MAPH at UChicago or Liberal Studies MA at NSSR

[père_fume]

Excluding economic considerations (ie which costs more, which offers better funding), which program do you think is better for someone looking for the best academic preparation for doctoral research? In other words: which is the stronger program, academically speaking?

[ursprache]

There are obviously pros and cons to both choices. I think at Chicago, you will be surrounded by a much more intensive and rigorous intellectual community. Plus, you'll get a "campus life" in a way that you won't with the New School. However, if you like a more integrated urban existence and think you'd love spending your next year or two in lower Manhattan (with all of the benefits and challenges that brings-- including commuting, if you're not lucky enough to get subsidized housing on campus), then maybe that's the best choice for you. I don't know your particular field, and that matters a huge amount too, as does the reputation of the program, and the faculty. Is your goal to continue on to a PhD program? If so, your most important concern should be with faculty. Work with well respected faculty whose research jives with yours and who you actually like on a personal level (to that end, visiting the schools and departments would be a good idea, if you haven't already). If you're not looking to continue on to a PhD program, then the reputation and quality of the faculty is less important. Chicago certainly has a more prestigious name, so there's that to keep in mind, but the NS has a reputation for cutting-edge work. The last thing I would add is that the NS has a HORRIBLE reputation for the way it treats graduate students. It's literally considered one of the most hostile environments in which to be a grad student. If you were doing a PhD, I would advise against the New School for this reason, but if it's just an MA then you're not in for the long haul and that could be less of a concern.

Obviously, no easy answer! The best bet is to think all the pros and cons through rationally (maybe make a table), visit, and then listen to your gut feeling.

[mmustard]

The last thing I would add is that the NS has a HORRIBLE reputation for the way it treats graduate students. It's literally considered one of the most hostile environments in which to be a grad student. If you were doing a PhD, I would advise against the New School for this reason, but if it's just an MA then you're not in for the long haul and that could be less of a concern.

I don't know much about UChicago's program at all, so I'm afraid I can't offer much in the form of weighed advice. But I can say that I disagree respectfully with the above - I'm finishing my two-year MA in NSSR's Liberal Studies program in May, and have recently been accepted into Columbia's PhD in my field (Art History). It couldn't be further from the truth that the school (faculty + admin) is hostile to its graduate students. The chair of the program and all of the long-term faculty are deeply committed to their students, and because the program is a terminal masters, the level of peer-competition is friendly, never aggressive or disheartening (or, at least that's the case in my cohort). Because it's essentially a critical-theory degree, with an interdisciplinary foundation, the people that I know there who've enjoyed it the most are those who enjoy the opportunity to spread their wings, as it were, but also have a firm and directed trajectory for their own research.

NSSR does not offer a PhD in Liberal Studies (and with good reason, but that's just imo), which means that were you interested in continuing on to the PhD at NSSR, you would have to switch disciplines. (It's done, usually into Philosophy or Political Science, but it's not very common.) The reality is - and this may be where the previous comment is coming from - that NSSR is part of the larger umbrella of The New School - which includes Eugene Lang College, Parsons (Design), Milano, Mannes and the NSGS. It's a monster: the campus literally consumes a huge chunk of Union Square and below. This often leaves students in the smaller schools feeling disconnected from the Big Cheese Administration and its decisions, which ultimately do affect student life - there's been a lot of tension recently over the President, for example. But within the little bubble of NSSR, I can only say good things about how the faculty and immediate administration respect and advise the students there. NSSR also, unfortunately, doesn't have much money to give out - the most common MA funding is about 50% tuition remission. My second year I was lucky to receive more - about 90% - but they only provide one full tuition remission a year, and no stipends (although there are plenty of opportunities to teach at the graduate and undergraduate level).

I'd be happy to answer any more specific questions you might have about NSSR; I'm sorry this is just a bit of a general overview addressing the above. I can say that I've really enjoyed my time there: I'm a stronger academic for the exposure to literature and scholars/critics/writers/professors I never would have been exposed to in my own discipline, and I don't feel that having NSSR on my resume has affected my own career trajectory negatively in any way (except, of course, for the loans).

Edited March 18, 2010 by mmustard

[père_fume]

Thank you both for the comments!

I am going into interdisciplinary MAs because I want to strengthen my curriculum and preparation for research. That said, my interests are pretty well defined: Lacanian psychoanalysis, political philosophy (in the vein of Arendt, Foucault, Agamben), and the transcendental/continental tradition of speculative philosophy (i mean Kant, Hegel, Heidegger...). What I want out of an MA is a very solid base of knowledge in these areas and (the opportunity to write) an excelent writting sample--goals in and of themselves, but, of course, goals in view of getting into the best possible doctoral programs. The reason I applied to Liberal Studies at NSSR instead of Philosophy/Psychoanalysis (which seems like a perfect fit), is that a professor warned me against it: she said that PhD programs in philosophy were reluctant to take students who had already been "steeped" in the methodologies and perspectives of philosophy departments at other schools. Was this bad advice? Is it really difficult to enter PhD programs at NSSR having completed the MA in Liberal Studies?

[mmustard]

Thank you both for the comments!

I am going into interdisciplinary MAs because I want to strengthen my curriculum and preparation for research. That said, my interests are pretty well defined: Lacanian psychoanalysis, political philosophy (in the vein of Arendt, Foucault, Agamben), and the transcendental/continental tradition of speculative philosophy (i mean Kant, Hegel, Heidegger...). What I want out of an MA is a very solid base of knowledge in these areas and (the opportunity to write) an excelent writting sample--goals in and of themselves, but, of course, goals in view of getting into the best possible doctoral programs. The reason I applied to Liberal Studies at NSSR instead of Philosophy/Psychoanalysis (which seems like a perfect fit), is that a professor warned me against it: she said that PhD programs in philosophy were reluctant to take students who had already been "steeped" in the methodologies and perspectives of philosophy departments at other schools. Was this bad advice? Is it really difficult to enter PhD programs at NSSR having completed the MA in Liberal Studies?

Your specific interests are certainly right in line with some of the real NSSR favourites! I'm sure you'd definitely feel at home, and I have to say that the LS program takes writing extremely seriously (Melissa Monroe in particular is an absolutely gem).

I'll agree with the professor to a certain degree, not knowing all that much about the Philosophy department: it's extremely insular, probably the most out of all the departments at NSSR. One of the benefits of the NSSR modus operandi, however, is the open-ended approach to essentially cultivating your own course list - you can take classes in any of the NSSR departments, and in any of the NYC consortium schools, with a little wrangling! If you wanted to devote much of your time to Philosophy courses within NSSR, it would certainly be possible. I'd recommend shopping around a little bit more with talking to different Professors, if you haven't done so already. They'll be able to give you more of an idea about transitions from the LS MA to other disciplines for the PhD.

[NELCy]

I'm at UofC; I've been here for a good amount of time. MAPH is generally regarded as a moneymaker. The acceptance bar is low and this is well-known inside and outside of the academy.

Best of luck to you in your decision. I know nothing about the other program.

[NELCy]

I didn't quite understand why you aren't applying for your PhD? Skip the MA. It's worthless--at UofC, most serious students start with the PhD (and I don't say this flippantly or arrogantly. I wasted two years doing an MA since I was fully funded). At the first go-around, I was accepted to the PhD program with full tuition (and no stipend) and I decided not to go (stupid decision since I went on anyway. . . ).

most PhD programs have MAs built in. If you've read the chronicle of ed lately, you'll see that most MA programs that don't lead to the PhD are worthless. There's no point in doing them at all (IMHO).

[americana]

I'd be careful about that Chicago MAPH, though. There's a lot of talk on the Lit/Rhet forum about how it's one of the biggest cash cows in all of American higher education. I'd love to hear some feedback abou that, though. But I'd be wary of paying 50 grand for any kind of Master's degree, and especially one in the humanities.

[Chi-grad]

I'd be careful about that Chicago MAPH, though. There's a lot of talk on the Lit/Rhet forum about how it's one of the biggest cash cows in all of American higher education. I'd love to hear some feedback abou that, though. But I'd be wary of paying 50 grand for any kind of Master's degree, and especially one in the humanities.

I wrote about this in another topic. Personally, MAPH was a useful program for me because it was a means to an end for improving my transcript. Enough so to be accepted at a top tier university for my PhD. But without PhD aspirations, I cannot in good faith justify paying 60 grand for an MA in the humanities.

And I would like to point out that not all BA students have a transcript that affords them immediate access to a PhD. For these students, MAPH can open doors, and very prestigious ones at that. It is just a high risk game. As always, caveat emptor.

Edited July 8, 2011 by Chi-grad