One school, no funding. Now what?

[cjh19]

I wanted to get everyone's thoughts on this, before admissions season comes to a close and everyone goes off to better things. While things aren't over yet, the worst case scenario for me this year is admission to one school, the University of Texas, with no funding. This is not bad, but also not great.

I'm currently working as a research fellow at an NGO in Washington. This gig can go through the beginning of November, if I want it to. If I'm lucky, I might be able to get a job out of it, either at this organization or with a friendly one.

So the dilemma is, should I take a guaranteed spot at a pretty good school (with no funding from the department), or work through my fellowship, try to get a job at the end of it and apply again with a few more credentials to my name? The downside is going through this process, with all its uncertainty, all over again (this is my second year applying). Plus there's no guarantee that I'll be able to land a job in November.

A third option would be to apply for a masters and go that route, although that runs up against the money issue, as well as delaying the start of a PhD program by two years.

So what do you think, either about my case specifically (UT vs. the Great Unknown) or the situation generally (decent school, no money vs. chance of a better school, funding next year)?

If it matters, these are my stats:

GPA: 3.92, University of Pittsburgh

BPhil--honors research degree

GRE: 800v, 660q, 5.5

Honors thesis published electronically by the University, two other minor publications. My current job involves some publishing in my own name, but not in academic journals

Two university-wide fellowships, one national scholarship (not super prestigious), my current fellowship

Study abroad in Moscow, decent Russian language

Subfield: Comparative (democratization, post-communist political transitions)

I appreciate any comments; perhaps others are in similar situations.

[Lex]

Part of the question depends on how you think next year is going to be, admissions-wise. This year is horrendous. State tax revenues are way down, private school endowments are getting scraped off the floor, and applicants are fleeing the job market.

I think next year's going to be worse. I think the economy's going to get worse and schools are going to run out of whatever transitional money is keeping them afloat this year. If I were in your worst-case scenario shoes (which I thought I was going to be a week ago) I'd be reapplying after two years, and I'd spend the next 1.5 years networking with professors at schools you want to go to, getting more experience, and trying to come up with other, better options.

I also, personally, wouldn't take on debt for a Ph.D. under any circumstances (with the possible exception of a little debt to supplement living expenses if I had a kid during the diss phase - definitely not tuition + living expenses debt). But that's just my appraisal of the job market.

[expatbayern]

Those seem like pretty good stats to have that problem...I think it's really just a testament to the random nature of the process. I would keep your spirits up for other places this time around, but if it doesn't come through, I'd still think that you ought to be able to get into a good program with good funding next time around.

If I were you and thought I could get a job in the fall, I'd probably do that and see if I could take a few classes as a non-degree student (maybe an intro stats/methods sequence? or something else that you think might be a weak point in your file) alongside. And definitely go over your applications with some professors that you trust and ask them what you could do to improve them (SOPs, etc.) for next time.

Of course, this depends on some specifics of your life. Could your finances handle taking out some loans for a year or two while trying to compete for funding at UT? Is your age such that you are anxious to get moving on a PhD, or are you just out of undergrad and ok to work for a year? etc.

Good luck.

[biginternational]

Tough situation, from one potentially facing a similar decision. I too wonder if the maxim against unfunded Ph.D. work should apply in (what are supposedly) these exceptional times. My inclination is that it should. It'll be hard, but if the funding doesn't come through for me I'll have to seriously look at putting plans to rest and pursuing my interests along another route. The lure of grad study is great but realistically it doesn't make sense to incur that level of debt without reasonable assurances of being able to recover the investment upon completion.

[flatcoat]

I agree with those who say do not do a PhD without funding. However, I think you are likely to get a funded offer, judging from your stats and your list of schools.

If you don't, I'd say keep the job and network like crazy to get another and reapply, but throw a few masters programs in next time. I got Stafford loans for my masters, and I do think that paying for a masters is more acceptable than paying for a PhD.

I feel for you having already gone through this twice. It's truly a nightmare.

[expatbayern]

Good point. For my one-year MA, I was offered half-tuition and took out loans (Perkins and both subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford) for the rest of tuition plus living expenses. It seemed reasonable enough, given that I managed to come out of undergrad without any debt, and now I'm successfully getting funded PhD offers.

[Lex]

Ah, good point: it does depend on your undergrad debt situation. If you have no undergrad debt, maybe it makes sense to take out $10,000 in loans.

I'd be really skeptical about master's programs, unless you think you could actually use the master's degree as a stand-alone thing. Maybe an MPP, but not an M.A. in political science. I do think the "no debt in pursuit of an academic career" rule is a good one, even in crazy times. If inflation really kicks in, a few years from now would be a good time to have debt; but I think if inflation is making that big a difference there won't really be jobs because the economy will be nuts.

[gradster]

First, wait till the season is over. But if you do not get anything else then this the advise:

-Find out what other students without funding do at Austin: are there teaching opportunities that would allow you to pay your way through, is funding in the future at all possible, other sources of income, etc.

- The first year of your PhD you are getting a masters and you get the degree whether you continue or not, so going there for a year and getting your masters is worthwhile, and you may receive funding from them in the future or apply to transfer to other programs.

- If you find out that there are no good ways to fund yourself there, then maybe a masters in a higher ranked school would help you get into programs with funding. Frankly, your stats are pretty good, so you should ask others to see your SOP and see what can be improved. Also, are you sure your letters are good? Maybe there is a red flag in one of the letters? I know you can't read your letters, but if you can always ask tell your letter writers that you didn't get into the schools you wanted and that if they honestly think you can do it and should give it another shot. If they are ambivalent that may signal they didn't write you a great letter, and you might want to get a letter from someone else (even its a non-academic letter). If they are enthusiastic ask them to read your SOP. For the SOP look at the most recent publications from profs in the schools you would like to go and see what they are doing now, and think of what avenues that are similar but not identical, you want to pursue. Best of luck.

[jackassjim]

I will only add to the choir, but I strongly advise you against enrolling in a program without funding. Schools are likely to be even poorer next year (a safe bet?), so counting on increased funding in the latter years of the program is a bad bet. Also, salaries down the line simply do not allow graduates to pay off huge debts.

I suggest you read this post from a Sociologist's blog. His advice really mirrors what I have been told by many of my own professors in political science.

http://orgtheory.wordpress.com/2007/05/ ... ad-school/

In short: I can't give you useful advice about Plan B, but don't go to Austin if they can't pay you to study there.

Edit: I know a Master's personally helped me write a better writing sample and SOP, but I don't think there is consensus about it being an unambiguous plus in your application. Also, I didn't pay for mine, and I don't think you should pay for yours. (Sorry to be so blunt. Please add nuance to all the things I said in this post).

[flatcoat]

Ah, good point: it does depend on your undergrad debt situation. If you have no undergrad debt, maybe it makes sense to take out $10,000 in loans.

I'd be really skeptical about master's programs, unless you think you could actually use the master's degree as a stand-alone thing. Maybe an MPP, but not an M.A. in political science. I do think the "no debt in pursuit of an academic career" rule is a good one, even in crazy times. If inflation really kicks in, a few years from now would be a good time to have debt; but I think if inflation is making that big a difference there won't really be jobs because the economy will be nuts.

Actually for what the OP is doing (NGO in Washington), the MA would definitely allow the OP to attain a higher position and salary. It's actually pretty necessary for many positions. I also work for an NGO in Washington, and it helped that I have one (although mine is in an area studies...and my research no involves nothing to do with that area). However, I'd offer the caveat that it would make the best sense to do an MA at a DC, policy-oriented school. SAIS, for instance, is where many of my coworkers got theirs. Maryland and Georgetown also come to mind. And of course the Ivies are represented.

[Lex]

Actually for what the OP is doing (NGO in Washington), the MA would definitely allow the OP to attain a higher position and salary. It's actually pretty necessary for many positions. I also work for an NGO in Washington, and it helped that I have one (although mine is in an area studies...and my research no involves nothing to do with that area). However, I'd offer the caveat that it would make the best sense to do an MA at a DC, policy-oriented school. SAIS, for instance, is where many of my coworkers got theirs. Maryland and Georgetown also come to mind. And of course the Ivies are represented.

You don't think an MPP would do just as much professional good? It's a complete degree in itself, rather than being viewed as a failed Ph.D. But that's not my world, so if you disagree I'll defer to your actual knowledge.

[publicpolicy79]

I would also argue that a MA, even in Political Science, is somewhat necessary for advancement in DC. I know I boosted my earning potential by about $15,000 a year by doing mine in American Politics at American University. Plus I made some great contacts and developed good relationships with profs who have now written my LORs. I took on some debt for that degree and I don't regret it.

On a different note, I previously had applied to only one doctoral program (in a different field though it is related to PSc) and was admitted without funding (oddly enough at UT-Austin). I turned it down, worked for two more years, and now have funded offers (my direction also changed in those two years). And while I don't know that my M.A. helped me signficantly, it does at least serve to demonstrate that I can do well at graduate-level work (especially since my graduate GPA was higher than my undergraduate gpa).

I will say this though, I had to retake my GRE because it was more than five years old. I got the EXACT same score (at least on the two sections that were still the same). So I apparently didn't get any smarter...at least as far as the GRE is concerned.

So, if it comes to it (which I don't think it will judging by your stats) I would not do the unfunded PhD. The MA is a definite option but not a requirement. Work experience in the field is not a bad thing (at least judging from the feedback I'm getting).

[cjh19]

Thanks for your thoughts, everybody. I hope that a funded offer will come up, either from Texas or somewhere else, but I feel like I need to get a sense of what my options are in case that doesn't happen. I appreciate your feedback.

I'm with you on the reluctance to take on significant debt in pursuit of the phd. I would have to be pretty confident that funding would become available in the second year, but I doubt the economy will be in much better shape this time in 2010. Even then I would seriously consider staying here in DC (or throwing up my hands and herding sheep for a while somewhere).

Like all of us, my hope was/is to start grad school this fall. It's discouraging to think about not entering a PhD program for another 2-3 years. Still some time left in this cycle, though, something could change. Anyway, thanks again, and don't let me put a stop to the conversation if you have something else to say. I'll take all the recommendations I can get.

[jimcompx]

I would echo the thoughts of others-I've been told by several respected professors not to accept an offer that doesn't have funding. It's just too hard to do if you also have to get a job-like most of us would need to.

As far as the MA goes, it has worked well for me to get one. I went to a good liberal arts school and networked-worked with the graduate director on his research-got a paid research position ($10/hr) and also was able to get an internship with a local think tank ($17/hr). Furthermore, I was able to get two positions teaching as an adjunct at local universities. So, since I received my M.A., I've made back all I spent on the degree (20k) and more.

Plus, it set me up to have a research agenda when and IF I ever get an acceptance letter!

Good luck!

[flatcoat]

You don't think an MPP would do just as much professional good? It's a complete degree in itself, rather than being viewed as a failed Ph.D. But that's not my world, so if you disagree I'll defer to your actual knowledge.

I think it would depend. For the kind of work I do (think tank), probably an MA is better. As far as I know, no one who works here as an MPP. An MPP could be better for other types of NGOs, though - I'm not at all familiar with MPP programs so can't really answer that. I'm not sure what you mean as "viewed as a failed Ph.D." A PhD is far from necessary in the world I work in, but an MA or some other kind of master's degree is absolutely necessary for any kind of real advancement. We just hired an ABD after a very competitive job search, and no one viewed him as a failed PhD. I never viewed my MA as "half a PhD." I got it as a terminal degree, but chose the thesis/research track in case I decided later to do a PhD (which, 5 years later, I have).

[publicpolicy79]

You don't think an MPP would do just as much professional good? It's a complete degree in itself, rather than being viewed as a failed Ph.D. But that's not my world, so if you disagree I'll defer to your actual knowledge.