joint MA/PhD vs. separate MA and PhD

[terralily]

What is your opinion on the whole joint MA/PhD vs. separate MA and PhD?  Is a slightly better school with little money for the MA and having to go through this turmoil again in two years worth it? Or is a decent school with probable TA position (with all the funding perks) not a bad option?  I'm just collating data in order to make a decision once all the info is in, and I figured other people might wonder about this as well. 

 

Cheers. 

[c m]

Let me preface this by saying, I do not have a cut-and-dry answer for you.

 

Ultimately, I think you have to decide what you want and what your concerns are.  If your goal is to get into a better PhD program than the one you are currently accepted in to then considering an MA or another round of applications the next cycle is definitely something to think about.  However, an MA from another school does not guarantee you acceptance into another/better PhD program the next time you apply.  It might help, it might not, but it will definitely come with a price tag both in tuition and application fees the next time around.

 

As for the PhD program, how well do your research interests fit with the program you applied to? How prestigious are they in this area? I am asking these rhetorically, you don't have to respond but you should consider. After graduation, prestige of the school certainly plays a factor but if the AH department you are applying to is known for what you want to study then that will help, as well.

 

I am in a similar situation so these are the considerations that are running through my mind.  However, I am very much inclined to the PhD program, because I won't take on more debt, it is a program that is well-known for the area I am interested in, and I know I want the terminal degree and this is a track towards that.

 

There are no guarantees, so best to go with the option you feel most comfortable with and make the best of it.

[qwer7890]

Neither is a bad option, of course.... 

 

To add to c m's solid advice: another very important consideration is where you are as a scholar and a thinker. Do you have a strong sense of your own historical/methodological convictions and a solid notion of what you want to write a dissertation about? Or, do you feel like you need more time to explore? If the latter, then maybe the MA is a good route -- that way, if/when you reapply for a PhD, you'll have a much stronger sense of where you want to go, why, and who you want to work with.

 

Also -- and this is important -- when you say "a decent school with probable TA position (with all the funding perks) not a bad option"... do you mean guaranteed funding for 5 years with living stipend? If not, then make sure you talk to current students and really think through carefully what 6+ years will be like -- having to pause research/writing to constantly apply for funding can be a huge time/energy/motivation drain (and really effect, in a major way, quality of life and research).

Edited February 25, 2015 by qwer7890

[theartman1193]

It probably depends upon how you define decent. Rather than this ranking business, I tend to focus on career placement and outcome. Phds.org has an oudated, but somewhat invaluable listing for this. A top program with a 50% job placement...hmm...

Edited February 25, 2015 by theartman1193

[terralily]

Thank you for your replies.  I know what I want to study with and my three acceptances are all with well-known scholars in that field (High medieval France, manuscript studies).  It's the whole job placement thing and going to the best school possible that has me concerned.  Honestly, I was expecting to have one offer, so having three (at this point) is amazing to me.  I really just wanted to make sure I wasn't overlooking some issue.  

[c m]

I am of a mind with theartman1193 on this, as well. Placement afterwards is important, as well. I was just talking to a mentor of mine who did her PhD (in Art History) at a big name school.  While she did fine, she said that it actually worked against some of her peers. Following qwer7890's advice, then, I think the PhD is a good option if your interests are focused, your POI there is respected in that field, and the funding package will support you throughout your studies.

[condivi]

I see your PhD acceptance was Kansas. I would think very carefully before deciding to go there. What is their placement record? I've been around for a while, and I've never met a Kansas PhD student in AH with a prestigious fellowship, or a professor at a major university with a degree from there. Honestly, I would not recommend going to any school not in the top 10. Even the next tier I would think twice about. Kansas is even below that. The job situation is rough and not getting better. And though it's not fair, prestige matters--a lot. I would say get an MA and improve your skills first, if you can afford it. If you can't, maybe you should reevaluate your plans, at least if you plan on getting a tenure track job or a curatorial job, because the truth is, the odds aren't good if you're coming from a place like Kansas. 

[anonymousbequest]

Going with Condivi, all the schools you are waiting on and have been accepted to are second/third tier-in general-except Yale (which I believe has made its initial offers at least). I do know a couple of well-placed Kansas PhDs but they are not in your field. Back in the olden days when Stokstad could have been your advisor it might have been better for medieval.  You'd probably eventually be fine, after adjuncting for several years or taking a string of visiting positions you could wind up at a low ranked state school in fly-over country as the only art historian teaching 4/4 for $40,000. Perhaps you should examine where the MA programs you have been accepted to have placed graduates into PhD programs, just like PhD programs not all MAs are created equally in terms of prestige or connections. Go with the school that a) gives you at least some funding b ) has the best PhD program placement record. But maybe you can beat the odds and become the first PhD from Kansas with a tenure track job medieval art history at Princeton. It's all a gamble, do what feels right and will cost you the least financially and emotionally.

Edited February 26, 2015 by anonymousbequest

[terralily]

You are assuming I want to teach elitist kids at Princeton. You are also assuming I'm not ok with making "only" 40k. I left the lucrative field of law to pursue something I actually enjoy. I appreciated the first few answers because the were not predicated on the idea that one must go the top programs in order to have a career that makes them happy. My lot is what it is. I am coming from a meh state school because it was the affordable, convenient option for a second BA. I've had an amazing experience with fantastic professors. I guess my point is simply that top tier doesn't guarantee success, nor does it define success.

[condivi]

You are assuming I want to teach elitist kids at Princeton. You are also assuming I'm not ok with making "only" 40k. I left the lucrative field of law to pursue something I actually enjoy. I appreciated the first few answers because the were not predicated on the idea that one must go the top programs in order to have a career that makes them happy. My lot is what it is. I am coming from a meh state school because it was the affordable, convenient option for a second BA. I've had an amazing experience with fantastic professors. I guess my point is simply that top tier doesn't guarantee success, nor does it define success.

 

I don't think that is what anonymousbequest is assuming at all. I think we're both assuming, however, that you don't want to be an adjunct teaching with no benefits for $5000 a course, because, sad to say, that is the most likely course. Certainly, getting a degree from Harvard/Columbia/Yale/Berkeley/etc. won't guarantee you'll be teaching "elitist" kids at Princeton (also, what makes you think they're elitist?); on the contrary, the odds that you'd get a job like that from even the best programs are vanishingly small. And that's my point: even from the most prestigious programs, your options will be incredibly limited and your job prospects scarce--years on the job market, possibly multiple post-docs, no choice about where you'll live, etc. When a job is posted, literally hundreds apply, even to jobs in the middle of nowhere at decidedly non-elite institutions. If the hiring committee has a huge stack of apps, in most cases they will just throw out the ones from less prestigious programs, because they can, and they don't have time to go through all of them. I'm not saying it's fair. It's not--but that's the way it is, and you should go in with open eyes about the realities of the job market out there. There's been a lot of debate lately about the ethics of schools like Kansas maintaining PhD programs in the humanities: it's good for them because they get cheap labor to teach their undergrads, but then their PhD's have very poor job prospects. So: you should totally do what you want, and you can of course have a happy career coming from a place like Kansas, but know you'll have a tough road ahead of you, and don't kid yourself about just how tough it will be. If you want to go down that road, I can't say it's the smart decision--and many would agree with me (just look at the chronicle of higher education)--but some decisions come down to other things.

Edited February 26, 2015 by condivi

[theartman1193]

I don't know enough really to say either way (especially since I am not a middle ages art person). Needless to say, rankings and the top ten do change depending upon who retires and who replaces them (if any). I think it's quite fun actually to see how the ratings of programs have changed since the 1990 list (floating around somewhere) to the more current one. I know in my sub-field, many of what are now considered to be 10-20 schools are placing better than the 1-10. Overall with perseverance, loading up on publications, and conference presentations (under the right advisor), anything is possible. I asked a variety of art historians at CAA who seemed to indicate how reputation based off of the ranking system may help very minimally. After that - it comes down to your own work, the quality of your thesis, and if you can teach or curate a wide variety of materials.

Edited February 26, 2015 by theartman1193

[anonymousbequest]

I was certainly not trying to be elitist, and I'm sorry to see that old attack rearing its head again this year.  Teaching or working in a museum is noble public service, whether it's at Harvard or UTEP, the Metropolitan or a tiny historical society. Like condivi, I was simply pointing out that the road is very hard for everyone, but more so for those coming from non-elite schools. As a former lawyer, you probably have experience with this- graduates of certain schools have an easier time getting whatever kind of job they want, whether at a big firm like Sidley or as a public defender, than others. 

 

Working at a small public school or its museum equivalent I'm sure can be rewarding and of course there is no objective measure of success. However, I will say that the life of a perpetual post-doc, visiting professor, or adjunct is no one's idea of success. You are constantly applying or networking for other gigs, moving where ever there's a next job, most likely commuting a ton between different schools, hardly doing your own research if at all. All for maybe $5000 if you are really lucky, could be as low as $3500, with no benefits. You pay your own expenses to go to CAA in hopes that you'll have some cattle call interview. If you get lucky on your third or fourth round you pick up and move again to a T-T job where the tenure clock starts the minute you arrive. Even state schools are amping up the requirements for tenure these days because it is a buyers market. Because you had to be an adjunct for so long, you're probably already behind in your research and publishing, and now you are teaching a 4/4. I'm not sketching out a worse case scenario, sadly I think this is becoming closer to the norm. 

 

It's great to think that there is movement in the rankings, and certainly things are better as the higher education system has democratized. I can think of a couple of subfields where programs outside the usual HYP-UC-Chicago etc... have traditionally been strong (African, Pre-Columbian, and critical theory for example), but these are exceptions. Large private and certain R1 publics have more money, more resources, and reputations to protect. They try to hire the best graduates they can, and the imprimatur of a name program is one way to ensure that, particularly when several faculty on the search committee may have gone there themselves. It's a bit of a closed system. 

 

Again, as I said you should do what will make you the most happy, and by all means attend whatever school you want. I just felt it would be irresponsible of me not to sound a word of caution.  Best of luck to you.  

[condivi]

I was certainly not trying to be elitist, and I'm sorry to see that old attack rearing its head again this year.  Teaching or working in a museum is noble public service, whether it's at Harvard or UTEP, the Metropolitan or a tiny historical society. Like condivi, I was simply pointing out that the road is very hard for everyone, but more so for those coming from non-elite schools. As a former lawyer, you probably have experience with this- graduates of certain schools have an easier time getting whatever kind of job they want, whether at a big firm like Sidley or as a public defender, than others. 

 

Working at a small public school or its museum equivalent I'm sure can be rewarding and of course there is no objective measure of success. However, I will say that the life of a perpetual post-doc, visiting professor, or adjunct is no one's idea of success. You are constantly applying or networking for other gigs, moving where ever there's a next job, most likely commuting a ton between different schools, hardly doing your own research if at all. All for maybe $5000 if you are really lucky, could be as low as $3500, with no benefits. You pay your own expenses to go to CAA in hopes that you'll have some cattle call interview. If you get lucky on your third or fourth round you pick up and move again to a T-T job where the tenure clock starts the minute you arrive. Even state schools are amping up the requirements for tenure these days because it is a buyers market. Because you had to be an adjunct for so long, you're probably already behind in your research and publishing, and now you are teaching a 4/4. I'm not sketching out a worse case scenario, sadly I think this is becoming closer to the norm. 

 

It's great to think that there is movement in the rankings, and certainly things are better as the higher education system has democratized. I can think of a couple of subfields where programs outside the usual HYP-UC-Chicago etc... have traditionally been strong (African, Pre-Columbian, and critical theory for example), but these are exceptions. Large private and certain R1 publics have more money, more resources, and reputations to protect. They try to hire the best graduates they can, and the imprimatur of a name program is one way to ensure that, particularly when several faculty on the search committee may have gone there themselves. It's a bit of a closed system. 

 

Again, as I said you should do what will make you the most happy, and by all means attend whatever school you want. I just felt it would be irresponsible of me not to sound a word of caution.  Best of luck to you.  

Yes--THIS! Spot on. 

[artlover26]

Your best bet would be a top 1-20 school, yes.  It may not be a Yale or a Harvard, but a Santa Barbara or a Duke might land you fine.  

[anonymousbequest]

Agreed, but the OP didn't apply to those schools. Duke, UNC, UCSB, USC, Delaware, Michigan, Temple, Rochester, Stanford, Northwestern would all be better choices in general than what the OP has left in my opinion. But, the OP can do a MA at a state school now and apply (or reapply in some cases) to programs with better placement records if they wish next year, or they can do a PhD at Kansas. The OP solicited opinions, then didn't like what they heard, so here we are.

[Gundohinus]

Yes, but the OP also said that s/he was specializing in high medieval French manuscripts. His/her choice of schools to apply to was wise in that regard. Of the schools you list, only Michigan and Northwestern would have been a good fit, whereas IU, UT Austin, and Kansas all have excellent people teaching in that domain. Personally, terralilly, I would go with one of those MA programs, learn as much as you can from Joan Holladay or Diane Reilly, and then throw yourself back into the mix for the next round of Ph.D. applications in two years. With an MA in hand from one of those places, having worked with one of those excellent scholars, you will be well positioned to land in one of the top-tier places. (Holladay in particular has a great record of placing students in first-rate Ph.D. programs.)

[brown_eyed_girl]

Yes, but the OP also said that s/he was specializing in high medieval French manuscripts. His/her choice of schools to apply to was wise in that regard. Of the schools you list, only Michigan and Northwestern would have been a good fit, whereas IU, UT Austin, and Kansas all have excellent people teaching in that domain. Personally, terralilly, I would go with one of those MA programs, learn as much as you can from Joan Holladay or Diane Reilly, and then throw yourself back into the mix for the next round of Ph.D. applications in two years. With an MA in hand from one of those places, having worked with one of those excellent scholars, you will be well positioned to land in one of the top-tier places. (Holladay in particular has a great record of placing students in first-rate Ph.D. programs.)

 

For what it's worth, I second the UT Austin vote. Well-respected program with a good person in your field. 

[terralily]

Gundohinus, scholars working on some form of high French/English narrative art was my primary factor on where I applied...with a few slightly shoehorned in. Thank you for recognizing that. The idea of going through the process again makes me nauseous, but it may be necessary. My concern at this point lands on funding. I already have a ridiculous amount of loans from law school. Fingers crossed on some sort of UT funding...hopeful, but not optimistic because it is only a MA. At this point I'm visiting all three and going with my gut (even if it might have sh!t for brains).

[qwer7890]

.... My concern at this point lands on funding. I already have a ridiculous amount of loans from law school. Fingers crossed on some sort of UT funding...hopeful, but not optimistic because it is only a MA. At this point I'm visiting all three and going with my gut (even if it might have sh!t for brains).

 

Also, don't forget to think long-term about funding. Entering into a PhD program with only partial funding might mean no (or fewer) loans in the short term but might come back to haunt you in the long-term -- if you have to delay finishing your dissertation because you constantly have to cobble together a living wage... which is why it's so important to talk to PhD students in their 5th, 6th (7th, 8th, 9th, 10th years.......) to see how they're faring.

[Gundohinus]

Yes yes yes, at this point the very best thing is to visit each place and give each of them equally serious consideration. Arrange to meet other grad students and ask how they're faring, and talk with your POI about the opportunities their program affords. By all means ask about their placement record, whether for students moving from MA to PhD or (in the case of Kansas) for students moving from PhD to job market. We can't forget that between TT jobs at elite research institutions and abject, short-term adjuncting posts, there is a large array of teaching positions at smaller local schools and other positions in small museums.

 

Remember, when you visit, that you have the upper hand in the sense that YOU will be making a choice and turning 2 places down. I mean, don't act like a pompous diva, but do know that at this point it is up to these schools to court you. Don't be shy about asking them questions, including this one about the MA versus PhD, about long-term funding opportunities, etc. It will come as no surprise to anyone that financial factors will be a concern, so you should ask about such opportunities (or limitations). But try to keep the conversations positive and focused on your scholarly/intellectual connections with your POI and others in the department. After visiting all three, I am quite sure that your gut will have a good sense of where you need to be. Congratulations again on your admissions -- a lot of people don't get that choice!