research required to get a competitive residency - paid?

[dr barb]

Is it just assumed, when we do research during the academic year, that it will be done for free (i.e. no financial compensation for work done, even if it's something they would have had to pay a tech to do?)


I'm in a quandry because on the one hand, I know I need to do research for my residency. On the other hand, I've already done a lot of research and have good technical skills, but I don't have any publications. The lab that I worked in during the summer wants me to stay throughout the school year, especially because I know some techniques that others in the lab don't, so I handle a lot of stuff that they can't. Now, a big time financial contributor is giving the lab money to do a certain project that they me to head up - but for no financial compensation. Does this sound right? It's not liking they're teaching me any skills that will prove useful to me later. They're capitalizing on skills I've had for years, and expecting me to do it all for the sake of getting my name on the publication. Should I just be happy for the opportunity?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Winged Scapula]

It is NOT assumed that any research you do will be without financial compensation. Residency programs place no different value on paid vs volunteer research when evaluating your candidacy.

Publications are nice, especially if you are competiting for a more difficult to match into residency. If you think it will make a significant difference in your application, and you are *nearly* assured (there are no such things in research - just ask me and many of my friends "promised" authorship) that you will be given authorship in the near future, then go ahead and take the position. But if you ask me, the extra work will not be worth your time without financial remuneration - sounds like they want to take advantage.

 

[dr barb]

Thanks for the advice!