PhD admits: Did you have an MA?

[strokeofmidnight]

I'm finishing an MA right now, and were I to go through the application process again, I would email every program I'm thinking about applying to and ask if they have a preference for BAs, if they set aside a certain number of spots for each, etc. Very few programs say on their website "we don't take MAs", but some basically don't (BU, as mentioned above, took 1 MA this year). So, as to whether it helps or hurts, it depends on where you want to go - you should include the degree preferences of programs in your evaluative criteria.

Very true. It's also worth noting, fit (which is always important) becomes absolutely critical if you're applying with an MA in hand (or, if you're a PhD transfer student). If you've already taken graduate-level courses (as a graduate student--BA taking grad course don't quite count in this respect), you're expected to present as far more thought-out, specific project. The dangers of doing so, of course, is that the more specific it is, the more important fit (and faculty) become. This round, 7 out of the 10 programs that I applied to were *really* good fits for me. Not surprisingly, the remaining 3 all turned me down. Out of the 7 "good fits"...5 accepted me, and the remaining two basically told me that they "would have accepted me, but..." (I'd rather not go into it, but there's a quirk about my application that makes me a pretty controversial applicant). If you're applying with an MA in hand, fit becomes utterly and absolutely critical. The programs know that while you can still change your mind, you're likely to be at a less formative "place" than someone with only a BA--and they'll want to make sure that your current "form" (approach, methodology, whatever you want to call it) is well in line with their own, even if you received your previous grad training elsewhere.

Some of my admits allow credit for the MA, but rarely as much as work as I completed. If youc an do the straight MA PhD, do. If you can't, look for schools that give some credit - I believe that most do. Of my applications, Stanford, Vandy, and Stony Brook did not. All the rest did.

As someone who is switching programs with an MA in hand, I think it's actually *really* valuable to take a least a year's worth of coursework at whatever program you enter. You'd want the opportunity to work with professors before choosing committee members...and coursework (as annoying as it is) can actually be a really profound period of scholarly growth. It's also worth noting, depending on your individual circumstances (and to some degree, how badly the program wants you), even schools that discourage/disallow transferring previous coursework might be willing to make exceptions. (it helps if the bulk of your coursework is taken under a peer institution). Three of the programs that accepted me offered to let me transfer far more classes than what their guidelines (formal or informal) suggested would be possible. One of those explicitly states on the website that require anyone with an MA (or a PhD transfer student) to start over in terms of coursework...so even if the language is tough, if the program is really exciting and interesting for you (and you're convinced that you're a good fit), apply anyway and see what they offer when/if they accept you.

[Venetia]

I'll just add my two cents, for what it's worth. I'm starting a PhD in English at a university that requires an MA of its PhD applicants (if you don't have one, they bump your application over to the MA applicant pool, I've heard), so I have an MA. However, it's not in English, but in Medieval Studies. For students that want to study the Medieval period, I think that an MA is *very* beneficial. There are always those spectacular few who manage to learn Latin and some vernaculars during their undergrad, but really for most of us it's graduate study that develops the skills for Medieval study!

[wordslinger]

I'm entering a PhD program that requires an MA in hand. I did discover in retrospect that several of the programs to which I applied accept more straight up BAs than MAs, but I wouldn't have changed my experience in any case. My MA program was excellent, and the PhD program I'm in is a perfect fit for me.

[wordslinger]

I'm very interested in Irish literature and history/politics, and the interplay of those fields. I applied to Irish Studies programs, or schools with respectable Irish literature names.

That's really interesting! I bet that you will write a great thesis.

[stormydown]

That's really interesting! I bet that you will write a great thesis.

Thanks so much! I got an unofficial email acceptance to NYU today, so it seems that Irish Studies programs are interested in my interests too.

[downtownchick]

Without an MA. Went straight to a PhD after working full-time for about 10 years. I see much better results from others with an MA generally speaking but I don't have money for it.

[melusine]

On 4/6/2010 at 12:03 PM, downtownchick said:

Without an MA. Went straight to a PhD after working full-time for about 10 years. I see much better results from others with an MA generally speaking but I don't have money for it.

MA doesn't necessarily mean money..

Although I've only been waitlisted for PHD programs this year (my first time applying) I was just offered a fully funded English MA with paid TAship and entrance scholarship.

All in all, in the short term, it amounts to the same thing as entering PhD. Plus it gives me something fun to do while I wait reapply.

[sibil]

I'm entering a Comp Lit PhD program with just a BA.

[wordslinger]

Thanks so much! I got an unofficial email acceptance to NYU today, so it seems that Irish Studies programs are interested in my interests too.

Congrats on that acceptance! That's huge!

[!anonscribe!]

I applied with an M.A. from a non-ph.d.-granting state U. Got into a UC and U Florida. My reasons were precisely the reasons others have noted: I punted undergrad with a 2.8 and had no direction in life. After working for a while, I realized English was something I wanted. So, I went into an M.A. program at a state U, nailed all my coursework, nailed my GRE's and got into two U's a liked with full funding. I will say though that having an M.A. was a liability at many programs (BU says it only accepts M.A.'s into the PhD program, failing to mention that they mean they only let M.A.'s from their own program into their Ph.D. program...or so I was told). Places like Columbia and other top programs don't even accept coursework from the M.A. from another U. Though, obviously, my biggest liability was a nightmarish undergrad gpa. Luckily, sometimes a person gets a second chance.

Anyway, I'm happy and healthy now in my program, which has a good representation of M.A.-holders from other institutions along with people straight from undergrad.

[melusine]

I just got into Rutgers' Comp Lit PhD (yay! it's such a great program!!) off the waitlist. They did say that my not having an MA, if not a problem in itself, was one of the reasons I hadn't been offered admission off the bat. Apparently, my obvious lack of focus and experience were pretty evident from my sop and writing sample.

Then again, I don't think anyone expects a 22 year old who's finishing their BA to have the same amount of skill and expertise as someone who's done graduate work and taught for a while..

[melusine]

*sorry: double-post

Edited April 16, 2010 by melusine

[lifealive]

If I'd had it my way, I would have gone straight into a PhD program. But I was older when I applied (5+ years out of undergrad) and knew exactly what I wanted to do. Unfortunately, my time "off" was a mixed blessing. I was more mature and motivated than I had been in my early 20s, but I had lost touch with the discipline. My writing sample was outdated (a close reading that flirted with a yucky form of historicism), and my statement of purpose, while avoiding the "I love literature" trap, was still pretty vague.

I was soundly rejected by all PhD programs the first time around and got into two funded terminal MA programs (with PhD programs ranked in the 70s). Two years later, after having completed a year of MA coursework, I was able to swing into a top 30 program. I wasn't, however, able to gain admission to any of the top 20 programs I applied to. Whether that had to do with writing or fit or luck or age or MA, I have no idea and don't want to speculate.

I do think certain programs are more forgiving of inexperience when that inexperience is young and right out of college. BA candidates have to be prepared all the same--these days, a love of literature and a good ability to close read simply aren't enough, which is why coming from a rigorous undergrad program or being really motivated and organized is essential--but rough-around-the-edges is more acceptable when you don't have an MA. For instance--okay, I don't want to draw huge sweeping generalizations--but my friend applied this year after taking approximately 1.5 years "off." She didn't have an MA but came from a top-20 undergrad program. She's smart but not that organized (didn't even start her statement of purpose until November, pick a writing sample until Thanksgiving, or take the GRE until December), and I can say without a doubt that my writing sample (from the second round) was much stronger. But she landed one of the best programs, go figure.

Having an MA won't necessarily seal you off from the top programs, but I would recommend continuing to take courses at the graduate level and reapplying before taking two years to pursue an MA that might not count toward your PhD. Most people have a lot of success when applying the second round. I think I had to do an MA before going on to a PhD--I simply didn't have the undergrad preparation, access to graduate-level courses, strong recommendations, or background in theory--but if you have access to grad classes, I recommend just taking a year. You can always throw a couple of MA programs into the mix time, but I wouldn't apply to them exclusively.

[strokeofmidnight]

I just got into Rutgers' Comp Lit PhD (yay! it's such a great program!!) off the waitlist. They did say that my not having an MA, if not a problem in itself, was one of the reasons I hadn't been offered admission off the bat. Apparently, my obvious lack of focus and experience were pretty evident from my sop and writing sample.

Then again, I don't think anyone expects a 22 year old who's finishing their BA to have the same amount of skill and expertise as someone who's done graduate work and taught for a while..

Congrats. Rutgers is really an awesome program I've had my fingers crossed for you that you'd score with one of the waitlists. Considering what a rough/competitive year this has been, you should be awfully proud of yourself for catching the eye of multiple programs, even if your lack-of-MA-training (rather than the MA per se) might have hindered you from first-round offers.

[lifealive]

Just a few of the schools I've come across that require an MA in-hand to enter their PhD program: Ohio State, Purdue, Michigan State, U of Maryland

I don't have an MA, but will be getting one in Fall 2010, luckily with a teaching assistantship.

Of those three programs, I think that Michigan State is the only one with a terminal MA program now. Maryland is no longer accepting MA students, period. I don't think OSU is turning them away, but they're now accepting BAs into a combined MA/PhD program a la Penn State. However, they just started doing this recently, so I don't think this will affect the PhD program for another year or so.

[paddington5]

I'm going into one of my top-choice PhD programs with an external M.A., as well as many fine folks on this forum, and here are some of my (possibly inconsequential) thoughts: I think that there are several advantages and disadvantages to getting a M.A. before the PhD. Cons? There are several "top" programs from which you'll be excluded or discouraged to apply (U of M--Ann Arbor and UC--Berkeley, for example). While having a M.A. won't absolutely bar you from these programs, they generally do not accept students unless they just have a B.A. That being said, other programs welcome students with external M.A.s, although the requirements are much higher and the competition much more advanced--not to mention you're competing for fewer positions. Your writing sample must be of near publishable quality, your GRE and LIT scores must be even higher than BA student requirements, your graduate GPA needs to be significantly high, your statement of purpose needs to be much more focused, and your research interests need to be edgier. Some schools also require a CV for their external MA applicants, where they don't require it for their B.A. applicants--this, of course, means they're looking for good conferences, university service, perhaps teaching experience, and possibly publications in a peer-reviewed journal (print or online).

Then again, getting a M.A. first means that you have time to accomplish some of these things at the same time that you're receiving experience at the graduate level. And, of course, your research interests will more than likely change or at least shift to focus on a new thread or question, so you may be more sure of which programs you'll be interested in attending. I originally applied to graduate schools as a 19th centuryist, for example, and after the first week of grad school already realized I wanted to do long 18th--the faculty wasn't as strong, nor was my cohort, in 18th-century studies. While I still got the training I needed to get into the PhD program I wanted, I was really glad I got a M.A. first because otherwise I would have been stuck in a PhD program without the resources I needed for my field.

One last thing, which can be a pro or a con depending on how you view it or to whom you are talking: most people with external M.A.s go for 2 years and then an additional 4 or 5 years for the PhD, making total time to the degree between 6 and 7 years, whereas B.A. to PhD programs generally take 5-6 years. Some people don't want to be in school an extra 1 or 2 years than need be, but some of the older professors will tell you that taking your time to degree is more reasonable and better for your career. It just depends, I suppose.

The best news of all is that, if you have a B.A. and want to get into a "straight to PhD program," there are plenty of great programs that will let you do that. If you want to get a M.A. first, then there are still great PhD programs that will accept and support you in that case, too. So my advice (though it may not be solicited) is do what makes you comfortable, you'll be fine either way! =)

[strokeofmidnight]

Cons? There are several "top" programs from which you'll be excluded or discouraged to apply (U of M--Ann Arbor and UC--Berkeley, for example). While having a M.A. won't absolutely bar you from these programs, they generally do not accept students unless they just have a B.A. That being said, other programs welcome students with external M.A.s, although the requirements are much higher and the competition much more advanced--not to mention you're competing for fewer positions. Your writing sample must be of near publishable quality, your GRE and LIT scores must be even higher than BA student requirements, your graduate GPA needs to be significantly high, your statement of purpose needs to be much more focused, and your research interests need to be edgier. Some schools also require a CV for their external MA applicants, where they don't require it for their B.A. applicants--this, of course, means they're looking for good conferences, university service, perhaps teaching experience, and possibly publications in a peer-reviewed journal (print or online).

Overall, I think this is a really nuanced, helpful, and accurate advice. I do have some questions regarding the section that I excerpted. Where are you getting the info that Berkeley and Michigan discourage students who apply with MA? I can say with a great deal of confidence (and for what it's worth, the hard numbers to back it) that this is untrue of Berkeley--though Berkeley's program has indeed changed drastically, so there's a very good chance that this was previously the case. Among Berkeley's current students, a third (often more) of each cohort came in with an MA degree. I'm less certain of Michigan, since I only have my own experience to draw on. But for what it's worth, I admitted (and heavily recruited) with an MA in hand. I won't go into the insane details of my situation, but in short...whatever disadvantages MA holders possess in the eyes of the committee were excerbated in my case. I have heard (from fairly good authority--someone in the program, relaying information from the DGS) that Michigan is reluctant to admit students straights out of undergrad (aka, applying before they've graduated), but that doesn't necessarily signal a preference for MA's.

You're absolutely right to point out that MA students do need much more focused SoP's that show a better grasp of their field...and are probably expected to have stronger writing samples (though I wonder if a BA student with a slightly weaker writing sample would actually be admitted over an MA student with a weaker one). I would actually disagree on teaching experience, service, conferences, and publications (I certainly had none of the above--same goes for many of my very successful MA-holding peers). The attitude that I've encountered in to programs seems to privilege quality over quantity--especially for publications. I've been told again and again to not publish unless I can publish well (especially at this early stage)--and when my submissions are rejected from top journals, to wait until I've "reached that level" rather than settled for a "lesser" publication. That once my work is published, it will follow me around for eternity, even if it's of lower caliber than I will (hopefully) produce in the future--and that this can actually hurt me on the job market. Most of my peers in the first and second year cohorts of the program that I'm entering have not published--though frankly, if they merely wanted a publication, they could easily have snagged one by now. I do think that publication standard is probably a good goal for anyone applying to grad school, but particularly if one has an MA already (and greater exposure to what "publication standard" means in your field--I presume, among the top journals). But I don't think that MA-holders need to translate that into an actual publication in order to be successful...and (probably more controversial advice), one should not publish prematurally (the whole "(pre?)preprofessionalization argument") simply to obtain the line in the CV. Ad-comms will recognize a "publication level" writing sample, with or without the actual reference.

As far as teaching goes...my experience (particularly this round, with an MA in hand) is limited to applying to programs that either heavily prioritized research over teaching, or prefer to train their own teachers. I had no teaching experience (or university service, for that matter) going in--and this definitely did not hurt me in the application process. I suspect that this may not be the case for programs with a slightly different sense of priorities, but the top programs in my field, at least, admit both BA and MA applicants for their research potential rather than teaching credentials.

[greekdaph]

Just briefly, piggybacking on on strokeofmidnight and paddington5's comments: I think there may be a distinction worth making between programs that discourage (either explicitly or implicitly) MA-holders from applying vs. programs that won't allow you to count any credits from your MA towards your PhD. Some programs--Yale comes to mind--prefer to train their own and so seem biased towards admitting applicants with only a BA, while some--such as NYU and UNC--are happy to count at least some courses from your MA towards PhD coursework requirements. In the middle, though, are programs that make you start from scratch when you arrive, no matter your previous experience, but that are more focused on the quality of your SOP and writing sample than on what that previous experience looks like. At those programs, MA training can help by allowing you to produce more focused and refined work but otherwise doesn't factor in (and the tradeoff, as paddington5 mentions, is the increased time to completion).

[americana]

No MA from me, though I graduated fully four years ago. My BA is from a SLAC. I'd say about a third of the people in my cohort have existing graduate degrees, though most of them have MFAs rather than proper English MAs. Which may erroneously imply that an MFA is an asset, as I think that's probably arbitrary.

[paddington5]

Overall, I think this is a really nuanced, helpful, and accurate advice. I do have some questions regarding the section that I excerpted. Where are you getting the info that Berkeley and Michigan discourage students who apply with MA? I can say with a great deal of confidence (and for what it's worth, the hard numbers to back it) that this is untrue of Berkeley--though Berkeley's program has indeed changed drastically, so there's a very good chance that this was previously the case. Among Berkeley's current students, a third (often more) of each cohort came in with an MA degree. I'm less certain of Michigan, since I only have my own experience to draw on. But for what it's worth, I admitted (and heavily recruited) with an MA in hand. I won't go into the insane details of my situation, but in short...whatever disadvantages MA holders possess in the eyes of the committee were excerbated in my case. I have heard (from fairly good authority--someone in the program, relaying information from the DGS) that Michigan is reluctant to admit students straights out of undergrad (aka, applying before they've graduated), but that doesn't necessarily signal a preference for MA's.

You're absolutely right to point out that MA students do need much more focused SoP's that show a better grasp of their field...and are probably expected to have stronger writing samples (though I wonder if a BA student with a slightly weaker writing sample would actually be admitted over an MA student with a weaker one). I would actually disagree on teaching experience, service, conferences, and publications (I certainly had none of the above--same goes for many of my very successful MA-holding peers). The attitude that I've encountered in to programs seems to privilege quality over quantity--especially for publications. I've been told again and again to not publish unless I can publish well (especially at this early stage)--and when my submissions are rejected from top journals, to wait until I've "reached that level" rather than settled for a "lesser" publication. That once my work is published, it will follow me around for eternity, even if it's of lower caliber than I will (hopefully) produce in the future--and that this can actually hurt me on the job market. Most of my peers in the first and second year cohorts of the program that I'm entering have not published--though frankly, if they merely wanted a publication, they could easily have snagged one by now. I do think that publication standard is probably a good goal for anyone applying to grad school, but particularly if one has an MA already (and greater exposure to what "publication standard" means in your field--I presume, among the top journals). But I don't think that MA-holders need to translate that into an actual publication in order to be successful...and (probably more controversial advice), one should not publish prematurally (the whole "(pre?)preprofessionalization argument") simply to obtain the line in the CV. Ad-comms will recognize a "publication level" writing sample, with or without the actual reference.

As far as teaching goes...my experience (particularly this round, with an MA in hand) is limited to applying to programs that either heavily prioritized research over teaching, or prefer to train their own teachers. I had no teaching experience (or university service, for that matter) going in--and this definitely did not hurt me in the application process. I suspect that this may not be the case for programs with a slightly different sense of priorities, but the top programs in my field, at least, admit both BA and MA applicants for their research potential rather than teaching credentials.

Very fair questions--thanks for the update on Berkeley, too. I admit I have no personal experience with Berkeley, only that which I have heard from both professors and fellow graduate students who applied two years ago, now. I am glad to hear that they are opening up the program to external M.A.s--how is your status in the program/# of credits once you enter? And I just checked U of M--their standing is that they give equal consideration to M.A. students, but acceptance does not guarantee different standing in the program--about a year ago, when I considered them, the website said something rather different. But thanks for catching me, I totally stand corrected! Still, in my experience there are some programs that do B.A. to PhD, and the positions for external M.A.s are fewer. U of Maryland, I know for a fact, claims that next year they will only be accepting students with B.A.s to their PhD programs. And places, like IU--Bloomington (the place I'm attending for the fall), claim that there are fewer spots for external M.A.s.

As to publication and teaching, I tried to be very careful in saying "perhaps teaching" and "possibly publication"--to be honest, I don't think teaching experience or publication in a tier 2 or tier 1 journal will harm your application's success; in fact, I think it could help you. Then again, like you said, these factors are not necessarily the deciding factors. The writing sample, SoP, and letters of rec will ultimately determine your fate. However, students applying to top programs with M.A.s in hand also need to realize that everyone else applying with M.A.s have experience in graduate coursework, advanced research, fairly high GRE/Lit scores, etc. Distinguishing your application, in both the quality of your research and your professional experience, can greatly help you when applying. You're exactly right to quote the phrase, "quality over quantity," though. I believe, however, that this phrase can be applied to conferences and, if you feel so inclined, publications: I honestly think that really good, competitive conferences, even in your M.A. program, will help you as an applicant and as a scholar, in general. In terms of publications, I have not felt inclined to publish either (I also got the advice to hold out until it's something I really want to put out there in a top tier journal), but I know of several people who have quality publications--trust me, that factor certainly didn't hurt them. In all honesty, it really helped them.

Teaching, though, can be sticky, it's true. If you spend too much time in your SoP or on your CV discussing your teaching experience, it may give off the impression that you're less focused on quality research. Then again, some schools really focus on teaching--not many of them seem to be in the "top 25," but I'm guessing that not everyone who is applying to programs next year will be interested in going to Research I schools. I guess what your questions really point to is the fact that, whether you have a B.A. or a M.A. in hand when you apply, you just really, really need to know the programs to which you're applying. For some, conferences, teaching, publications, might put you above the rest; for others, a kick ass writing sample will beat out all other factors.

That being said, congrats on Berkeley--way to be #1

Edited April 18, 2010 by paddington5

[downtownchick]

MA doesn't necessarily mean money..

It always means money in my case because when I didn't do an MA, I was making money to pay off debts from undergrad and from another very wrong financial decision, to support my parents, to pay vet bills for my sick pet and to have a comfortable lifestyle. If I did not have all those good reasons not to do an MA, I might have done one funded or unfunded. I guess it boils down to if you were not enrolled to a program, are you going to be able to make a lot more money doing something else? If you compare a funded MA with working as a clerk in the county library making $10/hour, then of course, no, your MA doesn't mean money. If you are able to make 5-figure a month selling houses/doing stunts/freelancing/whatever odd jobs you can think of to make money, you might have a different thought. I have been in a financial mess before so my take is as much as an MA helps application sometimes, it also feels nice seeing cash coming in every month without worrying how to pay bills and to put food on the table, especially sooner or later you most likely will have the opportunity to worry about them when you're doing your PhD anyway. Edited April 19, 2010 by downtownchick

[Christian O.]

U of Maryland, I know for a fact, claims that next year they will only be accepting students with B.A.s to their PhD programs. And places, like IU--Bloomington (the place I'm attending for the fall), claim that there are fewer spots for external M.A.s.

This might be because U of Maryland only accepted students with MAs to their PhD program this year. Not sure about that though.

This was the note on their site for this year:

please note: Applicants to the PhD program for fall 2010 enrollment must have an MA already in hand, or be positioned to complete an MA before fall 2010. Also, the MFA program is accepting applications for fall 2010.