Columbia's MA (Only) - Worth it?

[samora32]

 Hi guys, 

Just wondering if anyone has any word on Columbia's TERMINAL MA in English Lit? The website says one shouldn't hold one's breathe thinking that it will give you a leg up when applying to their PhD; apparently it is rare an MA student gets into the doctorate program! So since it is unfunded, any feedback/insight from those who have either attended in the past or hoping to get in will be really helpful.

Thanks,

Ric

[lotf629]

Rarely are unfunded MAs worth it...Could you apply to funded MAs for next year?

[Bpr2106]

A lot of people have knee jerk reactions to 'paying for graduate school'- professor's included. This doesn't seem to make all that much sense because people considering unfunded MA's, unless they are very irresponsible, are probably fortunate enough that they can afford it.

Another reason why using funded/unfunded as a rubric to make decisions about M.A. programs is unhelpful is because not all M.A. programs are created equal. The fact of the matter is that attending Columbia will give you more powerful recommendations, and allow you to compete at a higher level (and thus produce more dynamic scholarship) than attending a much less competitive program would. That said, many of the M.A. programs at the top ranked schools (if they have them at all) are unfunded.

Granted, this is all with the caveat that paying for an M.A. program is financially feasible for an applicant. If so, they can most definitely serve at useful stepping stones to great Ph.D. programs,

[sonofcioran]

Sounds like Chicago's infamous consolation prize Master's.

If you're in NY, and you want to get an unfunded Master's in something useless that you really love, you may as well get it at CUNY or SUNY for 1/10th the price.

[joeygiraldo]

Sounds like Chicago's infamous consolation prize Master's.

If you're in NY, and you want to get an unfunded Master's in something useless that you really love, you may as well get it at CUNY or SUNY for 1/10th the price.

This.

I took out a 20k loan for my entire master's from SUNY and proud that I paid only pennies.

edit: And I was out-of-state! If you are a NY state resident I don't know why you wouldn't jump at the chance!

[Bpr2106]

Hey Joey,

Out of curiosity, which SUNY did you attend for the M.A., and did you find it helpful to use as a stepping stone to gain admission to Ph.D. programs?

[sonofcioran]

This.

I took out a 20k loan for my entire master's from SUNY and proud that I paid only pennies.

edit: And I was out-of-state! If you are a NY state resident I don't know why you wouldn't jump at the chance!

Good for you! Yeah, it's cheap, right? I'm done with one Masters' in May and I'm more than halfway through 2 others for <15k. The administration is terrible, but eh. Can't complain. Price is right. I'll probably finish up the other two Masters' next year. I needed two of them for work, but the other one is mostly just for fun (even though it significantly overlapped with Master's A&.

Buy two Master's, get one free. They should advertise that.

[bowdoinstudent]

Sounds like Chicago's infamous consolation prize Master's.

If you're in NY, and you want to get an unfunded Master's in something useless that you really love, you may as well get it at CUNY or SUNY for 1/10th the price.

How is a MA in English Lit "useless?" :?: There are tons of job opportunities for someone with that degree (copy editor, secondary teaching in private schools, event manager, ediotorial assistant, communications assoicate, publicist, speech writer, paralegal...etc) And some of those positions even accept BA in English, if you come from an elite university or LAC. Actually, if you ultimate goal is just to obtain a Master's and then go into the work force, I'd say go with the program with the most prestige or recongnition. Why bother paying couple of thousands for a CUNY degree, when average, non-academic places really prize on great schools like Columbia, or even Chicago's MAPH (the consolation prize, I assume?). Of course, the rules are a little different if your goal is to get a PhD eventually, become a scholar, conduct literary research, publish, teach, and etc; then things like funding, program fit, location, loans obviously become more substantial when making your decision about the unfunded Master's.

[bowdoinstudent]

Tho, I must warn you, I heard not very good things about the Columbia Terminal Master's in Eng Lit. My professor, who was a Columbia PhD, told me that the program there is really big, they let almost everyone in and don't guarantee PhD admissions by all means, etc. But again, if you don't want to pursue a PhD later on, who cares - an Ivy League graduate degree sounds pretty impressive to most people, right? :wink:

[sonofcioran]

How is a MA in English Lit "useless?" :?: There are tons of job opportunities for someone with that degree (copy editor, secondary teaching in private schools, event manager, ediotorial assistant, communications assoicate, publicist, speech writer, paralegal...etc) And some of those positions even accept BA in English, if you come from an elite university or LAC. Actually, if you ultimate goal is just to obtain a Master's and then go into the work force, I'd say go with the program with the most prestige or recongnition. Why bother paying couple of thousands for a CUNY degree, when average, non-academic places really prize on great schools like Columbia, or even Chicago's MAPH (the consolation prize, I assume?). Of course, the rules are a little different if your goal is to get a PhD eventually, become a scholar, conduct literary research, publish, teach, and etc; then things like funding, program fit, location, loans obviously become more substantial when making your decision about the unfunded Master's.

A degree in Lit is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for employment in many of the fields you listed. Fields like journalism are very competitive (and generally low-paying) fields.

LOL, I used to work in HR. I interviewed lots and lots of people. No one cares where you got your Master's Degree in Liberal Arts from. Most laypeople think Penn and Chicago are state U's. Your life is missing something if the name on your (non-doctoral/non-professional) degree matters that much to you. There is not a single Master's Degree in any of the Liberal Arts that is financially viable, unless you already have a job as a teacher or Fed'l government and you get a schedule step increase for it. Surprisingly, knowledge of Proust, as much as I adore him and relish him as one of the greatest geniuses of all time, doesn't readily translate into any life skills.

But don't take my word for it.....

http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2009/01/2009013001c.htm

Also, academics look down upon unfunded Master's. A program like Chicago's or Columbia's is a lose-lose. The name isn't worth anything for that degree, and you'll be out a ton of money.

[bowdoinstudent]

1. I'm not a prestige whore, so I don't understand what you meant by "your life is missing something if the name on your (non-doctoral/non-professional) degree matters that much to you." I think the most misinformed way that prospective students pick their graduate programs is by looking at US News & World rankings. There are actually a lot of really good programs who voluntarily choose not to participate in reputational rankings, because let's face it, these ranking formats don't really account for the intangible qualities and distinctions between different programs, but instead resort to university endowment, or peer assessment, which US News and World claims is "subjective," but that is highly debatable. So, please, save the

[sonofcioran]

No, you're absolutely right - about goals. If your goal is to flush large amounts of your overly rich parents money or your trust fund down the toilet, an unfunded Master's Degree from a private college, especially from a consolation prize master's program (which is solely designed to profit from your bruised ego), is a great fit. In that case I'd whole-heartedly recommend it.

In all other instances, involving people who plan on working for a living, the same thing stands. An unfunded master's degree in the liberal arts from a private U is silly - academics scoff at them, and it won't help you in hiring for any regular job. Look at the statistics. Read that article. There's another related one if you search the site. Zero positive impact on earnings.

[Bpr2106]

Tho, I must warn you, I heard not very good things about the Columbia Terminal Master's in Eng Lit. My professor, who was a Columbia PhD, told me that the program there is really big, they let almost everyone in and don't guarantee PhD admissions by all means, etc. But again, if you don't want to pursue a PhD later on, who cares - an Ivy League graduate degree sounds pretty impressive to most people, right? :wink:

With all due respect to your professor, this is from the Columbia website:

APPLYING AS AN M.A.-ONLY STUDENT

Typically about 13 M.A.O. students enter the program each year. For fall of 2008, the department received 100 M.A.O. applications and accepted 25%. The average GPA of accepted U.S.-trained M.A.O. applicants was 3.8; only a very few had a GPA of 3.5 or lower, and then only when other aspects of the record stood out. The average verbal GRE of U.S.-trained students was 695.

If 25% admissions, a 3.8 gpa, and a 695 verbal, qualifies as "letting almost anyone in" then perhaps I don't understand the meaning of that phrase.

I was offered a full scholarship to Georgetown plus a healthy stipend and I turned it down to get my M.A. at Columbia. I couldn't disagree more with the advice being given on this board. If you do not want to have a career as an academic then go and get yourself a fully funded M.A. wherever you can. However, if you DO want to pursue a Ph.D. then go to the best department you can possibly go to, form relationships with the most influential professors you possibly can, and produce dynamic scholarship.

This whole sentiment that 'scholars look down" on people who pay for M.A.'s is meaningless. At the end of the day, when an admissions committee is evaluating your application they are not going to say, oh wait, this guy excelled at the highest level, has recommendations from powerhouse faculty, and with their guidance produced forceful scholarship BUT, he paid for it - so screw him. I know elitism is a taboo subject on this board but going to the best schools helps you get into the best schools. Not necessarily by the name alone, but rather, by placing you in a cutting edge intellectual environment that will push you to produce the best scholarship you possibly can. With all due respect to Wake Forest, if you can afford it, and are serious about using an M.A. program as a stepping stone to gain admission into a Ph.D. program, then by all means go to Columbia.

M.A. student's backgrounds are varied. Many programs get a bad rap because a lot of M.A. student's are not serious about their studies and give the whole endeavor a bad name. However, if you're talented, and serious about what you do, they can serve as an effective stepping stone.

[Bpr2106]

No, you're absolutely right - about goals. If your goal is to flush large amounts of your overly rich parents money or your trust fund down the toilet, an unfunded Master's Degree from a private college, especially from a consolation prize master's program (which is solely designed to profit from your bruised ego), is a great fit. In that case I'd whole-heartedly recommend it.

In all other instances, involving people who plan on working for a living, the same thing stands. An unfunded master's degree in the liberal arts from a private U is silly - academics scoff at them, and it won't help you in hiring for any regular job. Look at the statistics. Read that article. There's another related one if you search the site. Zero positive impact on earnings.

Why the vitriol? There is no need to resent someone who is fortunate enough to be able to go an earn an M.A. degree at a private college. As far as your 'academics scoff at them', what does that even mean? As I've suggested above, who do you think would look more impressive to an ad com, someone who excelled at Columbia, gained excellent recommendations from tenured faculty, and wrote a great M.A. thesis, or someone who got a funded M.A. from a much less competitive institution.

This subject always inspires a lot of snark from both sides. I can understand why, but unless people are blatant prestige whores, flaunt their privilege, and/or don't work hard at what they do, then I don't see any room for criticism.

[sonofcioran]

Why the vitriol? There is no need to resent someone who is fortunate enough to be able to go an earn an M.A. degree at a private college. As far as your 'academics scoff at them', what does that even mean? As I've suggested above, who do you think would look more impressive to an ad com, someone who excelled at Columbia, gained excellent recommendations from tenured faculty, and wrote a great M.A. thesis, or someone who got a funded M.A. from a much less competitive institution.

This subject always inspires a lot of snark from both sides. I can understand why, but unless people are blatant prestige whores, flaunt their privilege, and/or don't work hard at what they do, then I don't see any room for criticism.

I know more than a few people flim-flammed by the UC consolation prize and a few other programs with idealistic hopes that it helps get one a Doctorate - it doesn't. It just leaves you with debt. Any program is fundamentally dishonest if it preys on people at their low point to help fund their department. It's despicable, to be frank. Yet, I know several schools that do this.

Don't listen to me, just look at the stats. People need to be VERY careful with unfunded programs at some U's and be mindful of the rumors.

[Bpr2106]

I'm not clear on your logic here. Are you suggesting that funded M.A.'s by virtue of them being funded somehow help you get into Ph.D. programs? Or are you suggesting that M.A. programs in general don't help you get into Ph.D. programs, and thus paying for one makes little sense?

I've spoken to many people from both the Georgetown M.A. program, and the Columbia M.A. program who have gone on to have great success in applying to Ph.D. programs. I think you have to be careful about making blanket assertions based on anecdotal evidence (i.e. your friends who've gone to UC).

[bowdoinstudent]

However, if you're talented, and serious about what you do, they can serve as an effective stepping stone.

Good point. Bottom line is, funded or unfunded, if you are serious about your work, have great work ethics, and know how to network with the right people at the right time within your deparment, anything is possible. Now, that sounds really cliche and lame, but this entire application process is lame. A full-ranking professor at my school, who has published 3, 4 books, went to a very, very medicore UC school due to relocation difficulties with his wife back 20 years ago, finished his dissertation in 4 years (whattt???), and was granted tenured and full-rank professorship in a top 5 LAC. He is super smart and I personally believe (and he had admitted himself, too), that he could've gone on to much more competitive schools like Stanford or Berekely had not been relocation conflict with his spouse. The point is, if you are good at what you do and stay good at what you do, no MA from any program can stop you from fulfilling your goals (lame phrase #2 :wink: ). This is completely off topic, but look at Cary Nelson! I believe he got his PhD from Univ of Rochester, which is a great school, but you'd think someone like him would've gone to Harvard or Yale or something. Now look at him, with his gigantic white beard protesting all over college campus for academic freedom....how very radical. 8)

I'm taking a seminar with him next year....ohhh God. I'm too excited for words.

[sonofcioran]

I'm not clear on your logic here. Are you suggesting that funded M.A.'s by virtue of them being funded somehow help you get into Ph.D. programs? Or are you suggesting that M.A. programs in general don't help you get into Ph.D. programs, and thus paying for one makes little sense?

I've spoken to many people from both the Georgetown M.A. program, and the Columbia M.A. program who have gone on to have great success in applying to Ph.D. programs. I think you have to be careful about making blanket assertions based on anecdotal evidence (i.e. your friends who've gone to UC).

You tell me to be careful about making blanket assertions on anecdotal evidence, yet your rebuttal is that you know people who've gone on to great success. We're both dealing in anecdotes. I just have a few more of them and a more detached viewpoint. Try to remember the difference between possible and probable. PhD acceptance rates are very, very low so the vast majority of PhD applicants will not get accepted. Going for an unfunded MA at a private U to prepare for a PhD is a risky gamble. You'd be better off hedging your bets in a cheaper unfunded Master's program if a funded one isn't feasible for reasons I've already mentioned.

FYI, it's not just UC. Plenty of other schools - like NYU's Gallatin and some of Columbia's programs do the same thing and often have inferior faculty and access. Also, all the extension programs.

If I didn't care, I'd just tell everyone "go for your dream". Unfortunately, for many people this isn't fiscally viable and I think the academy spreads a lot of predatory half-truths like "If you're good enough, you'll get into a PhD program/hired/etc". The thing is, statistically, that's just not the case. PhDs and PhD applicants are both massively oversupplied.

80-100k in debt, a graduate degree in English that you could have gotten from a public U at 1/10 the cost, and a job as a barista at Starbucks sounds like a losing gameplan for life to me (unless you have money or a trust fund to burn) for a chance at a degree that gives you a minimal chance at employment.

[Bpr2106]

Point taken about our mutual use of anecdotal evidence. In addition, everything you say about the competitiveness of Ph.D. programs is of course true. However the bottom line is that going to an Ivy League school for an M.A. will give you a greater chance at gaining acceptance to a Ph.D. program than going to a much less competitive program will. Like I said, I was offered a full scholarship plus a stipend at Georgetown, and I chose Columbia (and Georgetown is not much less competitive than Columbia). The fact of the matter is that if you excel at the highest level possible it will help your application.

[wheel_of_fire]

I just got this random email notifying me I got into the Columbia terminal masters program--or so I think. The email came out of nowhere and mentioned a previous slew of other email/letters that I haven't yet gotten. What's up? Anyone else get one also?

[Bpr2106]

Is the email from Virginia Kay?

[wheel_of_fire]

Nope, from Nicole Horejsi. I also just got the official email notification from the GSAS linking me to the Apply Yourself site. No funding. Probably a no go in Manhattan!

[fields&charts]

When you speak of the UC program, I'm guessing you're speaking of Chicago's MAPH's program? I suppose I can't speak for the Humanities MA, but the Social Sciences equivalent does offer some 1/4 - Full tuition on a very competitive basis. That said, per credit the Chicago programs are less expensive than comparable programs at Columbia, NYU, etc and quite frankly seem to actually care about the students a bit more than either of the two schools in Manhattan. For instance, I was able to review the flaws in my PhD app with the department head who was also quite eager to recommend reading materials for the Summer to prepare for the Fall. Also, the advising staff are very helpful in steering students away from flakey or problematic readers for thesis papers.

I'll be attending the MAPSS program in the Fall, unfunded. I'm doing this mostly because a) due to previous business successes I can afford to do it with very little debt and as a social science degree, I may, depending on whether or not I'm able to gain research experience while in the program (this is actually my one major concern and essentially might make my time there less than worth it), I should be able to get a public or private sector job earning more than I am currently capable of making. Now would it be more financially sound for me to pursue a professional MA, yes, of course. Of course my ideal future is to go on for a PhD, as you said, who knows if that will happen. As it stands now, I can do nothing to improve myself on paper beyond what I've already tried.

As far as my experience goes so far, students are not barred from any courses and generally have an easy time getting access to faculty. This may all change in the Fall when classes begin. I have read very little, if any, good things on this board about Columbia's terminal MA programs and have had at least two friends who expressed dissatisfaction with Columbia's American Studies and Islamic Studies terminal MA programs.

I realize that this is often frowned upon and therefore I shy away from talking about it. Realize that in doing an unfunded MA of any sort you will often be scoffed at by PhD students, though maybe not faculty, and most certainly by friends and family. If anyone has any venom to spew at me, by all means do so. I applied to 5 schools, got pawned off to the consolation prize MA at two, accepted at two other MA programs, and rejected elsewhere. I chose one of the "consolation prizes" as some you call it because it seemed to offer me access to better faculty and a better learning environment.

[barryblitt]

Having attended columbia, I've found M.A terminal students to be some of the stupidest in my classes. A lot of wealthy older ladies who mistake literature classes for book clubs (by extension, mistaking lit professors for...Oprah). Professors don't give them the same attention they give to phd tracked students & there's a pervasive "cash cow" sentiment.

But...hey! If you've got money to throw around, why not? If you can make an M.A terminal program happen financially, you can always use it as a stepping stone to a better PhD program.

[rabelaisian]

I didn't used to be a fan of the Lit MA, period, because I felt that it was useless and a money-making scam. As I've seen Ph.D. after Ph.D. languish on the academic job market for years only to wind up teaching at community college or private high school, my view has been adjusted. Not to say that the MA can ever replace the Ph.D., which permits for intensive study. But if someone has an interest in vocation, the two might wind up being somewhat interchangeable.

The Columbia MA, specifically, is interesting because I've talked to people who've gone through it. It's a year program and it's almost entirely designed as a pre-Ph.D. program, to get you the best writing sample possible (and letters of recommendation) from a school that might have a better name than where you attended as an undergraduate (yes, that really counts, a horribly sad but true fact, obviously not a universal one but a trend). The only trouble with it is that your writing sample won't be done until the Spring, so you'll have to wait another year to apply for a Ph.D.

If you went to a college without much reputation but did well, if you've gone through a few rounds of Ph.D. applications without luck, if your recommenders are shoddy, if you're still feeling out the graduate world but don't want to commit to two years, or if you want a vocational fast track to teaching community college or (depending on your state) private high school, I do hear Columbia's MA program is one of the best.