I am supposed to meet with a PI to discuss the possibilities of joining his lab as a MSc student.
I have had one meeting with another PI last week, but it went bad. Essentially he was repulsed when I told him about my GPA and mostly, when he asked me specifically what exactly I want to get out of the MSc experience at his lab (e.g. specific instrument that I'm interested in mastering, etc.). He told me that I should know exactly my goals prior to starting a grad program and that an interest in the field isn't sufficient.
I agree, however, no matter how much literature I read in that field, I will still have that broad answer which is "I want to contribute to your current project" because as a MSc student, very little I can do in terms of research projects. Most graduate students find their passion once they start their program.
He was also repulsed when I told him that I intend to work in the industry, and I was surprised because the majority of students with higher degree decide to go to work in the industry (e.g. GSK, Pfizer, etc.). Perhaps I should have lied? But that shouldn't be the basis of our relationship as a student and a PI. There is no shame in pursuing a research degree because I intend to go to R&D. Why do most PIs make me feel that I should always answer that "I want to become an academic researcher?", because I don't.
If I made mistakes in the previous interview, please highlight them to me so I can avoid making them again for when I speak with the next PI (whose main concerns is funding). Should I not have said that my ultimate goal is to work in the industry? And how exact should I be in terms of my goals as a MSc student?
UPDATES: I met the new PI and it was an instant rapport! I clearly understand now how being genuine about your goals and educational background can serve you well in such situations.
No comments:
Post a Comment