PhD with no graduate experience

[woolfie]

I've been talking to a lot of MA students I know here, and it seems to be unanimous that they all got rejected from PhD programs without any graduate experience. Now they are all reapplying with MAs and I'm competing with them. I feel like there is no chance of getting in. Thoughts? I've been working on applications for years, and now I can see why I got rejected last year and I feel like my project is so much better outlined this year. Though I can't but feel it's hopeless as I'm competing with people who will inevitably have more experience than me. Do you think that MA holders and BA holders are judged basically on the same level?

[anonacademic]

OK, I'm an MA holder, so take this with a grain of salt (For the record - my program was really fantastic and unique, and I didn't want to go anywhere else, including PhD programs. It was also a terminal program.)

I've been talking to a lot of MA students I know here, and it seems to be unanimous that they all got rejected from PhD programs without any graduate experience. Now they are all reapplying with MAs and I'm competing with them. I feel like there is no chance of getting in. Thoughts? I've been working on applications for years, and now I can see why I got rejected last year and I feel like my project is so much better outlined this year. Though I can't but feel it's hopeless as I'm competing with people who will inevitably have more experience than me. Do you think that MA holders and BA holders are judged basically on the same level?

Maybe a lot of them are fresh from the BA? A lot of students in my MA program had that background - they were roundly rejected everywhere and ended up doing the MA in the interim.

The thing is - that could also be your background, applying straight out of the BA.

The important difference between these MA holders now, and their applications when they were BA holders only, is time and developed focus. It sounds like, from your assessment of your project, that you've had the same experience, more or less. In other words, you've also had time to develop your focus, and you've taken it.

So yes, we do, in a way, have more experience (or more English classes, would be better). However, I don't think there should necessarily be a large gulf between us in regards to our chances.

There seems to be wildly divergence and inconsistent opinions about the MA "problem" (with some arguing that having an MA is bad). I would say that the most significant thing is not the accumulation of degrees but rather a strong project and the background skills to accomplish that project.

[anonacademic]

Also, I wouldn't be too worried if you do end up attending an MA program next year. I'm so, so, so glad I did that first. There is absolutely nothing to be ashamed of, if you end up taking that degree separately. Plus, you'll have the advantage of experiencing two separate campuses, with different opportunities, faculty, and resources - there is nothing wrong with that! Frankly I think that's a huge advantage.

[lifealive]

I think that admissions comittees are much more forgiving of people applying only with a BA. I know a lot of people who have had success without getting an MA--and it seems that at that level it's more about raw talent, close-reading ability, and potential. MA candidates are expected to be much more on the ball and specific about their proposed interventions. (That one year of graduate-level coursework is supposed to clarify everything and crystalize your critical approach, apparently.)

[fall-11]

Also, I wouldn't be too worried if you do end up attending an MA program next year. I'm so, so, so glad I did that first. There is absolutely nothing to be ashamed of, if you end up taking that degree separately. Plus, you'll have the advantage of experiencing two separate campuses, with different opportunities, faculty, and resources - there is nothing wrong with that! Frankly I think that's a huge advantage.

Yup, seconding this. I'm in an MA program right now and it *really* helps to take grad level courses and write grad level papers. It makes me feel more confident about what I'm doing, which I think I probably wouldn't have felt if I was a fresh BA. That's not to say that fresh BA's don't get accepted -- they certainly do, and I know people both at my current university and at my undergrad college who have gone straight into the PhD right after the BA, so it certainly happens. But going the MA route is not a bad thing by any means.

[poco_puffs]

I got into a PhD program with only my BA behind me, although I did take a year off in between graduating and starting at my current program. There are 18 students in my cohort, maybe 5 or 6 are in the MA-only track, and the rest of us are there for the PhD. Probably about two-thirds of the PhD students have MAs already, but I got the impression during my own applications that programs do accept a fair, even surprising, number of students with no prior graduate experience at all.

In my time thus far at my program, I think I'm even less nervous and stressed out than some of the students who have already had 1-3 years of graduate school in an MA program. Maybe I just don't know enough to be scared or stressed out. I've been doing alright in terms of work-- just keeping my head down and trying to improve on my research and writing from where I left off at my undergrad. The seminar paper I need to start writing in the next few days has had me a little spooked, since it feels like nothing I've ever written before, but I'll just keep on trucking.

The point of all of this being: once everyone gets admitted into the program, there isn't always a lot of difference between incoming students with a BA or MA, and schools know that. I agree with the other posters here that schools MIGHT have higher expectations of MA students, hoping that they've covered a lot more primary and secondary material and criticism, to the point of making it easier for students without an MA to get away with some gaps in their knowledge. Several of the girls with MAs in my program feel like there is additional pressure on them because "they've already been doing this, they should know better than to make mistakes X, Y, and Z" (those are their words).

Since I didn't get an MA, I can't tell you about whether it would benefit you in the long run to get one first before applying to the PhD programs. Just try to be realistic about the money of applications, loans, and if you'll be on the hook for even more money from an MA. If you aren't keen on going into a non-funded MA program, you might consider selectively taking some post-baccalaureate courses at your undergrad institution or whatever university is nearest to you. At least if it's cost effective, compared to admission to a program. I've known plenty of people, including within my current program, that just spent time in between BA and PhD just doing independent research and maybe taking one or two classes a year to keep their head in the game.

This advice is just my moderately-informed opinion, however. I hope you'll consider it alongside all the rest of the good advice you're getting.

Edited November 15, 2010 by poco_puffs

[medicine]

Are MA and BA holders judged the same? Most people say no; and often, that can work in your favor as BA holder.

I can pass along, for example, that Rutgers told me (an MA holder who was rejected last year) that the bar for MA holders is much, much higher than for BA's, and that not a single MA holder was admitted last year.

Hope that gives you some confidence!

[soxpuppet]

It really depends on the school. I was accepted to one school that told me I was only one of two students accepted to the PhD program who didn't already have an MA. At the school I chose to attend, there are no MA holders in my cohort (though there are a few MFAs). The one thing that seems pretty common across the board is that admissions committees DO have different standards for MA as opposed to only BA holders - with an MA in hand you're expected to have a far more clearly defined project, and a much stronger sense of your field. Very roughly, with a BA, adcoms are looking for promise and preparation. With an MA, they want to see a lot more polish on top of that.

It might be useful for you to try to figure out which schools are more likely to prefer BA-holders, and which will prefer you to already have an MA. One reason certain schools prefer students with MAs is because they feel those students are better prepared to finish on time (ie, their interests are confirmed and they're not as likely to switch fields), which can be important for those programs that aren't able to offer much if any funding beyond the 5th year (I was told this by a member of an admissions committee, but I don't know how universal the sentiment is). As such, a student with an MA can *sometimes* be seen as a safer bet.

[foppery]

In my current cohort of 13, only three students have MAs. So, yes, I would agree that admission standards are higher for MAs - but I'd also say that if you have an MA *and* a clearly defined plan of study, your graduate degree won't hold you back.

Essentially, my advice is that if you're already a solid candidate with a BA, you might as well apply to PhD programs; but if your undergraduate record isn't what it could be, or if you're not certain that graduate work is for you, you should apply to MA programs. (By the way, it's true that applying with only a BA allows you more freedom - I know someone who applied to do Renaissance lit and submitted a writing sample on Samuel Beckett. Obviously this was a risky approach, but he got into several great programs.)

<br style="text-shadow: none;">

[woolfie]

Also, I wouldn't be too worried if you do end up attending an MA program next year. I'm so, so, so glad I did that first. There is absolutely nothing to be ashamed of, if you end up taking that degree separately. Plus, you'll have the advantage of experiencing two separate campuses, with different opportunities, faculty, and resources - there is nothing wrong with that! Frankly I think that's a huge advantage.

Oh, don't get me wrong; I see nothing wrong with getting an MA first. It's just that, for my relationship and personal reasons, moving again, and then AGAIN in two years is going to be difficult for us for a number of reasons. I will be grateful for all the reasons you listed, it will just be hard for him to find a job, etc.

[woolfie]

It really depends on the school. I was accepted to one school that told me I was only one of two students accepted to the PhD program who didn't already have an MA. At the school I chose to attend, there are no MA holders in my cohort (though there are a few MFAs). The one thing that seems pretty common across the board is that admissions committees DO have different standards for MA as opposed to only BA holders - with an MA in hand you're expected to have a far more clearly defined project, and a much stronger sense of your field. Very roughly, with a BA, adcoms are looking for promise and preparation. With an MA, they want to see a lot more polish on top of that.

Do you mind sharing which schools they were? No problem if you don't, this being the Internet and all.

[anonacademic]

Oh, don't get me wrong; I see nothing wrong with getting an MA first. It's just that, for my relationship and personal reasons, moving again, and then AGAIN in two years is going to be difficult for us for a number of reasons. I will be grateful for all the reasons you listed, it will just be hard for him to find a job, etc.

Ah, OK, I wasn't sure! Yes absolutely, those sound like good reasons to avoid an MA! It sounds like you stand a good chance for PhD programs, in any case. Good luck!

[soxpuppet]

Do you mind sharing which schools they were? No problem if you don't, this being the Internet and all.

I'll send you a private message.

[lady_coffee]

I'll send you a private message.

I would also be interested, actually, if you're comfortable PM'ing.

A distinction I've heard a lot of talk about is the BA candidate straight out of undergrad vs. the BA candidate with at least a year "off" before grad school. I'm curious as to people's experiences/thoughts regarding this distinction.

This time around, should I get in, I'll have had that gap year. Weirdly enough, time away from academia has been a blessing -- I know that my energy will be refreshed and focused in a very different way next fall than it would have if I'd gone straight out of undergrad. (Assuming, of course, that I'm admitted! )

Edited November 15, 2010 by lady_coffee

[diehtc0ke]

I would also be interested, actually, if you're comfortable PM'ing.

A distinction I've heard a lot of talk about is the BA candidate straight out of undergrad vs. the BA candidate with at least a year "off" before grad school. I'm curious as to people's experiences/thoughts regarding this distinction.

This time around, should I get in, I'll have had that gap year. Weirdly enough, time away from academia has been a blessing -- I know that my energy will be refreshed and focused in a very different way next fall than it would have if I'd gone straight out of undergrad. (Assuming, of course, that I'm admitted! )

Hmm. I actually hadn't heard of that distinction in terms of what it means for admission but I know every time I tell a professor that I took that year off between undergrad and grad school they commend me on my forward thinking or something like that. I mean, it definitely gave me the time to figure out what I wanted my focus to be and I was able to construct a completely new writing sample (which, even with that extra time, didn't completely align with my statement of purpose even though both were in the same general field of "black queer studies"). With that being said, have you gotten the impression that there's a significant distinction to be made? I know in my own case it was the combination of free time and pointed research that made me a more successful candidate than I would have been had I really given it my all in applying during my senior year.

As for the original question, my cohort is small with a 1:1 ratio of MA holders to non-MA holders. I wouldn't rest on the idea that BA holders are possibly judged less harshly in terms of focus, though. Especially if you only have a bachelor's, showing that you've given significant thought to a particular and narrow project should put you in good standing with a lot of PhD program admissions committees.

[lady_coffee]

Hmm. I actually hadn't heard of that distinction in terms of what it means for admission but I know every time I tell a professor that I took that year off between undergrad and grad school they commend me on my forward thinking or something like that. I mean, it definitely gave me the time to figure out what I wanted my focus to be and I was able to construct a completely new writing sample (which, even with that extra time, didn't completely align with my statement of purpose even though both were in the same general field of "black queer studies"). With that being said, have you gotten the impression that there's a significant distinction to be made? I know in my own case it was the combination of free time and pointed research that made me a more successful candidate than I would have been had I really given it my all in applying during my senior year.

As for the original question, my cohort is small with a 1:1 ratio of MA holders to non-MA holders. I wouldn't rest on the idea that BA holders are possibly judged less harshly in terms of focus, though. Especially if you only have a bachelor's, showing that you've given significant thought to a particular and narrow project should put you in good standing with a lot of PhD program admissions committees.

You articulated what some of my profs/advisors have said -- having taken time off, you had more time to read, reflect, and come back with a stronger focus. I'm also working up a new writing sample -- still writing it, even with a month to go re: deadlines. Procrastinating tendencies die hard (I only just decided to reapply a few months ago, but still).

Thanks for the info re: 1:1 ratio. And re: "particular and narrow project" -- oy, have I struggled with what exactly constitutes particular and narrow. I have specific research questions and a relatively narrow area of interest, with possibilities of expansion into the following period, but it's not a specific micro-dissertation-type proposal, as I've seen elsewhere on the boards. It sounds like in that, at least, there may be considerations made when considering BA vs. MA candidates.

Edited November 15, 2010 by lady_coffee

[diehtc0ke]

You articulated what some of my profs/advisors have said -- having taken time off, you had more time to read, reflect, and come back with a stronger focus. I'm also working up a new writing sample -- still writing it, even with a month to go re: deadlines. Procrastinating tendencies die hard (I only just decided to reapply a few months ago, but still).

Thanks for the info re: 1:1 ratio. And re: "particular and narrow project" -- oy, have I struggled with what exactly constitutes particular and narrow. I have specific research questions and a relatively narrow area of interest, with possibilities of expansion into the following period, but it's not a specific micro-dissertation-type proposal, as I've seen elsewhere on the boards. It sounds like in that, at least, there may be considerations made when considering BA vs. MA candidates.

That sounds like you're in a good place, then. I can't say that my statement of purpose was akin to a "micro-dissertation-type proposal" but I definitely was able go somewhere beyond "I want to study death in literature." All I can say is do more than just point out what that area of interest is--give them the stakes of your current and future research. This isn't a space for answering the questions that you have but use those questions to talk about the issues that you think need working through. Why do these issues/why does your research matter? I know my professors couldn't stand my drafts until they pointedly asked me that question and I was able to give them an answer. Hope that's helpful.

[soxpuppet]

I wouldn't rest on the idea that BA holders are possibly judged less harshly in terms of focus, though. Especially if you only have a bachelor's, showing that you've given significant thought to a particular and narrow project should put you in good standing with a lot of PhD program admissions committees.

That's true. I should specify - it's more the case that if you hold an MA and don't articulate a narrow focus, you pretty much have no chance, while that's not necessarily the case for someone who only has a BA.

ALSO: Taking a year or more "off" - whether working, at an MA/MFA, whatever - is almost always a good idea, for all the reasons that have been mentioned and more.

[augustquail]

I've completed an MA already, not because I got rejected from phd programs (this is my first time applying), but because I loved my dept, didn't want to leave it, and had geographical restraints. I was ready to do graduate work, and felt my undergrad dept still had so much to offer me.

I completed an BA/MA program (5 1/2 years), so I'm hoping I'm considered a little differently from some other MA holders (who knows). My dept says it only admits students with the intellecutal maturity and ability to do grad work as an undergrad, so i'm hoping it says something about my abilities (i took my first 3 grad seminars in my senior year). Getting an MA was a great experience; not only did I *know* that getting a phd was what I wanted to do, I also discovered that I held my own with phd students--some of whom already had MAs--as an undergrad, and that I was thoroughly able to do graduate level work (my status as an undergrad didn't affec their grading--I was just treated like a regular MA student). I also have a deeper understanding of what I want to do, and how the academy works than I did as an undergrad.

But perhaps the most englightening experience was writing my MA thesis. This was incredibly an incredibly difficult and issolating process--but I did it, and with great results. Being able to know that I can do that kind of in depth work is a real relief to me, and gives me confidence that I didn't have before. Though a MA thesis is much shorter than a disseration (mine was 90 pages), the process is in many ways similar, and I feel like I know what to expect from long projects that (hopefully) await me in the future.

It seems natural that programs should hold MA holders to a higher standard. That being said, some programs (like U of maryland) only accept students to the phd programs who already have an MA. So I think how they value your previous grad experience will really vary accross the board. Some may only admitt a handful of MA holders, prefering to train people in their paricular way, and some may only admit a handful of BA holders, prefering to admit students who they know can hack it. Unfortunately, it's kind of hard to discern this on a lot of program websites!

[lady_coffee]

That sounds like you're in a good place, then. I can't say that my statement of purpose was akin to a "micro-dissertation-type proposal" but I definitely was able go somewhere beyond "I want to study death in literature." All I can say is do more than just point out what that area of interest is--give them the stakes of your current and future research. This isn't a space for answering the questions that you have but use those questions to talk about the issues that you think need working through. Why do these issues/why does your research matter? I know my professors couldn't stand my drafts until they pointedly asked me that question and I was able to give them an answer. Hope that's helpful.

Very helpful, yes. Thank you!

Also, death in literature. Hee! Love/hate that video.

Edited November 15, 2010 by lady_coffee

[Pamphilia]

I had no grad experience, nor did 75% of my cohort. I was accepted to one program where not a single incoming student had an MA in English (this is not to say that none had done grad work; some had MAs in other fields, or MFAs; no doubt some took grad classes as undergrads). I was also accepted to a program where 50% were incoming with MAs in English. The question of whether or not an MA in English will help you or hurt you in English PhD admissions is very debatable, and depends largely on the program in question. For the record, I was advised strongly against pursuing a terminal MA before applying to the PhD by my undergrad mentors, but I know people for whom it was a great experience, and indeed the reason they are in strong programs now. In general, I can't imagine that taking grad classes either as an undergrad or in a non-degree capacity after your BA would be anything but beneficial (so long as you do well). But for many programs, that step isn't fully necessary. It really depends on the individual--where she stands as a student, a scholar, and an applicant, and where she is applying. OP, if your application is strong, I wouldn't sweat the lack of prior grad experience (except in the case of schools like Maryland, which only accept those with an MA in hand, as mentioned above).