Opinions on UCSF Tetrad, UC Berkeley MCB, Stanford Biology

Graduate School
1

<p>So, I know there are a bunch of these types of threads floating around, but I was hoping to get whatever thoughts/opinions I could. Incoming wall of text!</p>

<p>As the interview season is now over for me, I find myself having to decide which school I want to spend the next 5-6 years at. I have it currently narrowed down to UC Berkeley, UCSF, and Stanford. Each school has its pros and cons for me, which I will briefly list: </p>

<p>UC Berkeley
Pros:

  • has a great computational “emphasis” (i.e. sorta like a minor)
  • great campus
  • decent amount of faculty that I would be interested in working with
  • ease of access for doing xray crystallography (something I might be interested in learning)
    Cons:
  • I used to live in Berkeley, a change of scenery would be nice</p>

<p>UCSF
Pros:

  • felt more close knit
  • lots of interesting faculty
  • cool workshop with a 3d printer!
  • beer hour with faculty!
    Cons:
  • no undergrads, teaching experience would be only teaching first year grad students
  • no undergrad classes to take (e.g. computer programming, etc)
  • small campus (Mission Bay campus)</p>

<p>Stanford
Pros:

  • Higher stipend!
  • not as many labs I would be interested in rotating through (Biology Home) as the other schools, am unsure how easy it would be to rotate/switch Home programs. Have heard mixed things regarding this
  • they’re pushing for degree completion by 5.5 years, you only have 2 quarters to do rotations
  • nice campus
  • has medical school + other things on campus = ease of collaboration?
    Cons:
  • 2nd year of this new attempt to accelerate graduation
  • didn’t get much of a chance to interact with the students, no idea what they’re like</p>

<p>For what it’s worth, I don’t have any specific interests, just basic molecular cell biology/bacterial pathogenesis. </p>

<p>I realize that this is something I need to decide for myself based on my preferences and feelings on which school would offer the faculty I would most be interested in working with, but any thoughts or opinions would surely be welcomed and helpful. </p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

2

<p>I interviewed at all three of these schools this year (although for different programs, in particular BioE at Berkeley/UCSF, iPQB at UCSF and Biomed. informatics at Stanford), so I’ll give you my thoughts.</p>

<p>Berkeley-</p>

<p>I agree on all your “good” points on Berkeley (although I know nothing about x-ray crystallography). I’m also interested in the computational designated emphasis, I think it’s a nice qualification to have. If you are interested in doing work in industry at some point they also have a Management of Technology certificate you can complete that supposedly improves your chances of landing jobs in that sector. I think it’s open to most students at Berkeley.</p>

<p>UCSF -</p>

<p>When I was there, they mentioned that you can teach undergrad courses at USF, if that is an interest of yours. I’m not sure if you can count this towards your teaching requirement (if there is one for TETRAD), but it might be worth looking into. Also, at least for the iPQB, it seems that students are allowed to take courses at other schools including Berkeley and Stanford, so if you wanted to take an undergrad programming course I think you could probably do that (although it might be a hassle travelling around for it).</p>

<p>Stanford - </p>

<p>I felt similarly that they did not have as many faculty that I would like to work with. Don’t really have much else to add.</p>

<p>Best of luck!</p>

3

<p>

Last year when I was making my decision, I thought this would be an issue – I thought I preferred to be around some undergrads. Ultimately, I narrowed down my schools to Berkeley and UCSF, and the huge size of Berkeley’s undergraduate population just seemed too daunting. In addition, since coming to UCSF, I’ve experienced how nice it is to be at the center of the professors’ attention. When Tetrad professors have teaching responsibilities, those responsibilities are to teach YOU, the first-years! </p>

<p>As busterbluth mentioned, if you’re gung ho about undergraduate education, you can teach at USF (and teach entire lessons, not just TA!), though that would not fulfill the one-quarter TA requirement Tetrad has. Incidentally, you have the choice to TA non-Tetrad courses at UCSF, but I’ve found the system of TA-ing the first-year classes to be great. Getting to know everyone one class year above/below you is certainly a major contributor to Tetrad being so close-knit.</p>

<p>

Being in the UC system means Berkeley resources are open to you. Also, in the way of classes, though UCSF does not have these other departments, opportunities to learn things outside biology exist on-campus, though just not always through formal coursework. And at least for programming, I’m actually able to sign up for a minicourse on programming with an emphasis on bioinformatics applications.</p>

<p>

This seems to be a common con. And since your interview was with a large Biosciences department, I expect you had one of the better-case scenarios. For me, I wasn’t attracted to the research of ANY faculty in the Biochemistry program; the program’s coursework was just most in line with my interests. I don’t profess to know how changing home programs works (perhaps it’s just simple paperwork), but the division of Biosciences at Stanford into mostly tiny departments with way too much interrelatedness has always annoyed me.</p>

<p>

You know, it’s funny. If I had just gone by faculty I was most interested in working with, I would be at Berkeley. I would argue that just as important is going with your gut. At some point (dangerously close to April 15th) last year, I decided not to rationalize choosing one fantastic school over another and went with my intuition instead. All the unconscious considerations comparing the faculty, students, environment, etc. at UCSF and Berkeley eventually pointed me to UCSF, and I haven’t regretted my decision once. Your gut tends not to lead you astray.</p>

<p>

Hehehe!</p>

<p>Anyway, if you want any elaborations on my opinions of these three schools, please feel free to PM me!</p>

4

<p>

Obviously I don’t go to Stanford, but my understanding from someone I know who does go there is that it’s possible to change home programs, but it’s not that trivial. Perhaps this varies from home program to home program, though.</p>

5

<p>i interviewed at stanford micro and immuno. They seemed to suggest that home program is not that restrictive. The main requirement is that your FIRST rotation has to be in your home program. From there you are free to explore.</p>

6

<p>^Free to rotate elsewhere, yes. But actually declaring a lab outside your home program, at least for my friend, was not totally a snap. Not that it’s impossible, just that it’s not trivial.</p>

7

<p>Thanks for the replies thus far!</p>

<p>buster: That Manage of Technology certificate that you mention sounds pretty cool. Not sure if I’ll end up in industry or not, but it wouldn’t hurt to obtain one. And yea, I’ve heard about that USF teaching program as well. I guess it was more the convenience and ease of access to auditing undergraduate courses that I would be missing out on. Traveling to UC Berkeley for courses would be doable I suppose, just not ideal. </p>

<p>krypton: That’s a good point! I completely forgot that not having undergraduates means that the professors would also not be as busy teaching them. Do you know if the USF thing allows for TA’ing? I am not so sure that I would be quite prepared to teach entire lessons to start off. And I agree that teaching the first year grad students seems like it would be fun/useful, but it would just be different from the experience TA’ing a class of 30 or so. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Can you elaborate a bit more on this? Would they be more like 1-2 day seminars? And also, how long is your minicourse on programming? What language is it in if I may ask? </p>

<p>I agree with the Stanford perspective; it seems weird to have so many different departments that have a lot of interrelatedness. Some professors have joint appointments in departments, but it seems like most of them don’t, thus making it difficult if you want to do your thesis in a lab outside of your home group. </p>

<p>From what I’ve heard, funding is only provided if you’re in a lab that is within your home program. If you want to do your thesis in a different home program, you would have to switch into that program and fulfill that program’s graduation/course requirements.</p>

8

<p>Re: switching home programs-
I have a couple friends in the Biology program that had to switch home programs. Of course, to be honest, the department would rather you didn’t. They accepted you, covered your first year, they’d like to keep you. But people do it, and not that infrequently. Ideally, you can get the lab of interest to be co-listed, but I think there are limits to how many programs a PI can be co-listed in, so that’s not always possible. Alternatively, you can split your project between two labs, having your main lab in your department but conducting parts of your project with another lab. It happens pretty frequently within my department, but I’m not sure if there would be barriers to doing this between departments. And if none of that works, you could always just collaborate, which is strongly encouraged and there are grants available for graduate students doing inter-departmental projects (Bio-X).
All that having been said, if there aren’t really too many PIs that you’re interested in here at Stanford, then the point is moot, and you should go somewhere where people do the work you want do to!</p>

9

<p>

I would check out the following links:
<a href=“http://career.ucsf.edu/pff/assets/USF-PUMT-Teaching.pdf[/url]”>http://career.ucsf.edu/pff/assets/USF-PUMT-Teaching.pdf&lt;/a&gt;
<a href=“http://career.ucsf.edu/pff/assets/USF-positions.pdf[/url]”>http://career.ucsf.edu/pff/assets/USF-positions.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>It seems like the “lab instructor” position (“ideal for those with no teaching experience”) is akin to TAing a lab course. And I guess teaching at USF can replace the TA requirement if you would rather not dedicate time to doing both.</p>

<p>Also, as I mentioned previously, if you TA a non-Tetrad course at UCSF (for instance, a class in the School in the Pharmacy), that would be more similar to “the experience TA’ing a class of 30 or so” (actually, much larger than 30…). And the material would be new.</p>

<p>

I’m referring to the minicourses you take third quarter. These are 2- to 3-week-long classes (sometimes meeting as frequently as every day for several hours) emphasizing a lot of concepts in specific fields in a short-ish amount of time. The one I mentioned teaches Python, though I’m also taking a “Statistical Methods for Array Data” minicourse that teaches R, and there’s another class that teaches Matlab.</p>

<p>By the way, if I may ask, because I’m curious to know, why do you think you would greatly prefer having access to a wide range of courses the way you would at an institution with an undergraduate program? This is the second time I’ve heard a recruit raise this concern now, while I don’t know any current students who miss not having non-biology courses available (of course, maybe that’s why we all chose UCSF). Do you simply have more academic interests than you had time to satisfy during undergrad? My personal feeling is just that, once you get into the thick of thesis work, classes become an unwelcome distraction. (The first-years only recently celebrated the end of having to take classic, lecture-style courses, perhaps for the rest of our lives, hehe!)</p>

10

<p>krypton: Thanks! Those were very helpful. Looks like a decent way to earn supplemental income as well! Although it does look pretty time-consuming.</p>

<p>Hm, I guess I’m not sure if I would feel very comfortable TA’ing a large group of other graduate students (e.g. pharmacy students) unless it’s a topic that I’m very well-versed in or have taken the class before. </p>

<p>Those mini-courses sound pretty awesome; may I ask how many you can take? And to answer your question, I’m mainly looking for more computer programming courses to get some more background in that. But just having the option to sit in a random philosophy course or something would be nice, although as you mentioned, I’ll probably be too mired up in research to really have time to do that.</p>

11

<p>The third quarter is divided into three sections (each section being three weeks long), and you take one minicourse per section.</p>

<p>You can continue to take minicourses every year during the third quarter if you want, but 1st-years in all the PhD programs get priority for enrollment (since they’re required to take three of them).</p>

12

<p>Ah, I see. Thanks krypton!</p>

13

<p>Just as a side note: it’s pretty unusual for a graduate student to take a “random philosophy course.” In many programs, you have to get permission to take a course that is not directly related to your research. Math and computer science courses will likely be allowed, but philosophy? Probably not unless you can relate it to your work. Remember that the program and later your PI will be paying for your tuition. It may seem free from your perspective, but it’s not.</p>

14

<p>Ah, yes. I didn’t actually mean to enroll in the course, but to just audit it for a lecture or two depending on how interesting it seems to me. I remember there was this course at Berkeley, Physics for Future Presidents, that I always wanted to sit in on but was never able to due to schedule conflicts. So being able to crash a couple lectures would be nice, but not necessary.</p>

15

<p>I interviewed at UCSF and Stanford, among other places, and I’m 99.9% sure I’m going to UCSF in the fall (for iPQB).</p>

<p>The lack of other departments was an issue for me. I’m interdisciplinary, so being surrounded by herds of biologists (and only biologists) is probably not ideal. They’ve brought in faculty with backgrounds in various engineering/quantitative disciplines, but one person in a specialty is not the same as a department. And I know UCSF has lost faculty over this issue - not enough collaborators around, or not enough fellow engineers to talk shop with.</p>

<p>However, it seemed like there was a strong collaborative spirit. Faculty were doing legitimate joint projects - not just splitting up the work and going home, but trying to figure stuff out together. That’s my style, but it isn’t true everywhere. (Stanford might have had this, but there seemed to be isolated patches of people working on similar problems in different departments, which was a little weird. Also, Stanford rejected me twice, post-interview - I was too biology for BioE, and too engineer-y for Systems Biology. Which makes me just right for iPQB, I suppose.)</p>

<p>As others have said, there is always the option to take courses at Berkeley or Stanford. I know that BioE is joint between UCSF and Berkeley, with classes split between the two, so it can’t be impossible to manage (annoying, yes, but they’re both right next to Muni/BART). I might end up doing that if I decide I need a hardcore probability class. Stanford would be worse, but the Caltrain is quite convenient for the trip. (Would need a darn good reason to do it, though!)</p>

<p>Personally, I’m not that worried about the lack of random undergrad classes. I had a pretty good liberal arts education in college, and I liked it. But now, if I really felt the need to take Philosophy 101, I could go onto iTunes U and download lectures at my leisure - no permission needed, no paperwork, and genuinely free. Maybe being several years out of undergrad helps on this point.</p>

<p>And on the specific topic of computational courses, I can assure you that they exist - I’m going for a PhD in Bioinformatics. I’m not sure how easy it is to take courses outside your track, but I hope it’s not hard; I’d like to take a Tetrad course or two.</p>

<p>Also, there are some opportunities to work with high school students - I hope to get involved with their iGEM team, if I can manage it, and I believe there are other outreach programs.</p>

16

<p>

That is definitely possible. I don’t know whether you will run into any issues if you try to take the classes for credit, but we had listeners in our classes this past year, and sometimes random post-docs and graduate students would just sit in on classes when their PIs were lecturing.</p>

17

<p>Hm, that’s a good point. It’d be nice to take some iPQB or whatever else may be available on campus. Leaning heavily towards UCSF over Stanford now! </p>

<p>Hey krypton, I shot you a PM with some questions. If you have some time, would you mind answering them. Thanks!</p>

18

<p>After narrowing down my options, I am also choosing between UCSF Tetrad and Berkeley MCB. It’s such a difficult decision and I’m glad to find that I am not alone in making it. I wonder if any of us interviewed together…
My interests are in genetics / genomics and I hope to join a synthetic biology lab. As such, I’m looking for a place that can give me general molecular bio and genetics training along with quantitative tools and researchers studying synthetic and mathematical bio. Fortunately, (and unfortunately when it comes to choosing) both UCSF and Berkeley offer these, albeit each with its own strengths. I’ll list my observations (though some are repeating what others have said) and I would appreciate any comments or even corrections to my perceptions.</p>

<p>I didn’t apply to Stanford so I can’t comment there.</p>

<p>–Berkeley–</p>

<pre><code>Pros:
</code></pre>

<p>*The DE in Comp Bio is very appealing, not only because of the in-class training, but because of the comp bio seminars ([Center</a> for Computational Biology Calendar](<a href=“http://events.berkeley.edu/index.php/calendar/sn/ccb.html]Center”>Events at UC Berkeley)) monthly student seminars (with catered dinner, yay!) and annual comp bio retreat that draw together engineers, mathematicians and biologists to interact on a regular basis.
*The campus is beautiful, easy to get around, and the weather is better than in San Fran
*There are several labs that interest me
*Lawrence Berkeley Lab is right there
*Synberc, a synthetic biology organization, is headed there (also affiliated with UCSF)
*I received a fellowship at Berkeley, which doesn’t give more money, but is a nice honor</p>

<pre><code>Cons:
</code></pre>

<p>*Lots of undergrads
*No medical school</p>

<p>–UCSF–</p>

<pre><code>Pros:
</code></pre>

<p>*The tetrad group is small so there would be a lot of individualized attention for each student
*No undergrads
*Great medical school associated with the school
*Mission Bay buildings are ridiculously nice, new and fancy-feeling
*UCSF is VERY well funded by NIH
*Flexible structure allows students to take classes and interact with other programs - I’ve talked to faculty here and they say you can audit classes outside of your program
*good-sized group of people and a very collegial atmosphere</p>

<pre><code>Cons:
</code></pre>

<p>*Quantitative biology group small, not yet developed
*One of the best synth bio people (Voigt) just left for MIT
*No real campus at mission bay - the area is pretty empty and out of the way
*UCSF Tetrad and iPQB websites have hardly any info so it’s harder to get a feel for the programs and what is provided. This, however, only factors in as a con in deciding</p>

<p>Aside from these points, there are also some intangibles about the schools. This is going to sound silly but… Visiting UCSF felt very ‘elite’ like I was part of something special and really cool. Everyone seemed amazingly smart and immersed in their research. The faculty were not only biologists, but really cared about - how to put this? - the philosophy of science. It was down right inspiring.
Berkeley had a much more laid back feel to it. Maybe since the department is so much bigger it was harder to get as intimate of a feel for the place.</p>

<p>There are also some outside influences clouding my judgment:
I’ve heard that UCSF students are very competitive and cut-throat but I didn’t get this feeling when visiting. Has anyone experienced this?</p>

<p>I also get a reaction of amazement by interviewees and students at other schools that I got into UCSF. Is it so much rarer to get into than say, Berkeley? When I tell people I am considering both schools, some can’t believe I would pick Berkeley over UCSF and I don’t know where this amazement with UCSF is coming from.</p>

<p>I’m also concerned about living in San Fran and commuting to UCSF - is it affordable to rent and is public transportation good enough to do daily? I have a pet and can’t live on campus.</p>

<p>If I follow the advice to ‘go with my gut feeling’ then I should go to UCSF. But if I follow my research interests and academic best fit, I should go to Berkeley. Choosing between two great schools is the best problem to have, but it is a TOUGH problem!</p>

19

<p>

Yep. Pretty aggravating. :P</p>

<p>

I didn’t experience this at any of the schools I visited. Competition and cutthroatness, if they happen at all, happen on a per-lab basis; they are not characteristic of either Berkeley or UCSF as a whole. I myself have observed here at UCSF only friendliness and, as blueroses67 put it, “strong collaborative spirit.”</p>

<p>

Most students living off-campus bike to UCSF, which seems to work for them. Because Mission Bay is still newly developed, public transportation hasn’t yet extensively pervaded the area, making Mission Bay a somewhat inconvenient spot for getting to / coming from other parts of the city (where public transportation is otherwise great). However, there are the weekday UCSF shuttles that bring you to several different parts of the city (some students choose housing based on proximity to the shuttles’ routes), and a light rail DOES run right through campus, so it’s not as if public transportation is difficult to get to.</p>

<p>There are also neighborhoods right next to UCSF (i.e., Potrero Hill) that you can look into. I do not really have an idea of the cost of rent in the city (though it’s obviously not so high that students must live on an uncomfortably low sum of money), but I know several great people you can get in contact with for specific questions about living and commuting in SF.</p>

<p>Keep in mind that a few students do not live in SF at all (e.g., they live in the East Bay, or south of the peninsula), and they have not yet been driven insane by their commutes. :)</p>

<p>

Heh, campus is usually pretty sunny. Being all the way on the east side of the city means we escape much of the fog.</p>

20

<p>On the topic of taking random undergrad classes…</p>

<p>At Stanford I talked to several students who were enrolled in classes such as piano, ceramics, classics. At some schools this is fairly common. This is just a heavier load on you, so a trusting advisor shouldn’t take issue with you having outside interests (as long as it isn’t excessive and hindering your progress).</p>