Applying to Graduate School - Contacting Professors

When I first started this blog, I wrote some posts about the graduate school application process that are indexed here. Optimistically, I left space for more posts to be written in the future, including one about contacting potential faculty advisers. Ah, to be a first year student again, with so much time for blogging!

Obviously, my grad school application guide has been languishing for a while. But I recently received emails from two different neuroscience graduate school applicants who had questions about contacting faculty at their prospective schools, so I guess it's about time to write this post.

In general, I think it's good to contact faculty before submitting your graduate school applications. This is especially true if you're applying to a program based on the strength of one or two labs -- if those labs aren't taking new students, you might not want to spend the time and fees on that school. I recommend writing to faculty even if you're not committed to a particular lab, though. If you make a good impression via email or phone conversations with a professor, you are more likely to get invited for an interview.

Read on for tips about how to reach out to faculty at potential graduate programs.

Whom Should I Contact?

Most people apply to multiple graduate programs, and I strongly recommend identifying multiple faculty of interest at each school where you plan to apply. That adds up to lots of potential advisers. You don't need to email all of them! Resist the urge to write a form letter and send it out en masse. Professors are smart; they can tell whether you put thought into your message. Plus, they talk to each other, and if they all get identical emails from the same student, they will realize that you're just spamming the entire department.

My advice is to contact professors if you feel like you actually have something to discuss with them. If your previous research experience is similar to their lab's focus, you should be able to have a scholarly conversation about their work. If you're less experienced, but really enthusiastic about their lab, you should be able to convey your reasons for feeling that way. If you're not planning to work in their subfield, but you have a networking reason for contacting them (maybe they collaborate with one of your undergraduate advisers, or you met them at a conference one time, or...), you should be able to remind them of who you are and how you're connected. Don't write to someone if you have nothing to say beyond "I'm applying to the graduate program at [University X] and I really, really want to get in!"

What Should I Say?

Once you've decided to contact a professor at your prospective graduate program, it can be intimidating to craft that initial email. You don't need to sweat it as much as an application essay, but it is important to make a good first impression. I recommend following these guidelines:

1. Be clear and concise. Professors are busy people who receive a ton of email. You want them to be able to read, comprehend, and respond to your message as quickly and easily as possible. Keep your first message down to a few short paragraphs.

2. Identify yourself. As I said above, professors get a ton of email. Make sure they know who you are and why you're writing to them. Give your email an informative subject line and state that you're applying to their graduate program at the beginning of your message. This distinguishes you from undergrads taking their lecture course, collaborators asking for reagents, random eccentrics who stumbled upon the lab website, and any number of other people who might send unsolicited emails.

3. Ask questions. You want to give your potential adviser a reason to respond to you. If you're interested in joining their lab, let them know, and ask whether they have room for new graduate students. If you're interested in learning more about their research, ask specific questions that can be answered in a few sentences (something like, "Can you explain why you used the tail suspension test instead of the forced swim test in your most recent J. Neurosci. paper?" and not something like, "Can you tell me more about your research?"). On the other hand, don't make up a question just for the sake of asking a question -- as I recommended above, you should only be contacting professors if you actually have something to talk about.

4. Be available and accommodating. You're asking this person for a favor; make it easy for them to help you out. It's nice to offer to continue the conversation by phone if they'd prefer that to email, and to offer to send them additional information about you (CV, transcripts, etc.) if they'd like to learn more about your background.

5. Proofread! Run spellcheck. Avoid text-esque abbreviations and emoticons. If you're worried about your writing, ask a friend to read over your message before you send it. In general, you want to come off as intelligent and thoughtful, so try to avoid glaring errors. This isn't as formal as an application essay, but you should still put some effort into it.

Examples

Back in 2007 when I was applying to graduate schools, I wrote the following message to a potential faculty adviser. I would do it differently now, but I wanted to give you a real example, and also to show that even though this email was far from brilliant (marvel at my complete ignorance of neuroendocrinology!), it got a positive response. The professor in question later chatted with me on the phone, and I ended up receiving an offer of admission from this program (although I can't say for sure that my conversation with her had anything to do with it!).

To: [Prof of Interest]
From: Laura Mariani
Subject: Prospective graduate student

Dear [Prof of Interest],

I'm applying to the PhD program in neuroscience at [University] for fall 2008. When I read the research profiles of [University] faculty, I was drawn to your work. I have long been interested in neuroscience, but your research on how the brain interacts with the reproductive system strikes me as a new way to approach the subject, studying more of the whole animal rather than restricting the focus to the brain. My research experience is primarily in cellular/developmental neuroscience, studying mouse models of the developmental disorders Rett syndrome and tuberous sclerosis, but I hope to explore other aspects of neuroscience in graduate school.

I am writing to ask if you are currently accepting new graduate students. If so, I would love to hear more about your work (the [author names] paper listed as being in press on your CV sounded particularly interesting). I would also be happy to tell you more about myself and my background.

Thanks for your time, and I hope to hear from you soon!

Sincerely,
Laura

If I had to do it again today, here's what I would write:

To: [Prof of Interest]
From: Laura Mariani
Subject: Prospective graduate student

Dear [Prof of Interest],

I'm applying to the PhD program in neuroscience at [University] for fall 2008, and I'm especially interested in your lab. My previous research experience is in mouse models of neurodevelopmental disorders (Rett syndrome and tuberous sclerosis), but I am also interested in neuroendocrinology.

I would like to learn more about your work, particularly your recent paper on [hormone stuff]. My experience working with [developmental stuff] taught me [something relevant to endocrinology], so I am especially intrigued by the connections between the endocrine system and neural development. Is this something that I could explore in a rotation with your lab? Are you currently accepting new graduate students?

If you have the time, I would love to discuss this with you by email or by phone (you can reach me at [number]). I am also happy to tell you more about myself and my background, and can provide copies of my CV and transcripts upon request.

Thanks for your time, and I hope to hear from you soon!

Sincerely,
Laura

The revised version doesn't sound as warm and fuzzy because I tried to eliminate "filler" text. It also makes some intelligent connections between my own background and her research. Of course, back in 2007 I didn't know enough to make those kinds of connections -- I've actually learned a few things in grad school! Still, I think it's best to have something specific to talk about, and asking a question about possible rotation projects makes for a better conversation starter than "I would love to hear more about the stuff in this paper."

Both emails are short, focused, and give the professor an easy question to answer in her reply. They also make it clear that I put some thought into the message before sending it, because I comment specifically upon her research program and how it relates to my own interests.

Of course, neither of these examples is a perfect template, and you should let your own interests and priorities shape your interactions with a potential adviser. Even so, I hope that this post makes the process of writing that first email a bit less overwhelming.

SfN!

I'm in the Washington Convention Center right now! No time to write a blog post (who knows when there will be...?!) but I'm tweeting up a storm, which is unusual for me but has been fun so far. Stay strong, laptop battery!

B.A.N.T.E.R. at SfN

You know you love neuro-tweetups, even if you don't know what their acronyms mean. (Society for Neuroscience on Twitter: rocking awkward acronyms since "SfN the meh.") Mark your calendars!



(via Dr. Becca)

OIST DNC 2011 Write-up

OIST has put up an article about the Developmental Neurobiology Course (which they shorten to DNC -- it always makes me think "Democratic National Convention") that I attended in July. I'm quoted! There are also some great pictures of the students and labs, including the one pasted below (that's me in the green tank top!).



And, there's a video of us messing around in the lab! I think there should be more science-themed reality TV. Wouldn't you watch a whole hour of people doing experiments (and getting frustrated when they don't work)?



I haven't seen any information about a 2012 DNC, but I will definitely keep you posted about any future neuroscience courses at OIST. The 2011 OISTers are already planning our SfN meetup!

More advice for new grad students

Today I spotted a couple of links that might be of interest to all the science n00bs in the house: some tips from faculty, to go along with all the advice that I like to spout off around here.

Dr. Free-Ride's Advice for the new grad student

Prof-Like Substance's letter to new grad students

Are you new to grad school? How's it going?

GTPases in the blogosphere!

During a recent chat with my adviser, she casually mentioned reading about a new study on "the GTPase blog." To which I replied, "There's a GTPase blog?!" I think she was pleased to know more than I did about some aspect of science blogging. So, cheers to my adviser for inspiring this post!

GTPases: From the Bench is a blog by Dr. Anna Delprato that focuses on all things GTPase. Since I'm doing my dissertation on a small G protein (the coolest small G protein... but of course, I'm biased), I'm obviously all over this. In addition to blogging on peer-reviewed research, Dr. Delprato posts information about upcoming conferences that might be of interest to fellow GTPase enthusiasts. You can also follow Dr. Delprato on Twitter (@Gproteins). I admire her dedication to this protein family, and look forward to reading future posts!

On Choosing a Lab

Yesterday the lovely Ragamuffin shared some of her concerns about choosing lab rotations in this candid post. After composing an epic comment on the subject, I decided that maybe I should turn it into a post over here. The new neuroscience PhD students hit Emory this week (after a highly successful retreat last weekend -- we formed a five level human pyramid, if that gives any indication of how awesome it was) and are starting to think about their rotations, too, so this seems like a good time to write about it.

So, for all the science n00bs out there, I present: Laura's Helpful Hints for Choosing a PhD Lab. As a fourth year student (yiiikes), I've had some time to think about what works for me and what does not. But, I should mention that everyone has different preferences, and that the culture at your institution may make it more or less difficult to find co-mentors, collaborators, etc., so this advice might not fit your individual situation. Also, as I'm sure the more advanced scientists in our midst will mention, I'm not much more than a n00b myself, and may lack the perspective that a more experienced researcher can give you. So don't take my word for it; get lots of feedback.

Helpful Hint #1: Think Outside the Box. A lot of people come into graduate school with several years of experience as an undergraduate researcher or a research technician. They have honed their skills in a few techniques and feel comfortable within their subfield. Knowing this, they are forced to decide whether to stick with the same thing in grad school, or try something new. I would strongly encourage all new grad students to try new things, especially since most PhD programs in the life sciences require several lab rotations. Even if you're 99% sure that you want to study the same thing you've been doing since your undergrad days, it can't hurt to get exposed to new ideas in a rotation. You may find that you love animal behavior studies after doing all your training in cell culture, or that you find electrophysiology really satisfying after years spent on fMRI, or... whatever. You're in graduate school to learn, so it would be a shame to spend your PhD years doing more of the same.

Helpful Hint #2: The Science Almost Doesn't Matter. This is a weird piece of advice, especially in combination with Hint #1, but hear me out. I've encouraged you to try something new, even if it's outside your comfort zone. But what if you try it, and do your PhD in it, and realize that you want to spend your scientific career doing something else? OMG, the pressure!!! Well... chill out, because you don't have to decide right now. In fact, if you want a career in academic research, you're going to need to do postdoctoral research after you get that PhD. Choosing your postdoc lab will be a major decision, because most PIs base their independent research on the training they received as postdocs. But it is generally expected that scientists will switch gears between PhD and postdoctoral research -- you shouldn't do a postdoc focused on the exact same thing as your dissertation. Again, these training experiences are meant to teach you new things, so you're going to need to keep expanding your scientific horizons. Thus, if your PhD lab works on something that you don't really want to study forever... that's okay! You're going to do something else as a postdoc, and that's going to be way more important in shaping your future as an independent investigator. Obviously it's helpful if some of the techniques or concepts can carry over between PhD and postdoc, but you have a lot of freedom to change course. That said: this Hint is called "The Science Almost Doesn't Matter." It matters in that you have to find it interesting. If you're not genuinely curious about the answer to your research questions, it will be tough to keep working on them for the next 5+ years.

Helpful Hint #3: The Training Environment Really, REALLY Matters. The first two Hints were all about how you're here to be trained, damn it, so you should come prepared to learn a bunch of new stuff and not worry too much about the specifics. This Hint is about the "training environment," which is a catchall for your mentor's training style and the overall lab dynamics. As you consider a potential lab, you need to determine whether you're going to be able to effectively learn a bunch of new stuff in this environment. Things to consider: Is the PI a jerk? Are your labmates jerks? Does it bother you to work with jerks, or can you handle it as long as the group keeps churning out awesome data? Obviously, each person has their own definition of "jerk," but for me, it boils down to: if I have really, really screwed something up, can I handle the thought of walking into my PI's office/labmate's cube to come clean about it? Because... you are gonna screw up, eventually, and you need to be able to recover from it without being completely crushed. Other things to consider: Are you being handed a project to complete, or do you have some leeway to develop your own ideas? Do you want to learn more than bench techniques (teaching, grant writing, service, etc.)? Is the PI cool with you spending some of your time on that? Different faculty have different opinions about how much freedom to give their trainees. And, finally, you should consider the really tricky stuff, like how much funding the lab has, whether you'll be expected/required to secure your own funding, and even whether an assistant prof is going to get tenure (and what the plan is if they don't), or whether a more established prof would move the lab elsewhere if they got a job offer. Talking about those last few things can get uncomfortable, but for me, if I don't feel comfortable asking someone about hard topics, I don't really want to work for them. (Although, I did not actually ask my adviser all of these things before I started working for her. I didn't think to ask!) If you don't want to go there with the PI, you can ask other lab members about this stuff (and I recommend doing so anyway, to test the waters and see if everyone's on the same page!).

Helpful Hint #4: Don't Playa Hate; Collaborate. (Runner-up title for this Hint: "Stop, Collaborate and Listen.") Although The Training Environment Really, REALLY Matters, your mentor's lab does not have to be the end-all, be-all of your PhD experience. Maybe you've considered Hints #1-3, and your lab of interest measures up pretty well, but is lacking in a few areas. Maybe the research is interesting, but everything they do is in vitro, and you want training in animal models, too. Maybe the PI is an awesome new assistant professor, and you want to do some experiments that require the resources of a well-funded, well-established lab. If there's another lab at your institution (or a nearby institution) that has what you're looking for, collaboration could be the answer. This is something that I think can vary a lot between universities, but thankfully, I've found Emory to be extremely conducive to collaborations. I know several grad students here with two co-advisers (and one with three!), which can be tricky to navigate but also incredibly helpful for certain projects. While I have only one formal adviser, I have gotten a lot of help from the faculty on my dissertation committee and from other labs in our department. This includes access to equipment and reagents, training in new techniques, and an open door policy for times when I want to bounce ideas off an expert in a topic outside of my adviser's expertise. Your university is full of brilliant, successful scientists, and you should develop relationships with as many of them as you can. This is especially important if you're applying for fellowships and need multiple letters of recommendation -- yes, your DGS can write one for you, but I think a letter makes much more impact when it comes from someone who has really seen you in action as a scientist, whether that's collecting awesome data in their lab or designing clever experiments in their office.

Helpful Hint #5: Communicate. This Hint should be applied in combination with Hints #1-4. You should be very forthcoming about what you're hoping to get out of your PhD experience, what you need from your adviser, what your questions/concerns are, and what you're currently unsure about but hoping to figure out as you go along. Hopefully, your potential adviser will be equally forthcoming about his/her expectations, mentoring style, and resources. Ask about previous grad students, how their projects were chosen and developed over time, and what they're up to now. Assess whether the PI has rules that everyone is expected for follow, or whether they are more flexible about adjusting their training style to the individual. Discuss their philosophy on how your progress will be measured as you work toward your degree, the way work is divided among lab members, the number/type of publications you're expected to write, conferences that you'll attend, classes that you'll take, and anything else that you think might be relevant to your training experience. Ultimately, you're not going to figure everything out during a few early conversations, but you'll get a sense of whether you think the PI is being reasonable or not. Frequent, effective communication is critical in a mentor/trainee relationship: know what is expected of you, do your best to achieve it, and figure out how you'll address the problem if an expectation can't be met.

I think I've spouted off enough for one day. New grad students, I hope you find at least some of this to be helpful. As a neurotic over-thinker, I spent a lot of time agonizing about which grad school to attend, which rotations to do, and which lab to join, and I think it worked out well in the end. But I also think that if I'd made different decisions, I would still have been okay. So, I guess the last Hint is: Just Roll With It. Whatever lab you join, you're going to experience some success and some discouragement and some mind-boggling confusion and some cringe-inducing failure. Welcome to grad school! We'll get through this.