MA before PhD: Waste of Time?

[ktwann]

I just graduated from Chapman University with my bachelors in Psychology. My final GPA was a 3.9, and I have some research and clinical experience. However, I was denied to 5 out of the 6 clinical psychology doctoral programs I applied to, and I think it was because I did not show enough direction or intentionality in my applications.  I am looking at Master's Programs because I feel like they will prepare me better for doctoral applications and programs, while also giving me more experience in the field. However, a few people have told me that the master's is a waste of time if I plan on getting a doctorate in the end. Does anyone have any experience or input on this topic?

[Jay's Brain]

I guess the situation is different, but in Canada (where I am!), for example, most of the programs in Psychology require the 1-2 years of MA before you pursue the PhD. It may seem like an extra year, but I think many people I know can attest that it does help to prepare you for the rigour.

Now in your case, if you're looking into programs solely in the States, I know a lot of people do say the Masters is unnecessary. However, like you said yourself, one of the possible flaws with your application was the lack of direction. The Masters may be able to give you the opportunity to reassess what it is you're likely to pursue. Your GPA is stellar, but you didn't give a lot of other information (GRE scores, what kind of research experience you've had and how extensive, or publication/presentation), so is hard to judge. Assuming that the sole reason could be your intentionality, you need to find ways to do so. Just but be forewarned that some schools in the US don't fund your MA.

 

Alternatively, you can take the year to strengthen your application with more research experiences that are relevant to topics you want to pursue. See if you can do enough to get a publication or at least a presentation at a conference. Clinical psychology is a highly competitive program, and they want to make sure you not only have the aptitude, but the ability to do research in the topic you end up in. If you at least know that, you're on a much better footing.

Best of luck!

[_kita]

I just graduated from Chapman University with my bachelors in Psychology. My final GPA was a 3.9, and I have some research and clinical experience. However, I was denied to 5 out of the 6 clinical psychology doctoral programs I applied to, and I think it was because I did not show enough direction or intentionality in my applications.  I am looking at Master's Programs because I feel like they will prepare me better for doctoral applications and programs, while also giving me more experience in the field. However, a few people have told me that the master's is a waste of time if I plan on getting a doctorate in the end. Does anyone have any experience or input on this topic?

 

If  you can skip a masters program, it will save your coffers. It's rare that you'll get funding you can live off of for a masters program. I work a GA position for tuition waiver and receive about 750 monthly. However, I still take out have to take out loans. However, if you have no idea what you want to do in the field yet, it is beneficial to work more. I'd suggest avoiding the masters and working in research labs, but that's just because I feel that fiscally, it would set you up better, and you'll still get relevant experience. 

 

I'm happy with returning for my masters. I was able to get involved on campus, tutor for the psychology department and explore independent research experiences. That being said, I knew what I wanted to do before this program because of my 3 years in a professional clinical job and PT teaching job. I just needed to get back into research. The masters was the easiest way for me to do so. Financially, I wish I could have skipped it, but it's been a great experience otherwise. 

[Heavensmaiden]

I went on to a masters program. So far it has been ok. I am reapplying to a ph.d program. If I get in I am planning on leaving and if I dont have it as a backup. The good thing about my masters program is that I can work right after it and the pay is pretty good. I also see it as training for a ph.d program. just my 2 cents tho. 

[HermoineG]

No. It is a degree and adds to your credentials. You can probably take doctorate level classes ( I am taking those while doing my masters). If you get into  mentorship model masters program - it adds two more years of research experience. If you get to be a TA - it adds two more years of teaching/mentorship experience. If you are a good student - you could probably walk away with a departmental award or two... You get two more years to work on getting some publications out, conferences, making new contacts, getting new recommendation letters. So  - definitely not a waste of time.

About money - I got into a great masters program with some tuition waver. I earn TAship. So I am doing okay. You need to think about your finances.

[Oshawott]

9 hours ago, PsychChick said:

No. It is a degree and adds to your credentials.

If its a degree in the same area, then it really doesn't add much on top of what a PhD in the same field already tells you. If you got an Masters degree in another area of psychology or in a different but related/applicable field (e.g., statistics, computer sciences) then its a credential above and beyond what a PhD tells you.

-----

With that said, a MSc in the same field isn't necessarily a waste of time. In some countries, like Canada, its required to get it before your PhD. I'm currently doing my masters before proceeding to the PhD portion of my program, but there aren't different tiered courses--all grad courses are offered to Masters and PhD's (assuming you have the required pre-reqs). This will actually let me take more advanced stats courses so when I start my PhD, I can design experiments with better statistical methodologies in mind than if I had gone right from undergrad.

Assuming you aren't taking the Canadian route (where people are more likely to do their MSc and PhD at the same institution because that's how the program is structured), a secondary benefit of getting a Masters is increased networking opportunities if you do your MSc at a different institution than your PhD. You'll meet students in your cohort who are presumably going to do their PhDs as well, and you're going to meet different faculty members to do research with.

I really think the only reason that people say a Masters degree is a waste of time is simply the cost. As I understand it, in most American institutions, terminal masters degrees are unfunded. Tuition in the United States is obscenely large (compared to Canadian schools), and this isn't even taking into account out-of-state tuition fees. Is the extra (and if in the same field, mostly redundant) degree worth the extra debt?

Edited November 19, 2015 by Oshawott

[t_ruth]

You could always follow up with the programs you were denied admissions to and see what could make your application more competitive. Why not give yourself the best chance for future attempts?

Re: a Masters, I'd rather see an applicant who found a way to get more research experience (paid or unpaid or as part of school) than one who just went to take more classes. The value of your Masters will depend on what you do when you are there.