Does it really matter where I get a MA from?

[Joe Lordan]

I posted this in the History 2010 thread, but the question is fairly pressing so I thought I'd get more views if I posted it directly here!

So I was accepted to Northeastern University today, something I am pretty happy about because it is 1) in my hometown of Boston and 2) has a professor who is specializing in the field I'd most like to study in (World War 1). The rub, though, is that of the schools I've applied to it is further down on the list of ranked history programs (I think it is in the low 90s). Not all that good, but that isn't where the question I have lies!

It has been hinted that I'll probably be able to be a TA and get a tuition waver, which is a big deal for me since as a masters' applicant I was expecting to take loans out and pay most of my own way. By going to Northeastern I'd be able to save even MORE money since I'll be crashing at my parent's house and be covered by my wife's health insurance, so I wont have to pay for either of those things too.

Now, here is the problem: I'm not entirely convinced I want to be a professor; I'm torn between using the MA as a stepping stone to either academia or to government employment as an analyst. So, with that in mind, does it make sense to go to a worse school if they're offering a ride? Does it matter where I get my MA from (if I choose to get a PhD) if I do well there and have sweet writing samples and LORs? I'd think that being a TA for a spell will give me a better idea about the particulars of teaching and the rest of the schools I applied to don't have that option. So there it is! I turn to you, dear internet, since I don't know anyone else who is going through the application process. You are my only hope!

Anyways, thanks in advance!

[StrangeLight]

if you want to get into a PhD program, then yes, it matters where you get your MA. ask northeastern for their placement rates for MA students moving onto PhDs. if their MA kids are all making into PhD programs and that those programs are ones you would like to attend. if they've got good MA-to-PhD placement rates, then northeastern would be fine for you and you shouldn't worry about their ranking. if their students aren't getting into PhD programs when they finish the terminal MA, then you have something to worry about.

if you want to be a government analyst, i'm not sure if you need the PhD. the PhD is preparation for being a professor (unless you go to a program with a concentration in public history). the PhD doesn't really train you for government work, but a lot of people doing that government work hold PhDs. i can't really answer your question as to whether northeastern's ranking matters for a gov't job. my sense is that "fit" is thrown out the window when you leave academia, and it all comes down to how well known the school is overall. northeastern's a well known institution, so that could work in your favour, but on this part, i'm totally guessing.

but yes, again. if you want a PhD (for whatever ultimate career path), then the place you get your MA from matters. the ranking doesn't matter, their placement rate does.

[TMP]

In addition to placement rates...

Connections are everything.

Look at the acknowledgments in your favorite professors' books at Northeastern. Do they mention other people you'd like to work with for the PhD? If you don't recognize a name, it says something about the professor's social network, that the professor isn't out there batting for himself/herself or his/her students.

Yes, PhD is usually preferable to hold a gov't level job like, say, Historian of the Senate, because the job is so much more demanding in terms of expertise than at a local archive. They want people who are "walking encyclopedias." I'm not sure how many people actually expected to work in the industry when they receive their PhDs and they do usually come from well-ranked schools.

Also, what I've observed from being in DC as an intern, visiting researcher in San Francisco, and as a student at my University, if you're going to stay local (as in Boston), where you get your MA won't matter as much as if you're looking to re-locate to another part of the country. I do imagine that if a colleague of mine in DC who got her PhD from a school ranked in the 90s tried to move to a similar institution in California, she'd get raised eyebrows unless she's worked at this job for quite some time that her school's name won't matter. But if she stayed local, she'll be fine. It's a question of local networking- people in the community know the faculty and trust them to produce good MA degree holders.

So if you really want to work in DC, try to get better funding offers from other programs, or re-apply for DC schools next year.

[Joe Lordan]

Well, thank you for the prompt replies!

Anyways, to the nitty-gritty! Both waiting a year "and" applying to schools in DC are sadly out of the question, since I'm sort of dealing with a fairly strict timeline. My Fiancee is an OBG/YN resident and she has two years left of her program before she becomes a fully-fledged doctor - since she'll obviously be the main bread winner for our family (even with a PhD I probably could never hope of making the amount of money she will, even if I was tenured and about to retire) we need to take into consideration the hospitals that she'll be hired to and the monetary deals they make her. By waiting a year and then applying to schools she'll have to either take a year off from work (which is obviously out of the question) or she'll have to take a job and then immediately quit it, which would be an awfully sore mark on her newly minted resume. At the end of the day her job is obviously much more important than mine.

With that in mind, I totally agree that less money from a better institution is probably more valuable than a lot of money from a less prestigious one. With luck I'll be accepted to Umass or BC and there wont be much more to worry about.. there is just that nagging voice in the back of my head that is telling me that I should go home, after all of these years spent out of state. It is hard to divorce the emotional from the practical :/

Edited March 10, 2010 by Joe Lordan

[amercanist]

I'd have to disagree with one of the above posters, I do not think it matters too much where you get your MA from. I think the truly important thing is the quality of your research for your MA, who the profs are in this program (and just as important who they know), and the strength of your LOR's. LOL, I guarantee, if you're ambivalent about a PhD before your MA, you'll have a more concrete idea about what history is and is not once you complete your MA (i.e. gogogo book a week slog!) If you're like me and still willing to inflict more pain on yourself once completing your MA, then you'll know for certainty that you are either plan nuts or really want to earn a PhD. Good luck to you.

[Bearclaw]

I'd have to disagree with one of the above posters, I do not think it matters too much where you get your MA from. I think the truly important thing is the quality of your research for your MA, who the profs are in this program (and just as important who they know), and the strength of your LOR's.

Agreed. I did my MA at a public university in the South with no real reputation for history, but the faculty was great. They were always encouraging and willing to talk with me about my research, even after I graduated, and they were happy to help when I applied to Ph.D. programs. At the MA level, I think the faculty and especially the quality of your work are more important than the name on the school.

[KM3]

It absolutely matters. First (and perhaps most obviously), you would want to do an MA that would strengthen you as a PhD candidate. To that end, you want to consider the faculty you'd be working with not only for LORs but for how they can help you grow as a scholar. Whose work is really interesting to you or on the forefront of current historiographical trends? Thought-provoking methodologies?

The right MA program fit for you makes all the difference. Personally, I know that I am completely different as an intellectual post-MA and honestly, I feel very confident and prepared to take on PhD work because I had such a wonderfully rigorous and stimulating program with a supportive faculty.

[TMP]

It absolutely matters. First (and perhaps most obviously), you would want to do an MA that would strengthen you as a PhD candidate. To that end, you want to consider the faculty you'd be working with not only for LORs but for how they can help you grow as a scholar. Whose work is really interesting to you or on the forefront of current historiographical trends? Thought-provoking methodologies?

The right MA program fit for you makes all the difference. Personally, I know that I am completely different as an intellectual post-MA and honestly, I feel very confident and prepared to take on PhD work because I had such a wonderfully rigorous and stimulating program with a supportive faculty.

KMD, you've been pulling up quite a few old threads. Please keep the date in mind, the OP may already be attending a program.

[HistoryGrizzly]

The OP (though awhile back) raises a question that I've been considering over the past few weeks. I applied to PhD programs and I'm in my senior year of undergrad at an institution almost no one has probably ever heard of. I don't think any of the history professors here are really nationally known, however, they focus a LOT on mechanics, primary source research, research paper writing, and the nuts and bolts of history. I ended up wait listed and a couple half way decent schools, got a consolation MA offer from a great school, and I'm heading, in all likelihood, to UNL next year on a fully funded offer. Now, UNL isn't really up there with the big boys either when it comes to history, but they have a couple of nationally renowned scholars whom I hope to impress enough to go to bat for me in LORs, and after that, I think it's all up to me and how I perform there. If I can get to the next level out of a no-name undergrad institution, I'm sure I can parlay UNL into a great PhD program. I think at the MA level, while namebrand might help, 75% of what's going to get you in is all up to you, and 20% will probably be from your recommenders. You can find strong faculty at a relatively low-ranked school and turn it into something better.

[cyborges]

The OP (though awhile back) raises a question that I've been considering over the past few weeks. I applied to PhD programs and I'm in my senior year of undergrad at an institution almost no one has probably ever heard of. I don't think any of the history professors here are really nationally known, however, they focus a LOT on mechanics, primary source research, research paper writing, and the nuts and bolts of history. I ended up wait listed and a couple half way decent schools, got a consolation MA offer from a great school, and I'm heading, in all likelihood, to UNL next year on a fully funded offer. Now, UNL isn't really up there with the big boys either when it comes to history, but they have a couple of nationally renowned scholars whom I hope to impress enough to go to bat for me in LORs, and after that, I think it's all up to me and how I perform there. If I can get to the next level out of a no-name undergrad institution, I'm sure I can parlay UNL into a great PhD program. I think at the MA level, while namebrand might help, 75% of what's going to get you in is all up to you, and 20% will probably be from your recommenders. You can find strong faculty at a relatively low-ranked school and turn it into something better.

during my visits to two top 10 programs this year, i met several people who came from significantly lower ranked and no-name schools (and their master's programs). that is to say, top programs aren't just admitting master's students from the most highly regarded schools.

[RPits]

this is an excellent question, and like grizzly up there (and the original op) i've been considering my specific circumstance for a long time as well. currently, i'm in the final stage of completion of my masters at a public institution in nyc. though highly-rated, i completed my undergrad work at a public university, also in ny, that hardly anyone has heard beyond the state line. for those familiar, i've gone the SUNY/CUNY route (mostly because of economic reasons). now, i'm aware that my masters program isn't prestigious. however, i've studied under some pretty interesting professors who are all making contributions to their fields. i guess people here might describe them as "up-and-coming." regardless, i knew this, but i've really tried to make the most of my coursework. instead of signing up for the rudimentary masters thesis and research intensive, i sought one of my profs. out (who i had a good relationship with) and asked if she'd be willing to take me on through an independent study. now, more than a year later, i'm nearing the end of my thesis and wrapping it up. because she said yes, i've been able to travel to archives and institutions throughout new york and, as a result, have gained some really valuable experience.

i have a few friends who left our undergrad institution and got into programs straight away. one at chicago and another at rutgers. while i don't know if i've made the right decision concerning my masters program, i honestly because of circumstance couldn't have done it any other way. if anyone is in the same boat, and has to take a hard look a reality, then just try and make the most of it. build those strong relationships, seek out internships, and discover ways you can create freedom and experience for yourself within your program. at this point, even if my institution doesn't wow committees, at least i have an intensive piece of primary research that i am supremely proud of. hopefully a similar element can boost resumes for people in the same situation. good luck!

[Riotbeard]

I would say it doesn't really matter where you get your MA. Although I didn't get one... There are amazing scholars at schools across the country, and a lot of cutting edge work is coming from schools outside of the top 10 or even top 50 (I would argue most cutting edge work is not coming from these top programs, since they have more cultural restraints that come with these old and entrenched programs). Just think about Eugene Genovese who was blackballed for most of his career by any top program and teaching at New York polytechnic. However, 50 years after he started writing he is considered maybe the most important Southern historian of his generation. You can do great work at any school, and there are good advisers whose names aren't eric foner...

[KM3]

KMD, you've been pulling up quite a few old threads. Please keep the date in mind, the OP may already be attending a program.

Ah, true. I didn't look at the original post date because I was doing some late night surfing and my eyes were getting tired--and I'm not sure if you are suggesting that I'm doing this on multiple threads. If so, the threads are still obviously getting a lot of traffic (and you're still reading them to notice, right?) Besides, a lot of the information people give on these threads is of general use beyond the original "shelf life" of the post since people go through this process on an annual basis. I really don't see what the big deal is.

Anyway, hopefully my comment is at least partially useful to anyone who might read the thread, OP or not.

...and speaking of old...isn't KMD a band from the 80s or something??? Just trying to keep it light.

Edited April 2, 2011 by KM3

[Katzenmusik]

I had to make this decision last spring - and I turned down three expensive, unfunded Ivy League MA programs to attend a lower-ranked state school that offered me full funding.

I can say that my professors are great and are fully connected in their fields. I have no doubt that I am improving as a historian and learning a great deal from them. I am absorbing all I can, and I will be prepared to apply to PhD programs down the line.

Do you want to be saddled with $30,000 or so in debt just for the sake of prestige? Imagine all the other things you could do with that money. Plus, there is no guarantee that your Ivy League MA will feed into an equally elite PhD program.

Could you produce quality work at Northeastern? Check out the professors, their connections, and so on, as others have suggested. See if you can be put in touch with a current grad student who can answer your questions. Ask about where alumni go after the MA. If the answers are satisfactory, I say take the funded offer and run with it!

[lilorangecup]

re: Genovese

Yes, he taught at a Poly in Brooklyn to start out. Later he went on to teach at Rutgers and Rochester. At Rutgers he came out against the Vietnam War, was "blackballed" by some politicians but was never fired and was later made Dept. Chair at Rochester. And no, Foner needn't be your adviser to do great work. There is some symmetry to the fact that Genovese got his PhD at Columbia, where Foner now teaches, no?

Maybe Laurel Thatcher Ulrich would be suit the widely-influential-PhD-from-place-unknown parable. Mother of two, wife to a faculty member at UNH, now a prize winner, past AHA president, and distinguished chair at Harvard.

I would say it doesn't really matter where you get your MA. Although I didn't get one... There are amazing scholars at schools across the country, and a lot of cutting edge work is coming from schools outside of the top 10 or even top 50 (I would argue most cutting edge work is not coming from these top programs, since they have more cultural restraints that come with these old and entrenched programs). Just think about Eugene Genovese who was blackballed for most of his career by any top program and teaching at New York polytechnic. However, 50 years after he started writing he is considered maybe the most important Southern historian of his generation. You can do great work at any school, and there are good advisers whose names aren't eric foner...