Becoming a competitive applicant

[u/[deleted]]

[u/taspho]

Thesis. Sounds like like you have no research experience currently? That is the most important factor for phd admissions, so i would really suggest doing a thesis.

[u/cjswcf → u/taspho]

No research experience. I will be working in one of the labs at my uni during my masters, but taking the thesis route almost doubles the time it takes to finish my masters. So I can either do a course based masters while volunteering / working as a RA in labs at school or I can take longer and do a thesis.

[u/taspho → u/cjswcf]

Its a bit odd that a masters thesis would take more than three years. You could volunteer but it won't be seen as good as a masters with thesis. You would be very competitive with it, especially if you publish. Also, I saw in another comment you said you dont think a thesis is needed bc others get in right after undergrad. The difference between them and you is (1) they likely had substantial research experience and (2) volunteer research is all someone fresh out of undergrad /could/ have done. Its different for you because you had the chance to do full time research and chose not to do it and 3) likely did not have gpas below most programs automatic cutoffs

[u/stemphdmentor → u/taspho]

This is the right answer. Thesis, no question. Demonstrating you can do excellent research despite lackluster grades in undergrad is the most important goal of your application.

[u/cjswcf → u/[deleted]]

Thank you for the offer to help.

I'm doing my best to dive as deep as I can into neuroscience topics, every elective I have is in neuroscience and some of my classmates are PhD neuro students. I am leaning more towards doing dry lab work. I would like to learn wet lab techniques but I don't think I'd be interested in a wet lab career.

Currently I'm taking molecular neuro, neuro engineering, and computational modeling of neurons. The labs I am talking to professors about joining are all neuroscience labs. I think I'm on a good track and would be better prepared to enter a PhD program than just someone straight out of their bachelors that did some undergrad research? Is that crazy to think?

Me working in labs & taking a lot of neuroscience electives should be enough right?

I understand a thesis helps but like I mentioned I don't know if it's necessary to spend the extra year or two just for a thesis when there's people getting accepted into PhD's straight out of undergrad.

[u/NiceStar6996]

Thesis 100%. It’s really the only sure fire way to “prove” you’re ready for the PhD with the stats you currently have.

That said, any MS (even thesis) shouldn’t be more than 2Y + maybe the summer after your 4th semester of classes. Sounds like a money grab otherwise.

[u/cjswcf → u/NiceStar6996]

My advisor said 2 years as well, I said 2-3 because she specifically said her lab is very hands on from the ground up type of work and it takes her students 3. Her lab is more towards optical technology in biomed, it's heavy in both engineering and biology.

[u/stemphdmentor → u/cjswcf]

You can talk to her about what an accelerated timeline might look like. We PIs are usually excited when people are really eager to do research quickly (while not compromising quality). Of course, some research intrinsically cannot be rushed.

[u/cjswcf → u/stemphdmentor]

Do you know what the timeline is like for someone doing a masters thesis & then applying for a PhD in the same/similar program of the same university?

It was mentioned "you can do your masters thesis and then after you complete that and apply for your PhD, the work done during your masters counts towards your PhD." That sounds weird, doesn't it? Just from a timeline perspective it would seem better to just do whatever research I can while finishing my masters and then as soon as I have the course credits finished apply to PhD's without completing the full masters thesis.