Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

Grad School- Attending A Larger Top Level Or Smaller Lower Level Institution?


bob12345

Recommended Posts

Ultimately you want to go to a lab where you're going to experience the most professional growth.  This does not necessarily mean the biggest labs at the biggest institutions (will explain below).  As someone just starting formal research training, I would go somewhere where there is good productivity, good mentorship and good collegiality amongst lab members.   My personal opinion is that those are easier to come across at small/mid-size research schools but that's not to say they can't be found in places like U of T.
 

A lot of the time the big labs that pump out high quality research also house a small army of highly capable post-docs that do their own thing and publish said papers. Postdocs come with an established skill set meaning they can hit the ground running from day 1.  In these labs, face time with the PI will likely be limited, especially if you are a MSc student.  In that regard, being in a big lab does not always equate to more productivity (publications) unless of course you are very capable from the outset or thrive under "sink or swim"-type conditions.

 

For the research I do (basic translational), I would recommend for one to do grad school in a small/mid-size lab with an "early career" PI that has shown good academic productivity.  At this stage, mentorship is equally important to developing a practical skill set and can often complement the latter, so having more opportunity to meet with your PI is key.  

Clearly going too small or working with someone too green has its pitfalls.  The key is finding a good balance.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a really good question and one that I continue to ponder myself. I did my PhD at a mid size institution, but a small lab. I was my PI's first grad student so I had the advantage of being "senior" the whole time. I'm doing a post doc now at a small institution in a small lab. 

 

When you are talking about a big school like UofT, I will assume you're also talking about working in a big lab run by a big name too.

 

Compared to my peers, I had a much closer relationship with my PI's and therefore better work life balance. I consider my PI's friends now and have spent time with them outside the lab. I like/liked both positions and rarely dread research. No one has ever asked me why I came in late, went home early, or even came in at all. In fact, I usually did my lab work (long days usually) and analyzed and wrote at home. I'm not coming in on a nice day out to write a paper- I'm going skiing/climbing/biking. Try doing that at UofT. No one has ever stole my data or tried to maneuver up the author list. My productivity for both my PhD and post doc is unusually high and in "respectable" journals (IF 4-7). The vast majority of my papers are with me as the first author. I'm only a secondary author on maybe a handful of papers.

 

On the other hand, I've never published anything in the truly outstanding journals like Nature or Science. If you get into a lab with an outstanding PI you may end up with a middle authorship on a big paper which is good. Additionally, I wonder if academic job opportunities are more plentiful when you are known as "a former student of Prof. Big Shot" as opposed to "you did your PhD where?". The other issue I have noticed (n=1) is there is less expertise in a small institution (such as the REB's) and therefore you have to deal with a more cautious group of regulatory bodies who simply do not have the experience to adequately evaluate the merits of your research. They end up being the academic equivalent to the "little man". 

 

So having said that, there are pros and cons to both. I have been happy with my journey. If I do pursue an academic position, it will be at a place with the least amount of BS to put up with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...