stephan at hannibal.psych.ucla.edu (Stephan Anagnostaras) writes:
>Unless you have two or three publications, a perfect undergraduate
>record, and perfect GRE or MCAT scores, you should rule out MD/PhD
>programs. I don't mean to discourage you if you actually have these
>qualifications, but if you don't you shouldn't consider applying to
>an MSTP program.
Will somebody please explain to me how an undergraduate is
expected to publish anything? Please disregard the Australian
email address as I am American and familiar with U.S. schools
The only way I know that an undergraduate can even be in a lab
is either by getting a lab assistant job (which doesn't lead
to any research or publications) or by taking this class which,
at UCSD, was called Bio [some number] ..it entailed some minor
research which you then had to present in order to get academic
credit (or you could opt for getting paid).
Is it very likely that such research, done by an undergrad
underneath the supervision of a number of PhD's, professors,
and postdocs, would lead to an actual *publication*?
>The above typically pay $10,000-$14,000 per year plus
>tuition and fees fellowship for a couple of years then require that you
>get a TA or RA ship. Admission requirements are (average),
>3 really good letters, lots of good research, GPA at least 3.2 (ave=3.6),
>GRE's in the 700s. If your research is really good, grades don't matter.
>Other programs have easier requirements. Shop around. Some places
>a biology degree is better, some places psychology is better, so this
>may also play into admission.
Again, how many of these PhD programs *really* expect an
undergrad to have done *lots* of good research. Why would
a professor allow an undergrad to do publishable research
when they have postdocs (and themself) to do it?
Are professors really this concerned that undergrads be
introduced to research/publishing/etc ..to the point that
they will sacrifice getting their name on a paper in favor
of the undergrad?
Just questions ..