Tier 1 MS vs Tier 2 PhD

[Innominate]

So far I have the choice between an MS at a tier 1 school and a PhD at a tier 2 school.   An academic career is a possibility, with a certainty no higher than what a typical undergraduate has (I'm really not sure yet).  Since this decision is likely to be made by many other students I wanted to start a thread and collect opinions from the stat/math domain.

My question is:  Is the MS a potentially valid choice, or am I kidding myself thinking that MS -> top PhD is a realistic option?  My GRE scores are already excellent, so my most viable option to improve my profile would be future grades and publications, but counting on those seems risky.

 

In order to give the most concrete possible context I'll spell out my choices.  I have applied to both biostat and stat programs so here's an example of each:

• Biostat:  MS at Univ. Washington (unfunded) vs. PhD at Minnesota (full funds + stipend)
• Stat: MS at Univ. Chicago (unfunded, have not heard yet) vs. PhD at NCSU or TAMU (full funds + stipend)

 

One other relevant note is that I have enough saved to pay for a masters if need be, so the funding is less of an issue. I'm more concerned that it would be for naught and I'd end up with the same or worse PhD options later.

 

I would be especially interested in the opinions of those who are already into an academic career (e.g. cyberwulf, biostatprof) as they have the most perspective on what their peers did or regretted, what's realistic and isn't, etc.  I would be grateful also if discussions about school tiers, admissions notifications, etc. could be sent to me in a PM or put in another thread.

Thanks in advance, this forum has been a great resource while applying!

Edited January 26, 2017 by Innominate

[GoPackGo89]

If you are even thinking of pursuing a research job I think it would be a mistake to pass up the opportunity to go to a place like NCSU where their students not only consistently end up at top companies in industry but also find great positions in academia. At worst you decide a research job isn't for you and either finish your PhD at a great program or you drop with a masters depending on how far along you are. 

Check out the placement of NCSU and Minnesota PhDs, it's impressive.

Just my two cents.

[Innominate]

Thanks for the response, that's the direction I'm leaning.  Both are great schools, couldn't agree more, but it seems that people make a big distinction between Minnesota (as an example) and UW/Hopkins/Harvard, hence my hesitation.

[abstract_art]

From what I remember, most of the advice in the past on this forum about situations like this was to take the phd offer. Even if you're in a situation to pay for a masters there's no guarantee that you'll be in a better position at the end, especially considering how short a masters program is (i.e. wasting 60k to end up at a similar level phd program to minnesota/ncstate/tamu in a year or two because you didn't really do much in the 1-2 years at your masters program). Minnesota is a top 10 biostats program and ncstate/tamu are top 15 programs, so it's not like you'll be shut out from academia going to any of them. I'd second the advice to look at placement records (if you can't find them online email someone from the program, it's a perfectly reasonable thing to ask for), you'll probably find there are a few students each year who go into academia from the schools you've gotten into.

I'd also wait to hear back from other phd programs if you applied to any others.