Masters vs Doctorate (+JD?) for Rediscovered Career Path?

[ess33]

I have recently rediscovered a possible career goal for myself that I once had in college that may be worth pursuing: creating and running a thinktank advocating for changes to the American system of governance, or joining such a thinktank if it already exists. 

 

In light of this potential career path, a few questions present themselves. 

 

First, is this a good idea to pursue and devote much of my time/life to? I know of no thinktank considering such a course of action, except possibly on the margins (e.g. a movement to "get money out of politics" by passing a constitutional amendment overturning recent SCOTUS campaign finance rulings). The thinktank I would join or create would seek to change the nature of American representation and judicial selection/requirements, both fundamental to the country's fabric, which I anticipate will take a lot of time and focus to do, especially in building up support for it all, hence the thinktank, so I am curious if you think this would even be a good career pursuit, and what the benefits and drawbacks might be. 

On a related note, are you aware of thinktanks already in existence (not common cause) that aim to fundamentally transform American governance and how the US gov operates at the level of political representation and judicial selection? I would also be open to joining such an institution if one already exists.

 

Second, which do you believe would be most helpful in starting or joining such a thinktank: a political science Masters, political science PhD, or a JD degree? I believe some thinktanks have JDs at the helm and among the employees, but could an MA or PhD lend the thinktank a greater degree of credibility given the years of subject specialization their additional years of study give them? Would a PhD degree be significantly better for credibility's sake than an MA for building up a thinktank; alternatively, would a PhD degree open the door wider in applying for an established thinktank than an MA degree? Also, would a PhD find it more difficult to establish or work at a thinktank compared to an MA, since such activities are so far outside of the realm of academia? Are there other factors involved here that I might need to consider? 

 

Third, assuming I do end up wanting to start this thinktank and a version of it does not already exist, and assuming I do decide to go with either graduate degree, should I also take a JD as well, or just pursue the grad degree, (i.e. should I go PhD only or Masters only, or JD/PhD or JD/MA)? And on a related note, would an MA allow more career flexibility and options (thinktank + academia?) as opposed to a PhD (academia only?), or is the reverse usually true? I assume there is some flexibility for both, but which has more?

 

I have already been accepted by one MA program, not sure if I should take it or not because of the above questions I have. 

 

Looking forward to your responses.

[surreynotsurrey]

Hi there,

I'll do my best to answer your questions. However, I really suggest talking to someone in the non-profit research industry in your desired field as they will best know what preparation you need to lead a thinktank dealing with judicial issues. I currently have a JD, have practiced law in the past, and am just about to start my PhD to research judicial politics. As such, I have limited knowledge about what is required to be taken seriously in this field.

I can't really answer your first question, but I can say that the topic of reorganizing judicial appointments is broad and when you begin your graduate education, you'll figure out how to parse this question out and focus on smaller questions towards your overall goal. Starting an organization from the bottom-up is really hard, which is why many researchers just join academia and conduct their own studies. For example, I know of no organizations doing what I want to do, and I will likely try to stay in the academy.

Second, if you want to study the judiciary, absolutely focus on getting your JD first. There are scholars with only a PhD, only a JD, or have both. Those with both are the most respected, but you can absolutely get by with just a JD. Ultimately, I would argue that if you go to a top law school (think T-10) and you clerk after graduation, you likely do not need a PhD in a related field like Politics unless you want your work to be super quantitative (which is why I am doing a PhD). Ultimately, if you want your research to be based in legal thought and procedure, do the JD. If you want to analyze quantitatively why changing the judicial appointment process is beneficial, do a JD and a PhD in a quant related field. If you score really high on the GRE and LSAT (and have good grades of course), you may be able to do both a JD and PhD at the same time, and your JD might even be paid for (for instance, Vanderbilt has such a program for JD and PhD in Economics). Do research on this before proceeding. 

Third, a PhD is absolutely more flexible in this context. Thinktanks will hire MAs, JDs, and PhDs, but universities will only hire JDs or PhDs or JD/PhDs for both.Echoing my above answer, if you are serious about researching the judiciary, do a JD first and maybe even a PhD as well if you have the stamina. 

Hope this helps!

Edited April 18, 2023 by surreynotsurrey

[Boolakanaka]

On 3/29/2023 at 4:27 PM, ess33 said:

I have recently rediscovered a possible career goal for myself that I once had in college that may be worth pursuing: creating and running a thinktank advocating for changes to the American system of governance, or joining such a thinktank if it already exists. 

 

In light of this potential career path, a few questions present themselves. 

 

First, is this a good idea to pursue and devote much of my time/life to? I know of no thinktank considering such a course of action, except possibly on the margins (e.g. a movement to "get money out of politics" by passing a constitutional amendment overturning recent SCOTUS campaign finance rulings). The thinktank I would join or create would seek to change the nature of American representation and judicial selection/requirements, both fundamental to the country's fabric, which I anticipate will take a lot of time and focus to do, especially in building up support for it all, hence the thinktank, so I am curious if you think this would even be a good career pursuit, and what the benefits and drawbacks might be. 

On a related note, are you aware of thinktanks already in existence (not common cause) that aim to fundamentally transform American governance and how the US gov operates at the level of political representation and judicial selection? I would also be open to joining such an institution if one already exists.

 

Second, which do you believe would be most helpful in starting or joining such a thinktank: a political science Masters, political science PhD, or a JD degree? I believe some thinktanks have JDs at the helm and among the employees, but could an MA or PhD lend the thinktank a greater degree of credibility given the years of subject specialization their additional years of study give them? Would a PhD degree be significantly better for credibility's sake than an MA for building up a thinktank; alternatively, would a PhD degree open the door wider in applying for an established thinktank than an MA degree? Also, would a PhD find it more difficult to establish or work at a thinktank compared to an MA, since such activities are so far outside of the realm of academia? Are there other factors involved here that I might need to consider? 

 

Third, assuming I do end up wanting to start this thinktank and a version of it does not already exist, and assuming I do decide to go with either graduate degree, should I also take a JD as well, or just pursue the grad degree, (i.e. should I go PhD only or Masters only, or JD/PhD or JD/MA)? And on a related note, would an MA allow more career flexibility and options (thinktank + academia?) as opposed to a PhD (academia only?), or is the reverse usually true? I assume there is some flexibility for both, but which has more?

 

I have already been accepted by one MA program, not sure if I should take it or not because of the above questions I have. 

 

Looking forward to your responses.

I will say the top PHD in law programs ( and I would not consider some of the lesser known programs) are very competitive. Now, that said, they are all very nicely fully funded.  The big challenge is to obtain admission.