Applying for PhD just to get Masters for FREE

[anacron]

I think this is the most compelling argument I have seen. You would have to consider the SOP the same as qualifications (GRE, transcripts, letters), and I'm not sure I buy that. However I think you're on to something, where the OP should just mention his interest in working in industry right off the bat which would serve both his and the uni's purposes as well. Then, no red flags will be raised as to why his interests (including internships and the like) are centered on industry-specific knowledge and/or research.

A counter-argument would be that there are plenty of folks who really are fascinated by subject X and working with Dr. Z, but for various reasons - academic, personal (spouse, etc.), career (getting hired only a couple of years into the program) - they change their minds later. I don't think that makes them bad or even people who did not fulfill their commitments.

The OP's situation is not a spur of the moment, unavoidable situation. He/she intends to deliberately deceive the advisor and the adcom in order to get a free ride for something the OP does not plan do. Clearly this is unethical... I don't see how you could say otherwise in you previous post.

What the OP does with the money is irrelevant. The fact is that they are going to waste upwards of $50,000/year in tuition, fees and stipend of the ADVISOR's money (not the OP's money) with the promise to do research for the next 5-6 years.

The act of submitting a PhD application means that you intend to do research in the field for the long term, in fact your SOP should precisely document this. Note that all good SOPs are essentially research statements therefore the OP's plan would clearly undermine those exact statements which will gain admission to the program.

I have just taken a look through one PhD application at a Top 10 school. The application happens to have a "I certify that all statements are truthful, to the best of my knowledge" checkbox. So... the ramifications are clear. If you do not show them justification for dropping out with just a master's they could easily get you for lying on the application and intentionally misleading the committee. It doesn't mean that the university will act on it but they certainly can (and have) if they believe you are misleading them.

By the way, many companies encourage higher learning and do fund employees for master's and PhDs, so the best option would be to gain employment for a year or two, show them you're worth it and then go get the master's. The question is why would you want to risk lying and getting caught when you can get way more money immediately (by getting a job) and then letting the company pay for the degree. A PhD stipend does not pay very well compared to a full time job.

To the OP:

If you still intend to follow through with your plan, I would suggest that you stop and enroll in an MBA instead (seems like this would be your cup of tea).

[chaospaladin]

Let's say if a PI had so much leftover funding that there are not enough PhD students in his or her research group and the PI needed more PhD students to be TAs, would they knowingly accept PhD students who have a high risk of dropping out with a MS?

[Eigen]

Two things:

One, PIs don't need TAs. Departments need TAs. TA salaries come (primarily) out of the departments funds, RAships come out of a PIs grant. If the department was really that hard up for teaching time, they could just hire an adjunct for ~3k per class per semester as opposed to 50k+ that they'd need for a graduate student.

Two, it reflects badly on a department when people leave prior to completing their degree, so no, I doubt it would be encouraged in any case.

I'll also add that "too much funding" is not a situation I've ever heard people talk about.

::edit:: damn iPad autocorrect

Edited July 19, 2011 by Eigen

[anacron]

Let's say if a PI had so much leftover funding that there are not enough PhD students in his or her research group and the PI needed more PhD students to be TAs, would they knowingly accept PhD students who have a high risk of dropping out with a MS?

How would you know if someone is high risk? If they say so in the SOP or anywhere in the application then they would not be admitted, outright. Remember there are a lot of qualified people who are rejected so they would benefit from the leftover funding, not the person who says they might drop out.

If you do not say so on your SOP/application and do not have just cause for dropping out then you basically lied on the application...

You may as well not apply for a PhD if you plan to mention the master's degree in the application.

[chaospaladin]

They could just higher an adjunct.

Don't you mean "hire"? Also would a PhD program try to weed out applicants in the admissions process if possible? If students dropping out is bad, then why don't they try to reject potential drop outs?

[Eigen]

Don't you mean "hire"? Also would a PhD program try to weed out applicants in the admissions process if possible? If students dropping out is bad, then why don't they try to reject potential drop outs?

They *do* try to reject potential dropouts. That's one of the major points of the application process- to find a cohort of students they believe can successfully complete the graduate program.

[anacron]

Don't you mean "hire"? Also would a PhD program try to weed out applicants in the admissions process if possible? If students dropping out is bad, then why don't they try to reject potential drop outs?

The admissions process is the weed out process and they do reject potential drop outs. Why do you assume otherwise? The only places where a school would take the risk of admitting potential drop outs is at lower ranked schools. There are way too many overqualified students being rejected at Top 20 school for the adcoms to even glance at potential drop outs.

[timuralp]

Let's say if a PI had so much leftover funding that there are not enough PhD students in his or her research group and the PI needed more PhD students to be TAs, would they knowingly accept PhD students who have a high risk of dropping out with a MS?

The more common action in the case of too much money is to offer RA positions to current MS students (either for a summer or a semester or however long) and then get them to stay in the group for PhD. There are, often, plenty of MS students looking to transition to PhD.

Also, I have heard of a number of cases of too much money. I believe this is discipline specific. Also, I believe the value of MS is discipline specific and what the MS entails (for one, it frequently does not entail a thesis in CS). The one thing that I found interesting about this thread is how many people from outside of CS jumped on it, but, in my opinion, did not always have a good perspective of the ramifications and typical practice in this particular field.

[Eigen]

The more common action in the case of too much money is to offer RA positions to current MS students (either for a summer or a semester or however long) and then get them to stay in the group for PhD. There are, often, plenty of MS students looking to transition to PhD.

Also, I have heard of a number of cases of too much money. I believe this is discipline specific. Also, I believe the value of MS is discipline specific and what the MS entails (for one, it frequently does not entail a thesis in CS). The one thing that I found interesting about this thread is how many people from outside of CS jumped on it, but, in my opinion, did not always have a good perspective of the ramifications and typical practice in this particular field.

In my mind the ethics of lying on your application in order to get free funding aren't field dependent- although you are right, the dynamics of MS vs PhD do vary from discipline to discipline, and CS is probably one of the more unusual ones out there.

In these cases of too much money- is it money for students, or money for equipment? Grant money can't be spent on whatever you want, and funds for grad student salaries are an earmarked portion of the total, usually.

[csperson]

I have NO idea how schools determine which applicants are the potential drop outs...

[timuralp]

In my mind the ethics of lying on your application in order to get free funding aren't field dependent- although you are right, the dynamics of MS vs PhD do vary from discipline to discipline, and CS is probably one of the more unusual ones out there.

I agree that the ethics of doing what the poster suggested are not field specific. It is an unethical thing to do across the board. The characterization of what happens when someone does it, however, was. The conversation took a detour into the structure of the programs and their requirements, how likely it is for someone to succeed, and what it implies about academia. Those are the issues I was referring to.

In these cases of too much money- is it money for students, or money for equipment? Grant money can't be spent on whatever you want, and funds for grad student salaries are an earmarked portion of the total, usually.

I know of both cases, but I was referring to too much student funding, in particular. This does occur and there are cases where students are actively recruited as the funding is there, but no one is using it. At the same time, the group looks for a qualified candidate and as such, even with superfluous funding, can take some time to fill the positions.

Edited July 19, 2011 by timuralp

[chaospaladin]

Why do you assume otherwise? The only places where a school would take the risk of admitting potential drop outs is at lower ranked schools.

I'm talking about the lower ranked schools. I assume so because some programs have like a 10% PhD graduation rate year after year.

Edited July 20, 2011 by chaospaladin

[anacron]

I'm talking about the lower ranked schools. I assume so because some programs have like a 10% PhD graduation rate year after year.

The 10% statistic could be for a number of reason right? For example if you take on a PhD student you do so for 5+ years, so you can't expect a high percentage just by virtue of that fact, some people take longer and some people take shorter amounts of time, which is different from a 4 year undergrad program. Some admissions cycles have a lot of admits while another has almost no admits. In addition to this you have students who drop for reasons out of their control (i.e. family pressures, financial issues, relocation, etc), some who can't make it past their quals and some who go ABD.

Another factor is the school, if the school is not a well known research institution then you're going to have a really hard time trying to find the right advisors, the right amount of resources and the right amount of guidance and thought provoking work. So it stands to reason that you'd stagnate very quickly at a lower ranked school. This is one of the main reasons people opt to do a Masters and then a PhD rather than enroll at a less than decent school.

Personally, I wouldn't read too much into the graduation rate because the reasons vary from individual to individual. However, I don't think this is because the school accepts students who are not motivated (although they'd have a better chance at getting in). Funding is very hard to come by and they will not waste it on someone who isn't genuinely interested.

Edited July 20, 2011 by anacron

[ktel]

I would certainly read into the graduation rate, especially when you are choosing a school. An extremely low graduation rate could reflect some sort of systemic problem within the institution that is causing students to switch schools or drop out entirely. A 10% graduation rate seems abysmally low to me, however I don't know what I should expect from PhD programs.

[Amogh]

I would certainly read into the graduation rate, especially when you are choosing a school. An extremely low graduation rate could reflect some sort of systemic problem within the institution that is causing students to switch schools or drop out entirely. A 10% graduation rate seems abysmally low to me, however I don't know what I should expect from PhD programs.

I say start worrying if it is lower than say 50% but otherwise it should be fine. I can think of several programs where a lot of the people dropped out to start up companies and just never went back.

[Matt W]

Does anyone else think that this topic is basically just the OP trolling?

[Mal83]

Plenty of people go to school to improve their career opportunities; it's not as if the only reason to get a PhD is to work in academia. Even my advisors have told me that many folks leave as ABD's when they are offered jobs, because not many people pass up 80 to 100K a year just to do a dissertation to earn the PhD.

Also why is it disgusting for someone to spend money that he saved at nice restaurants or anywhere else for that matter? We're still a capitalist country, and people go where they get the best deals. If this guy can get his school paid for, good for him. If he wants to blow it on eating out, or even hookers and drugs, good for him.

Wow, you've really missed the boat on this one huh? If the OP plans to lie his way into a program many would dream of getting into for the right reasons then I don't want to hear about how he's going to "blow" money that doesn't belong to him in the first place. That money is for him to earn a phD at that school, not to get a Master's and then jump ship when it's most convenient. It's not just fooling the admissions committee to let you in and then you're home free. He'd have to lie to his recommenders who will craft letters that will convince the ad comms he has the ability to work for many years (not just 1 or 2) to earn the degree, he'll have to craft an SOP around the phD track, which is obviously much different than a Master's, then once admitted he'll have to just go through the motions in order to not give himself away all the while not contributing what he said he was going to contribute to the department. The OP, if he wasn't just trolling to get a rise out of people, brazenly touted how he will take advantage of a phD program, yes, he is stealing a spot from someone else who actually plans on getting a phD and stealing money that is not intended for students to get only a Master's. And as others have said, you are signing on the dotted line at the very end of the application to say that everything in the application is true. It's like taking money for services only half rendered and on top of that knowing full well from the beginning he was only going render half of those services...that's called fraud. "I'm going to remain a phD student so long as it is convenient and free" is not what ad comms are looking for, but that's exactly what the OP would be concealing. Not OK. "Many folks leave..." you know I really don't think anymore explanation of how intent comes into play here is necessary, how that's not strikingly obvious is beyond me.

Edited August 1, 2011 by Mal83

[honkycat1]

well, morality aside

1) there is a difference in the type of training that a terminal masters program give you compare to a phd program. so it might even put you at a disadvantage compare to people that went to a masters program.

2) your not the first brilliant mind to come up with this plan and employers/professors are not dumb

3) addition to #2, what kind of letters of recommendations are you looking for? and from whom? you might have faith that you can pull this off by getting in, but it doesn't seem like you have a solid plan how to get out clean.

[zep]

How difficult would it be to "pull off" this plan?

If a software engineer works for about three years, and decides that he'd like to have a masters degree in order to bypass Human Resource screenings for new recruits, then couldn't he just apply for a fully funded MS/PhD program?

I plan on working like 20 hours a week without the department noticing, and after the MS requirements are finished, I just drop out, saying a PhD is NOT for me. Free masters, additional work experience (probably at a start-up).

1. Why does this hypothetical software engineer have to be a "he?"

2. I'm not sure that having an MS would radically change how human resources departments perceive your job application.

3. Even if having an MS would get you an on-site interview at any company, HR screenings aren't really a big deal.

4. If you plan to spent only 20 hours per week on school, your grades will be so awful that putting your MS GPA on your resume might actually hurt your job applications. (I know you don't care about the quality of your research, so I won't go there.)

[pitz2]

I have a similar problem.

I was picked for a PhD program with full funding, but I haven't been through all the admission process yet. I just got the email of notification.

I recently figured out that for personal problems I can't be there for all the duration of the PhD.

Since the MS if funded too at that university should I ask them to switch program into that now or will they refuse my admission if I do that?

Or should I just do it and then leave after 2/3 years with a MS?

Consider that I'm an international student and that I need an american degree to be able to work in the States, where my girlfriend is.

P.S. I'm also a chem student but I like this topic. Sorry for the intromission

[Amogh]

Why resurrect this old troll-field! ugh..

Anyways, getting to the point, don't do what the OP intended to do. Inform them right at the start(right now). DO NOT attempt to leave in between. Not only will it be a rude shock to people who have expectations from you and who have invested in you, you will also feel an immense amount of guilty and all that anguish really isn't worth it. Given that you got into the PhD program, I think shifting you into the MS program shouldn't be difficult.

Good Luck