<p>my reasons for applying to phd programs instead of masters are (1) i know the exact field that interests me and think that pursuing a masters is an unnecessary step; (2) financial support. but, i'm starting to get paranoid that i won't get into any of the below comp sci programs:</p>
<p>berkeley (masters/phd)
mit (phd)
stanford (masters)
ucla (masters)
columbia (masters)
brown (phd)
jhu (phd)
dartmouth (phd)
nyu (phd)
bu (phd)</p>
<p>note: i'm under the impression that phd programs are more selective than masters, so i'm applying to masters programs at the more prestigious schools.</p>
<p>my adequate stats:
-3.87 gpa (double major in comp sci and math, while taking 18-19 credits every semester)
-3 yrs of research experience (one with NASA)
-co-author on a patent-pending research result (from the above NASA work)
-2 internships (1 of which was with a VERY good research institute related to my desired field)
-teaching assistant (grader and lab ta) for a 2nd year class (data structures/algorithms)
-SOP is pretty well written</p>
<p>my weak stats/questionables:
-my main research boss (2+ yrs of work with) may not write a good letter... he's very professional and hard. today, he told me, 'maybe you should apply to a backup school' as if these are all long-shots :-(
-gre scores: 470V 730M 5.5W (i retook and got 360V 770M... i think it's best not to send these latest scores to schools since they will see my horrible 360V... what do u guys think?)
-i'm thinking maybe i should get the teacher for whom im a TA to write me a letter... although our relationship is pretty limited... just i figure for phd programs, they would care more for hearing from him.</p>
<p>maybe i should add some misc state school as a backup, or just downgrade to applying to masters programs at some of those schools... any comments would be appreciated. i'm getting aggravated by this gradual letdown.</p>
<p>I don't understand. Who do you think gets into these types of schools if not people with ~3.9 and 3 years research exp with a paper? Unless you're coming from some really unknown undergrad institution, I don't see why you have any reason to worry. PH.d. admissions can be random, but you have some MS on the list, that you have to be a shoe in for. Still, you have to admit, those are all top 10 schools. I don't think anyone can call them safeties. This is probably what your adviser meant.</p>
<p>I wouldn't say masters is a waste of time at all. Many labs here at berkeley deduct a year off phd time(that is time before they let you take quals) for even a non-thesised MS. If you can handle the financial resources and aren't sure you have what it takes to get into the PHD program, MS can be a good stepping stone. From what I hear, many MS students work in a lab, find they like it, then get into PHD at the same school and finish it in about the same time as a regular Ph.D. student.</p>
<p>that if they are accepted into the PhD program. Some PhD program do accepts a small percentage of their master students. But I must put the emphasize on small though.</p>
<p>ah, thanks. and yea, i'm trying to stay focused on my goal and not sacrifice it merely cause it might be easier to get into a masters program. there's no way i can afford a MS education, unless i get the NSF fellowship...</p>
<p>and yea, i am from a "really unknown ugrad institution": Florida Institute of Technology. we have a good program but small reputation. for this reason, along with the fact that my main research boss probably wont write a great letter for me, i unhealthily fear getting into any school. thanks for the comments and help.</p>
<p>I don't think you're being paranoid about applying to these masters programs in addition to your phd programs. You're just playing it safe. Your stats are fine, but as has been said, these are top 10 programs. So if you don't get accepted, you will get accepted to a great masters program and will strengthen your apps instead of twiddling your thumbs for a year. There are lots of people who do this in every field.</p>
<p>That having been said, I think you're a strong candidate. I would sit down with the letter writer that you're concerned about, though, and make sure he's writing a good letter. Something to the effect of, "I thought about your advice to have some safeties, and I think you are probably right, as these are all reach schools for anyone. I am applying to these masters programs as safeties. What do you think?" After discussion, you can then ask, "So this addresses your concerns, or were there concerns about my abilities as a grad student that I should consider?" You should have an open conversation and listen closely. If your letter writer is negative, don't be afraid to ask again, "Do you feel comfortable writing me a strong letter of rec, or should I find another letter writer?" This is your future - don't put yourself in a position later where you wish you'd done something different.</p>
<p>i'd like to know - is getting into a Master's program easier than getting into a PhD program? is this certain? i was under the impression that in some programs, they only admit PhD students, but will admit Master's students if the quota for PhD students isn't met.</p>
<p>It can be easier if it is a school that has a masters option. Those that do it only if they don't meet a particular yield are not any less competitive generally, since they almost always meet that yield. Less competitive schools outright offer a masters program. Of those that do so, the entry requirements for it are generally much easier than phd, especially since phd is usually funded and masters is not. They're a lot more willing to take a risk on a student when they aren't paying for it (and when it's a shorter program, as is a masters).</p>