Quote:
Originally Posted by zoltan
Zoltaning:
This is sort of the whole point of grad school, is it not? Work you're doing should be motivated by work currently missing in the field, and your work should move the field forward. Go from there. When in doubt, talk to your advisor, whose job it is to help articulate these issues. Run a lab meeting and get feedback. The difference between a Nature paper and a second-tier is often how the work is spun.
Yea, it is the whole point of grad school.
I'm actually still in high school and have the awesome opportunity to contribute to a research lab through an internship program at my school.
I have an advisor, and she's amazing. She's senior faculty, very supportive, and is letting me pursue my own ideas. She also meets with me once a week / every other week for about thirty to sixty minutes, which seems generous considering the value of her time.
However, while my advisor reviews the work I'm doing and is generous with lab resources, I'm solely the one doing day-to-day research. Essentially I've been thrown into the grad-school pool without any swimming lessons. This has pros and cons.
What advice would you give a high-schooler in an informatics research lab?
As I understand it, advice on securing an academic career almost always boils down to: publish. So that's what I'm trying to do.
Other advice I've heard is not to "go rogue" too soon, which seems to be the line I've leapt across with this current paper. I think it will go over well, but I'm also considering collaborating on future papers to learn from researchers with more experience.