tomsmonticello

As I'm entering my fifth year of classroom teaching, I am interested in pursuing a doctoral level degree that will allow me to continue working in the field of education but equip me with more skills, resources, and knowledge to have a broader professional impact. My interest leans toward education leadership and policy, but I am uncertain on whether I should pursue the Ed.D. route or a PhD. Ultimately, I would like to work at the district or state level in K-12 administration, in a position to engage in policy analysis and recommendations. Is it true that, in a field like education, a PhD is not strictly limited to those with primary interests in research and a career in academia? It seems like the options for the Ed.D., which is certainly more practioner-oriented, are limited or seem to be more "mid-career" programs. Are the people accepted into Ed.D. programs in Education Leadership and Policy, like the ones at Peabody and HGSE, current administrators with more than five years of experience in the field? Will my lack of research experience (i.e., only having practical experience in the field) weaken my prospects for a highly ranked PhD program? I currently have a Masters in Education and, as I said, five years of teaching experience. Do I have too little practical experience to pursue a Ed.D. while also having too little interest in an ivory tower career to pursue a PhD? Any advice and guidance to help me find a program that best fits my interests would be welcome!

Would your goal be to use these programs as a catalyst for a PhD? I have seen people on this forum say that Masters programs abroad are held in lesser regard (than Masters programs in the US) when applying to PhD programs in the US, especially outside of the traditional Oxbridge, LSE, UCL schools. But I also remember my Academic Dean telling me that the MPhil and MLitt programs in Europe are more intensive than MA programs in the US, while PhD programs in the US are more intensive than DPhil programs abroad.

Thanks for your replies about the MA SOP--they were helpful/reassuring. I feel one of the reasons my PhD apps a couple cycles ago were not succesfsul was the lack of a clearly defined research focus. I studied Political Science as an undergrad and hope to use the MA to hone my research and better equip me as a successful PhD candidate. Should I state that I hope to use the MA as groundwork for a PhD or will they just wonder why I didn't apply for a PhD again?

How similiar/different are the SOP objectives for a stand-alone MA program and PhD? I applied a couple of years ago for PhD programs and was rejected by top-ranked schools. This, I think, was a combination of my GRE scores and my lack of focus in a research topic. My SOP could have been stronger in making the case and narrowing my focus. Does a different approach apply when seeking an MA in Political Science (not a professional degree).

Has any applied--or does anyone plan to apply--to NYU's MA program? The deadline was January 4th but the Prospectus states that they accept late applications. My question is how late is too late? Does anyone have any experience with submitting an application in such a situation?

I've heard similar things about the new format; verbal is my strongest area and I feel that I could improve this score given the new format. At the same time quantitative was my most challenging section and the changes could benefit me in that regard. And, if I understand correctly, the score report would include only the scores from my latest section rather than all of my scores to date. Is this correct?

Thanks for the reply. I did not prepare as much as I should have, number one, and, number two, I typically do not do well with those types of generalized exams. All through undergrad I grew accustomed to written examination. So it was difficult nut to crack all around. In addition, I hear that the new format could benefit test takers like me.

I plan on applying to Masters programs in Political Science mainly abroad, but I will be applying to some U.S. universities. I took the GRE twice in 2009 and twice in 2010. My scores, I felt, did not fully reflect my ability and were on the low end of what the top programs look for. The mouth section was my biggest weakness. On the writing section, though, I received a 5.0 twice and a 5.5 twice. Since it has been so long since I took the test, do you recommend I retake the new GRE? Or since I'm primarily focusing abroad, will it make a difference?

Finally received the tangible rejection from Harvard via mail. I never thought I'd be so happy to receive a rejection hah...at least I actually have it in my hands now.

I'm beginning to think every school is a crapshoot.

Yep--just got the notice via email from the ubiquitous "GS Autoresponder." Thank you for applying to our Graduate School for the 2011-12 academic year. While I assure you that the materials you submitted were carefully reviewed by the faculty in the Department of Politics, I regret to inform you that the department did not recommend your admission for the coming year. The number of places available at Princeton for entering graduate students is extremely limited and we cannot offer admission to all who are well-qualified. Indeed, many departments consistently have applicants who would be admitted without hesitation if the resources were available. Our decisions take into account not only the applicants’ merits, but also the suitability of the department’s programs to the candidates’ expressed interests. Our goal is to achieve a sound match between the strengths of our programs and the interests of the relatively small number of outstanding students that can be accommodated. I wish you success in your plans for graduate study and thank you for considering Princeton University. Sincerely, William B. Russel Dean of the Graduate School

I'm in the same boat--not a word from Princeton either way. The same with Harvard, which has left me accosting the mailman these past few days given the news that rejects are being sent out via USPS (which is certainly a nice gesture...).

It seems, based on last year's results, that there is no rhyme or reason to their notifications. There was a mass wave of rejections after most of the admits, but there are only a few admits on the results forum at this point. So I'm not sure what it means.

Yes, congrats to all who survived! I was one of the rejections, sadly, and Yale was probably my top choice. Two good friends who graduated from Yale's PhD program, though, told me they had to apply three times before they were accepted--so perhaps that should make some of us feel better.

I'm starting to think the same thing. It's weird, because it looks like last year Yale sent out a wave of rejections before acceptances. At the same time, their acceptances were spread out over a couple days. So perhaps there is still a glimmer of hope?