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

[isostheneia]

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.

 

IIRC, he said that, in the year he wrote the post, more than half of the incoming class had MAs (at Riverside). that was above average, but they're usually around 50%. I think he also said that he thought this was a higher proportion of MAs to no MAs than at other schools, but that he didn't have any data for this.

 

I'm in agreement with your last sentence. Getting an MA seems like a good way of countering coming from an undergrad with less than stellar pedigree.

[ianfaircloud]

I've missed this place, so I'm chiming in on a few topics today.  Love you people.

 

My thoughts on the MA in philosophy:  Full disclosure, I attended a T7 master's program (where T7 is defined here), and I ultimately failed in PhD philosophy admissions.  I'm now a JD candidate at Penn, and though I could drop into the PhD program (as other JD candidates have done), it's just not going to be worth it for me.

 

The decision to attend an MA program involves weighing costs and benefits, and the weight assigned to each component of the cost-benefit analysis is determined subjectively by the applicant (because, among free and equal moral persons, there are diverse and inconsistent conceptions of the good!).  The challenge is two-fold: what are these components, and what weight ought each component be assigned?  Of course, for some people, the weight of one component may be so great that its consideration alone is outcome-determinitive.

 

Ask some questions. How much do you want the PhD? How certain are you about what you want to do with your life? What is the financial cost of attending an MA program, and how much value do you assign that financial cost? (Every MA program comes with a financial cost, because at the very least, the pursuit of the MA puts off your eventual matriculation into the job market and your earning of a professional income.) How will pursuit of the MA affect important people in your life? Is the MA in philosophy valuable "in itself" and not merely as a means to the end of gaining admission to a PhD program? (Relatedly, how will you feel about failing in PhD admissions?) Are you able to gain admission to a PhD program without the MA? If so, will that PhD program do (enough of) what you want the PhD to do for you? How important is it that you feel, after all is said and done, that you did everything you possibly could do to fulfill your dream of becoming a philosopher? Finally: Will an MA in philosophy increase your chances of succeeding in PhD admissions, and if so, how much?

 

I think the last question is the one most people mean to ask when they ask the general question of whether to pursue the MA in philosophy. What people really want to know is, will the MA in philosophy substantially increase my chances, given my situation, of "succeeding" in PhD admissions?

 

The conventional wisdom is that MA programs in philosophy are meant to support applicants who for one reason or another do not shine brightly from their undergraduate experience or other experience in philosophy. Frequently that's due to the applicant's lesser-known undergraduate institution, or undergraduate institution with a weak or unorthodox (out of the mainstream) philosophy department. Also it's due to the applicant's not having sufficient connections to strong letter-writers. Sometimes it's due to the applicant's not having majored in philosophy or having spent intervening time outside of philosophy. Sometimes it's due to the applicant's weak performance as an undergraduate or inability to produce a strong writing sample.

 

MA programs may give a serious boost to applicants in these positions, though they probably give less of a boost to applicants who are already fairly strong or who attended a strong undergraduate institution (or institution with a strong program in philosophy). "Boost" is important here. Someone who attended Harvard for undergrad, didn't major in philosophy, and then attends Tufts for the MA, may do very well in philosophy admissions not mostly because of a boost given by the Tufts program. For this reason (and not to "pick on" Tufts in particular), it's very difficult to say Tufts is the best program, where "best" program is defined as the program that gives the greatest boost to applicants. Perhaps Tufts brings in people who already were going to do the best overall, and Tufts merely allowed those applicants the time and attention to produce a quality paper.

 

In my limited experience, the best thing that an MA program can do for an applicant is to give an applicant connections to strong letter-writers. The second-best thing that an MA program does is it gives applicants a great environment to produce a strong writing sample. Finally, I think MA programs simply pad an applicant's academic pedigree. Hence programs like Tufts and Brandeis are really helpful to people who attended lesser-known undergraduate institutions.

 

I do not regret my decision to spend $50,000 on an MA in philosophy, nor do I regret my decision to spend $7000 on applications to programs, even though I failed to gain admission to a PhD program. Here's why. I wanted to know that I gave it "my all." I knew that the other option was to become a lawyer, and I figured that I could do well enough as a lawyer to pay off the debt. I also believe that studying philosophy is important in itself. I am a better person, or at least a more informed one, for my devotion to academic philosophy. I studied with some amazing people. And now I'm at an Ivy League law school, and I'm doing very well here, in part because I can think very critically about the law. I'm very fortunate to have had these opportunities.

 

Good luck to you.

[alopachuca]

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.

 

Thanks for the information! 

 

 

 

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.

 

It actually seems believable to me that this happens sometimes. My intuition is that it doesn't happen very much. I can't imagine any applicants from MA programs not taking their work seriously, which includes being honest about one's work and ability. In any case, these professors should also express worry about students coming from lower faculty-student ratio undergraduate programs having more thoroughly "coached" samples than other undergrads. Just seems to be one of the imperfections of the admissions process. 

[Nastasya_Filippovna]

On the topic of MA vs Undergrad, how many here are apply as undergrads or Masters students? From what I can tell in the bios, it appears that the majority have their masters, but perhaps my inference is influenced by my intimidation- I am applying with my bachelors degree, and from an absolutely irrelevant institution at that!

[jjb919]

On the topic of MA vs Undergrad, how many here are apply as undergrads or Masters students? From what I can tell in the bios, it appears that the majority have their masters, but perhaps my inference is influenced by my intimidation- I am applying with my bachelors degree, and from an absolutely irrelevant institution at that!

 

I am applying (next year) as a Masters student.

[Nastasya_Filippovna]

I've missed this place, so I'm chiming in on a few topics today.  Love you people.

 

My thoughts on the MA in philosophy:  Full disclosure, I attended a T7 master's program (where T7 is defined here), and I ultimately failed in PhD philosophy admissions.  I'm now a JD candidate at Penn, and though I could drop into the PhD program (as other JD candidates have done), it's just not going to be worth it for me.

 

The decision to attend an MA program involves weighing costs and benefits, and the weight assigned to each component of the cost-benefit analysis is determined subjectively by the applicant (because, among free and equal moral persons, there are diverse and inconsistent conceptions of the good!).  The challenge is two-fold: what are these components, and what weight ought each component be assigned?  Of course, for some people, the weight of one component may be so great that its consideration alone is outcome-determinitive.

 

Ask some questions. How much do you want the PhD? How certain are you about what you want to do with your life? What is the financial cost of attending an MA program, and how much value do you assign that financial cost? (Every MA program comes with a financial cost, because at the very least, the pursuit of the MA puts off your eventual matriculation into the job market and your earning of a professional income.) How will pursuit of the MA affect important people in your life? Is the MA in philosophy valuable "in itself" and not merely as a means to the end of gaining admission to a PhD program? (Relatedly, how will you feel about failing in PhD admissions?) Are you able to gain admission to a PhD program without the MA? If so, will that PhD program do (enough of) what you want the PhD to do for you? How important is it that you feel, after all is said and done, that you did everything you possibly could do to fulfill your dream of becoming a philosopher? Finally: Will an MA in philosophy increase your chances of succeeding in PhD admissions, and if so, how much?

 

I think the last question is the one most people mean to ask when they ask the general question of whether to pursue the MA in philosophy. What people really want to know is, will the MA in philosophy substantially increase my chances, given my situation, of "succeeding" in PhD admissions?

 

The conventional wisdom is that MA programs in philosophy are meant to support applicants who for one reason or another do not shine brightly from their undergraduate experience or other experience in philosophy. Frequently that's due to the applicant's lesser-known undergraduate institution, or undergraduate institution with a weak or unorthodox (out of the mainstream) philosophy department. Also it's due to the applicant's not having sufficient connections to strong letter-writers. Sometimes it's due to the applicant's not having majored in philosophy or having spent intervening time outside of philosophy. Sometimes it's due to the applicant's weak performance as an undergraduate or inability to produce a strong writing sample.

 

MA programs may give a serious boost to applicants in these positions, though they probably give less of a boost to applicants who are already fairly strong or who attended a strong undergraduate institution (or institution with a strong program in philosophy). "Boost" is important here. Someone who attended Harvard for undergrad, didn't major in philosophy, and then attends Tufts for the MA, may do very well in philosophy admissions not mostly because of a boost given by the Tufts program. For this reason (and not to "pick on" Tufts in particular), it's very difficult to say Tufts is the best program, where "best" program is defined as the program that gives the greatest boost to applicants. Perhaps Tufts brings in people who already were going to do the best overall, and Tufts merely allowed those applicants the time and attention to produce a quality paper.

 

In my limited experience, the best thing that an MA program can do for an applicant is to give an applicant connections to strong letter-writers. The second-best thing that an MA program does is it gives applicants a great environment to produce a strong writing sample. Finally, I think MA programs simply pad an applicant's academic pedigree. Hence programs like Tufts and Brandeis are really helpful to people who attended lesser-known undergraduate institutions.

 

I do not regret my decision to spend $50,000 on an MA in philosophy, nor do I regret my decision to spend $7000 on applications to programs, even though I failed to gain admission to a PhD program. Here's why. I wanted to know that I gave it "my all." I knew that the other option was to become a lawyer, and I figured that I could do well enough as a lawyer to pay off the debt. I also believe that studying philosophy is important in itself. I am a better person, or at least a more informed one, for my devotion to academic philosophy. I studied with some amazing people. And now I'm at an Ivy League law school, and I'm doing very well here, in part because I can think very critically about the law. I'm very fortunate to have had these opportunities.

 

Good luck to you.

I'm curious, do you think there are advantages to accepting a PhD offer from an unranked school before accepting an offer from a good Masters program? I have heard many say that it "isn't worth going" if the school isn't highly ranked, however some say that it isn't worth attending a school outside of the top 20 outside of the top 50. Given the fact the job market for philosophy professors is scant regardless of school pedigree, would a school outside the top 50 only create a detrimental influence for those intent on pursuing an academic career in a prestigious institution? I would just wonder if accepting a PhD offer at an unranked school would be a wiser option than taking the slower, more expensive, and perhaps riskier path of the MA.

[overoverover]

On the topic of MA vs Undergrad, how many here are apply as undergrads or Masters students? From what I can tell in the bios, it appears that the majority have their masters, but perhaps my inference is influenced by my intimidation- I am applying with my bachelors degree, and from an absolutely irrelevant institution at that!

Though I'm a PhD transfer student, I guess I'd fall under the Masters category. 

[LennyBound]

On the topic of MA vs Undergrad, how many here are apply as undergrads or Masters students? From what I can tell in the bios, it appears that the majority have their masters, but perhaps my inference is influenced by my intimidation- I am applying with my bachelors degree, and from an absolutely irrelevant institution at that!

I have an MA from Tufts, and I was completely shut out last year. I decided to give it one more try before completely moving on from philosophy.

[Nastasya_Filippovna]

I have an MA from Tufts, and I was completely shut out last year. I decided to give it one more try before completely moving on from philosophy.

See that is terrifying to me- first of all, congrats again on your acceptance to U. Missouri- talk about overdue and well-deserved! But my God- look at your credentials- MA from TUFTS- creme de la creme of masters programs (and amazing GPA from Tufts no less), excellent GRE scores - and you get shut out last year?!! That is really disturbing to me. 

[ianfaircloud]

I'm curious, do you think there are advantages to accepting a PhD offer from an unranked school before accepting an offer from a good Masters program? I have heard many say that it "isn't worth going" if the school isn't highly ranked, however some say that it isn't worth attending a school outside of the top 20 outside of the top 50. Given the fact the job market for philosophy professors is scant regardless of school pedigree, would a school outside the top 50 only create a detrimental influence for those intent on pursuing an academic career in a prestigious institution? I would just wonder if accepting a PhD offer at an unranked school would be a wiser option than taking the slower, more expensive, and perhaps riskier path of the MA.

This is such a difficult question to answer.  The truth is that I'm not sure whether we know how much of a boost people receive from attending top PhD programs.  It seems like they get a boost.  But then again, it seems like the top PhD programs generally admit the very best people.  Maybe there's another way to look at this: When you attend a top PhD program, you sometimes learn from the very best.  You sometimes work with the very best.  Surely that changes things.  Of course, a lot of what makes a great philosopher is the work s/he produces.  Then again, the work s/he produces is (at least in part!) a product of her training...

I, myself, turned down a non-top PhD to attend a T7 master's.  After the master's, I was rejected to every PhD program to which I applied.  (I was wait-listed at UW Madison.)  I've posted elsewhere that I don't regret the decision to turn down the PhD and attend the MA.  I wanted the very best philosophical education possible, and I felt that I would recieve it at the T7 MA program.  (Indeed I *did* receive a great education from that program.)  Also, I wanted to know that I gave applications to PhD programs my very best.  I knew that I stood a better chance of being admitted to a top PhD program after attending the MA program.  Finally, I felt that attending the non-top PhD program was too risky.  Whether I would have done well is an open question.  That's the nature of something that's risky.

After the MA, I only applied to T20 PhDs (with the exceptions of Madison, Penn, and Duke).

For the rest of the analysis on whether to pursue an MA, see my post above.

[Monadology]

I do think that if you aim at landing a job at a prestigious institution, getting into a 'top' PhD program will be important and probably necessary (barring publishing something game-changing in grad school). It's my impression that placing 'up' in terms of prestige is rare. On the other hand, if you just aim at landing a job, there are some unranked or low ranked programs that place well enough that it can be worth it (depending on how you feel about losing 7 years to the PhD if you get unlucky on the job market). 

Edited January 27, 2015 by Monadology

[reixis]

Wow, reading Ian's history makes me just want to give up. 

 

Anyway, I have very mediocre GREs (see my signature) and an educational background (only a B.A.) that in no way compares to institutions in more developed countries like the US. I've changed my mind a thousand times during the past three years deciding whether to apply or not. I decided giving it a shot since some people really believed in me, and studying overseas was something that I really wanted for my life. I borrowed money that I didn't have from my parents and I could afford a few applications. Luckily enough, I got an early admission from an Anglophone department, which made the past few months much more easier. It's not a ranked one (I guess I'm not in the place to care about this), but a great department as I've heard. The good thing is that I can come back to my country, and if I do so, I will likely land a good tenured job here, since some parts of the country "lack'' well-qualified philosophy professors.

 

In a nutshell, I decided to apply and see what happens. If things don't go well, at least I will know that I applied and was rejected.

 

As the notifications have already started, hope we all get good offers and that we can meet at some conference sometime. Good luck everyone!

Edited January 27, 2015 by reixis

[isostheneia]

I was recently reading a thread from last year on Leiter Reports about writing samples from MA students versus those from undergraduate applicants (here). Bill Blattner (Georgetown) had a comment that stood out to me as potentially useful:

 

"I have been doing graduate admissions at Georgetown for a long time. I agree that the overall trend of an increase of applicants from MA programs is there. In fact, my colleague, Rebecca Kukla, wrote a guest post on this topic around a year ago for this very blog. The applicants for PhD programs out there should know that I, at least, and I suspect most others who serve on PhD admissions committees, make no assumptions about family wealth or why a student chose to pursue an MA first. There are lots of very good reasons to pursue an MA first: perhaps you didn't do an undergraduate philosophy major; or the major program you did finish did not prepare you fully for the mainstream contemporary philosophy scene (perhaps the idea to pursue a PhD came to you late in your major, which you had devoted before then mostly to cherry-picking the interesting-looking classes, rather than ones that would prepare you for grad school); or as one poster above remarked, you weren't sure you wanted to go all the way with a PhD in philosophy, and so you checked out an MA program first; perhaps you had a spotty record as an undergraduate, because you were a late-bloomer or had to work full time while in college or spent way too much time partying; the list goes on.

 

Now, the problem that the original correspondent raises, that it is becoming harder to sort through the applications and identify the 10 or 20 best based on the writing sample, is a real problem. The problem is, however, too much of a good thing. What I've inferred from the increased professionalization of the discipline at this level is simply that students are getting more rigorous training and are better prepared for grad school than they were 15 years ago. (When I applied for grad schools back in the early '80's, I just sent in an unedited paper from one of my courses. Done. That would not work today.)

 

It is simply impossible to know whether an applicant had help with an essay. This is true no matter where the applicant applies from, whether from a BA program or an MA program. One just has to assume the work is all the students'. Always assume honesty first. After all, this isn't Wall St.: there is very little financial incentive to "cheat" your way into a PhD program in philosophy. As the poster above from GSU (a program that sends us a bunch of applicants each year) notes, if the faculty at MA programs succumbed to the pressure speculated in the original post, it wouldn't take long for that program to fall into disrepute. Their students would flame out quickly. My experience has been that there are a healthy number of excellent MA programs (I won't list them for fear of forgetting one), and in fact every other year a new MA program comes onto the radar.

 

One last comment about "discounting" work from MA programs. I take it that the original correspondent was using the term the way it's used financially: calculating in the additional training that an MA student has done. A logician or decision-theorist can tell me whether this is just the same thing, but I think of it the other way around: when I get a very sophisticated paper from a student coming directly out of college, it attracts my notice precisely because the student did not have the extra training. There aren't a huge number of such papers each year, however, which is why more and more students are seeking MA training."

 

So I suppose we undergraduate applicants should hope that we've produced "very sophisticated" writing samples. Of course, it's not easy to tell whether one has done so. But on the topic of this thread, doing an MA is certainly one way to make sure you're sending a writing sample of the highest quality possible, which is an essential part of a successful application.

Edited January 28, 2015 by isostheneia

[philstudent1991]

I was recently reading a thread from last year on Leiter Reports about writing samples from MA students versus those from undergraduate applicants (here). Bill Blattner (Georgetown) had a comment that stood out to me as potentially useful:

 

"I have been doing graduate admissions at Georgetown for a long time. I agree that the overall trend of an increase of applicants from MA programs is there. In fact, my colleague, Rebecca Kukla, wrote a guest post on this topic around a year ago for this very blog. The applicants for PhD programs out there should know that I, at least, and I suspect most others who serve on PhD admissions committees, make no assumptions about family wealth or why a student chose to pursue an MA first. There are lots of very good reasons to pursue an MA first: perhaps you didn't do an undergraduate philosophy major; or the major program you did finish did not prepare you fully for the mainstream contemporary philosophy scene (perhaps the idea to pursue a PhD came to you late in your major, which you had devoted before then mostly to cherry-picking the interesting-looking classes, rather than ones that would prepare you for grad school); or as one poster above remarked, you weren't sure you wanted to go all the way with a PhD in philosophy, and so you checked out an MA program first; perhaps you had a spotty record as an undergraduate, because you were a late-bloomer or had to work full time while in college or spent way too much time partying; the list goes on.

 

Now, the problem that the original correspondent raises, that it is becoming harder to sort through the applications and identify the 10 or 20 best based on the writing sample, is a real problem. The problem is, however, too much of a good thing. What I've inferred from the increased professionalization of the discipline at this level is simply that students are getting more rigorous training and are better prepared for grad school than they were 15 years ago. (When I applied for grad schools back in the early '80's, I just sent in an unedited paper from one of my courses. Done. That would not work today.)

 

It is simply impossible to know whether an applicant had help with an essay. This is true no matter where the applicant applies from, whether from a BA program or an MA program. One just has to assume the work is all the students'. Always assume honesty first. After all, this isn't Wall St.: there is very little financial incentive to "cheat" your way into a PhD program in philosophy. As the poster above from GSU (a program that sends us a bunch of applicants each year) notes, if the faculty at MA programs succumbed to the pressure speculated in the original post, it wouldn't take long for that program to fall into disrepute. Their students would flame out quickly. My experience has been that there are a healthy number of excellent MA programs (I won't list them for fear of forgetting one), and in fact every other year a new MA program comes onto the radar.

 

One last comment about "discounting" work from MA programs. I take it that the original correspondent was using the term the way it's used financially: calculating in the additional training that an MA student has done. A logician or decision-theorist can tell me whether this is just the same thing, but I think of it the other way around: when I get a very sophisticated paper from a student coming directly out of college, it attracts my notice precisely because the student did not have the extra training. There aren't a huge number of such papers each year, however, which is why more and more students are seeking MA training."

 

So I suppose we undergraduate applicants should hope that we've produced "very sophisticated" writing samples. Of course, it's not easy to tell whether one has done so. But on the topic of this thread, doing an MA is certainly one way to make sure you're sending a writing sample of the highest quality possible, which is an essential part of a successful application.

Ya this all makes sense. And believe me I remember this debate, and I am so glad that most commentors disagreed with the OPs attitude. However, the reasons given in this post and in general in the blogosphere about why people pursue an MA don't seem to make sense of the reality at T7 MAs. In my experience at a T7 MA, no one is there because of a "spotty" undergraduate record, for instance. A few had less "mainstream" training, i.e. were at more Continental programs, and a few had fewer philosophy classes than would be ideal for a strong application to PhDs. But by and large, everyone at my T7 majored in philosophy and did very well in their courses. A few even come from PGR programs, having majored in philosophy, and having done very well. The view, and I'm not sure how prevalent it really is but it seems to be common, that MA students didn't major in philosophy just doesn't square with reality. 

[ianfaircloud]

Ya this all makes sense. And believe me I remember this debate, and I am so glad that most commentors disagreed with the OPs attitude. However, the reasons given in this post and in general in the blogosphere about why people pursue an MA don't seem to make sense of the reality at T7 MAs. In my experience at a T7 MA, no one is there because of a "spotty" undergraduate record, for instance. A few had less "mainstream" training, i.e. were at more Continental programs, and a few had fewer philosophy classes than would be ideal for a strong application to PhDs. But by and large, everyone at my T7 majored in philosophy and did very well in their courses. A few even come from PGR programs, having majored in philosophy, and having done very well. The view, and I'm not sure how prevalent it really is but it seems to be common, that MA students didn't major in philosophy just doesn't square with reality. 

 

Helpful response from Philstudent1991. In my own experience at a T7 master's program, there was a lot of diversity among the students. I think most of the students majored in philosophy. Some did not major in philosophy but came to the program to get a philosophy degree on the resume and (more importantly) to do the things one has to do to be admitted to a good PhD program in philosophy (connect with philosophers, write a good sample). For what it's worth, over the last two years, out of the MA program, at least one or two of our most successful PhD applicants did not major in philosophy but did have very strong academic backgrounds and pedigrees.

 

In my own experience, people came to the MA program because they wanted to pursue the PhD but (at that stage) weren't able to get into strong enough PhD programs. Most people come in thinking that they want the PhD. There weren't a lot of people who were on the fence about pursuing philosophy, though after a year or so in the MA program, several decided against pursuing philosophy. Some of those who decided against philosophy ended up doing very well for themselves in another field. Some others are still searching.

 

The most harmful suggestion by the philosopher in the original post is that MA students must be evaluated differently than those without the MA. That person's suggestion was that MA students are heavily coached and that their writing samples don't represent their own abilities. There was even some suggestion that people who pursue the MA come from wealth. So a lot of us found the person's comments to be shockingly ignorant of the realities of MA programs. (And since the person is reading applications at a T20 department, some of us were deeply disappointed at the idea that his or her views have influence.)

Edited February 15, 2015 by ianfaircloud