Funded PhD or Masters?

[PTiger0627]

Hi, I graduated from HYP in 2008 and have been working at a thinktank in DC since then, working on East Asia related policy issues. I would greatly appreciate if some of you could tkae the time to give me some advice on which school I should attend in fall 2010.

So far, what I have are PhD offers with funding from Georgetown ( IR/ 5 years + 18500 annual allowance) and Cornell (IR), and Masters offer from Chicago CIR ( half- tuition funding).

Personally, I don't think this year went too well for me because I applied to the wrong field. Eventhough I speak Korea, Japanese, and Chinese and my primary research interest is in how domestic politics impact economic and security policy of China, Korea, and Japan I applied to IR instead of CP. I think it was primarily due to my lack of knowledge in the boundaries of these subfields. I thought since I am doing foreign policy I had to apply for IR but apparently -- according to my friends who already have a phd -- that's not the case since I have a clear regional focus which is more CP, and I am more interested in domestic-level analysis than systematic IR one.

Just because I made a major error in my application, I am leaning towards attend Chicago CIR for a year and reapplying to PhD program for 2011 cycle. I am also worried that Georgetown and Cornell might not be the best places for me since I might want to switch to CP. But is choosing MA over a funded phd offer a wise thing to do? My parents keep telling me that Chicago CIR could easily end up being a waste of my time.

I would be very grateful If you could share your take on this with me.

[thatsnotmyname]

If you think the Master's could seriously add something to your application then do that, but otherwise, I would not recommend it. One, Cornell is excellent in IR and East Asia, and outside of HYP I personally can not think of a better place to be to study that kind of stuff. I can't speak to Georgetown, but my close mentor has consistently stressed to me how strong Cornell is in IR/CP and Asia. Personally, I am in CP, but I imagine I will certainly be dabbling in IR, so the school has a great fit for that. Two, the application cycle was really tough this year, and I don't think next year will be any easier. This isn't to say you aren't qualified enough to do well next time you apply, but it certainly is a risk.

If there is any possibility you could see yourself working a non-academic job with a Master's in hand then Chicago makes sense. Otherwise, I would go for whichever PhD program you prefer. I don't know that an additional two years would help you that much more. I am coming from a more policy oriented Master's program where I certainly learned a lot, but also had to spend time taking courses that are not relevant to my eventual studies. I don't regret it because I rolled my degree into my BA and finished in four years, while being funded. Your case is certainly more different and involves a greater cost and risk.

Of course, this is all conjecture and opinion from someone who is just as unknowing as these things as you. I would recommend asking your letter writers what they think about the situation.

And of course, congratulations on your acceptances! Will you be attending the Cornell open house?

Edited March 6, 2010 by thatsnotmyname

[Keller65]

CIR, no. If it were Yale...

[interista]

I highly doubt that CIR will land you a much better offer next year than Georgetown and Cornell. Those are both top-20 programs in IR. If you excel at GTown or Cornell, you'll get solid placement, and you won't have to pay for a 2-year MA which, in all seriousness, exists for the purpose of funding PhD students (do they even place students at top PhD programs?). I got accepted to Chicago's MAPSS last year, as well as a mid-level PT program and declined both rather than use the MAPSS to boost my app for this year (where am I going to come up with $45,000?) I just got accepted to a much stronger PT program this week. Of course, this all depends on your own financial situation. But I don't see anything wrong with taking an offer from a 10-20 ranked program. Most applicants would love to be in your situation, choosing between GTown and Cornell. The competition for spots at PhD programs is unreal - I'd love to go back in time and change my GPA to a 3.9, but even then, I'm not sure if that would guarantee admittance to Harvard or Princeton.

BTW, congrats on funding from GTown; they're real stingy with the cash down there (I'm waitlisted for funding in PT).

[plisar]

Go to Cornell and work with Katzenstein. You'll get an amazing placement and you'll learn a lot.

[curufinwe]

Definitely a PhD! I mean, if you are not interested in spending 5+ years of your life studying, you could always leave the phd after the 2nd year. They often award you with a Master's degree in that case anyways.

But if you are concerned about your study topic... I heard that schools are flexible with areas. Some schools (like NYU) make you apply for Comparative or IR specifically instead of Political Science (IR). If that was not the case, you will be fine.

Besides, (if I got it correctly) you will study the interplay between domestic and foreign. That is within the scope of IR, not CP.

[The Realist]

Cornell is a no-brainer easy choice for you. Very strong placement in IR and comparative (including both the P and the Y from your HYP in recent years). Plus if you care about Asia they have extremely strong East and Southeast Asia programs. I can't imagine a better place to study IR or comparative with an Asia focus. Georgetown is a notably inferior program. CIR is a cash cow that pays for PhD programs.

Just incidentally, I can't imagine that your marketing yourself as IR rather than comparative hurt your application. If people thought that you were a suitable candidate in comparative they would have treated you as such. If you want to switch to comparative after you arrive, go ahead, I'm sure no one will care. And as a comparativist, I can assure you that based on what you've written about security policy, you sound like an IR applicant. You just do second-image type of work.

It sounds like you think that you deserve to have gotten into a higher ranked program. I base this on the tone of your message, which among other things,

• thought to remind us that you went to "HYP"--which, I'm sorry to say, really doesn't matter now that you've graduated. If your letter writers from Princeton (you went to Princeton, right, looking at your PTiger username?) didn't write better letters this year, they're not getting better next year.
• is disappointed by an admission to a consensus top-20 program in IR

The question you should ask yourself is, what can you do in the next year that will make your application stronger next year than it is this year?

[interista]

Also - don't know how I forgot to mention this - one of my friends from undergrad is in his first year in IR at Cornell, and he was an East Asian Studies major as an undergrad. He also got into CIR and didn't think twice about turning down CIR for Cornell (incidentally, another one of my undergrad classmates was just accepted to Georgetown for IR).

[mab9ve]

"I got accepted to Chicago's MAPSS last year, as well as a mid-level PT program and declined both rather than use the MAPSS to boost my app for this year (where am I going to come up with $45,000?)"

MAPSS is def. not the same as CIR and the OP has said he got half of a full-ride to Chicago so I don't know how he would be used as a "cash cow". I wouldn't go to Georgetown, if you want to enter academia, you probably want to go somewhere much higher ranked and not to a school that is known to be a degree mill. With a Chicago M.A. this might actually be possible (the Chicago brand name by itself will carry you further than a Georgetown PhD), look at the placement that Chicago CIR has in top PhD programs...it's actually pretty impressive. A friend of mine applied to PhD programs two years ago, he got only into two schools (medium-ranked schools), he decided to go to Chicago, did well and he got admitted to UPenn and started his PhD in political science last year. And for the record, there's nothing wrong if the OP feels like he deserves to go to a better school, academics are prestige-whores...people should get used it.

PS: CIR is a 1-year program, not 2.

Edited March 7, 2010 by mab9ve

[The Realist]

Most students get at least partial funding for CIR. They make the official tuition $45,000 and "award" you a 1/3 ride or a 1/2 ride, and then you get to feel special because you're "only" paying them $30K or $22.5k for your masters. It's a common marketing strategy that many colleges use. It works amazingly well.

Since the CIR program is one year only, the OP, if he wants to use CIR to jump to top-10 departments, will have to figure out a way to get dramatically better letters from Chicago faculty, and will need to do so within about a month or so of having arrived (because writing good letters takes time). Call me skeptical that this can happen.

The OP is more than willing to try the application process again. Maybe it will work out differently. I, though, would be pretty pleased with an offer from Cornell if I were an IR/Asia scholar.

Edited March 7, 2010 by The Realist

[plisar]

Echoing everything that Realist said, UPenn and Cornell are at best on par. I don't think OP should be spending 22.5K to get a similar offer as he got this year.

[natofone]

I did the CIR and I am certain that it helped my application, but Cornell is very strong in East Asian politics. The Realist is right - you will need to take a year off after the CIR to benefit from it at all.

[Alun]

I did the CIR and I am certain that it helped my application, but Cornell is very strong in East Asian politics. The Realist is right - you will need to take a year off after the CIR to benefit from it at all.

Does Cornell have a program officically called International Relations at all? Or does IR in Cornell only mean regional studies like East Asian politics?