Decisions

[thepriorwalter]

As someone who did a master's, I do feel as though my successful application season was owed to getting an MA degree and that having teaching experience did help. I don't know that any school looked at my application and said, "She's the person we want because she has tons of teaching experience," but I do know that having teaching experience meant I had a teaching philosophy and was able to make connections between it and my research methodology, which in turn made me look like a more directed applicant than I had been previously and gave me practice in talking about myself as a teacher/scholar in coherent ways.

 

For an MA degree I would:

(1) Follow the money.

(2) Really follow the money.

(3) The money being equal, follow the teaching opportunities.

(4) Avoid one-year programs, because they generally still require a gap year, so why not spend two years in the MA program if both take the same amount of time?  

[empress-marmot]

Hey guys, I'm glad that we are talking about this on the English forum! I am trying to decide between four right now... and waiting on another four! I am applying to Masters programs though instead of PhDs.

Do you guys have any different advice for choosing a Masters program, especially if you did one? Do you feel like course offerings are more important, or is liking your advisor more important?

I am trying to decide at the moment between BC, which is offering me full tuition, and UChicago's MAPH program, UVA's English Masters, and St. Andrew's Shakespearian course. 

I'm hoping to study late medieval/early renn English drama. 

 

Hey, wetheplants! Congratulations on your acceptances! Personally, I'd choose the program with the best funding and best placement I could (assuming that you think all programs are a good fit). If the PhD is your goal, ask the program where their MAs have been accepted. 

 

Sometimes PhD programs ask for your teaching philosophy/student evaluations, so having teaching experience is a good thing. However, if your best offer doesn't include a TAship, I don't think this would exclude you from PhD program consideration. A TAship isn't your only opportunity for teaching experience, though it is probably your best one.

[wetheplants]

Thank you empress-marmot and thepriorwalter ! I am actually in the unusual position of not having to worry too much about funding. BC is the only place offering me funding right now, but my parents have basically said I should go to whatever I think the best place is.

And gap years, oddly enough, aren't really a big deal for me because I'm also a playwright - so basically any years I'm not in school, I'll be working to get my shows put up and that kind of thing. 

BC is definitely the lowest ranked program I got into (and the only program with a TA offer), but I visited and really, really liked one professor who said he would be my advisor! They say they've placed students in Brown, Cornell and WUSTL occasionally, but no other elite colleges. And of course they're offering full funding, so that's nice. 

Oh and their PhD director got super weird at me and barked about how awful they are when I asked if they ever sent people to PhDs in the UK, which was kind of odd. 

Chicago is the highest ranked program so far, which is the one-year MAPH - I know they place very highly. 

[Ramus]

Chicago is the highest ranked program so far, which is the one-year MAPH - I know they place very highly. 

 

Sometimes, but it's far from a guarantee. Same with UVA -- we have a UVA alum here at Alabama, and she only received offers from Missouri and us when she applied a couple of years back. I think the cash cow stigma associated with the MA programs at UVA and UChicago is just too strong for most applicants to overcome. Of course, they're only going to advertise their placements into Ivies, the UC System, and other top programs. But that doesn't mean it's the norm.

 

FWIW, I'd say BC is the way to go, since you'd get to work with Dayton Haskin, Mary Crane, and Amy Boesky, all of whom are well-known and -connected within the subfield. The postdoc in our department did her graduate work at St. Andrews but she hasn't said a whole lot about their program. 

[empress-marmot]

Sometimes, but it's far from a guarantee. Same with UVA -- we have a UVA alum here at Alabama, and she only received offers from Missouri and us when she applied a couple of years back. I think the cash cow stigma associated with the MA programs at UVA and UChicago is just too strong for most applicants to overcome. Of course, they're only going to advertise their placements into Ivies, the UC System, and other top programs. But that doesn't mean it's the norm.

 

FWIW, I'd say BC is the way to go, since you'd get to work with Dayton Haskin, Mary Crane, and Amy Boesky, all of whom are well-known and -connected within the subfield. The postdoc in our department did her graduate work at St. Andrews but she hasn't said a whole lot about their program. 

 

I agree with you. Funding shouldn't be something to brag about (I think education should be a right of citizenship, but let's not be political), but it is significant.

 

If funding isn't an issue and placement is about equal, (You can always be the first to be placed at an Ivy!) then I would start looking at course offerings, as you mentioned before. Which program is most likely to help you as a scholar? For example, I am about to accept an offer from a program which focuses on rhet/tech, over offers from pedagogy-focused programs.

 

And since you're a playwright, you may want to think about the best population for your works. I know nothing about the drama business, but if I wanted a theater group to test out something I'd written, I would probably have better luck finding one in a larger, more artistic city. 

[wetheplants]

Ramus and empress-marmot, thank you so much for your helpful feedback!

Great point about the placement too - I suppose you might even have a better shot if you really succeed and go above and beyond in a lower-ranked program. Looking at BC's classes, it sounds like I would hopefully be able to piece together something related to my subfield, and they seem to have some flexibility in being able to do independent studies/classes in other departments. 
Chicago would obviously be the most flexible, but oddly enough I'm not seeing too many courses which appeal to me on their lists, even looking through multiple departments...

And empress-marmot, I hope it didn't come across like I was bragging about funding. I apologize if it did!

[1Q84]

Oh and their PhD director got super weird at me and barked about how awful they are when I asked if they ever sent people to PhDs in the UK, which was kind of odd. 

 

The director was probably just peeved that a majority of UK schools don't guarantee funding, forcing their admits to spend an inordinate amount of time securing financial stability instead of actually getting research/coursework done. 

[__________________________]

On 3/18/2015 at 8:46 AM, wetheplants said:

Hey guys, I'm glad that we are talking about this on the English forum! I am trying to decide between four right now... and waiting on another four! I am applying to Masters programs though instead of PhDs.

Do you guys have any different advice for choosing a Masters program, especially if you did one? Do you feel like course offerings are more important, or is liking your advisor more important?

I am trying to decide at the moment between BC, which is offering me full tuition, and UChicago's MAPH program, UVA's English Masters, and St. Andrew's Shakespearian course. 

I'm hoping to study late medieval/early renn English drama. 

 

Agreeing with others--BC definitely sounds like your best offer.  Placements at Brown, Cornell and WUSTL ain't nothin to scoff at and the fact that they're waiving the tuition and giving you TAships makes it seem like a no brainer to me, to be honest.  I don't know anything about UVA or St. Andrew's programs, but I know MAPH is hella expensive.  UChicago is amazing, but personally I wouldn't go ANYWHERE that charged the cost of UChicago's tuition without aid.

 

Also, I don't know much about BC's master's program (I got accepted to it, but I'm not considering it), nor do I know the extent of your interdisciplinary/medieval interests, but BC has some cool resources for medieval studies -- their divinity school is hardcore and there are a good amount of solid medievalists there (Robert Stanton, Eric Weiskott).  I applied there largely on the strength of their medieval theology and philosophy departments.  Also, it's in Boston.  A major plus.

[lyonessrampant]

I'm echoing a lot of the other posters, wetheplants, but I wanted to speak from my perspective having done MAPH with a partial tuition scholarship.  I had a great experience, and I'm a much better scholar, thinker, and writer after it.  That said, I totally regret it.  I regret the debt.  Going significantly into debt for a humanities MA is not worth it.  I know you've said that your parents will pay for your MA, but seriously, save them 60-70K and ask them to put that toward an eventual downpayment on a house or something like that.  Even setting aside who is spending that huge chunk of cash, Ph.D. programs are well aware of the cash cow reputation of programs like UC's MAPH, UVa, and NYU.  If you get a tuition scholarship from one of those programs, that's a different issue.

 

Basically, money follows money, so you want to be able to show a Ph.D. program that an MA program has invested in you financially.  Just because you or your parents have paid for an MA from a top 10 program like UC doesn't mean that a program has invested financially in you.  The UC cohort is huge, and they accept a ton of people largely to bankroll their Ph.D. program.  Is their Ph.D. program phenomenal?  Absolutely.  Is their MA program?  Widely divergent opinions on this both from other institutions and from people who have done MAPH.  My cohort had over 100 people, and several of us went on to Ph.D. programs, some of which did include Ivies and top 20 programs, but a few high-profile placements loses its attractiveness considering that is a significant minority out of the number of MAs they produce.  

 

Sure, BC's Ph.D. program is ranked lower, but there are no rankings for MA programs, and the Ph.D. rankings do not map neatly onto MA programs.  BC's program is great, they're investing in you, and there are great professors there who will help you develop as a scholar.  One of the reasons that the BC prof may have been somewhat dismissive of doing the Ph.D. in the UK is that other than Oxbridge (and sometimes even then), if you want a TT job in the US, you need to get your Ph.D. here.  Basically, asking to do the Ph.D. there shows that you may not know a lot about the way academia works in the US.  No offense, but it sounds like you might want to do some more research on placement in terms of percentage of placements out of cohort, the places that accept people with MAs and where those MAs come from, and job prospects in the US (if that's where you want to stay) concerning where various tiers of institutions hire from.

 

Your choice, obviously, but picking an unfunded program when you have a full-tuition offer from a great school in a great city with great scholarly resources is a horrible decision (in my opinion).  Again, my opinion and I don't know you or your circumstances, but from the perspective of someone who did MAPH, didn't know hardly anything about higher education when I applied (because I was a first-generation college student), and has benefited from several years of experience, I can't say enough that following an institution's investment in you is far superior to going to a program with a prestigious Ph.D. reputation but tarnished MA one.  Lastly, if you want to go to UC, doing the MA there is pretty much a 100% guarantee that you won't get in there for the Ph.D.  There are exceptions (way less than 1% per cohort. . . 0% in mine), but if you really want UC, doing the MA there is a pretty good way of making sure you can't.

 

(Don't mean to sound harsh, but I think real talk is really important.) 

[wetheplants]

On 3/18/2015 at 8:02 PM, mollifiedmolloy said:

Agreeing with others--BC definitely sounds like your best offer.  Placements at Brown, Cornell and WUSTL ain't nothin to scoff at and the fact that they're waiving the tuition and giving you TAships makes it seem like a no brainer to me, to be honest.  I don't know anything about UVA or St. Andrew's programs, but I know MAPH is hella expensive.  UChicago is amazing, but personally I wouldn't go ANYWHERE that charged the cost of UChicago's tuition without aid.

 

Also, I don't know much about BC's master's program (I got accepted to it, but I'm not considering it), nor do I know the extent of your interdisciplinary/medieval interests, but BC has some cool resources for medieval studies -- their divinity school is hardcore and there are a good amount of solid medievalists there (Robert Stanton, Eric Weiskott).  I applied there largely on the strength of their medieval theology and philosophy departments.  Also, it's in Boston.  A major plus.

Hi mollifiedmolly - thanks so much, that is great advice! I know they have a strong divinity program, but I probably should be looking into what classes and resources they offer too, so that's a great point! I've checked the class schedule for next year, and at least according to what they say now, I can take a class with both Weiskott and Stanton before my first year is over, so that's a big plus!

And yeah, MAPH's ridiculous cost is definitely off-putting.

 

[wetheplants]

I'm echoing a lot of the other posters, wetheplants, but I wanted to speak from my perspective having done MAPH with a partial tuition scholarship.  I had a great experience, and I'm a much better scholar, thinker, and writer after it.  That said, I totally regret it.  I regret the debt.  Going significantly into debt for a humanities MA is not worth it.  I know you've said that your parents will pay for your MA, but seriously, save them 60-70K and ask them to put that toward an eventual downpayment on a house or something like that.  Even setting aside who is spending that huge chunk of cash, Ph.D. programs are well aware of the cash cow reputation of programs like UC's MAPH, UVa, and NYU.  If you get a tuition scholarship from one of those programs, that's a different issue.

 

Basically, money follows money, so you want to be able to show a Ph.D. program that an MA program has invested in you financially.  Just because you or your parents have paid for an MA from a top 10 program like UC doesn't mean that a program has invested financially in you.  The UC cohort is huge, and they accept a ton of people largely to bankroll their Ph.D. program.  Is their Ph.D. program phenomenal?  Absolutely.  Is their MA program?  Widely divergent opinions on this both from other institutions and from people who have done MAPH.  My cohort had over 100 people, and several of us went on to Ph.D. programs, some of which did include Ivies and top 20 programs, but a few high-profile placements loses its attractiveness considering that is a significant minority out of the number of MAs they produce.  

 

Sure, BC's Ph.D. program is ranked lower, but there are no rankings for MA programs, and the Ph.D. rankings do not map neatly onto MA programs.  BC's program is great, they're investing in you, and there are great professors there who will help you develop as a scholar.  One of the reasons that the BC prof may have been somewhat dismissive of doing the Ph.D. in the UK is that other than Oxbridge (and sometimes even then), if you want a TT job in the US, you need to get your Ph.D. here.  Basically, asking to do the Ph.D. there shows that you may not know a lot about the way academia works in the US.  No offense, but it sounds like you might want to do some more research on placement in terms of percentage of placements out of cohort, the places that accept people with MAs and where those MAs come from, and job prospects in the US (if that's where you want to stay) concerning where various tiers of institutions hire from.

 

Your choice, obviously, but picking an unfunded program when you have a full-tuition offer from a great school in a great city with great scholarly resources is a horrible decision (in my opinion).  Again, my opinion and I don't know you or your circumstances, but from the perspective of someone who did MAPH, didn't know hardly anything about higher education when I applied (because I was a first-generation college student), and has benefited from several years of experience, I can't say enough that following an institution's investment in you is far superior to going to a program with a prestigious Ph.D. reputation but tarnished MA one.  Lastly, if you want to go to UC, doing the MA there is pretty much a 100% guarantee that you won't get in there for the Ph.D.  There are exceptions (way less than 1% per cohort. . . 0% in mine), but if you really want UC, doing the MA there is a pretty good way of making sure you can't.

 

(Don't mean to sound harsh, but I think real talk is really important.) 

 

Hi lyonessrampant - thanks very much for your input. I am definitely leaning towards BC right now because of the funding (although getting frustrated that I haven't heard back from all these other places, gah! ><), and as my mother very rightly pointed out, if we're going to turn down forty thousand dollars, there better be a really good reason for it. I've been posting here to see if I can get other people's perspective on either these options or the other programs themselves - largely to see if people think that the prestige or resources of other programs are worth the extra cost.

Good to hear your perspective on the MAPH program - did you feel that one year was enough time to really buckle down and study and/or enough time time to really get to know your professors and department? I've heard vaguely wishy washy answers on these fronts from others who did the program, and no one has wholeheartedly recommended it to me so far. I'm a little concerned that in a traditional American format taking classes with lots of other people, and so spread out, a year isn't exactly enough time to get to know professors very well. 

And great point re: MAPH's fancy names for PhD acceptances. I suppose if you spit out a hundred smart kids every year, you're going to get at least a few good placements no matter what.

 

I was just surprised at his weird vehemence against the UK programs, mostly because BC has such strong medieval and Irish studies programs. Surely they must have some people who want to go there for research, or want to teach there? But maybe not in the English department, apparently... 

Anyway, my interest in the UK is purely in Oxbridge. I'm considering St. Andrews for a masters, but I'd obviously be much more interested in one of the Oxbridge schools (if they ever get back to me!!!) But for a PhD, I would really only go for Oxbridge. I studied in the UK for study abroad and I think I actually prefer the more self-guided setup they have for their MA and PhD programs, as that worked very well for me in the past. Plus, the resources they have for medieval/Rennaisance scholars are outstanding.

Anyway, I've been talking to as many people as I can to get different perspectives on studying at Oxbridge and transferring back here and the pros and cons of that, so I feel that I have a good handle on that. I understand that for many people it's either not financially viable, or it's not ideal if they want to instantly transfer back to the States, but I was just surprised at his vehemence - he was a little rude, actually, it was weird. (My mother thinks I might have offended him by saying "across the pond", apparently to some people that has a very fancy-shmancy connotation instead of just literal?) 

 

I have no particular tie to UC, I just applied to MAPH because my interests are interdisciplinary, so I figured that would be a good program.

My goal for the PhD is basically to end up at an Ivy or Oxbridge. If I decide to do theater history instead (which I am considering), then obviously that might change. 

As for researching PhD placements, I'd be happy to hear if you have any recommendations about where to be looking online, other than just on departmental websites. I've been out of school for a little bit, so I don't have any professors on hand to answer questions or point me towards things. I had mostly been researching MA programs and wasn't looking so much at PhD stats just yet, but that was mostly because I wasn't anticipating getting into this many places, so I figured my choices at this stage would be more limited. Now that they're not limited, I guess I have more data to be considering.  

[empress-marmot]

...but I was just surprised at his vehemence - he was a little rude, actually, it was weird. (My mother thinks I might have offended him by saying "across the pond", apparently to some people that has a very fancy-shmancy connotation instead of just literal?) 

 

On one of my campus visits, a grad student mentioned that she'd heard of other students taking on additional teaching classes to raise their stipends. In turn, I mentioned that to the program head, and asked if it was common. Apparently the program head thought I was asking about working outside the department, because I received a very, very terse response. The professor actually told me that if money was that much of an issue, I should think about student loans. Ouch! 

 

Try not to let one bad departmental experience reflect on the entire school. Professors are human, and goodness knows what they thought we were asking them. 

[wetheplants]

On one of my campus visits, a grad student mentioned that she'd heard of other students taking on additional teaching classes to raise their stipends. In turn, I mentioned that to the program head, and asked if it was common. Apparently the program head thought I was asking about working outside the department, because I received a very, very terse response. The professor actually told me that if money was that much of an issue, I should think about student loans. Ouch! 

 

Try not to let one bad departmental experience reflect on the entire school. Professors are human, and goodness knows what they thought we were asking them. 

Very true, that is a great point. Who knows what this guy was thinking... And thankfully he's not the director of the MA program, so even if he's a grumpy guy hopefully I won't be seeing too too much of him =]

[lyonessrampant]

Hi wetheplants, if you had a full-tuition remission from UC's MAPH, I would recommend it because loans to live cheaply in Chicago for 9 months wouldn't be too much for you or a high cost for your parents.  You have to be highly self-directed with a pretty clear sense of what you want out of MAPH to get the most out of it.  I drafted my MA thesis the summer before starting and spent the year workshoping it with a writing director and forming a strong, early connection with the professor I wanted to direct my thesis.  It went through several revisions over the year and improved significantly, but it was a much stronger piece of writing by the end of the year because I started so early (and became my first publication).  I went to all of the offered reading groups and events in my area and contacted professors in office hours and by email to try to create strong relationships.  I took time off after the MA for my partner to finish law school and maintained those links for a few years after finishing.  All of my LORs when I applied to Ph.D. programs came from them, but I bet those relationships would have been even stronger in a two-year program, and I bet that I would have been more competitive applying during the second year of a program rather than two years after finishing an MA and having time away.  Basically, UC is an amazing place with great resources, scholars, and support (for their Ph.D.s).  

 

As far as Oxbridge goes, the job prospects in the UK are even more dismal than here in many ways.  Add in protectionism in the US that disincentivizes hiring from outside the US system and it just seems to make sense to do the Ph.D. in the US if you want to teach here.  The fact that you don't get much (if any) teaching experience is a disadvantage, and the fact that the UK education system at both the undergraduate and graduate levels functions so much differently than the one in the US means you could have challenges being a strong mentor and advisor as a prof here.  I did a study abroad in the UK, too.  It's great.  Oxbridge is awesome, and if you can get in there and funded for a Ph.D., you may well be able to get around the protectionism in the US that privileges US degrees.  However, once in a Ph.D. program, there are research resources to go work with archives or at sites (if you get into med/ren drama that focuses on space and/or actual performance) and you could do a Fulbright or post-doc there.  This would let you get the experience with an American degree that would make you even more competitive in the US.  

 

As for placements, you have to explicitly ask programs because many don't advertise that information for the MA (or the Ph.D. for that matter).  It's not just enough to ask where they've placed MA students in Ph.D. programs.  Ask what an average cohort size is, the approximate percentage who apply to Ph.D. programs, and the percentage of those who applied who get in and where they got in.  Some programs don't have complete data about this, but many do and are reluctant to share.  The more forthcoming a program is in response to those type of questions is a likely indicator of a strong MA program.

[wetheplants]

Hi wetheplants, if you had a full-tuition remission from UC's MAPH, I would recommend it because loans to live cheaply in Chicago for 9 months wouldn't be too much for you or a high cost for your parents.  You have to be highly self-directed with a pretty clear sense of what you want out of MAPH to get the most out of it.  I drafted my MA thesis the summer before starting and spent the year workshoping it with a writing director and forming a strong, early connection with the professor I wanted to direct my thesis.  It went through several revisions over the year and improved significantly, but it was a much stronger piece of writing by the end of the year because I started so early (and became my first publication).  I went to all of the offered reading groups and events in my area and contacted professors in office hours and by email to try to create strong relationships.  I took time off after the MA for my partner to finish law school and maintained those links for a few years after finishing.  All of my LORs when I applied to Ph.D. programs came from them, but I bet those relationships would have been even stronger in a two-year program, and I bet that I would have been more competitive applying during the second year of a program rather than two years after finishing an MA and having time away.  Basically, UC is an amazing place with great resources, scholars, and support (for their Ph.D.s).  

 

As far as Oxbridge goes, the job prospects in the UK are even more dismal than here in many ways.  Add in protectionism in the US that disincentivizes hiring from outside the US system and it just seems to make sense to do the Ph.D. in the US if you want to teach here.  The fact that you don't get much (if any) teaching experience is a disadvantage, and the fact that the UK education system at both the undergraduate and graduate levels functions so much differently than the one in the US means you could have challenges being a strong mentor and advisor as a prof here.  I did a study abroad in the UK, too.  It's great.  Oxbridge is awesome, and if you can get in there and funded for a Ph.D., you may well be able to get around the protectionism in the US that privileges US degrees.  However, once in a Ph.D. program, there are research resources to go work with archives or at sites (if you get into med/ren drama that focuses on space and/or actual performance) and you could do a Fulbright or post-doc there.  This would let you get the experience with an American degree that would make you even more competitive in the US.  

 

As for placements, you have to explicitly ask programs because many don't advertise that information for the MA (or the Ph.D. for that matter).  It's not just enough to ask where they've placed MA students in Ph.D. programs.  Ask what an average cohort size is, the approximate percentage who apply to Ph.D. programs, and the percentage of those who applied who get in and where they got in.  Some programs don't have complete data about this, but many do and are reluctant to share.  The more forthcoming a program is in response to those type of questions is a likely indicator of a strong MA program.

Thanks for telling me about your MAPH experience, that makes a lot of sense. I'm starting to think that may not be the best program for me - I'm very self-directed and have a good idea what I want to study, but I don't think I could even imagine starting drafting a thesis this summer. Part of the reason I wanted to do an MA was to get a better sense of the field and help direct me towards either a Theater history or English department for a PhD, and judging by what you and others have told me, I probably wouldn't have a great sense of that until the end of the year... so not so helpful in terms of applications. 

 

Good point about the postdoc in the UK. 

I do have one other question, how does a PhD program know if your MA was funded or not? Is that something that goes on your resume, or is written on your transcript or something?

[InHacSpeVivo]

Thanks for telling me about your MAPH experience, that makes a lot of sense. I'm starting to think that may not be the best program for me - I'm very self-directed and have a good idea what I want to study, but I don't think I could even imagine starting drafting a thesis this summer. Part of the reason I wanted to do an MA was to get a better sense of the field and help direct me towards either a Theater history or English department for a PhD, and judging by what you and others have told me, I probably wouldn't have a great sense of that until the end of the year... so not so helpful in terms of applications. 

 

Good point about the postdoc in the UK. 

I do have one other question, how does a PhD program know if your MA was funded or not? Is that something that goes on your resume, or is written on your transcript or something?

My most recent MA is indicated as funded on my CV (I have a teaching fellowship). I also (very) briefly mentioned it in my SOP, as it was a competitive position awarded to about 1/4 of the cohort.

[empress-marmot]

I'm not sure if this is the right thread for the question, but it does have to do with making decisions.

 

Has anyone ever heard about an offer not working out the way it looks on paper? I'm being paranoid, but I am terrified that I will accept an offer and then be hit with invisible print. I have it in writing that I get free tuition+healthcare+stipend, and that I still have to pay student fees. But what if I get a letter that says, "Dear Ms. Marmot, we know we promised you two years of funding, but we lied."?

 

I'm being paranoid, right? Most of my mind knows that this doesn't happen, but could someone reassure me that this doesn't happen? Thanks!

[lyonessrampant]

Thanks for telling me about your MAPH experience, that makes a lot of sense. I'm starting to think that may not be the best program for me - I'm very self-directed and have a good idea what I want to study, but I don't think I could even imagine starting drafting a thesis this summer. Part of the reason I wanted to do an MA was to get a better sense of the field and help direct me towards either a Theater history or English department for a PhD, and judging by what you and others have told me, I probably wouldn't have a great sense of that until the end of the year... so not so helpful in terms of applications. 

 

Good point about the postdoc in the UK. 

I do have one other question, how does a PhD program know if your MA was funded or not? Is that something that goes on your resume, or is written on your transcript or something?

 

Your CV would show any fellowships or funds awarded as well as any teaching experience, which provides financial support.  If you have an MA but don't list fellowships or teaching a Ph.D. adcom will know that you paid for it.  Like InHac said, you especially want to call attention to any funding support that was competitive.  You should put any kind of money given you on your CV (travel grants, research funds, fellowships of any size, etc.).

[lyonessrampant]

Hi empressMarmot, I understand feeling paranoid, and there are some horror stories of this happening (particularly during the worst of the recession at some of the California schools), but they are super rare and you would cause for legal action if you were meeting all requirements of the program for degree progress.

[mikers86]

 

I'm not sure if this is the right thread for the question, but it does have to do with making decisions.

 

Has anyone ever heard about an offer not working out the way it looks on paper? I'm being paranoid, but I am terrified that I will accept an offer and then be hit with invisible print. I have it in writing that I get free tuition+healthcare+stipend, and that I still have to pay student fees. But what if I get a letter that says, "Dear Ms. Marmot, we know we promised you two years of funding, but we lied."?

 

I'm being paranoid, right? Most of my mind knows that this doesn't happen, but could someone reassure me that this doesn't happen? Thanks!

 

 

I've never seen this happen, and there's very few scenarios where that would be the case. The only thing that is always dicey would be the terms and conditions of health insurance (shocking, I know) - such as plan changes or renegotiation that occur before you start the program.

 

Even if an administrative slash and burn ALL THE FUNDING happened, that normally results in fewer offers/free tuition for the coming year, not those who are currently enrolled in the program or had already been accepted.

 

But if you're concerned, email the DGS.

[wetheplants]

 

I'm not sure if this is the right thread for the question, but it does have to do with making decisions.

 

Has anyone ever heard about an offer not working out the way it looks on paper? I'm being paranoid, but I am terrified that I will accept an offer and then be hit with invisible print. I have it in writing that I get free tuition+healthcare+stipend, and that I still have to pay student fees. But what if I get a letter that says, "Dear Ms. Marmot, we know we promised you two years of funding, but we lied."?

 

I'm being paranoid, right? Most of my mind knows that this doesn't happen, but could someone reassure me that this doesn't happen? Thanks!

 

I agree with the other posters, but you could always email your contact and just ask if there are any other fees or anything related to funding that you should be aware of before you accept, because money is tight. You can ask specifically about health insurance and student fees, that sort of thing. 

[wetheplants]

Your CV would show any fellowships or funds awarded as well as any teaching experience, which provides financial support.  If you have an MA but don't list fellowships or teaching a Ph.D. adcom will know that you paid for it.  Like InHac said, you especially want to call attention to any funding support that was competitive.  You should put any kind of money given you on your CV (travel grants, research funds, fellowships of any size, etc.).

 

 

My most recent MA is indicated as funded on my CV (I have a teaching fellowship). I also (very) briefly mentioned it in my SOP, as it was a competitive position awarded to about 1/4 of the cohort.

Hey guys, this is very helpful. I'm just trying to think how this would look - I've been offered what they call a 'full tuition scholarship' (which they apparently only award to four people) and then on top of that there are positions available to work as a writing tutor during my first year and TA/TF positions the second year with stipends. But I'm not guaranteed any of the positions - I mean, I feel hopeful that if they want me this much I can get one if I apply and they seem to have enough positions to satisfy most of the cohort, but that's not given at this point. 

So would I just say that it's a funded MA... and a teaching fellowship?

[InHacSpeVivo]

Yeah, I would say funded MA and then add a teaching assistantship if/when it is received.

[heliogabalus]

So would I just say that it's a funded MA... and a teaching fellowship?

 

To whom? Wait until you see what work you are doing before you put it on your CV, and I would just use the official terminology: "full tuition scholarship." Maybe I'm off on this, but to me funded implies a fellowship/stipend of some sort, not a scholarship.

[Ramus]

To whom? Wait until you see what work you are doing before you put it on your CV, and I would just use the official terminology: "full tuition scholarship." Maybe I'm off on this, but to me funded implies a fellowship/stipend of some sort, not a scholarship.

 

Agreed.