Should I accept a PhD from King's College London (only three years) or should I accept the five years (both MPhil and DPhil) from Oxford?

[wonderfulday]

I have two offers, a PhD in KCL and a MPhil in Oxford. The PhD in KCL is in War Studies--more in line with my BA and MA (which were in Conflict Resolution). The MPhil in Oxford is in Social Anthropology. Because my long term goal is to teach at a university level, I do intend to ultimately get a PhD. 

I visited both campuses and I loved Oxford a lot. My application to Oxford was for a DPhil (PhD) but they offered me an MPhil instead basically adding two more years to complete my PhD. As stated earlier, my ultimate goal is to finish my PhD. Now, I am really confused. Should I accept a PhD from King's College London (only three years) or should I accept the five years (both MPhil and DPhil) from Oxford? The only difference is spending two extra years in Oxford if I choose Oxford. I already have a Master's degree and the MPhil is a bit of a turn off, but yet giving up Oxford is really really hard for me. I must mention that the scholarship approvals on both are unclear as of yet.

And one last point: after I finish an MPhil in Oxford, I must apply to the DPhil. So it is not an automatic process, but a Professor in Social Anthropology in Oxford told me that it is a pretty common practice to transfer from MPhil to DPhil in Oxford. 

Your feedback and advice on making a final decision would be greatly appreciated. This might sound a pretty easy decision, but I find it very hard. I must admit I have somehow become really fond of Oxford's campus and its reputation. Maybe an immature thing to say, but I have to be honest here. 

Thank again for any advice you could offer. 

[oroanthro]

Hi there! Congrats on your two acceptances. I would say there are some big components missing from the decision-making process here: one is funding (which you acknowledge), the second is what kind of jobs you can get with either PhD, and the third is what current/recent grad students say about the possibility of moving from the MPhil to the DPhil at Oxford.

I am immediately curious as to how many KCL students actually finish in three years vs. how many need additional time (and therefore additional resources) to finish, how they feel about that process and what their experiences have been like pursuing a job after only three years of study and which departments hire lecturers in War Studies. How many of the faculty in that department have their DPhils in War Studies vs. something more traditional like Economics, Psychology or Anthropology? How many graduates have they been able to place in jobs like the one you want to pursue?

 I am also concerned that a professor at Oxford told you it is common practice to "transfer" when the standard rule is that you must apply to get into the DPhil from the MPhil and that your admission to the former is by no means guaranteed. It would be great if you could get in touch with current students in both Oxford programs to see what their plans are and how many of them were able to move from the MPhil over to the DPhil. Professors have a duty to upsell their program and are generally blind to the pain and confusion of students who get rejected.

Really, this is not a choice between a three year and a five year PhD, this is a choice between a three year PhD in War Studies and an MPhil in Anthropology. Which one will serve your ultimate career goal better? Which one makes it more likely you will achieve those goals? 

Lastly, don't apologize for liking one program more than the other! Some programs/universities make better impressions on us for different reasons. What may seem like a great intellectual atmosphere to you may seem stuffy and boring to someone else. If Oxford makes you more comfortable for whatever reason, definitely take that into account when making your final decision. 

Good luck, and let us know what you decide.

[wonderfulday]

Dear orangeanthropolog:

All of your points are quite reflective and offer good insight. I might have to do  more research before I can respond to some of the questions you posed, but the KCL's PhD is three years (both the offer itself and my supervisor confirmed this). The war studies fall under the strategic studies wing of the humanities in KCL...so most people graduating from that PhD end up teaching traditional IR courses or contemporary security.  In terms of future goal, I want to teach at the university/college level and that's why I mentioned I will ultimately need a PhD. I honestly care less whether I teach anthropology or IR, I just love teaching and I want to choose a uni that minimizes my teaching opportunity. 

You are making a great recommendation in terms of learning what percentage of students from Oxford MPhil gets transferred or accepted in Oxford DPhil. I agree with you that this switch is not guaranteed. I think this will play a big factor in my decision making. Also, if KCL PhD offers me funding and Oxford MPhil doesn't, that might also affect how I decide. But at this point, I wasn't going to let the money to be the biggest factor. 

[hats]

@wonderfulday I do think it's wise to let money be, if not "the biggest," quite a significant factor. If the difference is small, sure, go wherever will set you up for your career. If the difference is larger—funding vs. no funding, for example—I think you should seriously weigh that.

At least in the US, teaching IR and teaching anthropology are going to have you working with extremely different student populations, with colleagues with very different kinds of attitudes. Perhaps that doesn't matter to you, but I wanted to flag it for your attention. I would also look at where Oxford MPhil students go for their PhDs (and then where students from those institutions find employment, if they do).