BS from unheard school and PhD from top school

[armstrong101]

<p>I think it’s fine to assume people’s best motivations. If the OP plans to do MPP after his PhD, even if he doesn’t eventually complete the PhD, then power to him.</p>

<p>I don’t see why everyone has to already begin counseling him on quitting his PhD before he has even started.</p>

[ticklemepink]

<p>My advisor said: If there’s a masters in something that you want to do that’s not relevant to your PhD, do that first. Masters programs are not going to be responsive to accepting anyone who’s a PhD candidate. The PhD is the FINAL degree. There’s a reason why certificates exist out there- to give PhD students a little leg up without having to go through a masters program just to get that training.</p>

[Mr.Zoo]

<p>ergh my MIT-friend, of course the CalTech–>MIT route is more impressive than the no-namer–>MIT path… how could it be otherwise? </p>

<p>only problem is **how much **of a difference is there. I can tell you the difference is not VERY big, but certainly there is difference. why? just simply browse around faculty member’s CV, most of them go to good undergrad and then prestigious PhD/post-doc. In another words with everything else being the same, a CalTech+MIT candidate would outrun you for a faculty position, but you would own most MIT+no-namer competitors, I’m only comparing school names here since that’s what this thread is about, in real world there are obviously many more other factors. Again that is for academia, for industry there is almost no difference.</p>

[gthopeful]

<p>

I don’t think I am going to go for post-doc in EE. Instead I want to go to either Harvard or Princeton for MS in Public Policy. I just found out this M.P.P( Masters in Public Policy) for Ph.D. Scientists at Princeton. Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs | M.P.P.
But I am more inclined to attend Harvard beacuse of the brand name and the fact that I don’t want to relocate from Cambridge.

</p>

<p>Reread what you quoted here for us:</p>

<p>

The M.P.P. for Ph.D. scientists was created, in part, because many of today’s most pressing and controversial policy issues are rooted in science, such as global warming, stem cell research, the evolution of drug-resistant strains of disease organisms, and the protection of privacy in an increasingly wired world. While none of these issues are the exclusive domain of scientists, scientists will play an increasingly important role in addressing them. Therefore, WWS seeks to enroll leading professionals in the natural and physical sciences in such disciplines as physics, biology, engineering, information technology, atmospheric sciences, and the geosciences. Candidates for this one-year degree must have completed their Ph.D. when they apply to the WWS graduate program.

</p>

<p>Please repeat after me: you will not a leading professional in the sciences just because you will have graduated from MIT. That will take years of experience and a proven track record in the sciences, which you may not ever get. You can’t plan on becoming a key government official in science policy any more than I can plan as a grad student becoming an executive of Intel.</p>

<p>Edit: oh I didn’t see that “new member” shill for MITGradStudent, I guess this is a ■■■■■</p>

[phyz]

<p>Wow, I am really glad to hear that its only the PhD institution that matters. I’m in a pretty lowly ranked university (couldn’t afford any other place) and thought it was a huge black mark on my resume. I’m overjoyed now :D… Sorry to crash that other discussion going on</p>

[Aceflyer]

<p>

I think it’s fine to assume people’s best motivations. If the OP plans to do MPP after his PhD, even if he doesn’t eventually complete the PhD, then power to him.</p>

<p>I don’t see why everyone has to already begin counseling him on quitting his PhD before he has even started.

</p>

<p>No one’s telling the OP what s/he should or shouldn’t do. People are merely raising valid points and giving solid advice based on experience.</p>

[MITgradstudent]

<p>Thank you all for your awesome inputs!</p>

<p>Greatly appreciate it :-)</p>

[belevitt]

<p>Sock puppet account?</p>

[Aceflyer]

<p>“A sockpuppet is an online identity used for purposes of deception within an online community. In its earliest usage, a sockpuppet was a false identity through which a member of an Internet community speaks with or about himself or herself, pretending to be a different person, like a ventriloquist manipulating a hand puppet.”</p>

<p>From [url=<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)]Wikipedia[/url”>Sock puppet account - Wikipedia]Wikipedia[/url</a>].</p>

[Daniel12]

<p>

I don’t think it matters at all. MIT is MIT is MIT

MIT = 1 MIT = sqrt(-1)^2 MIT = sqrt(1/-1)^2 MIT = (sqrt(1)/sqrt(-1))^2 MIT = i^2 MIT = -MIT.</p>

<p>So, either MIT = 0 or MIT is not MIT…</p>

[phyz]

<p>Sockpuppet eh? Fancy name for a duplicate account :D</p>

[dfh932]

<p>From my experience, people don’t even ask about undergrad when you are seeking employment.
If you can hack a PhD at MIT, that means your undergrad education prepared you well enough to attend and succeed in that graduate school.
It’s just common sense. It sounds like the people arguing with you are being a little picky. You are great and a PhD from MIT is just a really, really big deal !~</p>