in the respective field when we started off, so what do I mean by growth here? If your research topic is only going to be a repeat of your previous techniques and scientific concepts, chances are, halfway through the project, you’re going to lose interest. It is great to start off the project with something familiar, but if it isn’t exploring in areas that are uncomfortable and challenging to you, is it really worth a PhD? Test new ideas, push your boundaries and give yourself a deadline to fully delve into answering these questions. But be wary not to spend too much time and get distracted. It is good to spend the first two years (in a five-year program) to be adventurous, but if it gets too challenging it really should not be pursued at the expense of your time.

I stress on personal growth next. PhD project is a LOT of time commitment. Especially to one very specific thing, that more often than not, will consume most, if not all of your time. This means one must consider having room for co-curricular activities that will in turn be an asset for your own research project. For example, I love to read about popular science, wildlife, climate science, conservation, policies and history. My program had a structured graduate minor alongside my PhD major and I decided to study science communication for this minor. Now, I get to write, read or watch other popular forms of science, engage with community, organize local events and dissect science policies as part of my curriculum. I have also gotten opportunities where I talked about my own research to strangers and thus, honed in my craft of communicating science. All of this will ultimately reflect in your resume and you know that apart from spending long hours fine-tuning your experiments, you will leave with heaps of useful skills for future jobs. So, I would recommend finding things that compliment your science early on, this will go a long way!

 

5) Will you need a backup plan?

If you are diving into something extremely challenging, let’s say it will not only require you to learn new, field-specific techniques, but it will mean questioning the dogma – make sure you have another small project to safely rely back on. If your program has at least one first-author paper requirement for dissertation, it is imperative you sit with your supervisor and make sure you will get a paper out in time. No dogma is worth challenging at the cost of your degree!

 

These are some pointers that I thought of, from personal experience. I hope that you will find it useful and informative.