In need of some advice!

[Raccount]

Just to provide some background, I'm a History major, triple minor (sociology,ethnomusicology and music) at IU with a 3.83 GPA. GRE: 157/148/4.5. 

Thus far, I've been rejected by 4 schools including my alma mater which needless to say crushed me (the feeling of shame/failure has not lessened since I got that news) accepted by one for an MA and wait listed at another. I've yet to hear back from 2 of my schools but I feel my prospects are fairly dim. 

As the rejection letters have started rolling in I've become increasingly anxious about what to do. The MA program that accepted me is 6 hours away and because I'll be considered an out of state student I'll be paying much more for that degree than if I were to complete it in my home state. I've already been told that I won't be funded by the school so financial aid is a negatory. 

So, my question is basically whether it's worth it to fork out the extra cash to get an MA and later reapply to PhD programs once I'm done or would it be more beneficial to take graduate courses at my alma mater as a non-degree seeking student for a year and then try to get back into a graduate program after that. 

[johnnycomelately]

I, much like many others on this forum, would not pay for grad. school. That being said, I think it could be worthwhile, should you not be accepted to one of the other two programs with funding, to take a year to work on languages (if you need to) and take a grad course or two and reapply next year. Here's my thinking: you might come to find that you don't want to do grad school and this could help solidify your decision either way; if you do well in those courses, your rec. letters will be strong(er); it will likely be much less expensive than going to an unfunded MA program as an out of state student; you can use that time to really figure out whonyou want to work with, make some connections (emailing prior to applying helped me work out the best way to approach the SOP for each program, and find out whether or not I would be a good fit) and fine tune your applications; maybe even try to raise your verbal score (it's not terrible, but over 160 opens up some possibilities for funding and such).

Also, try not to let getting denied by your undergrad school get in the way of continuing on the path you choose. Many feel that getting all degrees from one school is like intellectual incest and could put you at a disadvantage for future prospects. 

 

Good luck!

Edited March 1, 2016 by johnnycomelately
To clarify a point on applying.

[krystasonrisa]

I would second that advice. Definitely don't stress over your alma mater. It's more about match than you think. 

Don't pay for grad school. Just don't do it. Wait it out. Work on your application and reapply. (You want to aim to be in at least the 80th percentile on qualitative and writing, and have a very strong writing sample and statement of purpose.) Or, depending on your research interests, consider applying abroad as well. 

 

But also, don't stress it yet! There is still time! And these decisions in no way reflect your ability to do this. Timing and luck are huge, scary factors. I wish you the best of luck! 

[fencergirl]

I don't think being in the 80th percentile in quant is really necessary since history is for the most part not a quant heavy-field. I got something like 65% and was admitted to several funded PhD programs. (My verbal was quite high though, 96% I think). I agree that the total GRE score is a little low though. I think over 160 in verbal and over 150 in quant is a good place to be. 

Edit: just realized krystasonrisa wrote qualitative not quantitative. Oops. I'm used to hearing that part described as verbal. I agree that verbal should be over 80% though I'd think 157 would be close?

Waiting another year, taking some classes/working on languages, and retaking the GRE is probably good idea, and preferable I think to taking on debt for an expensive out-of-state M.A. with no funding. I would also get in touch with POIs (especially at your alma mater) and ask where they think you can improve your application. It could have been they felt your SOP didn't address fit well enough, or perhaps they were indeed worried about the GRE score or maybe they just weren't taking anyone in your specialty this year. Impossible to know unless you ask!

And it's late in the season but not over yet! Good luck, I hope it all works out.

Edited March 1, 2016 by fencergirl
reading comprehension

[kotov]

I obviously don't know much about getting into higher level programs, but one piece of advice I'll give you is the one I give to everyone here, which is DO NOT pay for a graduate degree out of pocket. I wouldn't even do that in a STEM field, much less in the humanities.

[mvlchicago]

I don't know how many times you've tried going for grad school, but it's really not uncommon to be rejected the first time. Once your season is wrapped up, I wouldn't hesitate to contact POIs and ask them what they thought about your potential//whether certain red flags killed your application, then decide whether you want to do an MA based on those red flags (language work hardly requires an MA; a year-long thesis might).

As other people have mentioned, your alma mater rejecting you is really not a personal thing: my advisor explicitly told me not to apply to mine, even if the fit was there, because it slows the development of your networks and most institutions are aware of that. Sometimes people go from undergrad to grad school at the same place but that's usually an exception than it is an expectation.

[Buzz Fledderjohn]

There is no guarantee that paying for an MA will provide a PhD program admit as a return. What courses would you take as a non-degree seeking student? How would they benefit your application? Definitely, spending the time to re-take the GRE would be worth it, and if you are able to invest time to gain proficiency in a foreign language, that would be wise as well. Is this your first application cycle?

[anthrostudentcyn]

My opinion: yes, take a few classes, but also work in something somewhat related to your field. Maybe get a job at a library, or a museum, and spend a TON of time on applications. Like, start them the end of spring, and work on them until November/Decemeber. Try to find a job that pays decently, because extra money saved up will ALWAYS be handy in grad school. 

[Riotbeard]

I had a similar issue my first set of applications, and turned down the unfunded PhD and waited another year.  I found one of those GRE classes really helpful in raising my verbal score from something just ok to 96%. I would say even 80% is not that high for verbal, when a lot of other people will be in the 90s.  I got into a bunch of places my second time around, so I would definitely not advise paying for an MA.

[storia]

Definitely take graduate courses as a non-degree student if you have to fork out a bunch of money for the MA. In fact, I would recommend taking only one or two courses a semester so that you can really concentrate on producing an outstanding writing sample. If you have all semester to write one or two papers you will be amazed at what you can produce. I think an outstanding writing sample might be worth more than all the MA coursework. I also second the idea that you might also want to invest some time in studying for the GRE. Finally, taking a year off will give you time to work up great statements of purpose/personal statements aimed at each of the schools you plan to apply to. Really spend a lot of time on those and show them to the professors whose classes you are auditing.  

[_etruscan]

I mean, I'll take a different tact here. I got accepted Vanderbilt this year with a very generous funding package. It's a high ranked program, and the POI there  advocated for my admission. 

There is no way in hell that would have been possible if I jumped from my BA to applying to a PhD program. I flunked out of my first year at UT-Austin. I was immature and not serious about college. Took me awhile to get my BA, going part-time and working full-time. GPA when I graduated was a 3.37. I will add that I jumped through various majors, first poli-sci then international relations. I was dissuaded from pursuing history because of "marketability" (which isn't wrong, tbh). But I finally did the change, and my major GPA was a 3.8. 

But that was good enough for to get into the MA program at North Texas. And I did, with the assumption that this can either be where I can show I'm PhD material or it can help me get a job as a teacher if that didn't pan out. So I did it. I developed my research topic for my Master's thesis. I began to submit conference papers. And I got a feel for what a graduate program entails. And I prospered. My Master's GPA was a 4.0. And professors I've worked with knew what I could do, and their letters of recommendation reflected that.

No doubt that my GRE scores helped (92% Verbal, 98% Analytical). But if for anything else, I realized what I wanted to research and work on. And that's what a PhD program is looking for: they're looking for whether you have the fortitude to succeed and if you match well with the department's focus and faculty. 

I'm not going to tell you that paying for a Master's degree is "right" or "wrong." I was lucky to have a job that gave me the flexibility to do that. And maybe sprucing up your application can help. But there's a world of difference between undergraduate history and graduate history. Between writing a term paper and understanding the historiography of a given subject. Of learning how to do research, of networking with students, and just understanding what a historian should and shouldn't do.

The writing sample I sent to Vanderbilt came from my thesis. When the POI asked to see my thesis, I sent it his way. He told me that sharing it with his colleagues solidified his (and their) support for my application. Honestly, would that had happened if I applied when I graduated with my BA? No, of course not. I demonstrated an aptitude that erased their concerns for my earlier travails when I started college. My MA and thesis proved I could to this. And that was the point. 

But at the end of the day, how much do you want this? And are you okay with only having a Master's degree when this is all said and done? I can't say what is best for your case. But what I can say is that I do not regret paying for my Master's degree. 

Your milage may vary, of course  

[TMP]

Are you currently attending IU?  Ask your professors there point-blank what happened.  If it's about fit, shrug.  It's usually the biggest reason why people get in-- good fit with the program and POIs.  Nothing personal-- they still love you but your interests may not be aligned right for a long haul.

Finish your admissions season before doing some analysis on "what went wrong."  If you're waited listed at a funded PhD program, wait until that decision turns to accepted or rejected before going through that process.  Speak with the DGS and POI of that program and your sought-after program to find out what could be strengthened.  You don't know what's going to happen between now and then-- it's still early in the grand scheme of things.

Do not pay for graduate school, especially if you're doing thesis and already have a language in hand.  What's your field?  We'd better able to  tailor our advice here.  I paid for my MA because I needed languages and more historical background in my field (which my tiny undergrad institution could not provide).

If you are a graduating senior, it's perfectly normal to freak out at this point.  You had hoped and planned to be in a PhD program in the fall and you don't know what to do now.  It probably feels like-- not a collapse of a house of cards but an entire building.   You don't know how to clean up that debris and what to do with all that.

My advice: Start applying for opportunities may it be Peace Corps, jobs, Americorps, whatever floats your boat now (probably not Teach for America for ethical reasons).  You might be in denial but don't let it "delay" your process of seeking other options.   The longer you wait, there won't be as many jobs available as right now as graduating students start applying.  The market is still competitive (though it's so much better than when I was doing all of this in 2010 and 2011).

Yes, that's right, I applied to PhD programs for three years running.  It was mentally exhausting and emotionally draining and it caused my depression to relapse after keeping it at bay for a decade.  But I got through it -- with the incredible support of my colleagues, professors, and friends.  While all that happened, I had really good "life" experiences that ultimately defined my research interests more clearly.  There is no "right" or "wrong" way in your pursuit of the PhD-- use your time wisely.

[Chiqui74]

I agree with everyone who has said not to pay for grad school, especially since your stats are not exactly abysmal.

As for your alma mater, I am not surprised they rejected you.  Some programs will not, as a rule, accept their own undergraduates.  It's not recommended that you do your PhD at the same place where you did your undergraduate degree and, from what I have heard, it's frowned upon when it comes to the job market.  So, this was a blessing in disguise.

If you don't get any funded offers this year, try again next year.  You do not need an MA to get into a PhD program.  I, for example, did not have an MA and my stats were worse than yours. It's about fit and luck, I think.

Good luck!

[random_grad]

While I get the reasoning behind "do not pay for grad school" advice, I think it should not be a rule of thumb. If the MA you're considering is from a significantly better-ranked school + offer unique training opportunities relevant for your field + you have a bit of savings, then I think there's nothing wrong with paying for that MA. I personally took out a loan to do my MA and the difference in maturity it offered was huge. I am confident that the writing sample I produced + references I got + training in specialty-specific tools greatly increased my chances. To be fair, I had partial funding for the MA so the ensuing debt was not huge. All this to convey that while the one MA to which you got accepted might not be ideal for your situation, you should not rule out the option of applying for more MAs next time around as a way of diversifying your profile (some universities would even accept their undergrads after they did an MA elsewhere). Talk to your LOR writers, present all the options you are considering. The downside of taking non-degree courses is that you won't get a grade/it will not be full-time and you will still spend money on this enterprise, while it is not clear how much difference it will make for your profile. Unless it's languages which you are missing, imo a few extra seminar courses won't make a difference.

[charlemagne88]

I'm in a similar position as you except I've not received any acceptance letters yet... still waiting and hoping. I applied to all PhD programs (might've been a little ambitious) and I've been told that sometimes applicants who apply to PhD programs will be accepted into MA programs w/out funding. If that happens to me, I'm prepared to pay my own way through my MA in hopes of receiving full funding to the PhD upon completing the MA program. After all, my career goals depend heavily on grad school, so any yes is, at least imo, an open door to success. 

On that note, I'm not sure self paying for one or two grad level courses will really be worth your while, unless you happen to know that a specific teacher is teaching a course that would help you in your research proposal. Otherwise you're just paying ridiculous fees to pass the time. btw, you'll still have to apply to the school as a non-degree seeking student and be admitted. 

 

just my own thoughts on the matter. 

[jpb]

22 hours ago, random_grad said:

While I get the reasoning behind "do not pay for grad school" advice, I think it should not be a rule of thumb. If the MA you're considering is from a significantly better-ranked school + offer unique training opportunities relevant for your field + you have a bit of savings, then I think there's nothing wrong with paying for that MA. I personally took out a loan to do my MA and the difference in maturity it offered was huge. I am confident that the writing sample I produced + references I got + training in specialty-specific tools greatly increased my chances. To be fair, I had partial funding for the MA so the ensuing debt was not huge. All this to convey that while the one MA to which you got accepted might not be ideal for your situation, you should not rule out the option of applying for more MAs next time around as a way of diversifying your profile (some universities would even accept their undergrads after they did an MA elsewhere). Talk to your LOR writers, present all the options you are considering. The downside of taking non-degree courses is that you won't get a grade/it will not be full-time and you will still spend money on this enterprise, while it is not clear how much difference it will make for your profile. Unless it's languages which you are missing, imo a few extra seminar courses won't make a difference.

I agree with this point, as I also received an MA (partially funded) from a top-tier program and found that it was one of the better experiences of my academic life. My interests changed a bit and solidified. My writing sample improved dramatically. My letters of recommendation were superior to my undergraduate ones. I've ultimately landed at my top-choice program with full funding. I also learned that academia is exactly where I want to be, where many PhD candidates straight out of undergrad question their choices a year or two into the program. While I agree that one shouldn't take on a significant amount of debt to obtain a Masters, the notion that an MA doesn't do much to improve one's application materials is a bit silly. I even received two personal notes from schools that rejected me, saying they loved my writing sample, but I just wasn't a thematic fit with the faculty. There's no chance that I'd be this prepared for doctoral work without my MA.

[sixgunguerilla]

On 3/1/2016 at 6:27 PM, rhiannonsdreams said:

Just to provide some background, I'm a History major, triple minor (sociology,ethnomusicology and music) at IU with a 3.83 GPA. GRE: 157/148/4.5. 

Thus far, I've been rejected by 4 schools including my alma mater which needless to say crushed me (the feeling of shame/failure has not lessened since I got that news) accepted by one for an MA and wait listed at another. I've yet to hear back from 2 of my schools but I feel my prospects are fairly dim. 

As the rejection letters have started rolling in I've become increasingly anxious about what to do. The MA program that accepted me is 6 hours away and because I'll be considered an out of state student I'll be paying much more for that degree than if I were to complete it in my home state. I've already been told that I won't be funded by the school so financial aid is a negatory. 

So, my question is basically whether it's worth it to fork out the extra cash to get an MA and later reapply to PhD programs once I'm done or would it be more beneficial to take graduate courses at my alma mater as a non-degree seeking student for a year and then try to get back into a graduate program after that. 

 Hi Rhiannon.

I had almost exactly the same statistics as you coming out of undergraduate, except with one major disadvantage: My undergrad GPA was 2.75, not 3.83. I *did* pay for a Masters degree -- against the other advice you've received here -- but I knew I was ultimately going to pursue history as a career to the ends of the earth, most likely through a PhD program, and I knew I would only be competitive if I had shown in the five years between my undergrad and Masters completion that I had grown as a student. I had a 3.8 GPA as a Masters student.

I have only taken the GRE once and my scores are in your range: 159/148/4.5

Alternatively, you can try to "buffer" your current stats with some classes as a non-degree seeking student. I do know, however, that although it came at a great personal cost, programs who otherwise likely would have rebuffed me did not because my financial expenditure with the grad degree demonstrated a passion, dedication and seriousness that I otherwise may not have been able to communicate. If you're paying for your Masters degree, you're pretty much saying you're willing to sacrifice 7-10 years of financial freedom later on in your life to take a risk now. There's nothing wrong with that. Plenty will advise against it, and that's fine too. But ultimately you will always find -- especially on the internet -- that there is no shortage of people willing to tell you why you are stupid for doing something or why you can't; and in the end you have to make the decision that is personally best for you.

Anyway, I've been accepted to PhD programs this cycle. It was my first try. 

Keep in mind what I did might not work for you, and what might work for you might not work for others. Everyone's mileage varies. But during the application process I've done a few things: The first is focus on presenting myself as professional and mature. I know that seems simple, but it will go a long way. Schools are, as others have mentioned, looking for "fit" in many cases, and sometimes they want to see that you have an appropriate "perspective" for their program as well. 

Know your POIs as well as they know themselves; know them as best you can on a personal level. Don't be creepy about it, but view them as people and remember that they went through this process too and had the same worries, suffered similar failures, battled rejection and persisted through. 

If you can't separate yourself statistically, you can at least separate yourself as a person who has a more mature and professional perspective of what it means to be a PhD student at your desired institution. 

I personally visited every school to which I eventually applied. Some schools refused my request to visit, and that was sign enough to me not to apply because I felt like my best way to distinguish myself was what I could do in person as opposed to on paper. In any event, in every instance I told my POI and the program director specifically that I understood that the opportunity to obtain a PhD at their institution was a two way street of opportunity; this is to say that eventually I would be someone who would go out into the field and represent the profession with the University's name attached to my credentials, and that I understood that meant something. 

Another thing was I measured my expectations accordingly. I knew I was never going to make it beyond the first pass-through at top-tier institutions because they would look at my statistics and simply throw me into the rejection pile. It stinks that this is the way it works, but it is. But I've committed to the idea that in most cases the work you put into your PhD is going to be the value you get out of it, and in most cases the prestige of your University is only going to matter at the extremes (very impressive or very unimpressive, the big middle can still be viewed as something of a meritocracy)

Finally, might I suggest supplementing your MA pursuits (be it in or out of state) with the best internship you can get. I was able to get an internship at a large public institution which provided me with a generous recommendation; and professors from multiple schools told me directly that it was an "impressive" internship. With the direction that history as a field is heading, I think some programs like to see that their students are not only driven but also agile; understanding the various and new found demands on historians. 

I would also say to be sensitive to the type of programs you're applying to for that reason: You want to be in a program with faculty who can help prepare you for what historians will be in 10 years, opposed to programs that may have more prestige in the moment, but can only teach you the skills to be what a historian was 30 years ago. It might seem opposite of logical now, but I believe this will flesh out to be true in the long run.

If I were you, I would probably take some courses at your local MA opportunity and supplement it with the best internship you can find, than fire another magazine of applications out next year. If you fail again, the opportunity for you to go to an unfunded MA program will be there next year as it is this year, and you can decide if that's what you want to do. You may lose a year along the way, but you may also find a cheaper route with less sacrifice and that is probably worth the trade.

The bottom line is, though, regardless of what you decide....if this is really what you want to do, fight for it for as long and as hard as it takes. Don't give up on it. It'll come. 

[sixgunguerilla]

On 3/6/2016 at 10:06 AM, Chiqui74 said:

I agree with everyone who has said not to pay for grad school, especially since your stats are not exactly abysmal.

As for your alma mater, I am not surprised they rejected you.  Some programs will not, as a rule, accept their own undergraduates.  It's not recommended that you do your PhD at the same place where you did your undergraduate degree and, from what I have heard, it's frowned upon when it comes to the job market.  So, this was a blessing in disguise.

If you don't get any funded offers this year, try again next year.  You do not need an MA to get into a PhD program.  I, for example, did not have an MA and my stats were worse than yours. It's about fit and luck, I think.

Good luck!

I don't mean to pick on this post, but it is a good example of what I was talking about with, "your mileage may vary".

I had this same question when I first started looking; and I believe it is usually called "Academic Incest". From what I was told at the time, this was a problem/concern at a time that has been diminished in many respects over the years, where many schools now don't consider this a problem whatsoever. I know of many PhDs who went to their undergrad university for their doctorate.

That doesn't mean Chiqui is wrong, it's just, there is a lot of gray area in this process. The most difficult thing about this compared to many more traditional career paths is there is no simple road map that everyone can follow to success, and thus the advice and feedback you get from everyone will vary. 

[Sigaba]

11 hours ago, jpb said:

[T]he notion that an MA doesn't do much to improve one's application materials is a bit silly. 

Where in this thread is this position argued?

@rhiannonsdreams

IMO, given the view that getting graduate degrees from one's undergraduate institution (UI) is bad form, you need to understand why no one at UI explicitly advised you not to apply. Or were you told but the message was lost in transmission because of your desire to get in or the message itself was too subtle? If no one told you, then you may have some fences to mend. If you misunderstood the message, you're going to need to work especially hard on decoding the guidance you receive from your professors at graduate school.

Also, I recommend that you start talking like a historian rather than an aspiring graduate student in history. What are your fields of study and why? What historiographical debates do you envision advancing through your scholarship? What is your vision of your identity as a professional academic historian? How do your interests in your three minor fields inform your approach to history?