I am currently completing my MA in Political Science in Canada, but I have been working closely with a brilliant professor from the Sociology department from the same university for half of my program courses; our interest are quite aligned for a very specific, niche field, and I am honoured to work with him (and I would be pressed to find anyone else with his level of expertise in this relatively unique area!). When I applied for Political Science PhD programs, I applied for the Sociology program as well after I was encouraged to do so, even when the deadline was passed!
While I didn't get to any of the handful of Political Science programs -- none of them offered anything close to what was my focus, and I was even told by one of them that my interests were too specific for the department -- I recently heard back from the Sociology department, and the admissions committee is extending me a "fast-track" master's degree admission offer, where I will be taking the exact number of courses needed to satisfy the course requirement for the PhD program! Essentially, I was told I would be technically completing the first year of the Phd program, though not officially, and that I would be officially upgraded into the PhD program as early as next summer, provided that I maintain an A- average for the five courses. The other caveat is that I will be dealing with an MA-level of funding for the most part of the first year, and I will get a Phd-level funding starting the summer (when I would start working on the first competency exam). The reason why they're making me jump through this hoop is because apparently this is apparently standard for those without any background in Sociology, and they want me have the appropriate foundation for methodology (even though I did really well in the Political Science methodology course!) and ensure that I do well in the statistics course (I suspect that my F in undergrad calculus from several years ago was flagged by them as concerning).
Anyways, I'm not sure what to think of it. On one hand, I am really happy I got an admission offer to work with an excellent supervisor, but on the other hand, I have this fear that if I were to go ahead with this master's program that something might happen in the future and they may change their mind and have me not proceed with the PhD program, even if I satisfy all conditions. In fact, this is what will be stipulated in my official admission offer, "We will consider you for direct entry to the PhD program after successful completion of five courses." I'm no discourse analyst, but there's nothing concrete in that language, paling in comparison to what was promised over the phone and email (though I can understand from their perspective why they want to give themselves that wiggle wiggleroom). The other issue is the matter of university prestige, it has been hammered into my head that getting into any of the top ten US schools truly makes a difference (especially if you are interested in pursuing a tenure position).
Do I stick with what really seems to be a safe, good offer here in Canada for a mid-tier university (provided their unofficial word is kept which is my main concern), or should I take the year off and apply to the other schools, namely US, UK and Australia, hoping to get into the PhD programs directly?! For my future applications, not only will I be applying to programs that are way closer to my interests -- for some strange reason my focus isn't really offered for the great majority of the programs here in Canada but they are definetely offered in the US-- but I will also broaden my focus just to be safe, making it less specific. Also, I will prepare for the GRE (the reason I didn't apply to schools beyond Canada was because I didn't take this exam!).
I'm absolutely torn choosing between the "safer" option or taking the year off and applying to arguably better schools. If I stick with the safer option, I will always have that regret of how my life would have turned out if I applied elsewhere, but if I do pursue the path of taking the year off and apply to several more schools and don't get into any, I will this other regret as well! I'm slightly gravitating towards the safer option because I don't think I will ever encounter the chance of having a prospective supervisor advocate on my behalf for the admissions committee to get me in. I would love to hear your opinion and what you would choose!
