<p>I have not seen these mentioned, it seems everyone is like "Fully Funded!", but for me the difference (engineering) between getting to be an TA or RA when starting sounds drastic.</p>
<p>Being a TA basically to me sounds like a 20 hour per week job, granted you are working in a field you like, but still a job.</p>
<p>However, starting off as an RA sounds like your proposed research rolls right into your job. You get to spend 20 hours per week doing work that can get your research ball rolling and putting together a proposal, making yourself familiar with the lab, working on reading journals etc. </p>
<p>An RA sounds like a way to get right into research, thus hopefully, finishing quicker. Has anyone been offered both, perhaps a TA at a "better university" but taken the RA position at the lesser university since it will get you rolling on your work more?</p>
<p>I'm an RA in my Master's program (we don't use TA's at my school), and granted, I spend more than 20 hours a week doing research, it all still follows with my thesis work. However, I couldn't imagine having a normal courseload, and spending the 30-40 hours per week my research demands, AND having a 20 hour per week part time job. </p>
<p>I ask this because I got a funding offer at a University for a full time TA position the first year. While I'm excited, as an older student who already has a Master's degree. I feel as though it sort of is going to slow down my progress overall.</p>
<p>I have been offered RA and TA positions in the past. You are largely correct - the RA position is more prestigious and generally contributes more directly to your research and any hopes of an academic career.</p>
<p>That having been said, being a TA generally dovetails more easily with coursework, so for your first year or two it is not that difficult. Some schools require at least a year as a TA to graduate, and many universities like to see the same experience in prospective professors.</p>
<p>I would also note that being a TA can really help some people to master the material, in a way that taking the class or even doing the research does not. I would not stress too much, just ask your advisor and some of the other grad students how hard it is to get an RA position - get through the first year as a TA, then make the jump to RA, it is a very common path.</p>
<p>An RA sounds like a way to get right into research, thus hopefully, finishing quicker. Has anyone been offered both, perhaps a TA at a “better university” but taken the RA position at the lesser university since it will get you rolling on your work more?</p>
<p>If you’re at a research-focused program (PhD) you’re going to be rolling right into research either way, in the sciences or social sciences. There’s rarely any waiting period; you find a mentor and you jump in. So the difference is typically that an RA does not require anything extra of you, whereas a TAship requires “extra” work in the sense that you have to do stuff for the instructor (varying amounts of stuff: I have TAed in classes where my job was mostly administrative and I have TAed for classes where the professor expects me to do lectures and I have TAed for classes where I taught my own lab). While I really like teaching, it can be incredibly time-consuming and contributes little to your research.</p>
<p>However, I wouldn’t say that I would turn down a higher-ranked school simply because they offered me TA funding instead of RA funding. It would depend a lot on the difference in ranking, but if it were significant then it wouldn’t be worth it. Paramount to me would be who I was working with at each school and what kind of resources there were for me; I’d also be looking at things like which school’s students get more external fellowships and grants, get finished faster, and get more jobs. You can always work out the TA thing later. And like cosmicfish said, TAing basic classes has given me a really deep understanding of the material.</p>
<p>At my program, you have to TA one semester every year for 5 years to graduate anyway.</p>