Unfunded Masters Programs

[bubawizwam]

I'm interested in everyone's thoughts on unfunded masters programs. On another post, the majority of people stated that they would not attend an unfunded PhD program. Does the same go for masters programs? What if attending an unfunded masters program allows one to later attend a funded PhD program? Does one bite the bullet for the MA to get the full-ride PhD?

[RedundantRyan]

Personally, I wouldn't attend either an unfunded masters or PhD program. A professor I'm close with on my campus did so, and she's really struggling to make ends meet--even with a tenure-track job.

The thing with an unfunded masters functioning as a spring-board for a funded PhD program is dicey. While it might work, it also might not, you know? That's a personal call that will vary, but I wouldn't do it. Since the job market for academics in a few years is an unknown (especially with the student debt crisis that seems to be brewing), it seems to me like getting an unfunded masters could be a major issue down the road, even with a funded PhD after.

[Darth.Vegan]

In certain circumstances I think it can be worthwhile personally. Just make sure that you can cover the cost using only federal loans, that way your eligible for the repayment programs that won't totally kill your finances later. I see it as potentially necessary to climb a prestige ladder and frankly given the PhD. placement of a program like MAPPS it seems to make sense. Is it a gamble? Sure. You could end up with loads of debt and not get placed in a PhD program, or not get placed in a PhD program that is ranked any better than one you may have gotten into without it. In that regard it is a personal decision. That said, I would imagine a masters from University of Chicago, or Columbia would greatly increase the likelihood of getting into a top 20 PhD program. This seems to me to be a very personal decision, and it really depends on your other options. That said, the monetary expense of a Masters seems rather small to the lifetime earning potential of having a tenure-track job vs possibly teaching adjunct (which is a fear a lot of us have I think). Personally I go back and forth on this a lot. If this time next year I only get into Santa Cruz or Oregon (both great programs but with questionable job placement), and I get into a partially funded masters at Chicago or Columbia I will certainly have a lot to think about.

Edited March 5, 2012 by xdarthveganx

[Darth.Vegan]

Here is what I meant about repayment programs by the way.

IBR or income based repayment:

http://studentaid.ed...ish/IBRPlan.jsp

This for me relieves some of the worry. Just stay the hell away from private loans.

Edited March 5, 2012 by xdarthveganx

[RedundantRyan]

I think your point about PhD programs with iffy placement vs. unfunded masters is a good one. That's a hard decision, no joke.

[sciencegirl]

I am not 100% sure of this... but aren't federally subsidized loans for graduate students going away? For some reason I read this somewhere...

[Darth.Vegan]

I am not 100% sure of this... but aren't federally subsidized loans for graduate students going away? For some reason I read this somewhere...

Don't know but it really doesn't matter, I am sure they will just increase the amount of unsubsidized loans. With IBR once you hit a certain threshold your monthly payment no longer increases, and after 25 years it's forgiven. For some people it may be worth it anyway.

Edit: Yes you are correct, what a damn shame

http://www.dailycal.org/2011/08/03/federal-graduate-loan-subsidy-eliminated-in-debt-ceiling-deal/

Guess we really don't prioritize higher education anymore do we?

Edited March 5, 2012 by xdarthveganx

[sciencegirl]

I think there are a lot of people freaking out about this in other forums... in Sociology, nicely, it seems that most programs are funded (whereas in the arts and professional programs this isn't the case).

I heard this segment on Marketplace Money on NPR the other weekend, and it terrified me.. I felt so bad for this guy who had over $100,000 in student loan debt and had no way out of it (even not in bankruptcy).. just a cautionary tale. Be really cautious of private loans, especially since the government ones are ending soon:

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/your-money/getting-personal/getting-personal-perils-private-student-debt

[Darth.Vegan]

I don't think federal graduate loans are ending anytime soon, just the subsidized ones where they pay your interest while you're in school. In fact the article I found says they are increasing the amount of unsubsidized loans to cover the difference. I do think private loans are a total trap though, those banks would literally suck the life out of you if they thought they could turn a profit.

Edited March 5, 2012 by xdarthveganx

[jacib]

I have had a few friends who've gone on to success very expensive masters programs. Think about what's missing from your application. Can this masters fill what needs to filled? One of my close friends just did MAPSS in anthropology. A year ago she was accepted nowhere, now she's got into all the top programs she applied to, except interestingly Chicago, which waitlisted her. She did great, but she already had data that she could use and analyze there from a Fulbright year. I actually have met a few people who've done MAPSS or Columbia's MA program. They got into programs that they're happy with, I think, but they said it convinced a lot of their peers not to apply to PhD programs. I think at one of those places, only like 30% ended up applying for a PhD immediately (not everyone went in thinking they were going to apply directly for a PhD, but a lot more than 30% did--a lot of people apparently came out discouraged, from what I've heard, or at least feeling they weren't ready for a PhD). In Chicago, I once split a cab with a MAPSS student and she was miserable. She felt like she got no support, and since it's only a year, had like three months to slavishly kiss ass all the time to develop a relationship with a new recomender. Keep in mind those things are money makers for the schools, so the schools love them, but students might have more mixed experiences. A lot of those people are 40k or whatever extra in debt with a sociology master's degree, which does not add the most transferable set of skills to your CV. The friends of mine who got into a top PhD programs think it was absolutely, unequivocally worth it for them, but I don't know about the ones who didn't. It really depends on the person; if you want to go, go in thinking strategically about what you want to get out of it.

Other people on this board have gone to unfunded but cheaper masters programs at places like Missouri or UNC-Greensboro. I don't know about success from those. If you're missing some quant stuff and say you want to do stats, especially, those might be a way to improve your application (I don't know of a cheaper masters program that has good networks people, but that might be my ignorance of networks people). Whatever you do, think about your goals and your application, and what's holding you back. Do they doubt you can do Ivy League course work? Are you missing a skill? Prestigious recs? A focused project? A good writing sample? Master programs are probably not the place you'll get a good writing sample, for instance. You'd probably be better off pouring your soul into revising an old paper. However, if you come from a lesser undergrad institution with a high GPA and high test scores and you think you're super promising, this kind of masters might put you on course for your dream school. Or if your undergrad GPA is spotty and indicates that you were "unserious" this might be a way to show that you're "serious" now.

Whatever masters you consider, ask them about success rates (defining success as getting into a top PhD program in a year or two) and what people do after. But then again, I wouldn't be surprised if the school doesn't really know those numbers...

[Darth.Vegan]

Does anyone know if you are automatically considered for Columbia's MA program when you apply to the PhD program?

[sleepycat]

Does anyone know if you are automatically considered for Columbia's MA program when you apply to the PhD program?

I heard that it does, but I didn't apply there. Also darth, be careful about Santa Cruz, they don't fund your whole experience leaving you to make up a good portion of expenses.

I am going for my unfunded MA at a local state school on the advice of my professors, who think I would be more competitive at bigger schools with the MA rather then going straight in with a good but not great GPA. I considered Columbia and Brandeis, but at $60,000+ I can't afford it because I do not want to be in that much debt for the rest of my life. I would rather go a fraction of that in debt (~$16,000 for 3 years) into a top school because I will do well in the MA program. It is going to take me longer to get the PhD because it is 3 years at least, but in that time I can make connections with people that went to top programs and have a much better writing samples. Pedigree might hurt me a bit though. Also I am switching to Anthro, so I need to make up courses that I missed as an undergraduate (upperdivision).

[jacib]

Does anyone know if you are automatically considered for Columbia's MA program when you apply to the PhD program?

Judging from the results board, yes, a lot of people have notes that say "Applied to PhD, got accepted to masters". I think Chicago's MAPSS is the same way. There may or may not be a little box to check, "Yes, I would like to be considered for the masters program," I can't recall from either of those places.

Also I wrote "lesser undergrad institution", which is a dickish, elitist, and inaccurate way to say what I meant. Pardon my poor writing skills and let me correct myself. I meant "less well known" or "considered less prestigious" or even "less well connected school". Thinking only of all those "less"es I wrote "lesser" in haste, but it now reads like a judgement about quality, which I didn't mean. Oops. And people from less well connected schools can and do get into programs of every reputation, it's just (like everything) more difficult than if you had letters from Buraway and Wacquant, or DiMaggio and Zelizer, or Andy Abbott and Mario Small. A friend of mine who did econ once had a eminent professor write down exactly what he looks for, and in his valuation, a letter from a person he knows was maybe the second thing (after some math stuff), and a letter from someone he doesn't know (personally or by reputation) is more of a tie breaker. Not everyone is so polarized in their assessment, but, you know, networks matter.

Edited March 6, 2012 by jacib

[Chuck]

I still believe that, in general, MA programs can be quite valuable. I know many people who are extremely happy with their decision to complete an MA or professional degree- whether as a precursor to the PhD/a professional goal, or simply to fulfill an intellectual itch. The benefits of a successful masters degree can be qualitatively different than anything available in a PhD program. Some of the most interesting people in academia are career changers, field changers, dabblers, recovered failures, etc. A well-chosen and well timed masters degree can certainly be a springboard into any number of rewarding and successful futures. I have posted on this forum about this a few times in the past, so maybe I will leave my general defense of master's degrees at that. No, they're not for everyone, but I love 'em! And they are certainly nothing to look down one's nose upon.

That said, I think there is vast variance of type and quality in master's programs. If it is your dearest intention to go on to the PhD, you're going to have to choose a program with care. Using the MA as a springboard to a PhD program is a very specific purpose. By definition, you're not trying to pursue a professional credential or scratch some obscure intellectual itch. You'd really rather be in a PhD program, but you either can't get into one, or you can't get into the one you want. This means that there are aspects of your application which you believe will be enhanced by what is essentially an academic "gap year" (now is when you should be thinking "can I strengthen my application without doing an MA?"). You think, with proper supervision and resources, you can come up with a better writing sample, strong recommendations from connected people, refinements to your research question, etc. You're a smart person who just needs a little time and help to put your best face forward in an application. And, you may be right. Or, you may be wrong. The MA as springboard is a gamble with no sure guarantees. These programs are host to a spectrum of students - people headed to top PhD programs, people headed to law school, people who will not go on to PhD programs, people who are just there to scratch an intellectual itch. If you fail out, quit, learn that research is not for you, decide that you hate social science, you can't imagine 6 more years of the same, etc, then great! You know more about yourself and you've saved the time, effort, and expense of applying to PhD programs, suffering through the admissions process, and even more years of a difficult lifestyle. If you succeed- learn multivariate stats, write a fantastic thesis, present at the ASA, and make strong connections with influential letter writers.. well, good for you! You still have to apply to PhD programs! And this is why I think that funding is absolutely crucial to your decision, and that the pedigree of the institution where you pursue an MA should perhaps be the least important factor inspiring your interest.

If I were in the position of choosing an MA program (with the intention of using it as a springboard to the PhD), here is what I would consider:

1- Admissions: Faculty on admissions committees say that the most important criterion in evaluating a sea of seemingly qualified candidates is an intangible one. They are trying to determine whether the candidate can complete the PhD and secure a tenure-track job. There is no test or credential that can demonstrate this quality. Applicants must be intelligent, creative, determined, and successful, yes. But they must also possess something more. Admissions committees review each year literally hundreds of applicants with top credentials. Most of these candidates no doubt also have stellar letters of reference, attesting to their superhuman academic skills. The best reference writers speak to an applicant's ability to undertake and complete brilliant creative PhD research. This assertion is most believable when corroborated with a strong writing sample, and supporting references in other parts of the application. But it also needs to be contextualized. The strongest letters are not those that are simply strong- but those that come from faculty known to the department. A letter that says "Janie wrote the best senior thesis at the University of East Timbuktu" is (unfortunately, for those coming from lesser-known schools) essentially meaningless. A conscientious letter writer can be more specific by adding "The East Timbuktu sociology department, though rather small, has a strong record of success in top-20 PhD placement. Janie's work in the department not only places her at the top of her graduating class, it is as good as that of John Smith and Sarah Jones, both of whom were granted admission to your department and have gone on to successful academic careers." Context is important. Networks are important. Therefore, building relationships is important. Fortunately, there are many ways to do it. If any faculty in your undergrad department have connections, these connections are going to be your best bet for standing out in the admissions process. Note that you do not need to be at a "pedigree" school (either for undergrad or your MA) to do this. It probably doesn't hurt, but I really don't think it's necessary. What is necessary is to find an MA program where you can reasonably be assured of an academic environment that will facilitate you strengthening your application to be the best it can be. You need access to meaningful dialogue with the right people.

2 - Placement: It will likely not be easy to get an answer to this question, but this is the question you want to ask any prospective MA program: "What is your placement rate in funded PhD programs, and which programs are they?" Many programs will instead answer the question "Of people who decided to go on to the PhD, what is your placement rate in (funded?) PhD programs, and which programs are they?" MAPSS answers the question: "Of people who decided to apply to PhD programs, and whose applications we supported, here are the programs to which they gained admission:" http://mapss.uchicago.edu/graduates/phds.shtml. Notice that the stats posted exclude potentially telling portions of their population. What does it mean that they only record data on the applications they "supported"? With any MA program, you're going to be most successful if you go in asking hard questions - and don't let up during your entire career as a student there. You're at the bottom of the grad student totem poll, with precious little time and resources to get what you came for.

3 - Academics: Being at the bottom of the totem poll in a graduate college geared primarily toward PhD students (or, lets, face it, often primarily toward producing academic research), is likely going to be a difficult experience. How much access are you going to have to the professors you came there to work with? Who will realistically advise your research? Are you going to be dealing mostly with an advanced PhD student, adjunct faculty member, or do tenured faculty actually teach and advise masters students? Speak to current students about their experience. Are they forming the relationships with key faculty that they were promised? Are they optimistic about their prospects of PhD admission? Are they happy?

4 - Funding: Funded master's programs are out there. The FLAS grant (from the state department, for the study of certain critical languages) is a big option at several schools. Many faculty have NSF-type grants with specific provisions for the support of masters students. TA-ships at public universities almost always grant a passable funding package. Many truly strong faculty members can be found at Masters-granting institutions, especially recent PhD graduates of the top programs you are considering. Do your homework. Figure out the academic lineages. You may not be able to study with Superstar X, but you will likely find out that her recent graduates are spread far and wide at MA granting institutions. And they're likely hungry for a strong student to mentor, someone who they can groom for entrance to a PhD program - their alma mater perhaps? I'd be wary of any MA program that requires you to pay tuition (If you don't find funding with a stipend, living expenses alone are going to put you in some significant debt). I'd want some sort of guarantee for that level of investment. For any MA program, I'd ask hard questions about completion rate, placement rate, whether the department admits its own graduates, and with what success rate, etc. For some it might be worth it, but I think a lot of students end up regretting going into programs at name brand universities without doing their due diligence.

Here is some good advice from a MAPSS grad a few years ago

I went through MAPSS, and there are some caveats to keep in mind:

1. The quarter system at UC is brisk. If you do not possess the kind of personality that makes the room shine when you walk in, or gregarious enough to force the room to shine, rethink attending MAPSS. You'll have a very small window in which to make an impression with professors, and that is the primary consideration for getting one's money's worth out of the MAPSS program.

2. When I attended, students had to scramble to find thesis advisors. MAPSS students are not always the most welcomed by some professors so if you have someone specifically you'd like to work with, better attempt to develop a relationship with him/her BEFORE you arrive on campus (or even accept the program).

3. Stellar academic backgrounds seem to help open doors but then again, do such backgrounds need a boost from MAPSS? Fair to middlin' apps (relative to the accepted cohort) will struggle unless, as I said at No. 1, you have the knack for impressing professors... quickly.

4. Tuition assistance or otherwise, all applicants must SERIOUSLY consider the costs incurred. This isn't a cheap program by any stretch of the imagination.

5. MAPSS is best suited to help those who have a very definite direction, that direction (or interest in that direction) can be found within the UC faculty, possess the ability to quickly win over a UC professor, but are coming out of a weaker undergraduate institution and really need a CV boost for a PhD program. Even then, seriously consider the costs that will be incurred, versus one's long-term prospects in the academic job market for social sciences, which isn't great at the moment.

6. Yes, if one is planning to apply to PhD programs after MAPSS, plan on waiting out the year after MAPSS, because no one will help you pull together your grad school app until after you have finished the program.

All that said, MAPSS does provide access to a number of great professors and courses that otherwise would be inaccessible.

Edited March 6, 2012 by Chuck

[Darth.Vegan]

Thanks for the advice Chuck, you always seem to have great insights.

Even though I do not go to a "pedigree" school, I feel like at least some of my letter writers will carry weight in the departments that they earned their PhD's from.

I intentionally made it a point to seek out advisers for my honor's thesis and take classes with professors I felt would be able to help me through the admissions process. Both in terms of the fact that they themselves went to top programs and because being relatively young, they still know people in the departments on a personal basis.

I have 5 letter writers and the programs they went to include:

Michigan-Ann Arbor

Wisconsin Madison

UT-Austin

SUNY-Albany

NYU

I think it is important to do this. I don't think it matters that much if people are "famous" although I am sure that looks great on an application. Networking seems to be the most important. If people at top programs know the individuals writing the letters, I am sure it will be more meaningful.

Now what I am trying to figure out is how to distribute my letter writers for the 15 programs I want to apply to. Also some programs have a strict 3 letter limit while others are ok with extra letters.

The program administrator at Chicago specifically told me that prestige of your undergraduate institution does not matter. While that is probably true, I would imagine that the prestige of your letter writer does. That said, it's not that difficult to find faculty from top programs at any large research school, regardless of prestige.

Edited March 6, 2012 by xdarthveganx

[wmnshlthsoc]

If this response is a duplicate idea, please excuse. I did not read everyone's responses.

Speaking as someone who has their MA, I'll say that being funded is not that common. My department only funded one student (cohort of 17). Most students relied on grants and loans (a true sacrafice for your education). Funding is not as common as PhD programs... at least not in my experience. Of course I have colleagues at other institutions who, like myself, cover the costs with TA positions, fellowships and work study.

But I would not vote against getting your MA because of funding since it's not the most common thing anyway.

[sociologo]

There are MA programs out there that fund, though I think they are a lot less common. Personally, I wouldn't go an MA program unfunded - you need to at least have partial funding. I just wouldn't want that much debt. I feel really lucky that that program I'm in currently funds all of its MA students.