Hello po, to people experienced in science and research, I have a question about how you properly and efficiently research factual questions that require credible citations.

For example, if I were asked to differentiate between metamorphic and igneous rocks, would I simply search keywords on Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, PubMed/PMC, etc., and go through the results until I find something relevant? I usually do this, but I feel like I am doing it inefficiently. I often find articles that are either too broad, too specific, outdated, or only indirectly related to what I need. I end up spending a lot of time reading titles, abstracts, and sections just to determine whether a source is useful.

I experienced this when researching the nutritional needs of elephants for a one-page essay. It took me almost an entire day to gather enough relevant sources, while a friend was able to find around 20 useful articles within five minutes. It made me wonder what I am doing wrong. Is it mainly my choice of keywords, how I use research databases, my ability to skim papers, or simply my lack of experience?

I also struggle with deciding whether a source is appropriate for a specific claim. For example, if I need a basic definition of a tendon but find an article about the relationship between muscles and tendons that only briefly defines tendons, is that sufficient to cite? Or should I look for a source specifically focused on tendon structure and function? Likewise, how broad or narrow can a source be compared with the information I actually need?

Basically, I want to understand how experienced researchers efficiently go from a question, to search terms, to relevant sources, and finally to evidence that properly supports their claims. I feel like I spend far too much time searching for information that should be relatively straightforward, so I would really appreciate some practical advice on how to improve this process.

Hi! I am thinking of taking MSc in Biology (Microbiology track) hopefully next year at DLSU or UST and with that I would like to ask for some insights regarding my situation.

I graduated Medical Biology last 2025. I graduated cum laude, was a DOST scholar, and had stellar academic and leadership background. However, I didn't really prioritize research, and my thesis wasn't related to microbiology at all. I dedicated my 4 years in college to be the perfect candidate for med school. I did get into med school and spent 2 months at a top medical school only to realize that medicine was not for me, so I dropped out. I did not incurr any failing grades while I was there and I was able to secure an honorable dismissal.

After dropping out, I started working as a clinic assistant at a known HMO company. I do not find this fulfilling as I don't feel challenged to think or be curious. I miss studying and knowing that I have contributed to science. So, I decided that I wanted to pursue further studies and take a masters degree related to Microbiology as this subject really sparked my interest in college.

With that, I would like to clarify some things:

1. How competitive is the admission process for UST and DLSU MS Biology?
2. Does having little to no research experience matter?
3. Do you need to already prepare thesis concepts during admissions or connect with professors in your preferred field in the university?
4. Do they really care about your undergraduate thesis and would rather have you pursue further studies related to it?
5. Can I take the RMicro certification exam if I gain enough units from my masters or is the exam only for undergraduate students?

Any insight, advice, or shared experience would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for answering!