Direct to PhD, or first complete MA? (Continental/Crit Theory)

[M.A.E.]

Totally new to these forums, so my apologies if this topic has been covered a thousand times before -- I'm sure it has.  But as a 2013 B.A. recipient now bent on returning to graduate school to study [continental] philosophy, I want to jump the gun and run my stats by you in the trenches to see what next steps I should take.

 

Undergraduate: Williams College '13 (B.A. in philosophy, GPA 3.57)

GRE: currently enrolled in a prep course; I will take the GRE this spring (probably March)

Areas of Interest: Georges Bataille, Nietzsche, Hegel's reception in France (i.e., Kojeve & Hyppolite); to a lesser extent: Foucault, queer theory

 

Obviously I was not a remarkable undergraduate student.  I matured somewhat over the course of 4 years, but it has taken a few additional years to -- if you'll excuse my French -- get my shit together and focus my interests.  Now, after working as a paralegal considering (and abandoning) law, I am certain that I would like to pursue a PhD in philosophy; my question is: how do I get there?  It seems I have much to make up for.  While I had a strong relationship with one well-respected Foucault scholar in undergrad (and a good relationship with a young Kant/Hegel prof), I would need to come up with one (or two, if the young guy is a bad bet) recommendation(s).  I also had acceptable grades (I intend this disparagingly  ).  While I test well, I haven't taken the GRE yet so it remains an uncertainty.

 

Specifically, I am wondering: is philosophy even the right place for me, a formerly mediocre undergrad?  I suppose my interests lie more in the vein of 'critical theory'.  In any event, I would love any and all advice that anyone can offer regarding compensating for poor undergraduate performance and solidifying letters of recommendation after graduating from undergrad.  The obvious answer to me is "get an MA", though I wonder about the value of such programs given the accompanying financial burden.

 

Let's say I could rope someone in to provide a 3rd rec, ace the GRE, and put together a stellar writing sample by the end of this year -- would I still be insane to apply to PhD programs?  (Browsing the forums here leaves me pessimistic about my chances at this point...)  It that's not an option, would an MA help my future chances of acceptance into good PhD programs?

 

Apologies for the lengthy post; anxieties are running high as you can see, as I'd like to move things along for the 2016 application cycle.  Any advice would be greatly appreciated -- and thank you in advance!!

 

 

[isostheneia]

I'm probably not the most knowledgeable person regarding the whole process, since the current round of grad apps is my first, but I'll try to give some advice. Others should correct me if I'm wrong about any of the following.

 

There are a lot of unknowns with your app - your GRE scores, the quality of your letters, and the quality of your writing sample especially. Given how important these are, it's hard to say whether you'd be competitive at PhD programs. It's entirely possible - you could ace the GRE, manage to get fantastic letters from trustworthy professors, and be an incredibly strong writer. However, it's just hard to say from the information given.

 

The professors you would be asking to write you letters, on the other hand, have considerably more information about you (as well as control over one part of your application), so I would definitely suggest asking them for advice. It would be a good idea to start having a steady dialogue with them in general, since it's been a couple years since you graduated. It's much better if they can write "I had MAE in a class a few years ago, have continued to work with him/her since then. S/he is developing quite well in terms of philosophical ability" than if all they can say is "I had MAE in a class a few years ago, and I remember him/her being a good student."

 

Depending on whether you're located near universities with philosophy departments that do work in your areas, it could be very beneficial to sit in on some classes, graduate classes especially. If you audit a professor's grad class on a topic you're interested in, this could turn into a strong third letter of recommendation. Again, you want your letter writers to be familiar with your work and to be passionate advocates for you, so I would approach your letters with this in mind. Some professors may agree to write you a letter simply because you received an A in one of their classes. But this is more of a last resort than a desirable letter. Basically, work hard at improving your relationships with your professors as much as possible. You want them to be excited about your potential as a philosopher.

 

The writing sample will, of course, be the most important part of your application (at least in most cases). So it would be advisable to contact one of your professors and ask to work closely with them in order to develop an outstanding writing sample. Once you're done, do another round of edits, and then another. Show it to everyone who will look at it for you. You'll have to compensate for a slightly below average GPA, but this is doable with work (and coming from Williams should help). In terms of approaching the content of your writing sample, my one suggestion is to make the issue your discussing specific. Work with a professor to think about a general area you want to write on, and keep narrowing it down repeatedly until you can't be discussing a more specific issue. Adcoms want to see your ability to engage with philosophical issues clearly and effectively, not to see your ability to create crazy metaphysical systems (or deal with less crazy but still overly broad problems).

 

Taking a GRE class should help substantially. Eat and sleep well for the week leading up to the exam.

 

If you're able to get really solid letters of recommendation, produce a great writing sample, and (perhaps slightly less important, though probably still more important than many of us would like) do well on the GRE, I think you could apply to a mix of MAs and PhDs. But most of all, I would listen to your professors' advice regarding where to apply and what mix of MAs/PhDs, as well as whatever other advice they give you throughout the process.

[Infinite Zest]

I agree with isostheneia.

 

It's hard to give advice with so many missing variables, but I think that if you plan on a career in academia, then I'd go with the MA route.

 

Financial burdens aside, an MA would only improve your chances of getting into a good PhD program. In turn, getting a PhD from a solid school makes it much easier to get a good job in academia. Basically, from what I've heard, everything's easier in academia when you have a PhD from a well-known institution.

 

Also, an MA would give you the valuable opportunity to work one on one crafting a writing sample with a professor. Reiterating the above, this will play the key role in determining your admission into graduate school. One of the perks of an MA program is that ample time is set aside for this very task.

[isostheneia]

Financial burdens aside, an MA would only improve your chances of getting into a good PhD program. In turn, getting a PhD from a solid school makes it much easier to get a good job in academia. Basically, from what I've heard, everything's easier in academia when you have a PhD from a well-known institution.

 

Also, an MA would give you the valuable opportunity to work one on one crafting a writing sample with a professor. Reiterating the above, this will play the key role in determining your admission into graduate school. One of the perks of an MA program is that ample time is set aside for this very task.

 

I agree with this. Just to clarify what I said earlier, I primarily wanted to say that it's not necessarily crazy for an applicant like MAE to apply to some PhD programs next year if the remainder of the application materials turn out well. But I agree that an MA would likely improve both grad school and job prospects for such applicants, so applying to MA programs pretty heavily (or exclusively) would probably be a good idea.

[perpetuavix]

You didn't say your philosophy GPA, only your overall GPA, but I think that coming from Williams means a lot more than those above me have accounted for. Adcomms will be much more impressed with a 3.57 from Williams than they would be with the same GPA from the vast majority of schools. GPA is a good predictor for success in graduate admissions, but it's certainly not the only one. If you look at the survey data from last year (), you can sort by school type. Out of the eight applicants who applied from Top 20 Liberal Arts schools (pretty sure Ian used World News and Report, which ranks Williams as the best liberal arts school in the country), all of them got at least one offer. A few did have a graduate degree, and only two were applying to continental programs. Several of the students had similar overall GPAs to yours--although they basically all had philosophy GPAs of 3.8 and up. Of course, last year's results can't predict your personal success. But there are students similar to you who have been successful in getting into PhD programs, and the fact that you went to a prestigious school will likely help you out. 

It does sound like you have some work to do in strengthening your application, though. Take the GRE and aim high, especially in verbal. You do need to find a third letter writer, but the two professors you plan to ask sound like good choices. I would definitely ask the young professor; I really don't put any stock in the idea that your letter writers need to be only eminent philosophers. I got a letter from an adjunct professor working in a nonphilosophy department at a not-great school; he wrote me a glowing letter, because I had taken three classes with him and had put effort into getting to know him. I'm sure you can find at least one other letter writer, and don't feel restricted to just the philosophy department; it's better to get a strong letter from someone who knows you (but isn't a philosopher, isn't famous, isn't tenured, isn't whatever) than from a famous, tenured philosopher who can only write you a vague letter. You're not that far out from undergrad, and professors know that writing letters for former students is expected of them. Stay in touch with those you plan to ask for letters; they can also help you refine your list of schools, edit your writing sample, and polish your statement of purpose. Your writing sample should occupy a lot of your time; do you have a paper from undergrad you can adapt? You might need to lengthen (or shorten it, depending on where it came from) to meet the requirements for schools. 

There is no one, however stellar their application materials look, who is guaranteed admissions to a PhD program; there's just too much randomness in the system. But you don't sound like an obviously hopeless applicant. You also don't sound as weak as you think you are. While I appreciate some humility on the internet, you need a little confidence, too. 

[Infinite Zest]

You didn't say your philosophy GPA, only your overall GPA, but I think that coming from Williams means a lot more than those above me have accounted for. Adcomms will be much more impressed with a 3.57 from Williams than they would be with the same GPA from the vast majority of schools. GPA is a good predictor for success in graduate admissions, but it's certainly not the only one. If you look at the survey data from last year (), you can sort by school type. Out of the eight applicants who applied from Top 20 Liberal Arts schools (pretty sure Ian used World News and Report, which ranks Williams as the best liberal arts school in the country), all of them got at least one offer. A few did have a graduate degree, and only two were applying to continental programs. Several of the students had similar overall GPAs to yours--although they basically all had philosophy GPAs of 3.8 and up. Of course, last year's results can't predict your personal success. But there are students similar to you who have been successful in getting into PhD programs, and the fact that you went to a prestigious school will likely help you out. 

It does sound like you have some work to do in strengthening your application, though. Take the GRE and aim high, especially in verbal. You do need to find a third letter writer, but the two professors you plan to ask sound like good choices. I would definitely ask the young professor; I really don't put any stock in the idea that your letter writers need to be only eminent philosophers. I got a letter from an adjunct professor working in a nonphilosophy department at a not-great school; he wrote me a glowing letter, because I had taken three classes with him and had put effort into getting to know him. I'm sure you can find at least one other letter writer, and don't feel restricted to just the philosophy department; it's better to get a strong letter from someone who knows you (but isn't a philosopher, isn't famous, isn't tenured, isn't whatever) than from a famous, tenured philosopher who can only write you a vague letter. You're not that far out from undergrad, and professors know that writing letters for former students is expected of them. Stay in touch with those you plan to ask for letters; they can also help you refine your list of schools, edit your writing sample, and polish your statement of purpose. Your writing sample should occupy a lot of your time; do you have a paper from undergrad you can adapt? You might need to lengthen (or shorten it, depending on where it came from) to meet the requirements for schools. 

There is no one, however stellar their application materials look, who is guaranteed admissions to a PhD program; there's just too much randomness in the system. But you don't sound like an obviously hopeless applicant. You also don't sound as weak as you think you are. While I appreciate some humility on the internet, you need a little confidence, too. 

 

With all due respect, I think we are making different points. I'd agree with you that, with a bit of work, MAE could get into a PhD program without an MA degree.

 

On the other hand, I believe that spending some time in a strong MA program can turn "reach" schools into more reasonable prospects. This looks like a viable option, at least to me, especially when you consider that there are some high caliber, funded MA programs out there.

 

Once again, look at the facts (or what I think the facts are): MAE has been out of school for some time, had a good but not spectacular GPA, may not have a very tight relationship with his letter writers, and still has to work on a writing sample. Based on the above, he looks like a very promising candidate, but the evidence that he will perform well in a PhD program isn't yet tangible. I think performing well in an MA program can fix all of this potential holes in your application.

 

Of course, I mean none of this in an offensive light. I think everyone's application has holes. I have almost a 3.9 from an T10 university, and I still feel like my grades are the weak point in my application; for instance, all the people who've applied from my school have GPAs at least as high, if not higher, than mine.

[overoverover]

I'm pretty much in agreement with Infinite Zest and isostheneia, but I'll offer my own experience as well:

 

My undergrad GPA was about the same as M.A.E's, and I got into one PhD program and was waitlisted at several others two years ago, so it is possible to go to a PhD with those grades. But I think MAs are incredibly good for some people, myself (sort of) included. So I'd highly recommend applying to MA programs. 

In addition: it's becoming more and more common for really good applicants to go to MA programs before entering the PhD. Everybody in BU's first-year cohort this year has an MA. And honestly, now that I'm in my second year of a PhD program and also reapplying to grad schools (so I basically am doing an MA at BU, but with funding and teaching), I can see why. I've been doing nothing but philosophy for two years; I know the landscape of the profession a lot better; my interests have narrowed and clarified; I've had time to go to conferences and a summer school; I've made connections at schools to which I'm applying. In a nutshell, I'm a better philosopher and a better applicant. I've received more guidance about admissions from profs at BU and elsewhere in the last six months (when I decided to transfer) than I did in four years in undergrad. That's so important when applying to schools, as I'm sure you all know.

 

Long story short: I'd suggest MA programs, but maybe apply to a few PhDs where you know you'd be happy. Don't settle for a bad fit program just because you really want to go straight to the PhD.

Edited January 4, 2015 by overoverover

[M.A.E.]

Thanks to all for giving words of advice, even with so many unknowns.  It is inspiring to hear that my case is not hopeless!

 

That said, I do have some questions about MA programs, should I choose to attend.  I have heard (perhaps not from reputable sources) that obtaining an MA prior to applying to PhD programs makes one a less desirable candidate.  Does anyone know this to be true in philosophy?  What internet research I have conducted suggests that it is program dependent, but I haven't been able to uncover any details specific to Continental philosophy.

 

I ask because I am looking at MA programs at the University of Warwick (UK), New School, Miami of Ohio... only the last of which seems to offer both a strong program and strong financial support (I have read some comments here and elsewhere regarding the New School's superb faculty but total lack of effective funding; Warwick seems of a similar status).  Assuming money is not an issue, would it be worth attending a seemingly weaker program for for the sole fact that funded programs are more impressive to PhD adcoms?  If it is any clarification: I would be most interested in attempting to place myself on a trajectory towards attending UChicago's Committee on Social Thought, which if I'm mistaken is exceptionally competitive and exceptionally difficult to finish.  Thus, I am interested in attending the MA program which is most relevant to my interests and highly-regarded (assuming, of course, I can actually get in!).

 

Apologies for the continued lengthy posts; a lot to hash out in my mind.  Some answers, of course, may be best provided by my former professors (with whom I intend to continue contact) -- but I figure it doesn't hurt to ask around.  My thanks in advance for your ongoing advice and assistance!

[overoverover]

At one point MAs were seen as a "failing degree" in philosphy ("you aren't progressing in the problem adequately, so grab an MA on the way out"). That's no longer the case. Multiple professors at multiple institutions have told me that they see good MAs or grad work elsewhere as evidence that one can succeed at the graduate level and finish the PhD in a timely fashion.

Edited January 6, 2015 by overoverover

[isostheneia]

I don't have as much info on MA programs as some other folks on here who have already attended one/are currently enrolled in one. But I don't think attending an MA program makes you a less desirable candidate - I'm inclined to say the opposite.

 

Regarding the Committee on Social Thought: I've also heard that it's difficult to finish, or rather that many students take a long time to finish. And I've heard that they're trying to counteract that in terms of hiring strategy. So at least at that program, it may be advisable to present a more specific research project than at other programs. (That's what I did in my current application to that program.) I don't know how they treat MAs; from their current students, it seems that fewer have MAs than at many philosophy PhD programs. But that could be purely coincidental.

[Infinite Zest]

From what I've heard, MA degrees aren't looked down upon by PhD programs.

[Infinite Zest]

From what I've heard, MA degrees aren't looked down upon by PhD programs.

 

Nevertheless, an MA in philosophy is probably a useless degree unless you intend to enter a PhD program. (Useless in an economic sense, at least.)

Edited January 6, 2015 by Infinite Zest

[M.A.E.]

Interesting, and helpful.  Does anyone get the sense that funded MAs are better-respected than non-funded?  This seems intuitively correct to a point, which is why I raised the example of New School vs Miami Ohio in my earlier post; all other elements of a program being equal, are adcoms likely to care about how your MA was financed?

[overoverover]

I doubt they care about funding per se. Brandeis doesn't guarantee full funding (I think) but is well respected, e.g. However in general I think the New School is best avoided: I've heard nothing but negative first-hand accounts, and their funding/tuition situation is flat out immoral.

To get a sense of how the program is viewed, I say look to the placement record.

[isostheneia]

I think the reason you tend to find so many recommendations for funded MAs over unfunded is that most people recommend not going into debt to attend graduate school, especially in a field with such poor job prospects as philosophy. But if you are independently wealthy or some other way of paying for graduate school, then I don't think there's any general correlation between funding and quality. At that point, I think considerations of which MA programs to attend should depend heavily (as overoverover notes) on placement record.

[Infinite Zest]

I think the reason you tend to find so many recommendations for funded MAs over unfunded is that most people recommend not going into debt to attend graduate school, especially in a field with such poor job prospects as philosophy. But if you are independently wealthy or some other way of paying for graduate school, then I don't think there's any general correlation between funding and quality. At that point, I think considerations of which MA programs to attend should depend heavily (as overoverover notes) on placement record.

 

On that note, we should all be thankful that it is now customary for philosophy grad programs to post their placement records. I know this is not the case in many other fields, even fields with job prospects worse than in philosophy.

[M.A.E.]

I doubt they care about funding per se. Brandeis doesn't guarantee full funding (I think) but is well respected, e.g. However in general I think the New School is best avoided: I've heard nothing but negative first-hand accounts, and their funding/tuition situation is flat out immoral.

To get a sense of how the program is viewed, I say look to the placement record.

 

Could you elaborate on those negative first-hand accounts?  And the funding situation?  Seems that a New School MA would come out to near $60k, minus any scholarship/financial aid (assuming 33% scholarship, that leaves $40k outstanding - far smaller a debt than is required for law school )

Edited January 7, 2015 by M.A.E.

[Infinite Zest]

Could you elaborate on those negative first-hand accounts?  And the funding situation?  Seems that a New School MA would come out to near $60k, minus any scholarship/financial aid (assuming 33% scholarship, that leaves $40k outstanding - far smaller a debt than is required for law school )

 

I mean, if you can afford it and you really know you want to do philosophy, is there really a better investment?

 

My cousin saved up for years so that he could buy a Porsche. I'd rather have a chance at a life as a philosopher than a Porsche.

[overoverover]

Could you elaborate on those negative first-hand accounts? And the funding situation? Seems that a New School MA would come out to near $60k, minus any scholarship/financial aid (assuming 33% scholarship, that leaves $40k outstanding - far smaller a debt than is required for law school )

Well, NYC is expensive, for one. So that's a lot of money that NSSR doesn't really help you with.

As for the accounts: from what I've heard (from an attendee of their MA), the environment is very negative and overly competitive (not the healthy kind of competition, I should say). Lots of people end up taking 3 or 4 years to complete the MA, which leads to further debt. And the MA cohort is usually pretty big, meaning profs can't possibly form quality relationships with the students.

[jjb919]

I doubt they care about funding per se. Brandeis doesn't guarantee full funding (I think) but is well respected, e.g. However in general I think the New School is best avoided: I've heard nothing but negative first-hand accounts, and their funding/tuition situation is flat out immoral.

To get a sense of how the program is viewed, I say look to the placement record.

Sadly I can vouch for this; I got my MA at The New School. While the professors are top notch, the funding is abysmal. I ended up taking on about $50,000 in debt just to cover tuition (not living expenses). As far as placement goes, NSSR is very well respected in its own niche of philosophy--granted this is a small niche that people like Lieter look down upon (which it putting it mildly). While I think I will be an attractive applicant to places like Oregon, Fordham, Stony Brook, etc. I can't help but feel that the fact that I have an MA from NSSR is going to count against me at some more traditional, analytic schools. We'll see how well I do next year.

 

I strongly advise against taking on debt to get any advanced degree, especially an MA. Of course I was too stupid to listen to this advice when I enrolled at NSSR. While getting an MA was an excellent, and I think necessary, route for me coming from an SLAC with not the greatest philosophy department (one of my advisers said that trying to get into any of the big name schools from my alma mater is like trying to get into West Point after coming out of the boy scouts), I wish I had had the wherewithal and patience to wait another year and apply to MA programs with funding instead of jumping on the acceptance. With the amount of student loan debt that I have, even if I don't borrow another penny while completing my PhD, if I don't pay the >$400 a month in interest while completing my degree it will effectively cost me nearly another $30,000 by the time I graduate with my PhD, just in interest. I will be paying this debt until I retire, maybe longer.

 

I think getting an MA, for a large number of philosophy undergrads, is a really beneficial stepping stone toward getting into a great PhD program. I think it can close the gap and turn out-of-your-league schools to attainable schools by giving you the time and training and maturity to take more philosophy, deepen and widen your knowledge base, work really in depth on a thesis which can be turned into a stellar writing sample, and help you narrow and better define your research interests so you can better present yourself to adcoms. But I don't think it is worth going into great amount of debt for (20/20 hindsight is a pain in the ass, isn't it?) Any debt is going to follow you and snowball while completing your PhD program, and if you're shut out of PhD programs and end up having to move on, you won't be any better situated on the job market than you were out of undergrad, competing for the same low-paying entry level jobs but with a lot more debt hanging over you.

 

I'd be happy to answer any questions anyone may have regarding my experience at NSSR.

[philstudent1991]

Ya, I totally agree with the general sentiment that applicants from good MAs are pretty much incomparable to those just coming out of undergrad. Their sample isn't just a decent paper; it's a thesis excerpt. Their letter writers know them very wekk, served on their thesis committee, and know a lot more talented young philosophers to compare them to. Their GPA is graduate, not undergrad. They've been in a philosophical community, know the field, know their interests, etc. 

 

But also, it may be that you do the MA, and while you enjoy it and learn more about yourself and the world and are happy for having done so, you decide that academic philosophy is not for you. There is no experience one can have as an undergraduate that fully prepares them for the way academia is. You just have to do it. And the MA offers a clean break for those that feel this way. Finishing an MA is a huge accomplishment even if you don't go on. Dropping out of a PhD, even if you obtain the MA en route, will feel like a failure when your peers are continuing their studies. MA can be a good place to see if this is really what you want to do. Just a thought. 

Edited January 22, 2015 by philstudent1991

[alopachuca]

From what I've heard, MA degrees aren't looked down upon by PhD programs.

 

I can't think of a good reason why they would be. The better news (I think) is that it's getting to be common for applicants to have them, so adcoms will just have to get used to the trend anyway.

 

On the topic of MAs, I think it's worth pointing out the time investment. If the following is incorrect, someone please correct me and I'll edit my comment. What I know is that (in the US) your coursework during your MA won't count significantly (often not at all) to your required coursework once you're in at a PhD program. How big a deal this is will depend on each candidate.

 

For me, it's a deal breaker. That's even assuming I'd finish an MA in 2 years (which apparently is becoming less common). That's 2 years on top of the few years people are spending on their PhDs. I love philosophy, but I don't want to spend close to another decade being a student. The UK is an option for those who are sympathetic to this mentality, but then you have a funding problem. 

[jjb919]

On the topic of MAs, I think it's worth pointing out the time investment. If the following is incorrect, someone please correct me and I'll edit my comment. What I know is that (in the US) your coursework during your MA won't count significantly (often not at all) to your required coursework once you're in at a PhD program. How big a deal this is will depend on each candidate.

 

 

It depends on the school. Many (if not most), will allow you to transfer a certain number of credits. Not all of them, but enough to knock off about a year of coursework. I'm not sure if they will also let you transfer credit for other requirements such as the logic or language requirement. As long as you are focused and complete your dissertation on time, you could complete your PhD in 4 years instead of 5 (although most people don't finish in 5 anyway). It's not a huge difference, but it's something. 

 

Other schools, usually the top ranked ones, will not let you transfer any credits and so even if you have a Masters degree you still have to start out as if you were just coming our of your BA. Chicago has this policy, for instance.

[isostheneia]

Ya, I totally agree with the general sentiment that applicants from good MAs are pretty much incomparable to those just coming out of undergrad. Their sample isn't just a decent paper; it's a thesis excerpt. Their letter writers know them very wekk, served on their thesis committee, and know a lot more talented young philosophers to compare them to. Their GPA is graduate, not undergrad. They've been in a philosophical community, know the field, know their interests, etc. 

 

Surely this isn't strictly true. Otherwise, top departments would only accept applicants with MAs. I agree with the general sentiment though, that MA students are, by and large, more prepared and have better overall applications, and that getting an MA first improves many students' chances of getting into top programs. It seems that acceptances are around 50/50 for MA/no MA these days. I'd be interested to see what the applicant pool is like at these departments. I'd guess that there are fewer applicants with MAs than without MAs (though that's entirely speculative), and so applicants with MAs have a better chance of acceptance, all else being equal.

 

I can't think of a good reason why they would be. The better news (I think) is that it's getting to be common for applicants to have them, so adcoms will just have to get used to the trend anyway.

 

There was a thread on Leiter Reports a couple years back in which a professor expressed a worry that MA students' writing samples are more "coached" than undergrad because of the importance of placement for MA programs, so that the writing sample is less indicative of philosophical ability for MA students than for undergrads. Most of the professors who replied, however, vehemently disagreed with this, FWIW.

[jjb919]

Surely this isn't strictly true. Otherwise, top departments would only accept applicants with MAs. I agree with the general sentiment though, that MA students are, by and large, more prepared and have better overall applications, and that getting an MA first improves many students' chances of getting into top programs. It seems that acceptances are around 50/50 for MA/no MA these days. I'd be interested to see what the applicant pool is like at these departments. I'd guess that there are fewer applicants with MAs than without MAs (though that's entirely speculative), and so applicants with MAs have a better chance of acceptance, all else being equal.

 

I think it would be interesting to see where that approximately 50% of admits with no MAs come from. I remember a post Eric Schweitzgebel made (I can't find the link, sorry) where he did an informal study of graduate admits to UCR. Of those who were admitted with no previous MA, nearly all of them were from other top programs. If we can extrapolate from this, then while top programs don't only accept applicants with MAs, you almost certainly need an MA if your BA is not from a top institution.