BA to PhD in Education Policy?
January 3, 2010 6:30 AM Subscribe
What are the pros and cons of going directly from a BA to a PhD in education policy studies?
I've just finished my BA at 21 (in the US), and I'm considering either an MA or PhD in education policy studies or social foundations of education, with the intent of going into education policy research. I want to consider both the likelihood that I'd be admitted straight into the PhD and the pros and cons of that route. Some important points:
* I carried a 3.9 in undergrad, and will enter grad school with about a year and a half of direct research experience in education policy when I enter grad school.
* My fiance and I are looking primarily at big state schools - I'm looking for schools of education with strong policy focuses.
* Financial aid is a serious concern. I'm more than happy TAing, etc. but ideally, I'd like to go to grad school without paying.
Will spending the extra time getting the PhD keep me out of the loop in my field for 4-5 years? If I drop to half-time during my studies, will not having an MA make it difficult to find a job? Does applying for the PhD make it more likely or less likely that I'll get a decent financial aid package? Is the extra job flexibility and income really worth going after the PhD? How likely am I really to get into a PhD program straight from BA if I apply?
All input appreciated. Thanks.
I've just finished my BA at 21 (in the US), and I'm considering either an MA or PhD in education policy studies or social foundations of education, with the intent of going into education policy research. I want to consider both the likelihood that I'd be admitted straight into the PhD and the pros and cons of that route. Some important points:
* I carried a 3.9 in undergrad, and will enter grad school with about a year and a half of direct research experience in education policy when I enter grad school.
* My fiance and I are looking primarily at big state schools - I'm looking for schools of education with strong policy focuses.
* Financial aid is a serious concern. I'm more than happy TAing, etc. but ideally, I'd like to go to grad school without paying.
Will spending the extra time getting the PhD keep me out of the loop in my field for 4-5 years? If I drop to half-time during my studies, will not having an MA make it difficult to find a job? Does applying for the PhD make it more likely or less likely that I'll get a decent financial aid package? Is the extra job flexibility and income really worth going after the PhD? How likely am I really to get into a PhD program straight from BA if I apply?
All input appreciated. Thanks.
How much research have you done into schools, yourself having these parameters? I'm currently enrolled in an Ed.D. program in education and policy studies at a large state school, and there were no TA positions being offered and there was no option to go full time. Perhaps because an EdD is more practical than a PhD and we were required to do a lot of papers/projects based on real-world school scenarios, but having a job in education while I do this has made it not only possible, but it would have been very difficult to do without access to the resources that come with working in the field you are studying. My program is 4 years, minimum, part time (2 classes each semester and every summer session), and I already have the masters degree. You will definitely be out of the job loop for a while, but this is also an exciting time to be in policy studies with NCLB coming due soon.
posted by archimago at 7:11 AM on January 3, 2010
posted by archimago at 7:11 AM on January 3, 2010
Response by poster: archimago: I'm currently enrolled in an Ed.D. program in education and policy studies at a large state school, and there were no TA positions being offered and there was no option to go full time.
My (admittedly limited) initial searching has suggested almost the opposite - that funding is more limited for MA than PhD students and that full-time programs are not only available but expected. This could just be PR or it could be the particular programs I'm looking at.
posted by l33tpolicywonk at 7:29 AM on January 3, 2010
My (admittedly limited) initial searching has suggested almost the opposite - that funding is more limited for MA than PhD students and that full-time programs are not only available but expected. This could just be PR or it could be the particular programs I'm looking at.
posted by l33tpolicywonk at 7:29 AM on January 3, 2010
Although I am not in your field, I always always always advocate working for a year or two rather than going straight from undergrad into graduate school, especially if you're thinking about a Ph.D. Also, I know several people who work in education, and there seems to be a bias against people who go into educational policy who don't have any practical classroom experience. Working in a school system for a year or two with some sort of teaching role will lend you credibility later on.
posted by emd3737 at 8:02 AM on January 3, 2010
posted by emd3737 at 8:02 AM on January 3, 2010
Best answer: I'm afraid that I don't know about education specifically, but in other social science and humanities fields, American PhD programs are happy to accept people directly from a BA without a masters, especially with a 3.9 (an excellent grade point average). Of course, with some work experience in the field, you aren't really coming directly from the B.A. For personal reasons, I often recommend that people take some time off before graduate school, but you will have had 18 months; that's often enough.
If your interest is in designing your own research, you are much better off with a PhD than a terminal masters. I've worked in a research unit, and the PhDs get to design the research while the Masters implement it. And if what you want is to go into education policy research, you don't have to worrry about being "out of the field" -- your PhD is the field.
Regarding funding: Don't go into any program without funding; no PhD (not even in the most in-demand fields) is worth any debt, and many masters are also not worth it. As you've already noticed, PhDs are much more likely to be funded than masters -- but there is, of course, nothing to stop you from dropping out with the masters (usually gained on the way to the PhD) if you realize that is really what you want.
Research the funding policies when you are applying -- I was accepted into a graduate school which guarenteed funding for all PhD students for 5 years (which included 2 years of teaching fellowships). If the best programs don't have funding themselves, look to other governmental or non-profit funding -- I don't know what this would be for education in the US, but something like NSF for sciences or Javitz for humanities (or SSHRC in Canada). I knew a political scientist who began her PhD on Homeland Security funding -- she told them that she was highly critical of their policies and they said, "great, have some money to go do research".
In my field (history), how good the program is largely has to do with how good your immediate supervisor is. And by good, I don't mean just how famous or influential, but how much their interests fit with your interests and how well you gel as people. If you are going into a program where you will be working on your own or closely with your supervisor (as opposed to in a lab with several faculty members to turn to, as was the case for an astronomer friend of mine), then you may find that you want to evaluate the programs similarly with a supervisor in mind. Find out who's working on what, read a bit (not all) of what they have published, and feel free to email them before applying to ask them about their work and if they are currently accepting students -- it's no good getting into a program only to find out that the person you hoped to work with has just moved to another university.
posted by jb at 8:20 AM on January 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
If your interest is in designing your own research, you are much better off with a PhD than a terminal masters. I've worked in a research unit, and the PhDs get to design the research while the Masters implement it. And if what you want is to go into education policy research, you don't have to worrry about being "out of the field" -- your PhD is the field.
Regarding funding: Don't go into any program without funding; no PhD (not even in the most in-demand fields) is worth any debt, and many masters are also not worth it. As you've already noticed, PhDs are much more likely to be funded than masters -- but there is, of course, nothing to stop you from dropping out with the masters (usually gained on the way to the PhD) if you realize that is really what you want.
Research the funding policies when you are applying -- I was accepted into a graduate school which guarenteed funding for all PhD students for 5 years (which included 2 years of teaching fellowships). If the best programs don't have funding themselves, look to other governmental or non-profit funding -- I don't know what this would be for education in the US, but something like NSF for sciences or Javitz for humanities (or SSHRC in Canada). I knew a political scientist who began her PhD on Homeland Security funding -- she told them that she was highly critical of their policies and they said, "great, have some money to go do research".
In my field (history), how good the program is largely has to do with how good your immediate supervisor is. And by good, I don't mean just how famous or influential, but how much their interests fit with your interests and how well you gel as people. If you are going into a program where you will be working on your own or closely with your supervisor (as opposed to in a lab with several faculty members to turn to, as was the case for an astronomer friend of mine), then you may find that you want to evaluate the programs similarly with a supervisor in mind. Find out who's working on what, read a bit (not all) of what they have published, and feel free to email them before applying to ask them about their work and if they are currently accepting students -- it's no good getting into a program only to find out that the person you hoped to work with has just moved to another university.
posted by jb at 8:20 AM on January 3, 2010 [1 favorite]
I'm doing a PhD in math, but have worked with many educational PhD's and EdD's. archimago's thought about the difference between EdD's and PhD's is correct. All of the EdD's that I've known have been working full-time in education while working toward their degree, as it closely relates to their current jobs. PhD's (mostly) tend to be full-time, with much more funding available.
posted by monkeymadness at 8:34 AM on January 3, 2010
posted by monkeymadness at 8:34 AM on January 3, 2010
Best answer: You're right that MA program don't usually fund.
I'm in a social science PhD program and my cohort is split - straight from BA versus took time off.
Straight from BA:
- Letters of rec are fresh.
- Knowledge is fresh.
- You'll be 27ish when you're done (and still plenty of time to have a career AND kids if you so choose)
- you'll maximize your higher earning years.
- you will be living like a student and never know what you missed.
Take a few years off:
- Know how much the working world both sucks and is awesome.
- More focused on what you want.
Personally, I regret taking time off because i'll be 31 when I'm done, starting at a salary lower than the one I left. I had a child my 4th year but having a second with tenure reqs + biology is iffy.
I enjoyed those early 20s years but not THAT much.
I'd apply, see what you get and remember that you could always drop out if you hate it.
posted by k8t at 8:59 AM on January 3, 2010
I'm in a social science PhD program and my cohort is split - straight from BA versus took time off.
Straight from BA:
- Letters of rec are fresh.
- Knowledge is fresh.
- You'll be 27ish when you're done (and still plenty of time to have a career AND kids if you so choose)
- you'll maximize your higher earning years.
- you will be living like a student and never know what you missed.
Take a few years off:
- Know how much the working world both sucks and is awesome.
- More focused on what you want.
Personally, I regret taking time off because i'll be 31 when I'm done, starting at a salary lower than the one I left. I had a child my 4th year but having a second with tenure reqs + biology is iffy.
I enjoyed those early 20s years but not THAT much.
I'd apply, see what you get and remember that you could always drop out if you hate it.
posted by k8t at 8:59 AM on January 3, 2010
In no small part because of the funding differences people have described, you might look more broadly at your research goals. You can do research on educational policy without an EdD and without working in an ed school (though those are also very realistic options).
If you want to study the precursors to policy, looking at which states or localities are more likely to institute some policy or how X, Y, and Z affect funding levels for programs, then you should also look at political science PhD programs at places with reasonably strong people in state politics (or political geography, or both).
If you want to do policy analysis over different bits of educational policy, then you might look at policy schools. This is their stock in trade, and honestly what you want to do sounds more policy-school than anything else to me.
If ``social foundations of education''' means that you want to look at how different social groups experience education, or in some other way look at the intersection of educational policy and social groups, then you might look at sociology programs.
I can't speak for policy or sociology. In political science, you don't know appreciably less about political science than someone who majored in it, even if you never took a course, and I wouldn't expect it to have a big impact on your admission chances if you wrote a good statement of purpose.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:08 AM on January 3, 2010
If you want to study the precursors to policy, looking at which states or localities are more likely to institute some policy or how X, Y, and Z affect funding levels for programs, then you should also look at political science PhD programs at places with reasonably strong people in state politics (or political geography, or both).
If you want to do policy analysis over different bits of educational policy, then you might look at policy schools. This is their stock in trade, and honestly what you want to do sounds more policy-school than anything else to me.
If ``social foundations of education''' means that you want to look at how different social groups experience education, or in some other way look at the intersection of educational policy and social groups, then you might look at sociology programs.
I can't speak for policy or sociology. In political science, you don't know appreciably less about political science than someone who majored in it, even if you never took a course, and I wouldn't expect it to have a big impact on your admission chances if you wrote a good statement of purpose.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 9:08 AM on January 3, 2010
Response by poster: Some added clarification: My job goals are either in the (quickly growing) non-profit / think tank / advocacy / foundation realm or education leadership in some capacity. I've pretty much ruled academia out.
While I appreciate the advice about teaching K-12, I have ideological reservations about doing it. In short, I know enough about what makes a good teacher to know I wouldn't be a good one, and I won't subject a few years of kids to my poor teaching skills just to accumulate experience. In my mind, that position is always defendable.
posted by l33tpolicywonk at 5:11 PM on January 3, 2010
While I appreciate the advice about teaching K-12, I have ideological reservations about doing it. In short, I know enough about what makes a good teacher to know I wouldn't be a good one, and I won't subject a few years of kids to my poor teaching skills just to accumulate experience. In my mind, that position is always defendable.
posted by l33tpolicywonk at 5:11 PM on January 3, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
A PhD is a long slog full of arbitrary and stupid requirements. You'll really enjoy it a whole lot more if you can recognize it for the bullshit it is and just roll with it.
posted by paanta at 6:47 AM on January 3, 2010