M.A./M.S. to Ph.D. Success Stories? Please Share!

[modestmousktr]

Hey All,
I recently applied to 18 Ph.D. programs in Clinical Psychology. I was accepted to one, ranked 94th, with no funding. Waitlisted at three (two were top 20 schools, I was thrilled to be waitlisted, haha). Anyway, that being said, it is not financially viable for me to attend the unfunded program which is across the country. My choices were to continue my research, raise my GRE, and re-apply to schools next year, or get a master's degree. It seems most individuals here take the year off, but I felt so uncomfortable and unsteady doing so.

Excited to just move on and dive into graduate education, I have accepted an offer from an un-funded, in-state Clinical Psychology M.A. program (tuition for me would be $20,000 for the entire M.A., before loans/grants/scholarships/funding offers).

Can anyone with a master's degree weigh in on your experience? How well did you feel prepared when you applied for Ph.D. programs? How did you make the most of your M.A. or M.S.? Did you get into the program that you ultimately wanted? I feel like I was very successful in applying straight out of undergrad, but that I could be more successful and get into a funded program if I show that I can successfully complete a graduate degree.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Nahsil]

It's likely that I'll be doing the same thing, so I'm curious as well.

 

[LisaLisa86]

I am graduating with my MS and entering a PhD program- I felt like it prepared me very well, and I would do the same thing again. I think as long as you find a program with solid foundation coursework, research opportunities, and research in your area of interest, it is a good investment.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

An MA/MS that has a significant research component (thesis, good opportunities to do research, etc) would be good. Pursuing a terminal masters that is therapy focused and meant for licensure....that probably won't offer you much to improve your app. You'd want a place that has a track record of getting their students into doctoral programs.

 

[erg923]

An MA/MS that has a significant research component (thesis, good opportunities to do research, etc) would be good. Pursuing a terminal masters that is therapy focused and meant for licensure....that probably won't offer you much to improve your app. You'd want a place that has a track record of getting their students into doctoral programs.

I did a MS prior to applying to Ph.D. programs. Research experience helped and my masters thesis transferred over, so that was nice. But otherwise, I simply think that time helped the most. That's is, I matured as a person, my interests became refined and more realistic, etc. I felt pretty ahead of the game my first couple years in my ph.d program because of my masters classes, but that all washed out my 3rd and 4th year.

 

[bmedclinic]

I did a MS prior to applying to Ph.D. programs. Research experience helped and my masters thesis transferred over, so that was nice. But otherwise, I simply think that time helped the most. That's is, I matured as a person, my interests became refined and more realistic, etc. I felt pretty ahead of the game my first couple years in my ph.d program because of my masters classes, but that all washed out my 3rd and 4th year.

I'd agree with this.
I had to do a MS because I, uh, had a lot of fun my first two years of college. Did no research. Didnt attend classes, etc. I was able to slack alot in HS and so I deferred my maturation process in college (sadly). But getting into an MA program got me to where I was able to show my skill at the graduate level and show my desire for more while seperating myself from my peers.

 

[pretzels]

This is an idea I had toyed with for a while. I was more or less convinced by posts on this forum that because some programs actually discourage masters first, or prefer studets to not have masters, as well as potentially just using that time spent doing volunteer research, that I should avoid a masters if i have the goal of a phd in mind. The tone of this thread seems to say the opposite.

 

[bmedclinic]

This is an idea I had toyed with for a while. I was more or less convinced by posts on this forum that because some programs actually discourage masters first, or prefer studets to not have masters, as well as potentially just using that time spent doing volunteer research, that I should avoid a masters if i have the goal of a phd in mind. The tone of this thread seems to say the opposite.

I'd say that's not exactly the case. I bet there are a TON of people NOT posting in this thread who have a masters degree and it did NOT work out for them. When I started my masters program they told me "people who want to get into PhD programs in clinical psychology after this have no problem." In summary, that is completely false.

Of the 14 people in my masters cohort, 1 got into Nova and decided not to go ($$$) one got into an "eh" counseling phd program and me- and my clinical psychology phd program has its struggles too (though they're quickly improving because it's relatively new).

Every single person who started my MA program wanted to go on when they started and many tried, and were not successful. If you look at just my program, about 7% (1/14) got into a clinical psych program following. Now if you view it as 3/14 (21%) then perhaps it did. Across the board, I would be surprised if 21% of masters level graduates got in, though.

 

[HomeworkHelper]

I'm not sure if this helps, but while I did not do a masters or take time off before graduate school, I know folks who have (and wish I did myself).

I'm at a top 35 more research-focused PhD program, and I would say at least 2/3rds of my cohort already had a masters or had taken 1-2 years off to do research prior to being accepted. If I had to do it over again, I would have gone either of those routes. For one thing, you would likely get beneficial experiences that you can add to your CV (e.g. presentations, articles, training). For another, once you reach a common comparison point like internship applications, you will have more experience than other folks and will be more competitive as a result. Likely, it will also benefit you and give you more options when applying for programs as well. I can't speak to that as directly because I never asked my cohort how many other interviews/acceptances they had...but it seems like folks with additional training beyond undergrad were more likely to be accepted into my program than not.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

"Rankings" always makes me cringe...as it is a personal pet peeve of mine. I wish every first year grad student had to complete a review of the current USN&WR report as part of their 1st year research training seminar. The methodology of their annual report is junk, so it'd be a good teaching exercise.

The quality of a program should be about the specific faculty within the program (especially your mentor), their standing within the psych community (where graduates get hired, if graduates rise to positions of leadership, etc), and then their stats in regard to internship placement, EPPP pass rate, % of grads licensed, etc. Sadly the popularity contest that is USN&WR is a necessary evil within the medical community, though in the psych community it holds far less weight.

/rant

ps. I made a thread about "rankings" 2-3 years ago if anyone is curious. I think it included USN&WR, Carnegie/R1, NIH Funding, and a few other ones. While judging on research $'s doesn't tell you much without additional info...I always liked them because the places I trained and worked were all in the Top 10-15. Those $'s really matter little too, but at least it was based on some objective data.

 

[pretzels]

I'd say that's not exactly the case. I bet there are a TON of people NOT posting in this thread who have a masters degree and it did NOT work out for them. When I started my masters program they told me "people who want to get into PhD programs in clinical psychology after this have no problem." In summary, that is completely false.

Of the 14 people in my masters cohort, 1 got into Nova and decided not to go ($$$) one got into an "eh" counseling phd program and me- and my clinical psychology phd program has its struggles too (though they're quickly improving because it's relatively new).

Every single person who started my MA program wanted to go on when they started and many tried, and were not successful. If you look at just my program, about 7% (1/14) got into a clinical psych program following. Now if you view it as 3/14 (21%) then perhaps it did. Across the board, I would be surprised if 21% of masters level graduates got in, though.

Thanks, i appreciate the input. I suppose i should at least look into a couple masters programs to apply to next cycle, if i can find some that have proven to put their graduates into phd programs... Im assuming research fit is just as important at the masters level?

 

[Psychadelic2012]

I was more or less convinced by posts on this forum that because some programs actually discourage masters first, or prefer studets to not have masters, as well as potentially just using that time spent doing volunteer research, that I should avoid a masters if i have the goal of a phd in mind. The tone of this thread seems to say the opposite.

I agree with bmedclinic--this thread is not the final word, by any means. If the applicant wants to go to a competitive, research-heavy program, a masters will not be favored. There are many reasons for this. It depends on the program.

I'm not sure if this helps, but while I did not do a masters or take time off before graduate school, I know folks who have (and wish I did myself).

I'm at a top 35 more research-focused PhD program, and I would say at least 2/3rds of my cohort already had a masters or had taken 1-2 years off to do research prior to being accepted. If I had to do it over again, I would have gone either of those routes. For one thing, you would likely get beneficial experiences that you can add to your CV (e.g. presentations, articles, training). For another, once you reach a common comparison point like internship applications, you will have more experience than other folks and will be more competitive as a result. Likely, it will also benefit you and give you more options when applying for programs as well. I can't speak to that as directly because I never asked my cohort how many other interviews/acceptances they had...but it seems like folks with additional training beyond undergrad were more likely to be accepted into my program than not.

I personally agree that there are benefits to having a masters degree, but many programs do not see it that way. Also, having a masters degree is not seen as equal to 1-2 years of paid research experience after undergrad, to some programs. It's really too bad. I think having the additional clinical training and experience (for a practice-based program) or the closely-guided research training can be really valuable. In any case, I think people in clinical/counseling psych programs need at least 2-3 years after graduating from college to mature before going into a program. Real-world experience is irreplaceable. But that's just me. Much of academia is full of people who went straight through, so they have a different bias.

 

[LisaLisa86]

I agree with bmedclinic--this thread is not the final word, by any means. If the applicant wants to go to a competitive, research-heavy program, a masters will not be favored. There are many reasons for this. It depends on the program.

I personally agree that there are benefits to having a masters degree, but many programs do not see it that way. Also, having a masters degree is not seen as equal to 1-2 years of paid research experience after undergrad, to some programs. It's really too bad. I think having the additional clinical training and experience (for a practice-based program) or the closely-guided research training can be really valuable. In any case, I think people in clinical/counseling psych programs need at least 2-3 years after graduating from college to mature before going into a program. Real-world experience is irreplaceable. But that's just me. Much of academia is full of people who went straight through, so they have a different bias.

It depends on the program. My MS program is research-heavy, and I do not think I would have gotten into a PhD program (which is a competitive, research-heavy PhD program) without it. In at least two competitive PhD interviews that I went on, the PI's invited people who mainly had their MA/MS/MPH, and it was clear they found that to be a benefit.

Overall: there are many different kinds of master's programs. Depending on your background, and what you need to improve/strengthen/change, there may be master's programs that are a fantastic fit for you and will get you to where you're going. Depending on your background, other options may be better for you. Figure out what you're missing and what you need to do and work backwards from there.

 

[modestmousktr]

Thank you so much for the thoughtful input everyone! I was feeling a little frightened to dive into this, even though my gut feeling was that it was right. I feel a lot more confident, given the advice you have all listed and your experiences.

The comment about it being a worthy investment was particularly what I was hoping would be the case for some. It seems if I make the most of my time, I should leave with a favorable outcome.

The program is in the CSU system, so it doesn't have a prestigious name, but I was drawn to it due to it's unique offerings and statistics:
1) I will be following the mentor model of a Ph.D. program and my mentor has already set up a meeting with me before school begins so that we may discuss a timeline to address everything I need before applying to Ph.D. programs in 18 months. By the December I apply, he's planning that I will have my thesis topic decided, 2 conference presentations, 1 manuscript in press, and one manuscript in preparation. Also, the research is in my exact area of interest and matches the Ph.D. mentors I want to work with, so I will be pleased to conduct a thesis that is germane to their work.

2) It is a clinical program, so clinical hours are required. I can work in a CBT clinic, a PCIT clinic, or a child assessment clinic. Each clinic is a one-year commitment.

3) They have a TA program where you are actually the instructor of record for a course (either intro to psych or intro to research methods). You are given a stipend for this.

4) The alumni lists students attending schools that are fully funded, that I would dream of going to for research fit and geographic desirability.

I know my biggest weakness is my GRE score (1260), so hopefully if I take advantage of all the opportunities listed above and bump my score to the 1400 range, I'll be one of the success stories you all are posting about! I truly appreciate all the comments on this thread- this community has been so helpful in some pretty sketchy times!

 

[Doctor Eliza]

MM,

Those are some real positives you listed. What I would do is ask your PI to put you in touch with a few of his or her recent grads. Their experience is most likely to be similar to your own. Make sure s/he is getting students into good doc programs and isn't a psycho (always a real possibility with academics).

Good luck!
Dr. E

 

[InNae]

Long post ahead!

What Dr. E said.

Also, as others mention above, all masters programs are not the same, so when we hear that a masters "hurts" chances of getting into a doctoral program, it's usually because the goals of the masters program are inconsistent with the focus of the doctoral program. If your goal is a research-oriented (aka research-heavy, aka non-practice-focused) doctoral program, the only masters programs that will "help" are those that provide substantial and comprehensive research training.

IF the goal is a research-oriented doc program, there are three potential reasons to pursue a masters degree, which should NOT be a "clinical" masters of any kind:

First, the student might need additional coursework (e.g., different undergraduate major).

Second, the student might have a lower than desired undergrad GPA.

For those two purposes, there is no functional difference between taking additional courses as a non-degree student and taking additional courses as a masters student. The latter will have an already-structured curriculum, but you can take the same courses on your own if necessary.

The third reason is to get high quality research experience while taking courses/raising GPA. An experimental masters or a "general psychology" masters is what you're looking for, and it should have the opportunity to work in an active research lab and to complete an empirical thesis. If you do not need the additional coursework or to raise your GPA, you can get the research experience without a masters degree program.

OP:
Much of the program you're considering sounds great, although IF you're planning on a research-focused doc program, please be very careful with the "clinical training" piece. The reality is that most doctoral programs suspect that applicants who have pursued clinical training via a masters are actually clinically-oriented, which obviously would not be good fit for a research-focused program. That issue is what seems to have turned into the umbrella "a masters counts against you".

Also, no matter what you do, be aware that teaching as an instructor of record takes lots and lots of time that you could be spending on research. I'll also assume that the manuscript authorship means you won't be 1st author (the timeframe including the time to review, and the other demands of the program, will make it tough to have a 1st author paper in press within 18mos).

Anecdata:
In my own research-focused doctoral program, no one had a masters, but everyone had several years of research experience. In my current institution we have an excellent record of helping guide masters students (and non-matriculated RAs) into doctoral programs, but it isn't automatic (i.e., we don't "put" students into doc programs). The students have to be willing to take the initiative and make the effort (i.e., generally show the qualities of a doc student, which frankly have nothing to do with coursework), but the framework is there.

For my own general psychology masters students (taking necessary courses and completing empirical theses), our doctoral admit rate so far is 100%; half in clinical science programs and half (by choice) in more balanced clinical programs. Our admit rate for non-matriculated RAs is about 85% (non-admits so far just happened to be a bit less-prepared at the time of application, and they subsequently were successful during their second app season).

Our RA admits skew toward research-focused programs (by which I'm hoping to show that unless coursework/grades are necessary, the additional research experience is the key). Finally, in (research-oriented) doctoral program admissions for my institution this year, some interviewed applicants had experimental/general masters degrees in progress and some didn't. No one was in a clinically-oriented masters program.

 

[modestmousktr]

Sorry to resurrect a deceased thread, but I had to say thank you all so much for sharing your experiences. Receiving input from doctors, doctoral students, and research coordinators has been key in my decision making, and I always appreciate the advice given in these threads. I feel bad leaving it hanging when you have all given such thoughtful and candid responses.

Admittedly, I am now a little frightened to have the word "clinical" attached to the M.A. degree I have enrolled in for fall. I at least hope that in spite of this, my CV will be looked at, because I think my focus will be very clear, but I understand that schools need to weed out applicants somehow.

I'll let you all know how things go when I begin applying in Fall 2014!

 

[LisaLisa86]

Sorry to resurrect a deceased thread, but I had to say thank you all so much for sharing your experiences. Receiving input from doctors, doctoral students, and research coordinators has been key in my decision making, and I always appreciate the advice given in these threads. I feel bad leaving it hanging when you have all given such thoughtful and candid responses.

Admittedly, I am now a little frightened to have the word "clinical" attached to the M.A. degree I have enrolled in for fall. I at least hope that in spite of this, my CV will be looked at, because I think my focus will be very clear, but I understand that schools need to weed out applicants somehow.

I'll let you all know how things go when I begin applying in Fall 2014!

I think as long as you emphasize your research in your pstatement, LOR, CV, etc. you will be fine. I think that having SOME clinical experience is actually a good thing for you- as far as figuring out what sort of clinical psych program you want (more clinically focused versus more research focused), and if clinical psych is even for you compared to other areas of psych. My current MS mentor (at a school that gets more than 600 applicants a year for their PhD program) actually thought my lack of clinical experience would be a problem when I applied to PhD programs. He thought this because there was no way to show that I really wanted to do the clinical side. I didn't, so I stressed in my apps that I wanted a research-heavy program, and it didn't seem to hurt me- but I'm sure other professors would feel the same way as him, depending on how much the program emphasizes the clinical side or what sort of projects you'll be required to work on in your lab.

Good luck!

 

[Avalakita]

This year 4 out of 8 people in my Clinical MS cohort (research focused; thesis; R1 School) applied to Clinical PhD programs, and we all got multiple offers. I got into my first-choice at a top 40 ranked program. We also all accepted offers from fully-funded programs. I don't think that this has been true for all previous cohorts though.

 

[Balmoral]

I did a terminal MA (MFT) and obtained my license as I started my PhD to help with cost of living. It helped quite well and provided me with professional opportunities that some of my peers did not have (at least in the beginning).

My MA program was excellent because it provided me with excellent assessment training. I also worked at a psychiatric crisis unit so I gained some strong experience with SMI. In addition, I also was active in research and because a board member of the local MFT association. I think all the other things made me more competitive as a PhD applicant.

If you apply to a doctoral program that is more clinical, a clinical MA will definitely help because you'll be able to show you can do the work. However, if you go to a more balanced program or one that leans more on research, you should definitely try to find a professor that does research and try to get something (even a few posters) under your belt during the MA years.

Good luck!