For those who obtained MA's before continuing on to a PhD...

[Ilikekitties]

I'm considering a few MA programs in applied anthro this year. When I was a senior in 2015/16, I was dead-set on entering a PhD program straight out of undergrad, but my horrible track record at acceptances basically shot that horse in the face.

Now, after having graduated 1.5 years ago, I am unsure if I want to obtain a PhD, so I'm only applying to MA programs this year. For people who went the "MA-first" route, what was your experience like? Are you glad that you got your MA first, or do you regret it? Did you feel better prepared for you PhD program?

[Bschaefer]

For me, it solidified my interest in earning the PhD after the MA. Overall, the MA program allowed me to manage a stable isotope lab and conduct research in biogeochemistry (A field I never thought I would be working in) in Mesoamerica, the Andes, and in Medieval Europe; Hone and refine my research interests and questions through writing a thesis on Human Sacrifice; and gave me time to develop my own professional persona within Anthro from networking at conferences and in the field to learning how to conduct myself in academic settings more properly. Additionally, through my collaborative research through my lab and other experiences, I have been able to present research at various conferences and have my name on quite a few publications. This is an added bonus expecially at the MA level since it is seen as atypical. Of course, my experiences are idiosyncratic, but it is about how you make it your own during the program. 

[lovekilledinos]

I went the MA route first, too. It also solidified my ultimate goal of going into PhD and I do think that it prepared me for the rigors of a doctoral program. These last two years have been hell, but if there is anything I've gained from it is a sense of myself and my own confidence. I was bullied and pushed around by faculty my first year, but when I came back this year I settled what I wanted to do and I've stuck to my convictions. 

I don't have a whole lot of research experience behind me, but what I do have I feel I've done well enough. Remember, your MA isn't what you're going to do for the rest of your life and it is, if nothing else, a stepping stone into helping you explore your interests and finding what you do want. 

[GreenEyedTrombonist]

Going MA first was definitely helpful in my case. It greatly increased my research experience, theoretical background, and helped me really figure out what I want to do. In addition, I did much better in my MA as compared to my BA (in terms of grades and commitment) because it was a choice I had fully made for myself (like many teenagers in my situation, I felt like college was just the next step-something everyone does).  

[Archaeodan]

Getting my masters first was definitely the best decision for me. It gave me time to figure out precisely what my research interests are and gave me a lot more specialized training helpful in zooarchaeology. I don't know how it was for you, but my undergrad Anthro program was really generalized. I mean, we took separate classes in sociocultural, bio, and archaeology, but the papers we had to write were more historical and ethnographic than sciencey. Zooarch is sciencey, so I solidified my paper writing skills, worked in various positions in the lab, and got good jobs when I got out. I was able to make myself a much more useful and independent researcher because I took the time to get the masters (in my case an MS) first. I'm sure it's possible to go straight from undergrad to PhD, but the reason so many of us don't is that we feel unprepared before and it's much easier to get in after. In any case, performing well in a masters proves you can perform well through the rigors of grad school, because you already did. It's a good self-recommendation. Undergrad doesn't so easily translate.