Schools Deciding on an REU - What looks best to grad schools?

[chickenwing71]

I'm a sophomore this year at a small liberal arts school - I've heard back on most of my physics REU program applications now, and have narrowed it down to two I'm seriously considering. However, I was in one of the programs last summer.

Further complicating things, if I go with the one I did last year, I'll be working with a professor I already know, and I'll be able to extend the research a few weeks beyond the REU program (making for 13 or so weeks). On the other hand, the research at the other school seems more interesting to me (but only a 9 week program).

Both are top ten schools in physics, though the one I did last year ranks a bit higher and has a little more prestige.

I know both will make for a fantastic experience, but how would graduate schools perceive doing the same program twice? Would it look better to a graduate school to be in one program two years in a row, or in two different programs for a more varied experience?

 

[RandomGuy88]

I doubt they would really care that you did the same program twice. Your research will be different, maybe not the topic but you will be at a different point in the research. Something to think about though is letters of recommendations. You will need at least three so working for someone else will give you another option. You want to avoid having to ask a professor for a LOR when all you did was take a class with them. Its much better if you did research work for them.

 

[physics girl phd]

In my experience as a member of a committee (as a graduate student member on the committee at CU Boulder, about 5 years ago), there are, unfortunately two ways to look at this:

1) It was considered a plus if you were on a publication from an REU -- would there be a better shot at getting one out of the project that you've already been involved with?
2) It was considered a plus if you had at least TWO different REU experiences and had recommendations from BOTH REU advisors as 2 of your FOUR recommendations (we were requiring 4 at a time when most schools were requiring just 3).

Although left to the reader to decide your score arbitrarily, most of us had a procedure, and in my case this would bump up your "reader score" by about 1 point out of 10 (and we had at least 3, maybe 4 -- I forget now -- readers whose scores would average)... other points looked for undergrad research at your own institution, above average coursework (including possible double majors), a well-written clear and informed statement, good letters about your research from your recommendations, etc.) and then weight heavily in a formula that involved GRE scores, GPA, prestige of undergrad, etc... )things out of readers control).Also -- you still have the year after your junior year to consider.

Must run... my little one calls. Hope others give you good advice too.

 

[Vanadium 50]

I think "how will graduate programs look at this" is the wrong question to ask. The right question is "where will you learn the most"?

 

[chickenwing71]

I went for the new one. It seems like I'll find the research more interesting, and it will help with my application being well-rounded. I'm just glad that either one seems fine and won't raise any flags. It's also interesting how graduate programs sift applicants... I didn't know that.

Thanks!