<p>Now I am a junior in engineering and aiming to apply for grad school next year. I am having a hard time about which choice would be better. I have been admitted to both research group. </p>
<p>1) Very Famous professor. One of the most famous professor in the department. Published around 200-300 papers, recieved numerous academic award, got alot of articles about his research in newspapers and professional journals, had sponsored research of over $3M total. I am okay with his research group however it is very theoretical and might seems too complicated for me. However I am okay with it, the topic seems interesting enough. I think one of the main reason why I am interested is because he is famous.</p>
<p>2) An Assistant Professor. Has a research idea that I REALLY REALLY LIKE. Like it alot more than my first choice, however he is still new and young. Only published around 15-20 papers. </p>
<p>Which choice should I choose? Which one will help me get into better Grad School?</p>
<p>I would go with #2. That’s not even a close call. Research is a self-driven endeavor. The more you actually care about your topic, the better you will do. What you don’t want to do is end up on a research project that you’re blase about.</p>
<p>All my friends that are unhappy with grad school are those which are working on projects they don’t enjoy. Not saying that everyone that works on a project that isn’t their favorite is unhappy with grad school; just that it seems you’re more likely to be unhappy working in a lab doing work you aren’t interested in.</p>
<p>My vote for number 2. I very well respected professor will probably recruit post docs to do his bidding (imagine that scene from the wizard of oz).</p>
<h1>2 no brainer. You want someone who’s a better teacher than a researcher for an advisor, actually. Yes, the person needs to be an excellent researcher in order to pass down his knowledge but he’s gotta be able to teach well so you CAN learn from him.</h1>
<p>Also, check out the famous professor’s schedule. With his papers and research, I imagine that he’ll be too busy to meet with students as often they need to see him (I’m talking more than just one face-to-face meeting per semester). He’s not going to have time to “nurture” you as a researcher/scholar. With that, then what’s the point of graduate school?</p>
<p>I would go with number #1 and not risk having to change labs after a year or so because your advisor either ran out money or left the University.</p>
<p>Issue here is topic of interest for undergraduate research right?</p>
<p>If both are okay advisers, I’d say #1. You’d only be working for a year (?). Unless you can get a publication out of #2 prof, #1 prof’s name will help a lot in the grad application process. Networks are especially needed when applying to grad school. It helps if your potential adviser respects and trusts your current adviser; they’re more likely to accept you as their student.</p>
<p>Now if this were an issue for a grad adviser, I’d go with what people said above about #2.</p>
<p>I think this is a tough call, but I’d go with #2. It seems more likely that you will do a noteworthy job on your research if you are very excited about it. Also, grad schools will be interested in your research. You’ll be writing about in in your essays and applications. You’ll certainly come across as a more serious student if you have actually been engaged in and inspired by your research, and you’ll have a better chance of finding a good fit in a grad school. It’s hard to fake enthusiasm, and with #2 you won’t have to.</p>
<p>I think you should be happy you have this decision. The only “better” situation would be to really love the work the famous professor does.</p>
<p>You’ll be fine either way.</p>
<p>Sometimes working with an up-and-comer has its benefits because the PI will motivated to make a name for hiimself. The established guy, however, has a proven track record and you will get your papers. </p>
<p>Either choice will help you, but I do think #2 is the better choice. If you are personally interested in the research topic, you will be much more motivated and will get much more out of the experience. Your enthusiasm will also come across as you write your applications for graduate school and in grad school interviews. </p>
<p>With Choice #2, I suspect that you will also be able to develop a much closer relationship with the PI (who you will be asking to write a letter of recommendation for you). The very famous professor will almost certainly have too many demands upon his time to get to know you well, and you will probably be reporting to someone at least one or two levels down from the “big name.” A personalized enthusiastic LOR from the assistant professor will help you a whole lot more than a ho-hum “yes, this person worked on my research team” letter from the big name.</p>
<p>FYI, this thread was started a year ago. I’m not sure the OP is still interested in the answer to this question, although certainly the dilemma is a real one for many grad students.</p>
<p>Is there any reason not to go with the famous advisor, similar to what the original OP described, if you are genuinely interested in the famous advisor’s work?</p>
<p>The one I’m particulary interested in has produced loads of PhDs over the years who have gone on to be sucessful.</p>
<p>By the way I think the original question is a tough call. I’ve known too many students who go with an assistant professor only to switch labs or even go unfunded. This can wreck havoc on student’s grad school career.</p>