Is a masters in Political Science worth it?
February 11, 2009 12:30 PM Subscribe
Is a masters in Political Science worth it? Or should I look at other two year options like Urban and Regional Planning?
I've been spinning my wheels toward graduate school for a few years now.
For a long time I was sure I wanted to go for PhD in political science, because I had this vague idea that I wanted to work in academia, and that finding a job wouldn't be that hard... but the truth is I never really thought long and hard about job prospects, and now that I am it's worrying.
Recently it began to click with me that my department isn't that great, that with a PhD the best I could hope for is teaching at community college or at a low ranked four year school in my region or a medium ranked school somewhere else in the country. Fact is, all of my professors have Ivy League or close to Ivy League degrees, and my school certainly is not in that running...
Also, I can teach at community college with just a masters, so the PhD is becoming increasingly questionable.
I'm not opposed to community college work, in some ways it's more appealing, but tenure tracks are hard to come by, and in my area (major city) all of the community college teachers I've met are either doing the work temporarily in the hopes of moving on to bigger things, or are spreading themselves thin teaching different classes at multiple different schools... in other words, it's contract work, and it's very hit or miss.
I love the subject, I truly do. I would love nothing more than to spend my days teaching and writing about it. I just worry that I've run out of time for securing a good job in academia. If I were ten years younger I wouldn't worry about it as much.
Here's the pinch: I'm in my early 30s, and I want stable, medium to medium-high income by the time I'm 40 with strong job security. (And a solid gold toilet, while I'm at it, right?) I want to start a family between now and then and be able to afford it. Most of all I want work that is intellectually stimulating, and that allows me to feel like I'm making a positive difference in my community.
I guess my question is this: with a MS in political science, what type of work could I find outside of academia?
I'd still like to live my dream, and doing the PhD part time while working full is always an option later, but right now I want to pursue a masters degree that will make me marketable in a major metropolitan area, with good job prospects, and long term security.
To this end I've started feeling out Urban Planning. My school has a good program, it's intense, but the job sounds appealing. I know that pays have risen recently in this field, and that while some say it's an awful time to get into planning, I think in two or three years it may be better.
If it helps I'm concerned with social justice, globalization, urban environments, quality of life issues and the like... I've always been focused on theory, and I'm scared of quantitative data analysis, but I do like combing through data. I've even had some exposure to GIS and liked it fine.
Thanks for any and all advice.
Throw away email: grad.school.clueless@gmail.com
I've been spinning my wheels toward graduate school for a few years now.
For a long time I was sure I wanted to go for PhD in political science, because I had this vague idea that I wanted to work in academia, and that finding a job wouldn't be that hard... but the truth is I never really thought long and hard about job prospects, and now that I am it's worrying.
Recently it began to click with me that my department isn't that great, that with a PhD the best I could hope for is teaching at community college or at a low ranked four year school in my region or a medium ranked school somewhere else in the country. Fact is, all of my professors have Ivy League or close to Ivy League degrees, and my school certainly is not in that running...
Also, I can teach at community college with just a masters, so the PhD is becoming increasingly questionable.
I'm not opposed to community college work, in some ways it's more appealing, but tenure tracks are hard to come by, and in my area (major city) all of the community college teachers I've met are either doing the work temporarily in the hopes of moving on to bigger things, or are spreading themselves thin teaching different classes at multiple different schools... in other words, it's contract work, and it's very hit or miss.
I love the subject, I truly do. I would love nothing more than to spend my days teaching and writing about it. I just worry that I've run out of time for securing a good job in academia. If I were ten years younger I wouldn't worry about it as much.
Here's the pinch: I'm in my early 30s, and I want stable, medium to medium-high income by the time I'm 40 with strong job security. (And a solid gold toilet, while I'm at it, right?) I want to start a family between now and then and be able to afford it. Most of all I want work that is intellectually stimulating, and that allows me to feel like I'm making a positive difference in my community.
I guess my question is this: with a MS in political science, what type of work could I find outside of academia?
I'd still like to live my dream, and doing the PhD part time while working full is always an option later, but right now I want to pursue a masters degree that will make me marketable in a major metropolitan area, with good job prospects, and long term security.
To this end I've started feeling out Urban Planning. My school has a good program, it's intense, but the job sounds appealing. I know that pays have risen recently in this field, and that while some say it's an awful time to get into planning, I think in two or three years it may be better.
If it helps I'm concerned with social justice, globalization, urban environments, quality of life issues and the like... I've always been focused on theory, and I'm scared of quantitative data analysis, but I do like combing through data. I've even had some exposure to GIS and liked it fine.
Thanks for any and all advice.
Throw away email: grad.school.clueless@gmail.com
Read this. Then read this.
If that doesn't squash your desire to get a Ph.D. in the humanities, I don't know what will. Unless you're going to one of the best schools or have other
Though the data for Ph.Ds. is bad on average, if you go to a very good (read top-25 at most) school, the odds are significantly better. Yeah, only 25-50% of Ph.Ds. get a tenure track position, but if you went to Harvard or Stanford, your odds are far better than they are if you went to some middle-of-the-road school. So if you're thinking about a Ph.D. in political science and you don't think you can get into one of the very best schools, "only" teaching at a community college may be more than you can reasonably hope for.
A masters in urban planning would actually take you out of that whole calculation. Unfortunately, as I understand it the urban design market is divided into two major branches: working for municipalities or working for a handful of national design consultancies. The latter is damned good work, if you can get it, but again, unless you go to one of the best schools in the country, odds are kind of bad. The former is, well, working for the city, which is a whole different ball of wax. Government pay, government benefits and job security (though see California for an ongoing counterexample), but with quite unpredictable openings.
posted by valkyryn at 12:54 PM on February 11, 2009 [2 favorites]
If that doesn't squash your desire to get a Ph.D. in the humanities, I don't know what will. Unless you're going to one of the best schools or have other
Though the data for Ph.Ds. is bad on average, if you go to a very good (read top-25 at most) school, the odds are significantly better. Yeah, only 25-50% of Ph.Ds. get a tenure track position, but if you went to Harvard or Stanford, your odds are far better than they are if you went to some middle-of-the-road school. So if you're thinking about a Ph.D. in political science and you don't think you can get into one of the very best schools, "only" teaching at a community college may be more than you can reasonably hope for.
A masters in urban planning would actually take you out of that whole calculation. Unfortunately, as I understand it the urban design market is divided into two major branches: working for municipalities or working for a handful of national design consultancies. The latter is damned good work, if you can get it, but again, unless you go to one of the best schools in the country, odds are kind of bad. The former is, well, working for the city, which is a whole different ball of wax. Government pay, government benefits and job security (though see California for an ongoing counterexample), but with quite unpredictable openings.
posted by valkyryn at 12:54 PM on February 11, 2009 [2 favorites]
I'm sort of in the same boat as you. I graduated with a BA in Political Science and want to go for my PhD in Political Science (specializing in theory and comparative). The difference is that I then want to get a Masters in Urban Planning specializing in developing communities with the goal for working in non-profits or advocacy organizations to create sustainable, politically decent communities around the world.
I guess my point is that if you're open to doing more than teaching, the mix of Poli Sci and planning seem like they can work really well. But then, I'm hellbent on creating my own Marxist community someday and have no real desire to stay in academia, so YMMV.
posted by youcancallmeal at 1:06 PM on February 11, 2009
I guess my point is that if you're open to doing more than teaching, the mix of Poli Sci and planning seem like they can work really well. But then, I'm hellbent on creating my own Marxist community someday and have no real desire to stay in academia, so YMMV.
posted by youcancallmeal at 1:06 PM on February 11, 2009
You could always go to law school, which is filled with humanities majors (especially poli-sci) who couldn't figure out a practical application for their academic interests.
posted by Pomo at 1:10 PM on February 11, 2009
posted by Pomo at 1:10 PM on February 11, 2009
Urban planning is VAST, ranging from the two major options valkyryn mentioned, down to niche areas (health planning, advocacy planning, and more that elude me). California has some really big issues for jurisdictions to deal with, so even though there's an economic down-turn, state law might force more jurisdictions to hire intelligent folks or face lawsuits.
Getting a PhD in Urban Planning seems like over-kill, unless you really know what you want. I have an undergrad degree, and I'm in the public field (which can be split into current and long range; reviewing plans submitted to the jurisdiction, or working on future documents). Public work is stable, especially with larger municipalities, where you can focus on one thing forever, or move around (assuming the management supports these types of moves). Commercial planning can either be designing communities and preparing the review documentation, or you can be a consultant for a municipality.
If you want to browse through the up-and-coming topics in Urban Planning, Planetizen provides news stories from around the world and a bunch more (though their forums seem pretty quiet). Or MeMail me and I'll ramble further.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:26 PM on February 11, 2009 [1 favorite]
Getting a PhD in Urban Planning seems like over-kill, unless you really know what you want. I have an undergrad degree, and I'm in the public field (which can be split into current and long range; reviewing plans submitted to the jurisdiction, or working on future documents). Public work is stable, especially with larger municipalities, where you can focus on one thing forever, or move around (assuming the management supports these types of moves). Commercial planning can either be designing communities and preparing the review documentation, or you can be a consultant for a municipality.
If you want to browse through the up-and-coming topics in Urban Planning, Planetizen provides news stories from around the world and a bunch more (though their forums seem pretty quiet). Or MeMail me and I'll ramble further.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:26 PM on February 11, 2009 [1 favorite]
If that doesn't squash your desire to get a Ph.D. in the humanities
Not to be snarky, but political science (at least political science as its practiced at the vast majority of universities) is a discipline within the social sciences, not the humanities. While I totally agree with the points the author is making in those Chronicle articles, they are just not particularly relevant to the OP's query.
Returning to the OP's question, as somebody with a grad degree in political science and ABD in public administration, I would probably go with the urban planning degree. The job opportunities for people with a MA in political science (and especially those without strong quantative skills) are not really that great. Also, your instincts are right--a PhD from a second rate political science program isn't going to get you anywhere, both within and outside of academia.
I think you also might like an MPA--depending on the program, it can be a good mix of the practical knowledge you would gain in the urban planning program with some of the theory gleaned from political science. Check out NASPAA's website for more info on that front if you like.
posted by jtfowl0 at 5:54 PM on February 11, 2009
Not to be snarky, but political science (at least political science as its practiced at the vast majority of universities) is a discipline within the social sciences, not the humanities. While I totally agree with the points the author is making in those Chronicle articles, they are just not particularly relevant to the OP's query.
Returning to the OP's question, as somebody with a grad degree in political science and ABD in public administration, I would probably go with the urban planning degree. The job opportunities for people with a MA in political science (and especially those without strong quantative skills) are not really that great. Also, your instincts are right--a PhD from a second rate political science program isn't going to get you anywhere, both within and outside of academia.
I think you also might like an MPA--depending on the program, it can be a good mix of the practical knowledge you would gain in the urban planning program with some of the theory gleaned from political science. Check out NASPAA's website for more info on that front if you like.
posted by jtfowl0 at 5:54 PM on February 11, 2009
Um, I'm basically an urban planner and a bit unclear about what your question is. Here are a few thoughts that come to mind about some of the masters degree options you might consider.
1) If you want to get actively involved in city planning policy, I would recommend you also consider a Masters in Public Policy. I know a number of people with that degree. I don't know anyone with a Masters in Political Science, though maybe that's coincidence.
2) The difference between a Masters in Public Policy and a Masters in City Planning is whether you want to work for the mayor and city council, or if you want to be city staff. If you work for the politicians, you deal with some substantive issues but also all the politicking. For example, you might get to propose that the city create a Climate Action Plan and eventually cause every decision to get filtered through the climate change lens; you basically set the city's agenda and tell staff what work to do. You might also have to deal with an annoying citizens group complaining about something you consider trivial (the public works staff has posted notice that they'll trim a particular tree's branches so they wouldn't fall on a power line, but the group wants it to be designated as a Heritage Tree and protected, and the power line to be undergrounded at huge expense), and you'll have to deal with rival city council members and re-election campaigns. There are emergencies and overtime ("we have to have a position on this by tomorrow at 9 am!") and irate people. To some people all that sounds really fun.
If you work as city staff, you'll be more of a technocrat and deal a bit more with the jargon-filled issues (dwelling units per acre, traffic levels of service). It's a bit more stable and calm. In a way you have more control because you're the person drawing the map and then figuring out how to sell it to the politicians; in a way, you have less because you're working at the service of the city council, and they can make really bad decisions that you have to carry out. So, one detail from you and your coworkers' plan might become a huge political kerfuffle and you might be semi-powerless about how that conflict plays out (after having missed your opportunity, to prevent the kerfuffle). But the other fourteen decisions you made might get accepted as common sense without anyone noticing. You'll also have to deal with citizens and their NIMBY complaints during planning activities (hint: whatever you propose will increase traffic).
3) Both degrees let you get a wide range of jobs. MPPs are better for crossing different geographic scales (from city issues to the federal farm bill). MCPs are better for preparing you to deal with a wide range of things at the city scale (from creek setbacks to affordable housing development). MCPs have a wide range of content expertise already, whereas MPPs are good at the process but will constantly need to be acquiring content knowledge.
4) The Masters program in both cases is useful because of whom you meet. The internships you take and the relationships with classmates are key. Go to school near where you want to ultimately work.
5) MCP jobs are more stable. You could be a GIS technician or a Planner II for decades. If you work for Councilmember Betty and she loses, you have to find a new allegiance or go work on her campaign for State Senate. But that insecurity is also there at the highest levels of staff as well; planning directors can get fired with a shift in political winds.
6) About the ease of getting good-paying jobs, I live in the SF Bay Area, and all the people I went to grad school with for city planning got snapped up into really interesting jobs. My highest-paid friend works in transportation engineering (e.g., figuring out a workable transit plan for connecting a bunch of small mountain towns) and is probably making near $100k. A friend who went to public policy school is making $90k working for the City of San Francisco. I'm not sure which is more lucrative, but most public agencies post their salary ranges, so you could look at those. I'd guess that MCP jobs are easier to find in smaller towns where they still have city staff who do everything from approving fence posts to making long-range plans, but their councilmembers are volunteering and not themselves paying people to run Mayor Sal's Sustainability Task Force. Whereas in big politically-charged cities, the public policy knowledge may be more highly valued.
7) Right now is the best and worst of times. Some cities in California are totally broke and firing all their staff and all their councilmembers' staff right now, though in two years, that will likely have changed. Also, the Obama administration is very interested in urban issues and infrastructure, so this might be a great time to be an up-and-coming brilliant graduate student.
posted by salvia at 6:17 PM on February 11, 2009 [4 favorites]
1) If you want to get actively involved in city planning policy, I would recommend you also consider a Masters in Public Policy. I know a number of people with that degree. I don't know anyone with a Masters in Political Science, though maybe that's coincidence.
2) The difference between a Masters in Public Policy and a Masters in City Planning is whether you want to work for the mayor and city council, or if you want to be city staff. If you work for the politicians, you deal with some substantive issues but also all the politicking. For example, you might get to propose that the city create a Climate Action Plan and eventually cause every decision to get filtered through the climate change lens; you basically set the city's agenda and tell staff what work to do. You might also have to deal with an annoying citizens group complaining about something you consider trivial (the public works staff has posted notice that they'll trim a particular tree's branches so they wouldn't fall on a power line, but the group wants it to be designated as a Heritage Tree and protected, and the power line to be undergrounded at huge expense), and you'll have to deal with rival city council members and re-election campaigns. There are emergencies and overtime ("we have to have a position on this by tomorrow at 9 am!") and irate people. To some people all that sounds really fun.
If you work as city staff, you'll be more of a technocrat and deal a bit more with the jargon-filled issues (dwelling units per acre, traffic levels of service). It's a bit more stable and calm. In a way you have more control because you're the person drawing the map and then figuring out how to sell it to the politicians; in a way, you have less because you're working at the service of the city council, and they can make really bad decisions that you have to carry out. So, one detail from you and your coworkers' plan might become a huge political kerfuffle and you might be semi-powerless about how that conflict plays out (after having missed your opportunity, to prevent the kerfuffle). But the other fourteen decisions you made might get accepted as common sense without anyone noticing. You'll also have to deal with citizens and their NIMBY complaints during planning activities (hint: whatever you propose will increase traffic).
3) Both degrees let you get a wide range of jobs. MPPs are better for crossing different geographic scales (from city issues to the federal farm bill). MCPs are better for preparing you to deal with a wide range of things at the city scale (from creek setbacks to affordable housing development). MCPs have a wide range of content expertise already, whereas MPPs are good at the process but will constantly need to be acquiring content knowledge.
4) The Masters program in both cases is useful because of whom you meet. The internships you take and the relationships with classmates are key. Go to school near where you want to ultimately work.
5) MCP jobs are more stable. You could be a GIS technician or a Planner II for decades. If you work for Councilmember Betty and she loses, you have to find a new allegiance or go work on her campaign for State Senate. But that insecurity is also there at the highest levels of staff as well; planning directors can get fired with a shift in political winds.
6) About the ease of getting good-paying jobs, I live in the SF Bay Area, and all the people I went to grad school with for city planning got snapped up into really interesting jobs. My highest-paid friend works in transportation engineering (e.g., figuring out a workable transit plan for connecting a bunch of small mountain towns) and is probably making near $100k. A friend who went to public policy school is making $90k working for the City of San Francisco. I'm not sure which is more lucrative, but most public agencies post their salary ranges, so you could look at those. I'd guess that MCP jobs are easier to find in smaller towns where they still have city staff who do everything from approving fence posts to making long-range plans, but their councilmembers are volunteering and not themselves paying people to run Mayor Sal's Sustainability Task Force. Whereas in big politically-charged cities, the public policy knowledge may be more highly valued.
7) Right now is the best and worst of times. Some cities in California are totally broke and firing all their staff and all their councilmembers' staff right now, though in two years, that will likely have changed. Also, the Obama administration is very interested in urban issues and infrastructure, so this might be a great time to be an up-and-coming brilliant graduate student.
posted by salvia at 6:17 PM on February 11, 2009 [4 favorites]
By the way, I should add I make much less than those friends. There is a very wide range depending on whether you work for a consulting firm, a big city, a small city, or a nonprofit. My point was only to say that with either degree, you could easily surpass your salary requirements. (However, the Bay Area is quite expensive, and $90k here might be more like $30k in central Indiana.)
posted by salvia at 6:21 PM on February 11, 2009
posted by salvia at 6:21 PM on February 11, 2009
I do political science.
Recently it began to click with me that my department isn't that great
Where are you? Memail me if you want; I might have some knowledge of the extent to which people from there get jobs.
Beyond that: the answers depend on what you mean by "political science." If you mean you do or intend to do primarily political theory/philosophy, bail now and don't look back. Theory is effectively in the humanities with the dismal job prospects that brings.
Otherwise, an MA in political science can be good for work in government, and can gain you entry into survey research / analysis and other quantoid jobs. If you liked that, anyway.
I can't speak to the decision between the various fields. I would not normally recommend paying for an MA in political science outside of a few well-contained situations.
Note, you have another option: send transfer applications and see if you can't move to a higher-ranked department. Or email the DGSes at some higher ranked deparments and ask if you would be competitive as a transfer applicant.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:43 PM on February 11, 2009
Recently it began to click with me that my department isn't that great
Where are you? Memail me if you want; I might have some knowledge of the extent to which people from there get jobs.
Beyond that: the answers depend on what you mean by "political science." If you mean you do or intend to do primarily political theory/philosophy, bail now and don't look back. Theory is effectively in the humanities with the dismal job prospects that brings.
Otherwise, an MA in political science can be good for work in government, and can gain you entry into survey research / analysis and other quantoid jobs. If you liked that, anyway.
I can't speak to the decision between the various fields. I would not normally recommend paying for an MA in political science outside of a few well-contained situations.
Note, you have another option: send transfer applications and see if you can't move to a higher-ranked department. Or email the DGSes at some higher ranked deparments and ask if you would be competitive as a transfer applicant.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:43 PM on February 11, 2009
Also, the market in political science is not, except for theory, like humanities. We don't see the 400 applications for a high teaching load job in Shithole, Nowhere. I've been associated with two PhD-granting departments and I don't think we ever received more than about 60 applications for jobs, and usually only around 30 that were "serious" actually did what we asked for and looked like they would finish on time.
You do not need to be from Ivies to get jobs in political science; probably anywhere in the top 30 can compete (though being from a top-5 or 10 is better). On the other hand, the job placement of people ahead of you should be pretty indicative where you might end up.
All of which went out the window when state budgets and endowments went blooey. Baaaad year out there.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:49 PM on February 11, 2009
You do not need to be from Ivies to get jobs in political science; probably anywhere in the top 30 can compete (though being from a top-5 or 10 is better). On the other hand, the job placement of people ahead of you should be pretty indicative where you might end up.
All of which went out the window when state budgets and endowments went blooey. Baaaad year out there.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:49 PM on February 11, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
There was a lot of this in my graduate planning program.
I've always been focused on theory
There was also some of this, but in the real world, it's a lot of bureaucracy and politics.
I've even had some exposure to GIS and liked it fine.
If you like data, you'll love GIS. Plus, maps!! mmmmm... maps... Word to the wise, if you want to seriously pursue GIS, then seriously pursue programming, like yesterday.
I got my master's in urban planning (with a concentration in GIS) in 2007, and while admittedly I've dragged my feet, jobs have NOT been easy to come by and I'm working outside of my field. Probably about 60% of my classmates (that I still keep in touch with) found jobs in the field, mostly in smaller markets. I don't think any of them are making above $40-45K, even the Type As that had internships and volunteer work. Take that FWIW; I certainly can't predict what will happen in the next few years.
posted by desjardins at 12:52 PM on February 11, 2009