Dropping out of PhD for an MA instead

[Minerva1917]

I am very interested in getting an MA in history, but am mired in debt and cannot afford the high tuition costs. How common/possible is it for students to go into a funded PhD program and then drop out after their second year in order to come away with a master's degree?

[TheHessianHistorian]

It is done, but it is sort of a dirty mark on your academic record. I replied to someone who asked about this in another thread by repeating what I've heard from my mom and grandpa who are both professors: it raises a red flag, it in itself won't sink your chances of getting accepted to a PhD program later some day, but if there is another red flag or two in addition to that then you are going to have a heck of a time getting into a good PhD program after having dropped out of one before.

There are tons of funded MA programs out there. You just have to do some research and, in some cases, email a POI or the graduate school for clarification on how their tuition waivers, GTA stipends, fellowships, etc. work for Master's students at that particular school.

[BuckinghamRabbit]

Why would you want an MA in history if you are not planning on getting a Ph.D.? There are basically no benefits to a history MA except for the fact that they make you smarter and more competitive for Ph.D. applications. It is not unheard of for people to drop out of Ph.D. programs early, but it is NOT considered normal to join a Ph.D. program with the expectation of dropping out.

If you want a funded MA program, your best bet is FLAS (if it is still around in the coming years). You need to focus on an area in which you can use whatever FLAS language you are being funded for. Also, plenty of programs allow MA students to be TAs, but it is usually not guaranteed (you could lose your position in your second year or semester, etc.).

Edited March 2, 2018 by BuckinghamRabbit

[AP]

It takes a lot of money and time to admit you and support you in a PhD program. Knowingly accepting an offer that you will walk out from is not very professional. I agree with @BuckinghamRabbit that you need to think of why you need the MA and not the PhD. I don't think an MA is purposeless. On the contrary, many professions require "only" an MA in history, such as teaching, museum and archives, library service, etc. There is a lot you can do with the MA, do you know what you want to do?

When you know what you want to do (if you don't already), think of what you need to get of another program. I bet you will need letters of recommendation, correct? Do you picture yourself asking people to recommend you if you wasted their time and money? You need to be strategic money wise, because you don't want any more debt, but also professionally. 

That said, I know a lot of people that left the PhD program with an MA. I doubt they came knowing they were going to leave, but they are so much happier that I'm glad they did. Some left in good terms and some in not so good. All of them have jobs. 

To sum up, think of what job you want/need the MA for and then take it from there. 

[TMP]

Not only all the above, you need to consider your relationships with your peers.  You will make "friends" in your classes with peers who will expect you to be deeply engaged in the readings as they are and support their trajectories.  If you come in already confiding to them that you plan to walk out after the MA, they are likely to isolate you (and professors will soon pick that up in the classes).  If you go through this "got into funded PhD, but gonna drop out" route, you will basically have to keep this a secret from everyone for two years or so.  The stress of the PhD program will definitely get to you that you may crack at some point.  This including your new best friend until you are absolutely sure that this new best friend won't judge.

I know of quite a few people who walked away with a MA, largely because they realize they didn't have the same level of motivation and were basically unhappy. I do think that you will be much happier being with other like-minded graduate students who are there just to get the MA for whatever reason.  There's a thread further down in this History forum listing funded history MAs.  I know that Miami University (of Ohio!!) is one of them....

[BuckinghamRabbit]

16 hours ago, AP said:

I don't think an MA is purposeless. On the contrary, many professions require "only" an MA in history, such as teaching, museum and archives, library service, etc. There is a lot you can do with the MA, do you know what you want to do?

1

I definitely agree with this, but in my defense, I was talking about a pure MA in "History." For all of the professions you mention, you generally need a very specific kind of history related MA. Teaching usually requires a MAT; museums and archives require an MA in Public History; library services require an MA in library science (which many people tack onto their history MA). As a current MA student whose program title is just "History," I can say that there is literally no path for which a more specifically tailored MA would not benefit me. 

Edited March 3, 2018 by BuckinghamRabbit

[ashiepoo72]

12 hours ago, BuckinghamRabbit said:

I definitely agree with this, but in my defense, I was talking about a pure MA in "History." For all of the professions you mention, you generally need a very specific kind of history related MA. Teaching usually requires a MAT; museums and archives require an MA in Public History; library services require an MA in library science (which many people tack onto their history MA). As a current MA student whose program title is just "History," I can say that there is literally no path for which a more specifically tailored MA would not benefit me. 

The only cases I've seen where a "pure" MA in history is beneficial is high school history teachers who want a boost in pay, which having an advanced degree does do (at least in CA). My MA program was made up of like half those types of people, nearly half hobby/late in life historians who could easily self fund and maybe 1-2 per cohort who intended to apply to a PhD program.

[AP]

On 3/3/2018 at 11:32 AM, BuckinghamRabbit said:

I definitely agree with this, but in my defense, I was talking about a pure MA in "History." For all of the professions you mention, you generally need a very specific kind of history related MA. Teaching usually requires a MAT; museums and archives require an MA in Public History; library services require an MA in library science (which many people tack onto their history MA). As a current MA student whose program title is just "History," I can say that there is literally no path for which a more specifically tailored MA would not benefit me. 

a) If you can market yourself, you need the specific MAs. I know people with the regular MA working in those jobs. The one teaching is doing the MAT now, the five people I know working in libraries are doing the MLIS, and the four I know in archives are ok with that "pure" history MA. 

b)I reiterate, then, my big question in my post: Why do you want an MA for? 

[BuckinghamRabbit]

19 hours ago, AP said:

a) If you can market yourself, you need the specific MAs. I know people with the regular MA working in those jobs. The one teaching is doing the MAT now, the five people I know working in libraries are doing the MLIS, and the four I know in archives are ok with that "pure" history MA. 

b)I reiterate, then, my big question in my post: Why do you want an MA for? 

a) I am not totally sure what you are saying with "if you can market yourself, you need the specific MAs." It is much easier for people to get jobs (and actually required for teachers in public schools and librarians at research universities) to get an MA degree tailored to their specific career. Archives are different, but the vast majority of archival and museum workers have degrees in Library Science or Public History. Why get a "pure" MA in history and limit your competitiveness?

b)If you are asking me, I got my MA because I needed language training in order to be competitive in PhD applications and I was able to secure full funding. It worked out remarkably well: I made relationships with extremely important scholars in my field, learned a language, and got into great PhD programs.

 

Edited March 5, 2018 by BuckinghamRabbit

[BuckinghamRabbit]

...

Edited March 5, 2018 by BuckinghamRabbit

[archi]

On 3/3/2018 at 10:32 AM, BuckinghamRabbit said:

I definitely agree with this, but in my defense, I was talking about a pure MA in "History." For all of the professions you mention, you generally need a very specific kind of history related MA.

I'd reiterate this from my own experience. While it's possible to make a History MA work as an alternative qualification in some of these fields, the professional degree is usually preferred. Once people are established, they may add on a History MA as @ashiepoo72 said above, since it can make you more competitive or give you a raise. If you're concerned about cost it's worth noting as well that future employers may help you pay for a MA-- I know several people working in university libraries who took advantage of this. 

Another aspect that people have been circling around is that a big advantage to any MA is the networks you build, whether that's getting better letters for PhD applications in a history MA or by getting contacts and internship experience at a MLIS or Public History program. So if you're intending to earn a MA through a program designed for PhD students you really won't get any advantages there because you won't get relevant work experience and you won't get a useful professional network. 

However, I think this discussion might be moving towards debating the merits of various MA programs in general, which is not really the original question. It seems like the consensus there is no, it's not a great idea.