hesadork

On balance, I think all of this argues strongly in favor of MSU in the event UConn turns you down. So if GVSU puts you in the position of having to respond ASAP to its GA offer, I think you can feel good about being fairly insistent on an extension. Provided the $ difference between GVSU and MSU isn't obnoxious -- and to your point, you're the only one who can/should judge that -- I'd be hard pressed to cave to GVSU's demands to accept immediately. Good luck and keep us posted! (And: breathe...)

It did make sense...and I agree it's a tough spot to be in. Also agree that UConn is a no-brainer if you get admitted; let me say I think your choices get super muddy after that. Some more ?'s to help you think this through: 1) I think it would be smart to run the GVSU vs. MSU numbers, assuming you get the GA you want at GVSU but have to go hourly at MSU. How big a $ difference are we talking to complete the programs, soup-to-nuts? 2) Is there any way of determining the prospects for finding a GA at MSU post-matriculation? (Said another way: is it even possible to "find one eventually" after you've already begun the program?) 3) How sure are you about academic advising? 4) As I recall you know Michigan pretty well. As between living in East Lansing and living in Grand Rapids, do you have a strong preference?

Most importantly try to hang in there and not let the stress eat you up. (Easier said than done, I know.) Let me back up a second and ask you this -- among the three programs where you interviewed, if you had to rank the "smaller school in MI" in terms of your level of interest, where would it fall? 2nd question, how confident are you that you're likely to be admitted to the other two programs?

I advocated for Vandy above because you have no HE experience, are right out of UG and don't want to land in the northeast. A two year program will give you more seasoning (and meaningful work experience) than a one-year program, which will be a boon for your employment prospects. And even schools with national reputations tend to place regionally in this field for a variety of reasons. If you were 3-5 years out the calculus would be different. Re rankings/reputation: most hiring managers for low-/mid-level HE jobs (ie, the kinds of jobs OP and many recent master's grads are eligible for) do not follow the rankings year-to-year and may have only a vague sense of who's higher than who at any particular point in time. And just as many folks in the midwest and southeast will be inclined to write off Harvard as "New England fancy" as will be inclined to be knocked out by the university's general reputation. Point is -- these are professional credentials. You are far better off focusing on cost, length of program, access to internships and region where you want to end up than on your perception of the "name" of the school.

Congratulations SheWrote! That's wonderful. Which program(s) at HGSE and TC?

It's hard to comment without knowing your GRE scores. That said, I wouldn't be too worried about your UG GPA in light of your performance in grad school. Just make sure to review each school's admission requirements to see if there are GPA cutoffs. Honestly I think your biggest weakness/vulnerability for admission to a higher ed doctoral program is your lack of professional experience in higher ed. I don't see it as a deal-breaker, but it is a gap that you might consider addressing before application. (Some faculty will give you "credit" for your experience as an RA and in TFA, others won't find that to be terribly persuasive.) Two final points: 1) to the best of my knowledge neither Johns Hopkins nor UC-Berkeley offer higher ed doctoral programs or particularly robust post-secondary course offerings; and 2) TC generally does not provide much funding for its HPSE doctoral program.

The rankings you cite are NOT for the master's programs...they are doctoral. There is a difference. Do not let this factor into your calculus. Based on your background and level of experience, I think Vandy is the better choice. How do the cost of the two options compare?

I'm in general agreement with the posters above, but will add this as friendly advice: 1) You'll need a master's to be competitive for admission to any decent (read: funded) doctoral program in ed. Exceptions are few and far between. 2) Get some work experience (in ed) prior to pursuing a master's. Even if it's just a year. You'll get much more out of your master's program if you do. And yes, you should consider any opportunity to do so that come across your path. Doctorates in ed are professional degrees -- even when they're PhDs (rather than EdDs), even when they're granted at "theory" schools. You will need practical experience in order to make the degree useful.

FWIW, I think it's a mistake to get caught up in perceptions of reputation when we're talking about master's degrees in education, which are professional degrees intended to position you for entry/mid-level work experience. (And for which there are no rankings!) Having been a hiring manager for more than a decade across three institutions, I can tell you -- reputation really doesn't matter. And I agree with MichiganGirl that this field tends to function regionally in hiring and professional development opportunities. Focusing on length of program, required vs elective coursework, internship opportunities and funding will stand you in far better stead than focusing on institutional reputation. Doctoral is a different story: sub-field rankings matter a lot.

I concur. I think delaying grad school for a year or two makes sense for anyone considering a career in higher ed, but especially so in your case given your numbers and your interest in some very competitive programs. These are practical degree programs; you'll get a lot more out of them if you've actually had full time, post-UG experience. Plus it will make you much more marketable post-Master's.

"Need-based" in terms of graduate financial aid is a euphemism for "loans."

I was referring to institutions with highly ranked HESA PhD/EdD programs that have master's programs that: 1) offer little to no financial assistance; and/or 2) have huge enrollments. I'd rather not name individual programs; it's easy enough to tick through the USNWR list with these criteria in mind and get a sense of where the red flags might be.

My strong advice would be to seek full-time employment in higher ed (in your case, in admissions) prior to graduate school. It will give you time to decompress from undergrad, obtain practical experience and get a better sense of what you want your career to look like. It will also make your grad school experience much richer, since master's degrees in HE/SA take a very practical, applied approach. You may also find that admissions isn't a good fit or that your future isn't in higher ed. Far better to figure that out BEFORE investing in a graduate program. Your undergrad major is irrelevant.

I'm in agreement with ZeChocMoose on this thread but would add a few other thoughts. In general, people with PhDs in Higher Education go on to teach graduate students in schools of education and/or to conduct research/engage in policy work on higher ed subjects. In general, people with EdDs in Higher Education are career administrators, who may conduct research but usually only as a part of their day jobs. (Major caveat: some of the most elite institutions -- like Columbia/TC, or Harvard prior to this cycle -- only award the EdD in higher ed. At these institutions the question of PhD vs EdD is can be pretty meaningless.) While you're correct that people in senior positions within the academic affairs hierarchy (e.g., Presidents, Provosts, deans) have PhDs, these folks tend to come out of faculty roles in 'traditional' academic disciplines (like English or Biology or Political Science). Their PhDs generally are NOT in an education related field. That's more commonly the case as you ascend the hierarchy of an institution. (Again, caveat: leadership/senior administration in schools of education are much likelier to have doctorates in ed.) All of that said, I have a close friend who has an EdD in ed policy (from a grad school of education that only grants EdDs) who is a full-time researcher at a major think tank. And I have a close colleague who has a PhD in higher ed (from a grad school of education that grants both degrees) who is a mid-level academic affairs administrator. So none of the above generalizations are hard and fast rules. For me it comes down to this -- the PhD is the right choice if and only if you have a burning desire to conduct original research at a very high level. If what you really want to do is be an administrator, focus on pursuing an EdD. Plenty of universities have tuition remission programs for their employees that could make an EdD very affordable (if not free).

You're applying to 19 schools ranked in the top 40? Insanity. Seriously. Applying "widely" is a recipe for disaster in doctoral admissions. It does not suggest a hedging strategy. It's suggests lack of clarity about what constitutes "fit" in this context. In my experience, most successful doctoral applicants -- irrespective of field -- can find no more than 6-8 programs that are a good fit given their research interests. An over-broad SOP will be the kiss of death to faculty...

Rutgers. 1) It's cheaper (and will be quicker with the transfer of credits). 2) The "school of continuing studies" is a red flag that likely undermines/undoes any reputational advantage NW enjoys.

Think about the flagships in Iowa, Minnesota, Indiana... This is a great tool to help focus the search: http://www.petersons.com/graduate-schools.aspx (Click 'advanced search' so you can filter it to Higher Ed master's programs by state.) Good luck!

A lot depends on your GRE performance. That said, all of the schools you listed (save Loyola-Chicago) are highly competitive and in hot demand by virtue of the reputation of their doctoral programs (ranked by USNWR). I think your UGPA is going to be an obstacle to admission to these programs. Work experience is helpful but two years isn't the same as 5 or 8. Is there a region of the country where you want to end up? Or a particular type of institution where you want to work?

If you're clear that you want to be in administration, then yes, I would give this option serious consideration.

There are a bunch of interdisciplinary ed doctorates that are jointly administered between an ed school and a traditional discipline in a grad school of arts/sciences. (For example, history/ed, econ/ed, sociology/ed.) I'm in the northeast so the two soc/ed programs that come to mind are at NYU and TC/Columbia, though neither is higher ed specific. That's probably the closest I've seen to a SHIPS model. My sense -- and full disclosure, I've been out of soc for a very long time -- is that these 'joint' programs look and feel a lot different from traditional soc departments that happen to offer an ed concentration or have faculty specializing in ed. Given the extent of your soc training already, do you really want more soc classes (particularly if your ABD credits don't transfer)?

Dean or VP of what? Admission/Enrollment? Student life? Finance? People that end up in those positions at CCs tend to be career higher ed administrators, not scholars or folks with teaching experience (even if they've earned doctorates along the way). Experience teaching has little bearing on your competitiveness for admission to (post-secondary) education doctoral programs...

Re CC teaching with only a master's in a field like poli sci: not so easy. There is such a flood of unemployed (and underemployed) PhDs that master's level folks are often crowded out. I think you'd be looking at adjunct-ing at best, but there's no guarantee of that. When you say "CC administrator," what kinds of roles are you envisioning? That might help determine what training would be most appropriate.

What are your ultimate career goals, ie, how do you want to use the doctorate? And are you looking to stay in California?

Hmmm. Unless you're looking specifically at Sociology of Education programs (usually housed in grad schools of education or jointly between ed schools and grad schools of arts/sciences) I'm not so sure a general sociology program is going to be the best place for you given these research interests. Soc of Ed or Higher Ed (my field) is likely to be a better fit. Higher ed particularly so if you end up going in a more applied direction (e.g., studying diversity initiatives). This also opens up the possibility of a master's in higher ed rather than a master's in sociology. Depending on your career goals, you might find the former useful (and frankly, more marketable outside of the context of soc doctoral admissions). And if you ultimately did decide to pursue a PhD or an EdD in higher ed you would definitely need a master's to be competitive as an applicant to the top programs.

Wako, I agree with bradley610 that a terminal master's seems like a more viable next step than a funded PhD. It will allow you to address the GPA issue and hone your research interests to something more manageable than poverty, racism and capitalism (that's at least half the field!). A one year master's need not cost you a fortune, particularly if you have a good state university nearby.