English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Which would be the wiser decision:

1. Accept a generous funding package from a Ph.D. program (political science) at a decent graduate school.

2. Apply to a MA-only program (these seem to be less competitive) at a more prestigious graduate school and hope that it propels me into the Ivy League for my doctoral work?

Thanks so much folks!

2006-12-06 13:31:48 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Education & Reference Higher Education (University +)

You folks are missing it. The second choice includes pursuing a Ph.D.

2006-12-06 15:29:15 · update #1

Hey "riemannsurfaces", did you not see the term "doctoral work" in the second option? Go help your mom fold your panties bub...

2006-12-08 15:51:09 · update #2

11 answers

Take the PhD offer. No question.

I direct a terminal MA program, and yes, they are less competitive, since upon completing the program, applications must be made again to PhD programs. (Who wants another round of stress?) My MA program is very highly ranked, but even then, we only have a 75% PhD placement rate.

Do NOT count on ANY terminal MA program setting you up for Ivy admissions. That's a one-in-a-hundred shot. Ivies rarely take MAs from elsewhere.

You'll also be grateful after you finish your PhD for the funding package you accepted. So many folks are so terribly burdened by student loans in their early years of teaching, when they're barely making enough to get by. Take any step you can to avoid that particular hell.

2006-12-06 14:35:38 · answer #1 · answered by X 7 · 0 0

Depending on your career goals, an Ivy League school is not always your best option. We were told many times by our profs that Ivy League grad programs do not graduate good professors. They graduate people who are really good at the publish or perish treadmill and perhaps people who will be good mentors to grad students. My department has hired at least one faculty member every year for the last 4 yrs, and they find that the Ivy League graduates who've applied for their jobs are often not well prepared to teach undergrads. Their second tier applicants haven't just been tossed out there, they've been taught how to do the job well.

So, if you want to teach undergrads, I would pick the decent school, as long as the poli sci program there has a good reputation. You can look these things up, but you can also talk to your department chair. Its part of their job to help you make good grad school decisions. My department chair has always been really honest with us about whose graduates are getting good jobs and whose aren't.

If your goal is something other than teaching, I would ask the same questions about what you do want to do. Who is getting the best jobs and where did they get their PhD?

2006-12-06 14:31:48 · answer #2 · answered by pag2809 5 · 0 0

Well it seems to me you are more concerned about where you goto school rather than getting the degree itself. But my choice would be #1. But in actuality, you need to pursue a Practical Knowledge Doctoral Degree that will allow you to put your skills to work as soon as you finish the program, rather than work on a Ph.D. that entails nothing but researching past theories and figuring how to make them better. The latter is more for becoming an education professional or a consulting, whereas the former will place you in a better position in a company right now, making a very nice salary because you have a created something that can be applied to that company's policies and SOP's right then.

2006-12-06 15:45:36 · answer #3 · answered by â¤??? ?å???? 4 · 0 0

I think it is up to you. Do the less prestigious school have a good reputation in Poli Sci. Yes, ivy league is well respected, but they aren't number one in every field. For example, I think it's UC-San Diego that has a very good graduate poli sci program, but it's hardly ivy league.

Going to a more prestigious schools will open more doors, but doesn't necessarily mean that it will make you a better political scientist. Plus, you will have all of that debt. And I know very few wealthy political scientists out there.

I go to a top law school, and I can tell you for sure that the longer that I am here, the less I value prestige and name recognition. Yes, I'll be able to find a job better, but since I have no big law aspirations, I could be getting the same education at a lesser ranked school on a full ride. And might have to work a little harder for a job, but I wouldn't be $200,000 in debt.

It's what you ultimately make of your education, not where you went to school. Not all Harvard professors went to Harvard. Not all famous thinkers went to top schools. But life is harder coming out of school without that Harvard degree.

2006-12-06 13:43:49 · answer #4 · answered by Jamir 4 · 0 0

I would personally go with number 1. Having less to pay back and a decent grad school is important. The only question is if a PhD would over qualify you for jobs...but since you are planning on getting it it must not. Ivy league is no guarantee of the contacts etc..for you future career.

2006-12-06 13:45:20 · answer #5 · answered by drcfenton 2 · 0 0

It depends on what you want to do. If you wish to be a professor at a research-based, tier 1 institution, your better bet is to try and get your doctorate from the best institution possible. If you are fine working at a smaller, liberal arts college that isn't as aggressive with research, then you are better taking the financial package and getting your phD at the decent school. Where you get your doctorate will have weight if you seek to work at a better institution. If that isn't your goal, take the funding.

2006-12-06 14:29:45 · answer #6 · answered by hey u 3 · 0 0

I think it depends somewhat on what you plan to do with your Ph.D. If you are planning to teach at the college level, it is my understanding that many of the people who land tenure track positions come from a small number of elite schools. I would ask the school in option 1 what their graduates are doing. If you want to follow in their footsteps, go for #1. If you don't, go for #2.

2006-12-06 14:22:40 · answer #7 · answered by Ace Librarian 7 · 1 0

I think my choice would be #1. You will get to know your professors better over the course of time, and they will be very important later on as references when you apply for work in the world of academia.

That is my opinion. Best wishes.

2006-12-06 13:36:23 · answer #8 · answered by Rhonda 7 · 0 0

I graduated from undergrad and knew i had to get a masters in some unspecified time interior the destiny. i had to anticipate awhile relatively i did no longer comprehend what i had to get it in. 5 years later I even have began grad college. i do no longer think of i could be doing the main significant i'm if no longer for a fashion my existence went after graduating. go once you already know. Grad college takes up an excellent style of time so which you would be waiting to earnings.

2016-10-04 23:45:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Personal opinion .... I would take the funding package and opt for the Ph. D. It will open far more doors for you than an MA.

2006-12-06 13:37:36 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers