<p>Hey all,</p>
<p>I apologize in advance for the length of this question, but I'm very curious and haven't found a thread that really answered my questions. I'm a third year structural engineering major at UCSD, and I'm thinking about what I want to do after I graduate. Mainly, I'm deciding whether I want to get an MS and enter industry or pursue a PhD and become a professor involved with research somewhere down the road. I have a 3.8 cum GPA (3.9-4.0 major), am involved in 1 to 2 extra curricular activities throughout the year (depends on the quarter), and I did an engineering internship last summer for a start up company, just to give you a basic idea of my talents / work ethic. UCSD offers an accelerated BS/MS program which pretty much means I could have an MS in structural after my fifth year, but I want to know if I should have my eyes set on a change of scenery. I am also looking at Berkeley, Stanford, and UIUC as potential graduate schools. However, attending these would probably mean I would not have an MS until after my sixth year, so there is a financial concern with that. I know UCSD is pretty good for structural, and one of my professors said it was actually the best (he said UCSD SE is currently surpassing Cal's structural program in the CEE dept, and he is also a Berkeley alum, so I can hardly believe he is biased against Cal. He also said Stanford's name has this aura of prestige about it, but he has never heard anything too spectacular about the quality of the engineers they produce). I haven't spoken to other profs but he seemed pretty unbiased, telling me his honest opinion. (Not trying to attract haters here from those institutions, I'm just brainstorming because I do not know for myself). If I were to apply for an MS program and only an MS program, do you guys think I should just stay at UCSD, or are there better options worth the extra year of study that I should seriously consider. I like UCSD and would not mind the fifth year, but I don't wanna go through life knowing I could have gone to the best school and declined out of ignorance.</p>
<p>My second question is related to the first in that I have recently been more interested in getting a PhD, as I think I prefer the academic setting to the professional one. However, I have heard that there are many PhD graduates and not many professor/research type positions available, causing a "high supply, low demand" type of situation which I am not keen to be a part of. Is this true? And if I want to be considered for both an MS and PhD program at a school, can I indicate that or am I only allowed to apply to one or the other? I know PhDs are more selective, but would applying for that hurt my chances of being admitted for an MS?</p>
<p>I am aware PhD programs look for undergrad research and I'm trying to get more involved with this, as I have talked to multiple professors about possible openings.</p>
<p>I don’t have any experience specifically in civil engineering, but I can help you out on a few other aspects of this question.</p>
<p>[ul]
[li]PhDs in engineering are not limited just to the academic job market. In fact, the majority aren’t aiming for that and end up in industry anyway. So, in your case, the debate between MS and PhD shouldn’t be equivalent to industry versus academia, but about what your ultimate career goal is in terms of research. Earning a PhD opens up a host of new job opportunities for you, nearly all of them involving performing research as a primary job function. The PhD does overqualify you for a lot of jobs, though, so it closes a lot of doors to career paths to you as well. The MS, on the other hand, will open up the doors to a few of the “lesser” career paths that a PhD has available, but won’t close many that you already had open with just a BS. Generally speaking, though, you won’t be the one running the research program, you will be following the lead of those with PhDs.</p>[/li]
<p>[li]The change of scenery sort of depends on the degree you wish to seek. Generally speaking, when earning a PhD, it is a good idea to avoid earning all of your degrees at the same place. That is more true when entering the academic job market than it is when entering industry, but I’d argue it is the right thing to do personally as well, as it will broaden your perspective on the topic. With just an MS, it honestly doesn’t matter. You could also always take the BS/MS option and if you decide to continue on for a PhD, then move to a different school. I think the most important factor here should be the kind of research with which you can get involved offered at each institution.</p>[/li]
<p>[li]I wouldn’t worry too much about cost just yet. Basically all engineering PhD students have a funding source that covers their graduate studies plus a bit of a stipend on top. Many (if not most) MS students doing a thesis option, have funding as well, though the actual percentage varies by school and by department, so I can’t make a similar blanket statement.</p>[/li]
<p>[li]The academic job market is definitely very tight, as you have heard. It is a job that many more people want than there are jobs available, so if you decide that is your goal, you have to be aware of that. It usually requires doing at least one post-doctoral research position before realistically standing a chance of being hired these days, too. That said, if it turns out that is your goal, then by all means, go for it. If you end up deciding on that route, going to a big name school will give you a slight edge over a perceived lesser name. On the other hand, if you study at a “lesser” program but under an advisor who is well-known in the field as being a top scholar, that can easily make up for the perception of a weaker pedigree from your school. Quality post-doc positions can also overshadow a “lesser” PhD granting institution.[/li][/ul]</p>
<p>I’d also like to clarify that I am not trying to disparage any programs by using the word “lesser”. I tried to keep using quotes because, in many cases, it is as much about perception as it is about actual quality. Ultimately the decider should be the quality of research and the research that best matches your interests. If you are studying a topic you really enjoy and within a setting that allows you to do it rigorously, that will lead to higher-quality publications than going to MIT and studying something that you really don’t care about.</p>
<p>Thanks a lot for the clarifications there, bonehead (haha)! yeah I knew there were more careers for PhDs, but that is the one I would be most interested in. Still, I see what you’re saying about the change of scenery not mattering as much for the MS. I don’t really know which programs are better for certain focuses within structural eng, so maybe I should do more research on that. Like if I got into Cal or Stanford and find they are worse than UCSD for design but better for earthquake or analysis, that could impact my decisions as well in a year from now. But thanks again for responding! If anyone else has some feedback/other points of view, don’t hesitate to post them!</p>
<p>Look through high-quality structural engineering journals and look for topics that interest you. That should give you an idea of who is publishing quality work that you want to study.</p>