Bad Advice?

[zeldacrash]

So when I first started telling profs in the history department at my undergrad school that I would be applying for grad schools after I graduated they all told me to NEVER apply for MA programs, to ALWAYS apply for PHd programs. Well here I am with 4 rejections, and 3 schools left to hear back from and hope is fading. Add to this that I was at work on Friday and a client told me about all of the great programs she's been accepted to in my EXACT field (Russian History, Cultural) for MA programs. I was iffy about the PHD only advice to begin with and now I'm really wondering. What does everyone think? Should I have applyed to some MA programs despite the advice of my profs?

[kahlan_amnell]

So when I first started telling profs in the history department at my undergrad school that I would be applying for grad schools after I graduated they all told me to NEVER apply for MA programs, to ALWAYS apply for PHd programs. Well here I am with 4 rejections, and 3 schools left to hear back from and hope is fading. Add to this that I was at work on Friday and a client told me about all of the great programs she's been accepted to in my EXACT field (Russian History, Cultural) for MA programs. I was iffy about the PHD only advice to begin with and now I'm really wondering. What does everyone think? Should I have applyed to some MA programs despite the advice of my profs?

MA programs can be a good way to get started with grad school if you think that your stats are keeping you out of Ph.D. programs. Your professors probably advised you not to apply to MA programs, because most history MA programs are not funded, and if you change programs for your Ph.D. a number of your credits may not transfer, and it will take longer to get the Ph.D. Some schools don't accept any transfer credits for people with MAs. (I'm looking at you UC Irvine.)

[Dirt]

So when I first started telling profs in the history department at my undergrad school that I would be applying for grad schools after I graduated they all told me to NEVER apply for MA programs, to ALWAYS apply for PHd programs. Well here I am with 4 rejections, and 3 schools left to hear back from and hope is fading. Add to this that I was at work on Friday and a client told me about all of the great programs she's been accepted to in my EXACT field (Russian History, Cultural) for MA programs. I was iffy about the PHD only advice to begin with and now I'm really wondering. What does everyone think? Should I have applyed to some MA programs despite the advice of my profs?

I applied to an M.A. program right out of undergrad, mostly because I wasn't prepared to commit to a Ph.D. program. It was probably the smartest move of my academic life. I finished undergrad with a 3.4-ish GPA (probably a little lower in history) and exactly one history professor who actually liked me well enough to remember my name (and he wasn't in my subfield). I finished my M.A. last year with a 4.0 graduate GPA, four semesters of a language that's actually useful to me, a published journal article, a thesis that contains another article or two in embryonic form, several conference papers (two of them award-winning), two years' experience as a TA, and some really great letters of recommendation from faculty that I worked with intensively over the course of several years. Plus I actually know what I want to study now, so I was able to be pretty discerning about which doctoral programs I applied to. I'm no boy genius, but I'm definitely in better shape than I was before.

The downside of M.A. programs really is the lack of funding. I would recommend looking at programs that offer the M.A. as their highest degree. My TA work took care of tuition and brought in a small stipend, but I also had to take out loans (really dumb) and work a full-time job through the whole thing in order to eat and pay my mortgage. At times, that really got crazy; I had to make a lot of sacrifices.

[riss287]

I applied to MAs because I wasn't quite sure if I could handle PhD.s and my GREs aren't the best ever. The University of Iowa's program (please please please please) has funded MAs if you choose the Plan A which leads to their Ph.D. program. That's one of the reasons I chose it. I don't want to have to change schools for my Ph.D. So, anyway, my point is that their MA program is funded for people who want to get their Ph.D. at the same school.

[feisty]

I think it depends on a lot of things.

If you are pretty certain you want a PhD and can get into a PhD there is no reason for it.

Funding, also.

I also think that if you have a specific career in mind that could be boosted ($$$$$) by an MA then it makes sense as well. I'm not sure how a history MA would fuel a career, but maybe for things like policy, international banking, global development, aid work, etc. you would want some specialized knowledge of a global region/issue and then get back into the working world asap.

[zeldacrash]

Thanks for the responses everybody! Great food for thought! Especially since it looks like I will be doing this again next year.... :wink:

[Louiselab]

I know you already gave your "thank you" so this probably a done deal but here goes...

I was told to get an MA because I didn't have as much coursework in history (I double majored and came to history late in life). I was also told to use it as a chance to up my GPA. Naturally, being the kind of person I am, I totally ignored this. I got a master's in an unrelated subject, and did colloquia and research courses through their history department. I don't think any of this actually helped me and made the difference between "accept" and "reject" since none of it showed up on my transcript, and while I know why I was rejected I am still clueless as to why I was accepted.

The plus, though, is that I was able to use my independent research paper for a final project for one and got some great feedback on it to fine tune everything. I had a much better vision for "the future," if you will, and I definitely am not entering graduate school scared about whether or not I will be okay or feel like a stupid moron everyday. So there are good things. I would recommend the following, though:

Only get the MA if you can do it through a public university and pay in state tuition. It is not worth paying a great deal of money for, especially if you find yourself at the end of the time with no acceptances to a PhD program and a history master's that prompts you to think "what the hell am I going to do with this?" This was my biggest fear and why I avoided getting an MA, personally.

[jaw17]

Zeldacrash: You might want to seriously consider applying for the Master of Arts in Global, International & Comparative History at Georgetown; I'm not sure whether they ever extended their fall deadline, but they do also accept students for the spring semester (the whole degree is 3 terms). My husband was one of the first students in that program - also for Russian/Eurasian studies - and it served him very well. You can do a search to find all of my past posts on this, rather than regurgitating them here, but suffice it to say that he is now getting his PhD at Princeton, where the generous stipend will more than make up for the costs of the master's degree.

[synthla]

You can do a search to find all of my past posts on this, rather than regurgitating them here, but suffice it to say that he is now getting his PhD at Princeton, where the generous stipend will more than make up for the costs of the master's degree.

Good point, provided, of course, zeldacrash also gets into Princeton. Otherwise he/she will probably be getting by on less than $22K per year stipend, and possibly (probably?) much less. This scenario is a great example of what can be achieved by paying for an M.A. first, but I wouldn't call it a likely outcome. Even if it was, paying the full cost out-of-pocket at not less than $52K just for tuition (based on ~$35K per year found on the Georgetown website) and more likely at least $70K all-in with living expenses, is going to significantly off-set even a Princeton level stipend (if you figure it will take 5 years to finish the Ph.D afterwards, it'd be like subtracting $14K per year from your award for those 5 years, but having already paid it in advance of course).

I have to agree with the post above - paying out-of-pocket for the M.A. first probably only makes sense if it's in-state tuition at a public university, in the majority of cases.

[blukorea]

I generally agree with what everyone said so far. When I was applying, my UG mentors also advised me to look for admissions from PhD programs alone. I later on regretted not having applied to terminal master's programs in which they offer some TAships. My impression as a second year grad student so far has been that students with MA degrees normally do better in PhD admissions and also when they actually arrive.

This does not mean I should go complaining to my advisers, because I am sure that their recommendation originated from good will and they highly regarded my potential. It simply means that their assessment was a bit out of tune with the extent of competition and strength of other applicants, of which they may not have a complete grasp especially if they are not recent PhDs or if the department does not have a PhD program.

Alternatively, you can try to take year off working or something and try again next year. Students customarily fare better in their second time. Good luck!

[jaw17]

This scenario is a great example of what can be achieved by paying for an M.A. first, but I wouldn't call it a likely outcome. Even if it was, paying the full cost out-of-pocket at not less than $52K just for tuition (based on ~$35K per year found on the Georgetown website) and more likely at least $70K all-in with living expenses, is going to significantly off-set even a Princeton level stipend (if you figure it will take 5 years to finish the Ph.D afterwards, it'd be like subtracting $14K per year from your award for those 5 years, but having already paid it in advance of course).

Points all well taken, but I just wanted to clarify that the total cost we paid for the MA at Georgetown was $24k ($4k per class, with tuition waivers for the last 4 of 10 required courses). I agree that's nothing to sneeze at, though, and we did get very lucky in how everything worked out.

[TMP]

Strange, I wrote a post last night... and it's disappeared!

But blukorea's comment is what I was going to say. My UG didn't have a PhD program and the department has had slew of new faculty in recent years. One of the recent faculty members that I had a class with (he was the first one to speak up that I should go to graduate school LOL) highly suggested that I do my MA first just to get my feet wet and get a gist of graduate school so that I can become an experience graduate student when I go in for my PhD. Another younger faculty member couldn't seem to give me a straight advice as she explained that she came from an unusual background (working as a journalist for a couple years? People write!) and couldn't relate to my situation. Um, thanks. But the older members, as blukorea pointed out, were a bit more out of touch with the realities of grad admissions and pushed me to apply to straight PhD. My UG adviser discouraged MA programs unless it was in something else like museum studies, partly because of funding issues, but she also had very high opinion of me. So take that into account as well- what do professors REALLY think of you? Faculty members, especially those at LAC, have been sugar-coating so for long that I think they forget to look at things a bit more objectively.

To prove a point how times have changed, when I got rejected from PhD programs, I told my advisor what the grad programs said my major weakness was- language preparation. Nothing against her department in terms of coursework. Just ya know, little things. And then she gasped, "Is that why Michigan took me?! Because I'm fluent in Russian? I mean I remember other students struggling with the readings in original text... man, I can't believe that languages are THAT important..." Now I'm telling her that it's smart to encourage people to at least minor in a language if they're serious about graduate school in history. Then she sort of just resigned as to say "Oh I give up. I don't know a thing about graduate admissions, okay?"

At least she remembered how tough grad school was and proceeded to kick my ass for the rest of the semester on my UG thesis to prepare for my MA program that I am in now.

I do also advocate for MA programs. They may be cash cows but it's worth looking into it and figuring out which ones will give you the most opportunities to succeed while doing it as cheaply as possible. Even though typically MA programs are 2 years, with mine, if you plan right, you can finish in 3 semesters.

[StrangeLight]

regarding MAs, people might want to look to canadian schools.

for history, at least, canadian schools do MAs and PhDs separately. there are no MA/PhD programs and if you want to go to school here, you do your BA at one school, then apply for an MA, and then apply for a PhD (maybe at the same place as your MA, but often not). in general, this makes the minimum time required to complete grad studies around 7 years instead of 5, but it has one big advantage:

canadian schools fund masters students. many schools offer students full funding with stipends comparable to those granted to PhD students in the states. tuition at the top schools in canada is rarely above $5000 for the year if you're canadian, and rarely above $15,000 for the year if you're international. in canadian dollars, too. how aboot that, eh? even if you aren't offered full funding, it's affordable in comparison, but most programs will give masters students full tuition remission and around $17,000/yr.

many, many students with MAs from canadian schools can get PhDs from top 10 american schools. at my current school (the university of british columbia), one of the MA students is getting full funding at northwestern and another is off to yale next year. all of the professors in my department obtained their degrees from top 10 schools. most of them have degrees from princeton, harvard, yale, duke, utexas (that's off the top of my head). i don't think a single one got their PhD from a school that wasn't at the very least in the top 5 for their subfield of history (african american labour historian from duke, mexicanist from utexas).

for people that don't mind the thought of moving once for an MA and again for a PhD, doing an MA in canada's a decent alternative. full funding, study with prestigious faculty members, and set yourself up well for a PhD. doesn't hurt to throw an application or two to programs north of the 49th.

[Izimbra_]

StrangeLight offers great advice -- there are lots of great funded M.A.s here in Canada. Especially at UBC where you have a renowned faculty AND funded M.A.s. I should say, however, that the other three heavyweight History Departments in Canada (McGill, Toronto, York), do not fund M.A.s much if at all. I could be wrong about McGill, but I don't think they even give full funding to all their PhDs, so I don't think this bodes well for M.A. hopefuls there.

Still, I do highly second the recommendation of looking at Canadian M.A.s.

Also, an added plus: for those considering doing a PhD in Canada, you will get credit for your M.A. So you will only have one year of coursework for your PhD as opposed to two.

[thepoorstockinger]

I'm starting a Canadian MA program next year and while I agree with everything said above I will qualify it with this:

1) If you're doing US history this might not be the best idea. Even the programs with the most US historians tend to have a very small number of them, and you will likely be cobbling coursework/committees together with people who are thematic fits, rather than region (which isn't the worst thing possible, I guess). I'm in this boat.

2) Some of the smaller programs cross list MA courses with senior undergrad courses. Avoid these programs like the plague.

3) Canadian schools do not provide tuition waivers, so funding packages here are not worth the same as they are in the US. It's assumed that top candidates are topping up funding packages with external funding (SSHRC, OGS, etc.). So if you get $15k from a school and have to pay international tuition fees you may only get $3k after fees. (A lot of places are starting to waive the international differential, but you're still looking at around $5k in fees).

It's certainly a viable option, particularly for people who are looking at European, Russian, middle east, ancient or a comparative field like gender or labour (labour history seems to still have much more traction here then it does in the US). As an added bonus there's no GRE requirement.

[StrangeLight]

hmm, well, a friend of mine is getting a full ride at calgary, and he doesn't have a SSHRC or any other external funding. but it's entirely possible that he performed sexual favours for that money (kidding).

can i ask which school you're going to, tps?

[thepoorstockinger]

It's totally possible to get a full ride for an MA in Canada without a SSHRC- SFU offered me $23.5k for the first year before any external funding ($9k would have been clawed back if - it just tends to be the exception. But SSHRC really is the primary way to get MA funding in Canada, or at least to get any significant amount of funding (sometimes I wonder if it'd be better to just give that money directly to departments to disperse). Most TA/stipend combination in Canada are in the $10k-$15k range which is not bad if you're paying domestic fees, but the international differential will kill your funding package.

There are only a handful of grad programs in Canada that offer funding PLUS paying for students' tuition fees, Calgary is one of those places (but I don't know if they do it for every MA student). At most places you're deducting tuition fees from your funding.

Again, I think Canada is a good MA option for people from the US but the funding situation, particularly given the likelyhood of paying differential fees, means people should be careful about where they're applying if money is a major concern. The one good thing about Canada is that with the exception of Toronto and York, the better programs actually tend to offer better funding.

I got in at SFU and Queens but I'm going to Trent (MA history). I'm also a Canadian who did my BA in Canada.

[Rahbigabah]

Just curious if anyone else was advised by UG profs that personal contact (emails) to potential grad advisors was not that important in the application process? Mine said the grad advisors would be "very busy and probably wouldn't respond," and "you can't make much of an impression by shooting off a blind, unsolicited email." I'm currently 0-4 with one turn at bat remaining.

[thepoorstockinger]

Just curious if anyone else was advised by UG profs that personal contact (emails) to potential grad advisors was not that important in the application process? Mine said the grad advisors would be "very busy and probably wouldn't respond," and "you can't make much of an impression by shooting off a blind, unsolicited email." I'm currently 0-4 with one turn at bat remaining.

I was told to contact potential supervisors for a few reasons:

1) Check to see if folks will still be around (i.e. sabbatical)

2) Check to see if folks would actually want to supervise my project/think it's a good place for me to do my research

3) See if I even sort of like people before going to work with them

4) To try to have my name ring a bell when files are circulating.

I went 3/3, but who knows if my e-mails made a difference? I will say that it made me more comfortable when it came to actually picking a program.

[Auzzfest]

Just curious if anyone else was advised by UG profs that personal contact (emails) to potential grad advisors was not that important in the application process? Mine said the grad advisors would be "very busy and probably wouldn't respond," and "you can't make much of an impression by shooting off a blind, unsolicited email." I'm currently 0-4 with one turn at bat remaining.

I emailed probably 10-12 professors, after reading a significant amount of their work, and definitely took into account their responses when applying. I got good replies from professors at UCSB, Georgetown, George Washington, and Indiana, all places I was accepted or waitlisted. It really just depends if you can make an impression, and through an email its hard. If you could actually meet with a professor that could be even better. But honestly if you don't have what they're looking for your not getting in, and if you do, you will, whether or not you sent an email earlier in the year.