Is Spending an Extra Semester in Undergraduate Research Worth It?

[cgreeleybsu]

I am at a bit of a fork in the road. I know after I am done with my undergraduate degree, at least at some point, I would like to either go to graduate school or be an independent researcher -- either way, I really want to do research. The way I see it, conducting research could help me on either path in the following ways:
Independent Researcher

1. I have been told it would be a bit unlikely that if I were to submit a paper without a PhD. or M.A and no institution next too my name it may not be taken all that seriously (mostly concerned about peer review). Being published may help me gain a little bit of credibility -- I know it should not be that way, but this is what I have been told basically twice now (though I am happy to listen if your opinion differs).
2. Gain experience researching for future work, that I may not get in the future

Graduate School

1. My errr, formal metrics, for grad school are not all that great. I have been told that if I am published it would matter less.

The goal here is to get published.
The aforementioned fork in the road comes because, I could graduate this semester, but I do not think it is likely I could publish something this semester. If I went the research rout, I would just take 1 or 2 classes, a directed study and research "class" with my professor (two professors want to do research with me). I would graduate next fall, and continue to research over the summer and into next fall in addition to this semester (so basically a full year). It would be an experiment or at least developing the theory for something in Quantum Communications and Networks/Information Science. I also may do some theory work in CS. Please note I have been working on my undergrad since 2014
My question:

1. Are my assumptions valid
2. Is is the trade off of a year of undergraduate research worth it, for the time I could potentially spend in grad school (though it may not be a place I was hoping to go), not considering the amount of time I have been in undergrad
3. (2.) but considering the time I have spent in undergrad.
4. Is it realistic to think that I could get published in a year before graduation
5. Is it realistic to think that at least the work could be done, so something could be published using the data collected after graduation.

P.s Bonus I might be able to complete a degree concentration if I stay, it may help me to do engineering type stuff in the future

 

[Choppy]

Graduate school isn't just a hoop to jump through in order to be able to do research. You'll actually learn how to do research along the way. The reason most people who haven't done graduate school have trouble publishing is because it's very rare for someone to figure out how to do novel research on their own. It will also help them to review what's already been done and why certain approaches to a problem have and have not worked, how to present the research, and how to build up a network within a specialized field.

But to your questions more directly, I wouldn't give up a year of graduate school just to work on an undergraduate research project in the hopes that you might get in some place better. Apply this year. Use the extra research year as a backup if you can't get in the first try but feel you really want to do this.

With respect to publication and timelines a lot depends on the specifics of the project. If you're starting from scratch, it could be a while, but if you're joining a bigger project that's already in motion, sure, you could see some publications within a year. Its also important that as far as graduate admissions go, there are other things that count too such as peer-reviewed conference abstracts, white papers, technical notes or an undergraduate honors thesis.

 

[berkeman]

If I went the research rout, I would just take 1 or 2 classes, a directed study and research "class" with my professor (two professors want to do research with me). I would graduate next fall, and continue to research over the summer and into next fall in addition to this semester (so basically a full year). It would be an experiment or at least developing the theory for something in Quantum Communications and Networks/Information Science. I also may do some theory work in CS.

It sounds like your research projects will be determined by those two professors, but you may still find this Insights article by @Dr. Courtney interesting:

https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/niches-publishable-undergraduate-research/

 

[cgreeleybsu]

It sounds like your research projects will be determined by those two professors, but you may still find this Insights article by @Dr. Courtney interesting:

https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/niches-publishable-undergraduate-research/

Thanks for the link, actually the professor has said they would be interested in an idea I presented too them.

The other one, I think I will also have a fair degree of freedom on the project.

As for the article, I noticed its within the context of novel, while what I am planning to research would extend an existing theory, I did notice it does not seem to take into account publishing to all results/open access journals.

 

[cgreeleybsu]

Graduate school isn't just a hoop to jump through in order to be able to do research. You'll actually learn how to do research along the way. The reason most people who haven't done graduate school have trouble publishing is because it's very rare for someone to figure out how to do novel research on their own. It will also help them to review what's already been done and why certain approaches to a problem have and have not worked, how to present the research, and how to build up a network within a specialized field.

Thank you for the response, I have a few questions, I have done a fair amount of research (not experimental or writing a paper, but just looking into things, either out of my own interest or for class assignments). I have started to learn to dig a bit through archives and try to find things that are indirectly related but may be relevant or may provide a different view. I had one project where I probably read the abstracts of at least 100+ papers, and skimmed or read a number of them. I feel I was very detail oriented and discerning during this process and when reviewing other students proposals. I am typically not one too get too excited or overgeneralize a result. Are these at least a start on the types of skills you are referring too?

But to your questions more directly, I wouldn't give up a year of graduate school just to work on an undergraduate research project in the hopes that you might get in some place better. Apply this year. Use the extra research year as a backup if you can't get in the first try but feel you really want to do this.

Just to clarify, it would be this semester, the summer, and next semester, I would need to still be in school this semester regardless. If I am not sure I want to go directley to grad school, or possibly go at all is there another path you would suggest?

I can't really wait too see, my semester starts in a few days, and I have to make the decision about how many classes I take on.

I also haven't studied for any GRE at all.

With respect to publication and timelines a lot depends on the specifics of the project. If you're starting from scratch, it could be a while, but if you're joining a bigger project that's already in motion, sure, you could see some publications within a year. Its also important that as far as graduate admissions go, there are other things that count too such as peer-reviewed conference abstracts, white papers, technical notes or an undergraduate honors thesis.

I appreciate your answer on this. I have a feeling that it may not be enough time, but I am not entirely sure. If I make it a goal to say, get one theoretical paper out, might that be feasible, also how relevant
too my goals do you think that may be?

Thank you again!

 

[Choppy]

I have a few questions, I have done a fair amount of research (not experimental or writing a paper, but just looking into things, either out of my own interest or for class assignments). I have started to learn to dig a bit through archives and try to find things that are indirectly related but may be relevant or may provide a different view. I had one project where I probably read the abstracts of at least 100+ papers, and skimmed or read a number of them. I feel I was very detail oriented and discerning during this process and when reviewing other students proposals. I am typically not one too get too excited or overgeneralize a result. Are these at least a start on the types of skills you are referring too?

A start? Sure.
But how do you know that you're not missing any major papers in the field? How do you know whether the methods in a given paper are outdated? How do you know that you're understanding those papers you're reading correctly?
That's where graduate school comes in. There you would have regular meetings with your supervisor, and others in your research group, who already have all of this expertise. You don't have to spend (as much) time re-inventing the wheel. You would also complete advanced coursework with regular testing and feedback, so you'd know much more objectively how well you're understanding the material you're studying. You develop a research plan and get a committee of professors who will offer guidance and feedback on the plan, and options when that plan doesn't quite work out the way you might expect.

Just to clarify, it would be this semester, the summer, and next semester, I would need to still be in school this semester regardless. If I am not sure I want to go directley to grad school, or possibly go at all is there another path you would suggest?

It depends on your specific goals. If you have a desire to do research in any kind of academic setting, there really aren't any alternatives on par with graduate school that I'm aware of. On the other hand, if you're really into say, machine leaning and want to write your own code, or you're a maker and want to build your own Tesla coil or something, then there are other alternatives.

If I make it a goal to say, get one theoretical paper out, might that be feasible, also how relevant
too my goals do you think that may be?

Remember that there's a lag time between submission and acceptance. This can be anywhere from a few weeks to several months, or longer. Typically you submit, the paper goes through an initial quality control process, gets assigned an associate editor, then goes out to referees. They review it. The AE reads the review and makes a suggestion to the chief editor and then the paper comes back to the author. You have revisions. All papers end up with some revisions, I heard one editor suggest it was about 1/10,000 that are accepted "as initially submitted" in my field. Sometimes this process can go through two or three rounds. And that's AFTER the authors finish their work.

Also all papers are not created/published equal. You have to know which journals are the major ones in your field. A publication in an obscure journal that people on admissions committees have not heard of won't carry the same weight as a publication in Nature.

 

[yucheng]

But how do you know that you're not missing any major papers in the field? How do you know whether the methods in a given paper are outdated? How do you know that you're understanding those papers you're reading correctly?
That's where graduate school comes in. There you would have regular meetings with your supervisor, and others in your research group, who already have all of this expertise.

Just curious, do academics usually keep a list of must-read , pedagogic, enlightening papers? Do you know of anyone who does so or of any lists that exists (on the web; I know book bibliographies are a great place to look at, assuming it's annotated)?

 

[Choppy]

Just curious, do academics usually keep a list of must-read , pedagogic, enlightening papers? Do you know of anyone who does so or of any lists that exists (on the web; I know book bibliographies are a great place to look at, assuming it's annotated)?

I don't know how common it is for a professor to maintain a reading list, but it's not unheard of, particularly when that professor has lots of new graduate students.

More commonly professors will just keep files of papers of interest relating to a certain topic. When a student shows an interest in that topic they'll hand the student the most relevant ones.