Special Masters vs. Traditional Masters

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

Is it always better to complete a special masters as opposed to a traditional two years masters program (thesis-based) at a state school (e.g. CUNY-Hunter MA in Biology)? Special masters programs are significantly more expensive and I feel that in terms of academic enrichment programs if I perform well in a traditional masters I can increase my competitiveness for medical school admission.

Can exceptional performance in a traditional masters ever slightly overshadow a shaky undergraduate record (in the sciences)?

Thanks for any insight!

Hi.
I am doing research based masters at a major university and hold a masters from another school. I was told that my masters didn't really help my situation all that much. MD schools will onlu consider the undergrad GPA, is what i gathered from reading the forums. I am going to call schools I want to apply to and see what they say. Folks here tend to get a little upity about what gives the best weight..

I think special masters programs with linkages to schools are good.. I am looking to apply to one because i want that guarantee that I am in.. Are you and UM? if so there is one with georgetown that is really good.

Originally Posted by Prettypuff1

Hi.
I am doing research based masters at a major university and hold a masters from another school. I was told that my masters didn't really help my situation all that much. MD schools will onlu consider the undergrad GPA, is what i gathered from reading the forums. I am going to call schools I want to apply to and see what they say. Folks here tend to get a little upity about what gives the best weight..

I think special masters programs with linkages to schools are good.. I am looking to apply to one because i want that guarantee that I am in.. Are you and UM? if so there is one with georgetown that is really good.

Thanks for sharing your experience. What is UM? How was your experience in the graduate program? Was it more rigorous that undergrad? Were you able to work during the program?

Originally Posted by stjude05

Is it always better to complete a special masters as opposed to a traditional two years masters program (thesis-based) at a state school (e.g. CUNY-Hunter MA in Biology)? Special masters programs are significantly more expensive and I feel that in terms of academic enrichment programs if I perform well in a traditional masters I can increase my competitiveness for medical school admission.

Can exceptional performance in a traditional masters ever slightly overshadow a shaky undergraduate record (in the sciences)?

Thanks for any insight!

A SMP serves a specific single purpose -- to demonstrate an ability to succeed at med school type/level courses for an applucnt whose prior record puts that into question. The problem with a traditional masters is it doesn't give really adcoms much of a feel for how you will do in med school. And most traditional masters programs have some degree of grade inflation, making evaluation difficult. so you need to use the right tool for the right job.

I agree with the poster above. It makes more sense to join a program that is designed to meet your needs. In addition to the coursework and focus, a targeted admissions program will also give you 1) a supportive community with similar goals and 2) extra attention from ad coms. Even MS programs without official linkages go the extra distance to make sure their applicants get noticed.

Plus, being a non-trad, time is always a factor. A non-thesis masters can be had in as little as 9 months, as opposed to 2+years. And you don't have the wild card of your research taking longer than you expected.

Nobody I know looks at grades in a (regular) Master's program as an indication of ability in medicine.

Originally Posted by stjude05

Thanks for sharing your experience. What is UM? How was your experience in the graduate program? Was it more rigorous that undergrad? Were you able to work during the program?

I am an underrepresented minority ( african american female, low income, single parent)UM..


In my graduate programs, both were research intensive and had/have a thesis component. My 1st masters is in biology.. I am technically in a PhD program, but'll probably leave with a masters.. maybe before depending on what i need to do to rework my uGPA. i am fully funded and I am unable to work outside of my department.


I am connected to a medical school so i am waiting to hear back from them regarding how they view graduate grades in their decision.

SMP seem to be fairly competitive. What if you can't get into an SMP? Would you recommend a traditional masters or retake undergrad courses, even if they are just liberal arts and non-science courses?

Originally Posted by Law2Doc

A SMP serves a specific single purpose -- to demonstrate an ability to succeed at med school type/level courses for an applucnt whose prior record puts that into question. The problem with a traditional masters is it doesn't give really adcoms much of a feel for how you will do in med school. And most traditional masters programs have some degree of grade inflation, making evaluation difficult. so you need to use the right tool for the right job.

This is probably true. I hedged my bets and did a traditional thesis-based master's program and it was in a public health area. I figured the traditional master's would help me more if things took a different turn away from medical school. Fortunately, things have worked out so far.

Originally Posted by Prettypuff1

Hi.
I am doing research based masters at a major university and hold a masters from another school. I was told that my masters didn't really help my situation all that much. MD schools will onlu consider the undergrad GPA, is what i gathered from reading the forums. I am going to call schools I want to apply to and see what they say. Folks here tend to get a little upity about what gives the best weight..

I think special masters programs with linkages to schools are good.. I am looking to apply to one because i want that guarantee that I am in.. Are you and UM? if so there is one with georgetown that is really good.

Not all MD school only consider ugGPA. This is just SDN dogma telling something not completely accurate. The majority of schools will look at only ugGPA but there are other who actually do look at your gGPA (ex Wayne state and some other examples on the forum). Dig deeper in the forum and only believe the people who give examples not the ones that state "well medical schools only look at ugGPA blah blah blah."

The best course of action is to call the schools up as you have mentioned.

I am doing a year-long MSc degree at a major UK university. The school is considered world-class, and it is a major research university, especially for the biomedical sciences (my studies). The reason I chose this university was due to its reputation for the sciences and its rigour for self-directed and problem-based learning. I also wanted to perform research at a major university like this where I work non-stop in the lab day-in and day-out. The year-long component I figured would be enough time for me to decide whether or not I would like to pursue my PhD or become an MD, since I am torn between two things I love/would love to do! I didn't really consider my undergraduate research experiences to be significant in this decision.

The grading system is different in the UK, and I feel it gives a better representation of candidates with regards to their academic abilities and critical thinking. True, it is expensive, but I also have the name of a reputable institution to back me upon completion, and I could land a job anywhere in the world should I decide to continue with a PhD -- even having an MSc is enough to land you a job above some other candidates.
I guess you could consider this a special program in terms of a US master's, but this is quite traditional for us UK people (with some exceptions of course).

My reasons, it appears, are different from yours, but I thought I'd offer my experiences.


Now I've got to go check on my cells... :x