Masters!

[yehk]

Hey guys,

Just wondering what your opinion is on people applying to self-funded Masters programmes. Would it make sense in thinking that since in essence, you are paying the university to study there rather than the other way round, your chances might be sliiiiiiightly better? I do realise that acceptances are mostly merit-based but perhaps in a recession, they'd like to receive masters students who pay for themselves.. haha..

What do you think?

[red_crayons]

The university where I work has several official documents floating around that say things like, "increasing revenue-generating graduate programs [i.e. master's]" is a way to plug the gaping budget hole. I've also seen some results on this site where PhD applicants have been offered places in non-funded master's programs this year, which seems to reflect this attitude.

So, yes, probably schools want more people who pay to attend this year than years past.

My university actually totally phased out master's in most programs, and it's kind of a big deal that they're bringing them back. I suspect they got rid of them they could claim they fund all/most of of their graduate students to get more people to apply here. Also, they were pushing the research angle, and most federal grants require a PhD AT LEAST, and often job status as faculty, to apply. So phasing out Master's also made them look better in terms of job placement and grants received by alum. Now the economic winds are pushing them to abandon that calculus for one where they may lost face but get desperately needed money up front.

Thanks for asking this question. I've been following this closely where I work, and I'm curious to hear what other people have to say about it.

[piccgeek]

I dunno, I don't think the self-funded master's programs are NECESSARILY any easier to get into than the funded master's programs...if it is easier, I would chalk that up to less applicants, or more acceptances, or something like that, rather than the adcoms giving us a break. After all, if 35 people apply to a funded master's that accepts only 5-6 (or 400 people apply and they only accept 55, or whatever), they're still going to pick the "best" applicants.

I am terrified of applying to a non-funded master's program, but I'm doing it anyway. I would be leaving my current, funded program to do it, but...that's how it goes, I suppose.

[Lauren the Librarian]

Hey guys,

Just wondering what your opinion is on people applying to self-funded Masters programmes. Would it make sense in thinking that since in essence, you are paying the university to study there rather than the other way round, your chances might be sliiiiiiightly better? I do realise that acceptances are mostly merit-based but perhaps in a recession, they'd like to receive masters students who pay for themselves.. haha..

What do you think?

The master's program I've applied to "likes to keep the program small" with 10-13 students. They usually receive anywhere from 50-85 applicants, Fall of 2009 was on the higher end of that. There is some funding available, as in they show you links to places you can apply for funding, but the program itself is fee-based. I'm sweating bullets and hoping that I'm one of the best applicants.

[yehk]

hhaha - When i visited the campus/met the director of grad studies at the university of one of the masters programmes that I've applied to, i was told that they have had no applications to the terminal MA programme for as long as the director's been there for.. hahahahaha. They only get PhDs although the terminal masters programme does exist in the handbook. No idea why that is though - their masters course is my top choice - sounds like an awesome programme from what the course outline says! Guess if i do get in i might be the only masters student.. hahahaha whoops

[modernity]

Hey guys,

Just wondering what your opinion is on people applying to self-funded Masters programmes. Would it make sense in thinking that since in essence, you are paying the university to study there rather than the other way round, your chances might be sliiiiiiightly better? I do realise that acceptances are mostly merit-based but perhaps in a recession, they'd like to receive masters students who pay for themselves.. haha..

What do you think?

Yes, schools want your money. Yes, your chances at a masters are better than a PhD. However... there are many more people applying for masters right now too - they've been rejected from PhD programs, they're trying to improve their profile if they didn't do well in UG to stay in the game, the mythical person who can't find a real job and wants to hide out in academia (I assume they exist), etc. So they definitely are not a guarantee.

[JerryLandis]

I'm finding it likely that I will have to choose between a non-funded masters program at a very prestigious university with well-known faculty (where I'm expecting to be accepted for masters instead of the PhD programs I applied to), or a funded masters program at a local university no one has ever heard of. My grandmother has set some money aside for me to attend graduate school, so either one is an option, but I'm wondering which one would be better if I intend to apply for PhD programs again after the masters. Will receiving a hefty scholarship from the lesser known place make up for my attending a less prestigious university? Just wondering what people may think about this. Hopefully I will be admitted to one of my PhD choices so I won't even have to make the decision.

[mudlark]

Well put, seadub.

The question isn't whether unfunded master's degrees are easier to get into, but if they're worth doing. Both of the grad programs I've been in (did an MA in Canada, where they're standard and cheap) were looking to sharply increase their MA cohorts in order to "show growth" and make money for the university. Here are the problems I see.

- Funding is not just about money. It's also about work experience (teaching or research assistantships) and building up your CV to increase your odds of getting funding in the future. You can't just replace funding money with personal money and think that it's a wash. You're often losing experience and reputation as well.

- Programs that accept self-funded master's students often steer them towards program structures that are not in their best academic interests. For example, humanities programs looking to increase their MA cohorts often simultaneously move away from thesis options towards small capstone papers, or from small capstone papers to purely course-based programs. In cash cow programs, students often do not get the opportunity to do an extended project with direct faculty supervision. That does them a serious disservice when they apply to PhDs.

- Overall, this leads to a devaluing of the degree, which results in master's students being seen more as honours undergrads who won't go away than junior colleagues. In cases where master's cohorts are sharply increased, they are often resented by people already in the program because they take up resources. And while it's not necessarily fair, there is often an implicit or explicit assumption that people being brought in as part of a 'cost recovery' program are not as capable as those who won limited, funded spots. Combine this with the program structures described above, and you have people stuck in really unproductive, unhappy situations where they're paying lots of money and not getting the academic or social support they need to succeed in the future.

In my opinion, anyone looking at an unfunded master's should make sure they do their homework about the professional development opportunities offered, and the department culture.

OP, have you asked *why* the master's option is so unpopular at that school? Maybe nobody applies to it for good reason. I can't imagine a program worth going to that would be so thoroughly ignored by applicants.

[rising_star]

I'm finding it likely that I will have to choose between a non-funded masters program at a very prestigious university with well-known faculty (where I'm expecting to be accepted for masters instead of the PhD programs I applied to), or a funded masters program at a local university no one has ever heard of. My grandmother has set some money aside for me to attend graduate school, so either one is an option, but I'm wondering which one would be better if I intend to apply for PhD programs again after the masters. Will receiving a hefty scholarship from the lesser known place make up for my attending a less prestigious university? Just wondering what people may think about this. Hopefully I will be admitted to one of my PhD choices so I won't even have to make the decision.

I would go to the funded program. What matters is going to be the conference presentations you give, the papers you write, the networking you do, etc., not strictly the name on your diploma.