Get a masters or retake courses and get research experience?

[BobbyMac]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I talked to a UCLA adviser today and she told me that the focus on getting into their PhD program was not on my undergrad GPA but on having 2 years of research experience. She explained that if I were to get a Masters degree at another school, the credits would not transfer over, and I'd essentially have to get a second Masters degree at UCLA en route to my PhD.

My question is this, would it be a better idea to enroll in a Masters program at another school in order to raise my GPA and gain research experience at the same time.... or should I concentrate on volunteering for research studies while retaking individual classes that I did poorly in during my undergrad program? The latter would obviously save me some money and time. thanks!

 

[erg923]

I hope I'm not outing you here, but didn't you write in another post (on the BA and MA psych forum) that your UG GPA was like a 2.5? If so, you wont even meet the minimum cutoff of 3.0 for ANY Ph.D or Psy.D programs. The absolute, no exception, cutoff for ANY program will be 3.0, and that is often set by the graduate school, not the actual psych department admitting you. Thats just the lowest minimum possible, and of course clinical psych Ph.D programs look for the highest bar, not the lowest. Remember, you are competing against people with years of experience, pubs, and 4.0s here. In reality, the mean GPA for those actually accepted into a Ph.D program is over 3.5. I'm sorry to say that you will not get anywhere with a GPA below 3.0, you simply could not be admitted. You would have to get the GPA up via a masters, and make a 4.0 in that program to offset the UG GPA. You really have to get a masters if you wanna try to have a shot at a Ph.D. And as I said before, you would need to get some solid research experience while you are there and make sure they require a masters thesis.

 

[BobbyMac]

No you're not outing me, that was my gpa from 10 years ago, correct. I am asking in this forum because I shared my GPA with the adviser and she told me to focus more on my research experience because that is what they would focus on.

Wow you're on here a lot 🙂

 

[erg923]

...yea, I am during the day, while I'm writing reports. I realize she said to concentrate more on research, and yes, that is more important of a criteria, but when you don't even meet the minimum 3.0 cutoff (which I guarantee you every Ph.D program has), you cant get anywhere there. If you are starting with a 2.5 cumulative, I doubt you could raise your GPA to a competitive range (i.e., 3.4 or so) even if u retook several classes. Remember, your competitors are people with 1400 GREs, pubs, and 4.0s. People with average stats don't make it, not to mention slightly below average. Get your masters and nail that 4.0!

http://www.psych.ucla.edu/Grads/Prospective/faq.php

number 13 states a 3.0 minimum to be eligible to apply to their program

http://www.psych.ucla.edu/Grads/Prospective/csd.php

Also, take a look at their stats, specifically the numbers of those who applied vs how many they actually accepted, and the mean GPAs of those accepted. about 6 percent of the almost 400 applicants and 3.7s across the board. From a realistic and pragmatic standpoint, you would have to ask yourself what your statistical odds are here. Even after the masters.

 

[deleted176373]

+1, your only hope at this point is a masters with an impeccable reputation and a high masters GPA, a solid GRE score, and research leading to pubs. That 2.5 GPA needs to be sufficiently buried by a stellar performance in your masters program so that you can explain it away as youthful indiscretion.

Mark

 

[BobbyMac]

You are killing my bank account with this advice! Ok ok.. I'm going to set up an appointment with an admissions counselor at CalState Northridge. Thanks again.

 

[myelin]

Now that's the spirit! Isn't UCLA ranked #1 in the new top graduate schools mag?

Some schools will transfer credits from another MA program to their PhD program and some won't. The ones I've come across that do transfer credits seem to take around 30 credits which is about 15 or so credits shy of a MA. Not bad. That is, if all 30 of those hours are deemed equivalent. Also, make sure if you do go the MA route that your thesis is empirical. I read time and time again that PhD programs, rightfully so, will only accept a thesis from another university if it was empirical in nature. I don't know why someone would do a non-empirical theisis though, but still.

 

[BobbyMac]

Now that's the spirit! Isn't UCLA ranked #1 in the new top graduate schools mag?

Some schools will transfer credits from another MA program to their PhD program and some won't. The ones I've come across that do transfer credits seem to take around 30 credits which is about 15 or so credits shy of a MA. Not bad. That is, if all 30 of those hours are deemed equivalent. Also, make sure if you do go the MA route that your thesis is empirical. I read time and time again that PhD programs, rightfully so, will only accept a thesis from another university if it was empirical in nature. I don't know why someone would do a non-empirical theisis though, but still.

again, this is all excellent information to have. i do have to say though, that your brain workout avatar looks like an uncooked hamburgler to me though.

🙂

 

[erg923]

Yes, UCLA is a highly ranked research driven program. It's location alone, not too mention the names there, give it a buttload of applicants each year, so they can afford to be super super picky with who they admit. Florida and UC- Berkley are the only schools of seen with over 350 applicants every single year.

Obviously, transfer credits if you can, however, do it cautiously. Your comp exams/qualifying exams might be specific to info taught in, or concentrated on in your program. Your still responsible for knowing all that info they taught, even though you didn't take the class there. Also, most programs will not transfer the assessment classes. And sometimes, even though you can transfer some classes, the programs still has a rule that you have to complete X amounts of units. In other words, they wont make you repeat the classes, but you still have to take elective courses within the clinical program to reach the X number of credit hours they require. In general though, expect to repeat some things. It might knock off a year if your lucky.

I agree with the uncooked hamburglar analogy But how bout some props for "machine-gun kitty"......

 

[BobbyMac]

I do have much love for Machine Gun Kitty (MGK) as well, though MGK is a staple in a lot of the online forums I utilize.

Which program are you currently enrolled in? That may be information I can find with a click on your profile, I'm not sure, there goes my research cred again.

 

[myelin]

ok, you asked for it!

 

[cara susanna]

UCLA has some course requirements too (I wanted to go there at some point) that you may want to look into as well.

 

[BobbyMac]

Ok I spoke to an adviser at UCLA again and they told me that admissions would first look at my undergrad GPA and research experience, and then might go on to look at the grades in any class I had retaken in an attempt to raise my gpa. I had thought that somehow retaking a class would magically erase it from my transcript.. apparently not 🙂 I'm learning a lot in this process.

In the end I think it would be worth my while to seek a volunteer research position asap and begin the application/gre process in order to get into a masters program at a nearby school. As the adviser mentioned, I don't have to complete the masters program in order to apply at ucla, and that might in fact be a waste of time as I'd have to retake those classes. I believe erg mentioned that too.

All this is pulling my brain into 100 different directions but it's quickly becoming clearer. I'll start making my way into all of the GRE threads now..

 

[psy86]

I really would not recommend getting too hung up on the issue of getting into the particular program at UCLA. The odds of being admitted to any single program are quite small, and frankly I think the odds of your being admitted to UCLA with an undergrad GPA of 2.5 are nearly nil. Could you get into some doctoral program somewhere with the plan you're undertaking? Maybe. Is it likely that you'll get into UCLA in particular? (or ANY single specific highly competitive Ph.D. program in particular?) No.

 

[BobbyMac]

I really would not recommend getting too hung up on the issue of getting into the particular program at UCLA. The odds of being admitted to any single program are quite small, and frankly I think the odds of your being admitted to UCLA with an undergrad GPA of 2.5 are nearly nil. Could you get into some doctoral program somewhere with the plan you're undertaking? Maybe. Is it likely that you'll get into UCLA in particular? (or ANY single specific highly competitive Ph.D. program in particular?) No.

eh, I don't know about that. I spent the last 8 years in sales, and already I have the Psych adviser rooting for me. Next step, volunteering for a UCLA professor. Anything's possible, no need to be a downer.

 

[psy86]

Anything's possible, no need to be a downer.

True enough (that's why I said nearly nil). 😉

 

[myelin]

eh, I don't know about that. I spent the last 8 years in sales, and already I have the Psych adviser rooting for me. Next step, volunteering for a UCLA professor. Anything's possible, no need to be a downer.

That's the spirit bobby. If you want it, go get it.

 

[psybee]

i decide to apply as an older student too -- took me 3 years of RAing, volunteering, and studying for the GRE til i got myself to the place where I felt I'd be competitive for the kinds of programs i was interested in. And when i start started to apply -- registered for the GRE, collecting transcripts, making my nerdy spreadsheets, i had a top school that i was just swooning to get into. i had studied up on all the schools i was applying to and this school seemed like a perfect fit.

let me tell you, interviews (and getting feedback about programs from other students i met though the interview process) really influenced my perspective. my ex "top" school, while still a great program, turned out to be not the best fit out of the schools i applied to, and the culture of the department really wasn't me at all, which totally surprised me. same for my #2 choice. i ended up having totally different rankings after interviews -- talking to profs, hanging out with current and former students, etc. so the moral of my story is that, much like online dating, a lot of programs look like a love match online, or even at their grad school open houses, but are way different in person.

 

[deleted176373]

eh, I don't know about that. I spent the last 8 years in sales, and already I have the Psych adviser rooting for me. Next step, volunteering for a UCLA professor. Anything's possible, no need to be a downer.

They are not trying to be a downer... They are being realistic. You should consider being realistic too. You need to know that your competition is going to be ridiculously well qualified, have impeccable credentials, and active contributions in the scientific community to which they are applying to.

I am not telling you not to go for it. I am telling you to come loaded for bear, because anything less than an extraordinary effort will fall flat.

The one question you must ask yourself, and have them answer without any hesitation on their part is: "Why out of 350 applicants must we have this one person?" If they don't have an answer and you haven't provided them that answer, you will not get in. You have to give them a reason why they MUST have you there.

Mark

 

[erg923]

I agree, rank order things. Do not set your heart on one program. Even impeccable applicants apply to 10-15 schools. This is just the nature of the beast, and the fact of the stats you face. Your application, after the masters, should be spread among mid tier programs, with a couple dream schools sprinkled in.

You also mentioned that you are interested in practicing? UCLA is a clinical program, but is that really the program for you and your goals. If you mention a desire for practicing in your personal statement, thats your death sentence for a program like that. Its a clinical science model (not Boulder), I seriously doubt they emphasize clinical training above the minimum.

 

[erg923]

As the adviser mentioned, I don't have to complete the masters program in order to apply at ucla, and that might in fact be a waste of time as I'd have to retake those classes. I believe erg mentioned that too.

All this is pulling my brain into 100 different directions but it's quickly becoming clearer. I'll start making my way into all of the GRE threads now..

I'm confused? So you would apply to a masters program, get into it, do it for year, then drop out? Why would you do that? The masters GPA wont mean squat unless you actually finished the degree! And where would you get rec letters from? From faculty who's program you just dropped out of after a year? How good could those letters be? And you have to explain to all the Ph.D. programs you're applying to why you dropped out of a masters program after one year. It would look suspicious. Talk about planting seeds of doubt for an admissions committee, that would do it. Plus you wont have gotten any clinical experience, or had time to do any meaningful research or a masters thesis!

The masters first is not the most efficient way to go, this is true. But this is your only option. And you want to skip out on the learning experiencing it will give you (i.e., real world feel exposure to clincial training, experience in research and conducting an independent research)? Please clarify this if you don't mind.

 

[KillerDiller]

I'm confused? So you would apply to a masters program, get into it, do it for year, then drop out?

Perhaps the UCLA advisor meant that you can apply the year you intend to graduate for admission for the next fall. For example, I applied in January of 2006 for admission in fall of 2006, but I graduated from my Masters program that May.

I also would not advise someone to apply to a Masters program if they don't intend to finish the degree. It's not like it can't be done, but it is rather dishonest and may anger people who will later be your colleagues.

 

[myelin]

Perhaps the UCLA advisor meant that you can apply the year you intend to graduate for admission for the next fall. For example, I applied in January of 2006 for admission in fall of 2006, but I graduated from my Masters program that May.

I also would not advise someone to apply to a Masters program if they don't intend to finish the degree. It's not like it can't be done, but it is rather dishonest and may anger people who will later be your colleagues.

Yes I completely agree with this statement. The world of psychology is much smaller than you'd think and it might come back to bite you later on.

We recently had a person in our department that failed comps but was accepted to a PhD program and opted not to re-take comps. Numerous faculty worked with them to help them understand stats as well as obtain them a top-notch practicum placement at a well-known private institution with a medical school. This person isn't in the greatest of graces among the faculty at the moment. I feel sorry for the PhD program that accepted them as this person has a host of "cluster b" issues and will have to put up with it for the next 10 years.

 

[BobbyMac]

"MarkP" I know what is realistic to me, perhaps it couldn't be realistic to you. That's not my problem. Thanks to everyone else for their constructive criticism.

 

[BobbyMac]

Perhaps the UCLA advisor meant that you can apply the year you intend to graduate for admission for the next fall. For example, I applied in January of 2006 for admission in fall of 2006, but I graduated from my Masters program that May.

I also would not advise someone to apply to a Masters program if they don't intend to finish the degree. It's not like it can't be done, but it is rather dishonest and may anger people who will later be your colleagues.

Well she actually did suggest that I not complete the Masters program as she saw it as a waste of time since I would have to retake most of the classes and I would gain a Masters in that program.

 

[erg923]

Well she actually did suggest that I not complete the Masters program as she saw it as a waste of time since I would have to retake most of the classes and I would gain a Masters in that program.

If you don't think that would ruffle feathers in the highly political world of academia, then you're in for a rude wake-up call my friend. What is the supposed gain here anyway? Six masters level courses doesn't do much for your situation. You may make some A's, but you will not demonstrated any discernible skill at anything, research or clinical. Its a hollow GPA that wont count for anything. And on top of that, you are leaving your masters program one in the hole. And again, where would your academic rec letters come from?

"Yes, student X took a class from me at our university's masters program and decided to drop out at the end of his first year. He made an A in my class, but I have only know him for 9 months and I was not able to observe his aptitude for critical reasoning, problem solving, or assess his potential to engage in clinical or experimental research. I was not able to observe him with patients or within a clincial context, and am therefore unable to attest to whether he possesses the interpersonal qualities necessary for the practice of clinical psychology."

Just from a common sense perspective, how does this look to an admission committee?

 

[deleted176373]

"MarkP" I know what is realistic to me, perhaps it couldn't be realistic to you. That's not my problem. Thanks to everyone else for their constructive criticism.

I'll shut up then. You obviously have this wired. Good luck at UCLA, I'm sure you'll do great once you get in!

Mark

 

[psy86]

Given your stated career goals, can you explain why you think it makes sense for you to attend the clinical Ph.D. program at UCLA?

 

[psybee]

"MarkP" I know what is realistic to me, perhaps it couldn't be realistic to you. That's not my problem. Thanks to everyone else for their constructive criticism.

Mark can come across as critical sometimes, but after relying on this board quite a bit the last year or so while I was applying to PhD programs, I am convinced that he is actually just matter-of-fact, and his motivation is to help others, not to cut them down. If you read further you'll find out more about his saga applying to schools, and see how he faced lots of disappointment but just powered through it to get where he is, which is a top-notch program at a great school. Being coddled it the information gathering stage doesn't help us, since we sure as heck won't be coddled as applicants (and likely as students). The stuff I learned on this site and through members like Mark did freak me out at first, but ultimately led me to toughen up, really prepare, and kick butt during the process.

What I've learned from this process is to try, to the best of your ability, to be as aware of how insanely competitive and difficult this process is, but not allow fear to dissuade you from your goals. Though I guess folks that decide to no pursue the PhD because they are freaked out about the grueling application process aren't really ready anyway. Keep on reading, here but of course also on sites of other schools you are interested in. If you're sure you want practice over research (or equal emphasis) only look at programs that make it clear that is where they stand. If you hang out here, you will read over and over people with great stats and experience posting that this is their second time around because they only applied to one or two schools last year.

One thing you'll see people say over and over (and it's true, largely) is that there are great programs at schools with less famous names, and really big-name schools who may not have a program that's right for you. I had that experience, applying to PhD's in the same city I went to undergrad, and the way you looks at names and programs is really different. I first thought Big Urban Ivy was my dream school, but as I began to looks at other programs I saw that there were other, non-Ivy programs that were perhaps better in general, but definately better for me. NY is also notorious for not providing great funding -- I don't know if you get the same thing in LA -- and the non-ivies often also funded better, because they didn't have the fancy name to draw folks and make them willing to take out loans.

UCLA is a great school. I guess when I see someone saying (and forgive me if i missed something and am wrong) that they have thier hearts sent on one program, I worry that they are setting themselves up for trouble. I'm 31, and Back In The Day you could apply for college like that (I think I applied to 3 reaches and go into all of them) but things are different now, especially psych grad school. I guess as someone who has gone through this ordeal and come out where I wanted to be, my motivation for responding to posts of people just starting out is to try to share what I learned and maybe save them some aggrivation. And what I learned, which is also something I learned when I was dating in my twenties, is that you may have a type but it's good to take a hard look and make sure that it's really the best for you. Check out other programs, looks around, talk to other admissions advisers and also Masters and PhD students at those schools -- half the time if you poke around the website you'll find student reps you can contact.

good luck!

 

[deleted176373]

If you read further you'll find out more about his saga applying to schools, and see how he faced lots of disappointment but just powered through it to get where he is, which is a top-notch program at a great school.

Very true, the list of schools I didn't get into is long, but distinguished. LOL.

Mark

 

[amphigory]

Well, as a result of this thread, I took a closer look at the UCLA site and saw the year of chemistry/physics ack! that cara susanna alluded to upthread. So I scratched it from my list. So someone is listening to the advice here...