<p>I'm an undergrad now (dual major Biology/Genetics and Physics/Nanotechnology) and I plan on eventually finishing with my PhD in Science/Engineering. I was wondering is it better to go right into a PhD program after undergrad or finish my Masters first? Is there a difference in cost and time? Does either way 'look' better than the other?</p>
<p>As far as “looking” better, no. It won’t matter when you are on the job market for research or academic jobs.</p>
<p>“Better” is a loaded word, because it is so subjective. Better for whom? And what does “better” mean? I went straight to a PhD after my bachelor’s and I have lots of thoughts.</p>
<p>Pros:
-You get finished with your degree faster - you don’t have this interim stage between BA and PhD.
-You don’t have to figure out how to pay for your MS, or worse, take on debt for it.
-You get to jump right into what you really want to do.
-Only one application cycle, only one time to take the GRE!
-You don’t get out of the school groove - you know how to be a student, and although graduate school is different you’re still a student.
-The PhD stipend is probably more money than you’ve ever made, so you’re used to being broke. Therefore it doesn’t bother you to be slightly less broke.</p>
<p>Cons:
-The students with MS degrees will probably be better prepared than you at least in the beginning, and you will be competing with them for resources in the PhD program.
-If you are unsure about your research goals and interests, jumping straight in can extend your time to degree if you change what you are interested in later.
-If you are unsure about the exact PhD you want to do (for example - immunology vs biomedical engineering), applying after your bachelor’s makes it more likely that you will pick the wrong one.
-You’re going to feel less prepared than your colleagues who got master’s degrees first. You may have to learn to do things they already know how to do, like balance graduate level research with graduate level classes, or deal with tons more reading than you are used to.
-MS gives you time to figure out whether you really need a PhD or not.
-If you work, you can save up money, which will be useful when you are broke.</p>
<p>There are pros and cons to both. Personally, I think that taking time <em>off</em> is a good idea - working for a few years, I mean - if you aren’t 100% sure what you want to do. I think a master’s can be a good idea if you aren’t sure you want to go all the way to a PhD, but you know that you want to do at least master’s level work in a certain field. A master’s can also be a good choice for someone who majored in something unrelated in college and wants to switch fields, or for people who know they want PhDs but had low grades in college. But if you are positive you want to do a PhD, and you are already a competitive applicant for PhD programs, it’s better to skip the debt and the time and go into a PhD program (regardless of whether you work in the interim or not).</p>