Master’s Prestige

[astroid88]

Hello, 

As am I anxiously awaiting the results of my MA applications, I was wondering whether or not (or, rather, to what degree?) the prestige of an institution should play a role in my future decisions. I ask this question because I am in a weird situation where the more prestigious schools actually have less faculty and courses in my thematic and geographic concentration. 

I applied to MA programs in MENA studies at 4 universities. They are UT Austin, Arizona, UMich, and Chicago. 

The last two (Well, Michigan does have one.) do not have full time faculty in my thematic and geographic area, despite being the “better” (whatever that means) schools. 

In a hypothetical situation where I get into all 4, what would be the best option? A place where I can be guided by two or three scholars in the area I intend to study at the doctoral level? Or a place that will have, at best, one person in my area but “wow” people more? 

I am a little self-conscious about this because I did not attend a remotely prestigious undergrad (though I did do academically well there). I don’t know if I need to offset that with a “prestigious” school to make me more competitve for history PhD programs.

 

Edited January 17, 2018 by astroid88

[ltr317]

Here's a different way to look at it.  Where do the scholars at UT-Austin and Arizona that are potential mentors received their doctorates?  Were they earned at top history programs?  Do they still have a relationship with their former schools?  Are they respected in their sub-fields?  If the answers are in the affirmative, then I think those factors are more important than the "prestige" of the school with just one faculty or no faculty in your chosen field at the MA level.  

[KLZ]

I don't think you have to worry about prestige all that much to get into a top PhD program following your MA (especially given the schools that you listed, all of which have enough 'prestige' to suffice for PhD admissions). You want to attend whatever program will best prepare you to write a killer thesis, further your languages, and develop solid relationships with faculty. This means choosing one with sufficient resources to support your research and a strong team of advisors. I would also say that it is important not to take on debt for your MA, so don't choose a school that isn't offering you sufficient funding.

[astroid88]

@ltr317 Thanks for the perspective. I had not looked it at it that way. 

 

20 minutes ago, KLZ said:

You want to attend whatever program will best prepare you to write a killer thesis, further your languages, and develop solid relationships with faculty. This means choosing one with sufficient resources to support your research and a strong team of advisors.

This was my original aim, but then I started considering notoriety. Glad to hear I was going about it the right way. 

 

20 minutes ago, KLZ said:

I would also say that it is important not to take on debt for your MA, so don't choose a school that isn't offering you sufficient funding.

I understand the importance of not getting into a lot of debt, but no debt? Austin is first on my list because of its low tuition for out-of-staters and its Arabic program, but I figured if I get in, I'm going to have to take out some loans. I have no debt from undergrad, which makes me okay taking out some. 

Edited January 17, 2018 by astroid88

[KLZ]

7 minutes ago, astroid88 said:

I understand the importance of not getting into a lot of debt, but no debt?

As little as possible. Don't take on more than you absolutely need. 

[dr. t]

The real question is what do you need an MA for? Are do you want to acquire some new skills? Prestige isn't that important. Trying to make up for a mediocre undergraduate? Prestige is more important.

[astroid88]

10 minutes ago, telkanuru said:

The real question is what do you need an MA for? Are do you want to acquire some new skills? Prestige isn't that important. Trying to make up for a mediocre undergraduate? Prestige is more important.

Graduated with a 3.7 in history and 4.0 in philosophy (my other major) and a 3.7 overall. 

I'm trying to take as many Arabic classes as possible, connect with a person that who knows my field well, and prepare a good thesis. 

Edited January 17, 2018 by astroid88

[rising_star]

2 hours ago, astroid88 said:

Graduated with a 3.7 in history and 4.0 in philosophy (my other major) and a 3.7 overall. 

I'm trying to take as many Arabic classes as possible, connect with a person that who knows my field well, and prepare a good thesis. 

Focus on what you're trying to do and go to the best place to do that (assuming that best place also leaves you with the least amount of debt). Don't get distracted by notoriety.

[Pacifist101]

I have a similar question, guys. I've applied to a couple of schools that aren't prestigious but offer funding to master's students. I am a little worried about my chances of getting accepted by top PhD programs later on if I end up going to one of the MA programs I applied to. It seems like one of them sent people off to decent PhD programs in my sub-field but not Ivies, and another one had someone go to an Ivy League school, but it seems like an exception rather than the rule. How much does the rank of the school and the connections of your POI play a role in the PhD programs' admissions process? Or is it just that lower ranked schools typically don't have as many monetary and intellectual resources to produce many applicants competitive for top 10 schools?

[OHSP]

24 minutes ago, InternationalCatLover said:

I have a similar question, guys. I've applied to a couple of schools that aren't prestigious but offer funding to master's students. I am a little worried about my chances of getting accepted by top PhD programs later on if I end up going to one of the MA programs I applied to. It seems like one of them sent people off to decent PhD programs in my sub-field but not Ivies, and another one had someone go to an Ivy League school, but it seems like an exception rather than the rule. How much does the rank of the school and the connections of your POI play a role in the PhD programs' admissions process? Or is it just that lower ranked schools typically don't have as many monetary and intellectual resources to produce many applicants competitive for top 10 schools?

Funding is so important, follow the funding. I went to a no-name institution outside of the US for my MA, got into 5 schools, one of them an ivy (seeing as we're talking about prestige). Can I ask why it matters to you to go to an ivy? And why you're distinguishing between "decent programs" and ivies? Depending on subfield it can be true that people have somewhat easier times getting a job if they've been to Yale than if they've been to a very good but not "ivy" school like Michigan, but rarely without the right advisor, supporting faculty, etc etc etc. Is your goal to use your MA to get into the best PhD program for you or to get into an ivy program, because those are different things. 

Edited January 19, 2018 by OHSP

[Pacifist101]

@OHSP you make a good point. I guess I should've been clear about what I meant by "decent programs", which is mainly them being somewhere a little below top-10. My goal isn't necessarily an Ivy League school but one that'd be best for me. Since I'd like to get a tenure-track position, I shouldn't be aiming low for my doctoral education. So to answer your question, it doesn't have to be an Ivy. I was just using a term that'd give an indication of my ambitions.

[OHSP]

10 hours ago, InternationalCatLover said:

@OHSP you make a good point. I guess I should've been clear about what I meant by "decent programs", which is mainly them being somewhere a little below top-10. My goal isn't necessarily an Ivy League school but one that'd be best for me. Since I'd like to get a tenure-track position, I shouldn't be aiming low for my doctoral education. So to answer your question, it doesn't have to be an Ivy. I was just using a term that'd give an indication of my ambitions.

I chose a school "below top ten" -- actually the lowest-ranked of my options -- because rankings didn't outweigh the benefits of going to the school I chose (and so far I'm pretty sure I've made the right choice). I don't think I'm out of the running for tenure-track positions, not because of a feeling but because recent graduates from my school and in my field have been getting jobs. Rankings are not entirely irrelevant but there's so much else to consider if you're aiming high, etc.  

[Pacifist101]

@OHSP would you mind sharing what made you choose your school? Was it just a better fit overall?

[OHSP]

@InternationalCatLover it was a better fit (academically, politically, and in terms of cohort). There was a larger pool of potential committee members, access to a much broader academic network--so far I have benefited a lot from being proximate to other schools and at a school where it's very easy for me to work with other departments and faculty--and then the stipend was also relevant (though I turned down better stipends to go to my current school). The one state school I was very interested in going to was going to make my life too financially difficult but otherwise would have been a great fit. The ivy is going through a transitional phase in my field and I would have had a great advisor but a precarious situation in terms of committee. I can't know what my life would be like right now if I'd made a different decision but grad school is hard enough without feeling like you're not quite in the right place, in terms of how you fit into your program as an individual, so currently I'm pretty happy I made the choice I did. 

[psstein]

4 hours ago, OHSP said:

 Rankings are not entirely irrelevant but there's so much else to consider if you're aiming high, etc.  

The only metric that actually matters is jobs. The US News and World Report rankings are junk.

[AGingeryGinger]

There are some schools that offer full funded MAs in History with a stipend. U of Cincinnati is one of them. I did/am doing my masters under a professor who isn't exactly a fit in my field (English Reformation, She does continental reformation) but its okay for a masters to have a bit broader in your field, especially if that school is offering funding and a stipend. 

[TheHessianHistorian]

As I browse the biographies of the current graduate students at prestigious PhD programs like Princeton, Yale, etc., what I notice is that virtually all of the doctoral candidates at the Ivies got their Master's degrees from either another top tier institution or from an overseas institution.

Can any current PhD students at top-tier (esp. Ivy) programs shed light on whether this is because there is an actual preference among ad-coms for prestigious M.A.'s from high name recognition institutions, or is it because the strongest PhD applications just come from top tier Master's programs (because top tier Master's programs best prepare students to apply to top tier PhD programs)?

[dr. t]

8 hours ago, TheHessianHistorian said:

Can any current PhD students at top-tier (esp. Ivy) programs shed light on whether this is because there is an actual preference among ad-coms for prestigious M.A.'s from high name recognition institutions, or is it because the strongest PhD applications just come from top tier Master's programs (because top tier Master's programs best prepare students to apply to top tier PhD programs)?

A couple thoughts:

• Yes, prestige absolutely plays a large part.
• The Ivy > Oxbridge > Ivy loop is very, very strong and established.
• Many high-tier MA programs can offer substantial funding, attracting a high-tier pool of candidates.
• Getting 3 letters of rec from Ivy professors doesn't ever hurt.
• There is some difference in quality of instruction. In my experience at BU, UMass, and Harvard, I found that BU and UMass were roughly the same (despite BU costing 3x more), but that the teaching at Harvard was significantly better. 

[anon1234567]

8 hours ago, TheHessianHistorian said:

Can any current PhD students at top-tier (esp. Ivy) programs shed light on whether this is because there is an actual preference among ad-coms for prestigious M.A.'s from high name recognition institutions, or is it because the strongest PhD applications just come from top tier Master's programs (because top tier Master's programs best prepare students to apply to top tier PhD programs)?

In my cohort most do not have MAs. Those that do, have them from Ivy or Ivy-equivalent institutions. Internationals, such as Brits and Canadians, have them from their respective high ranking institutions. 

Correlation does not imply causation but there is a trend. Probably has something to do with program and professor (lor writers) recognition. 

Edited January 28, 2018 by anon1234567

[TheHessianHistorian]

11 minutes ago, anon1234567 said:

In my cohort most do not have MAs. Those that do, have them from Ivy or Ivy-equivalent institutions. Internationals, such as Brits and Canadians, have them from their respective high ranking institutions. 

Correlation does not imply causation but there is a trend. Probably has something to do with program and professor recognition. 

Yes, I have also noticed that many PhD students at top tier institutions went there straight from a Bachelor's program, and in those cases seem to have always come from a top tier or foreign undergrad. In the cases where a PhD student at a top tier institution has a Master's degree, the Master's generally came from another top tier or foreign grad school. In those cases (those who go the BA->MA->PhD route), there are some who earned Bachelor's degrees from state schools or less prestigious private schools. The trend seems to be (at least from my examination of current grad student biographies) that Ivy PhD programs have people who started from humbler roots, but that the step up from lower-tier to top-tier happened at least one degree removed from the PhD program. 

Every so often (maybe 1 out of 30 biographies), I find a current PhD student listed who came into an Ivy PhD program straight from a University of Georgia or a North Carolina State University--so apparently it can be done, especially if the applicant has done something noteworthy and earned a nice award or two--but they are definitely few and far between.

Edited January 28, 2018 by TheHessianHistorian

[anon1234567]

12 minutes ago, TheHessianHistorian said:

es, I have also noticed that many PhD students at top tier institutions went there straight from a Bachelor's program, and in those cases seem to have always come from a top tier or foreign undergrad. In the cases where a PhD student at a top tier institution has a Master's degree, the Master's generally came from another top tier or foreign grad school. In those cases (those who go the BA->MA->PhD route), there are some who earned Bachelor's degrees from state schools or less prestigious private schools. The trend seems to be (at least from my examination of current grad student biographies) that Ivy PhD programs have people who started from humbler roots, but that the step up from lower-tier to top-tier happened at least one degree removed from the PhD program. 

Every so often (maybe 1 out of 30 biographies), I find a current PhD student listed who came into an Ivy PhD program straight from a University of Georgia or a North Carolina State University--so apparently it can be done, especially if the applicant has done something noteworthy and earned a nice award or two--but they are definitely few and far between.

Yes, I noticed that as well. Those that come directly from BA, from lower tier schools, usually did something exceptional, like worked with a professor on an edited collection, or a lone manuscript, in which the said student also did some obscure translation. 

[anon1234567]

1 hour ago, telkanuru said:

There is some difference in quality of instruction. In my experience at BU, UMass, and Harvard, I found that BU and UMass were roughly the same (despite BU costing 3x more), but that the teaching at Harvard was significantly better. 

Really? I did notice much the same, though not particular to the institutions you quote. But I've started to wonder whether it may also be attributed to the professor adjusting his or her instructions/grading to the perceived competence of his or her students. 

[Pacifist101]

That is exactly what I am worried about. I am afraid that by taking an offer from a funded MA program from a non-prestigious school I may be closing doors to the very top PhD programs. Based on what I've read and seen, it appears that connections matter the most when it comes to applying for these programs. That is, there is a strong preference for applicants from prestigious master's and bachelor's schools. I may be wrong since I am relatively new to all of this as I am switching fields, but this is my number one concern at this point.

[ltr317]

1 hour ago, anon1234567 said:

Really? I did notice much the same, though not particular to the institutions you quote. But I've started to wonder whether it may also be attributed to the professor adjusting his or her instructions/grading to the perceived competence of his or her students. 

I've experienced your attribution first-hand.  Certainly with adjustment of instruction but not as much with grading--grade inflation is now almost universal.  I earned a BA and master's degree (different majors) at an Ivy university earlier in life and am currently completing my history master's at a public university--for the much lower cost.  I found professors expected more from students at the Ivy by teaching at a higher, more nuanced level, as well as requiring heavier reading lists and longer writing assignments.   

[Kingsouth]

A large number of internationals will have MA's due to institutional differences and the need to stand out as a candidate. As telkanuru stated, the Ivy-Oxbridge loop is extremely strong, but that's preclude people outside the system breaking into the Ivys. You just have to have a very solid research toolkit, part of that is having an extremely strong MA thesis regardless of institution.