Take the safe option, or risk it for a better school?

[adlai_kat]

I was accepted two bioengineering programs: one at UCSD, and one at UCLA. UCSD rejected me from the Ph.D. program but gave me an unfunded spot in their M.S. program with the option to petition into a Ph.D. after one year. UCLA, on the other hand, admitted me with funding for a Ph.D. I'm curious to hear what people think about this situation. Is it worth it to spend $10k and risk not getting a spot, for the chance at doing a phd at a top program? Or is it wiser to not risk it and just take the guaranteed spot at a less strong program?

 

[Need Coffee in an IV]

I would go for UCLA. Best case situation for UCSD is that you spent 10,000 and ended up in a phd program. Worst case is that you don't get in and then you have to reapply to other schools. It seems like a silly risk to me.

[fuzzylogician]

I don't know the rank and placement differential between these two schools so this is a bit of a shot in the dark, but in general I think it would take a lot for me to seriously consider taking an unfunded offer with an uncertain future with regard to the PhD over a funded offer from a strong PhD program. 

[rising_star]

I wouldn't take the unfunded offer, in no small part because it's going to be more than $10K once you consider living expenses on top of tuition (presumably you're from CA and therefore paying the in-state tuition rate). I would definitely take the funded PhD offer.

[MarineBluePsy]

UCSD isn't guaranteeing you a spot in their PhD, you'd have to petition for it.  That means they could say no.  Given the solid reputation of both schools I think its kind of splitting hairs to say which is better.  Both cities are outrageously expensive so you may find you need some loans regardless.  The way I see it after reviewing all of your materials UCLA thinks you're worth investing in now while UCSD does not.  A wise person once told me to always go where I'm wanted.

[blacknighterrant]

On 3/19/2016 at 2:22 PM, adlai_kat said:

I was accepted two bioengineering programs: one at UCSD, and one at UCLA. UCSD rejected me from the Ph.D. program but gave me an unfunded spot in their M.S. program with the option to petition into a Ph.D. after one year. UCLA, on the other hand, admitted me with funding for a Ph.D. I'm curious to hear what people think about this situation. Is it worth it to spend $10k and risk not getting a spot, for the chance at doing a phd at a top program? Or is it wiser to not risk it and just take the guaranteed spot at a less strong program?

 

It is always better to go with something that is guaranteed than something that isn't. Do keep in mind though that going with UCSD would give you more flexibility. For instance, you could probably reapply to other PhD programs the same time you petition to change to PhD for UCSD which would give you a chance to try for Johns Hopkins/other programs better than UCSD and UCLA (although UCSD is already an extremely top tier school for bioengineering). Have you tried leveraging your PhD acceptance for funding? It helps occasionally, who knows maybe they'll fund the masters to make the offer more enticing. Whatever you decide, I wouldn't commit until closer to April 15th, sometimes they'll change their mind or give late funding (maybe those they accepted for PhD or funding will reject their acceptance and they'll change the conditions of your acceptance) ( you could also send professors emails about the possibility of an RA at UCSD and see if you could get anything before committing ). You should also consider who your advisor would be at UCLA, if you could get a phenomenal advisor there, it would be better than going to UCSD for your PhD would be even without the conditional acceptance. (advisor > ranking)

Edited March 21, 2016 by blacknighterrant

[adlai_kat]

Thanks for the input everyone! I didn't realize leveraging other acceptances/funding options was possible. I'll try that.