GradStudent2009 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 Still stuck between my two grad schools After much thought, I feel that the UWO program is more in line with my future goals HOWEVER the minimum stipend for UWO is low. Queen's is offering me twice as much money. As someone who is already drowning in OSAP debt, the thought of applying for more loans makes me feel a bit sick. It's frustrating that university financing limits the amount of hours you can commit to outside employment... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
switcheroo Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 At my grad school, if we wanted to work more than the university would allow for funded grad students, we could write a letter explaining why we wanted to work more, and they would sometimes approve it. They were most likely to approve it if the work was related to our field of study (e.g., you were working as a research assistant in your advisor's lab). Maybe this could work for you, and make UWO more feasible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invincible110 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 Yes the stipends are often low but you will have to decide for yourself if it is more worth it to you to be doing something in the long run or to be financially stable. Are you certain the queens situation won't be useful to you in other ways? If you elaborated more maybe I could comment on a few more things. BTW out of curosity what is the stipend at UWO and Queens. Just wondering because im in grad school at UfT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradStudent2009 Posted July 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 21, 2009 UWO is currently offering me $10,000/year whilst Queens is willing to put up $20,000/year. I like the program at Queens (Masters in Neuroscience), I'm just not sure whether I want to study neuroscience for the foreseeable the future. How do you like grad school at UofT? I went there for undergrad and loved it! It was my first choice for Masters, unfortunately, I missed the application deadline for my program Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invincible110 Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 10000 wow UWO is really cheap. 20000 is around pretty much what you get at UfT - can go up to 25 000 depending on the dept that you are in, and even a bit higher with top up if you have a scholarship. UfT grad school is great. I love it, but it also depends on your work and profs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkles3288 Posted July 22, 2009 Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 10000 only!??! Wow thats pretty low. How do people make ends meet? In my program at calgary, we get min 21000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradStudent2009 Posted July 22, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2009 It doesn't make it easier that you also have to pay out $2600 in tuition... I assume to make ends meet, people either have money saved up, apply for OSAP, get TA positions, scholarships.. I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tsng Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 Grad school at U of T is the best decision I made so far. It is really fun and really gave me time to consider why medicine would be the career for me. Are there any Canadian medical schools that "favour" graduate students besides Uoft and McMaster? and can you get in without any publications? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eng_dude786 Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 ottawa...lower cutoffs for grad students. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradStudent2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 I've been offered admission to a fast-tracked Ph.D program - would having my Ph.D (rather than MSc) offer me any benefits when applying to med school? I tend to think not.. but figured I might as well ask the forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
future_doc Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 Not really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ontariostudent Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 I've been offered admission to a fast-tracked Ph.D program - would having my Ph.D (rather than MSc) offer me any benefits when applying to med school? I tend to think not.. but figured I might as well ask the forum I've heard that they expect more productivity with a PhD than an MSc. Also, a PhD (even direct-entry) will take longer, and they don't like if you de-class to an MSc. A PhD looks good on paper if you have it, but a direct entry program isn't always ideal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invincible110 Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 Hey but you should be weary of these fast tracked programs into phD, a lot of ppl in my lab specifically look down upon it, but that is mainly because they are all planning on staying in academia. But you should note that it will be difficult for you to get scholarships and such at least in the first year because you will be competing against people who have done a one year masters, with lots of results, and are planning to switch to a phD... If medicine is your goal and you have the stats/ECs to get in after a masters then dont waste your time with a phD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradStudent2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 I don't think that I would personally see it as a waste of time. I'm excited to be going to grad school - I think its going to be an eye-opening experience for me, to find out whether the world of academics is where I want to settle. As far as med school goes, I've been on the fence for a while.. after spending some time at SickKids during my undergrad, there are certain facets of the medical world that make me uncomfortable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ontariostudent Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 If you're thinking of academia or full time research, I would suggest doing a Master's first. That way you will have more opportunities to find a topic/area you love, and to really build up your skills. Direct entry PhDs aren't so well received because they require cutting corners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradStudent2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 What do you mean by "cutting corners"? As far as the topic/area is concerned, its completely in line with my interests - I'd be enrolled in the Health & Rehab Sciences program stream concentrated on Child & Youth Health. I'm also pretty thrilled with the project I'll be working on - it would involve delving into the neurological basis of abnormal hearing disorders in children aged 0-5. I think the program has potential to be a great stepping stone into a variety of career paths, may it be med school or academia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invincible110 Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 Sorry I didn't know that you were still on the fence between academia and med school. It might end up being a great experience if you are 100% sure of what exactly you will be doing. Most of the time people are unsure of how the project will actually turn out and as a result they go into a masters first. If they like the project and feel good about the future directions then they will switch to a phD, but if they hate it then they have the option of just finishing with a masters and doing a phD elsewhere. I am not trying to deter you in any way, just want to make sure you understand the advantages/disadvantages to direct entry into a phD program. Good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ontariostudent Posted July 29, 2009 Report Share Posted July 29, 2009 What do you mean by "cutting corners"? As far as the topic/area is concerned, its completely in line with my interests - I'd be enrolled in the Health & Rehab Sciences program stream concentrated on Child & Youth Health. I'm also pretty thrilled with the project I'll be working on - it would involve delving into the neurological basis of abnormal hearing disorders in children aged 0-5. I think the program has potential to be a great stepping stone into a variety of career paths, may it be med school or academia. What I meant is that a direct entry PhD is the fast route that few people take. That means that people who took the regular route may feel that your Phd isn't as good because it took less time, experience and effort (I'm not saying it's right, but since some people spend forever in grad school, it's understandable). If the program is exactly what you want, definitely give it a try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradStudent2009 Posted July 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2009 Sorry I didn't know that you were still on the fence between academia and med school. It might end up being a great experience if you are 100% sure of what exactly you will be doing. Most of the time people are unsure of how the project will actually turn out and as a result they go into a masters first. If they like the project and feel good about the future directions then they will switch to a phD, but if they hate it then they have the option of just finishing with a masters and doing a phD elsewhere. I am not trying to deter you in any way, just want to make sure you understand the advantages/disadvantages to direct entry into a phD program. Good luck When I spoke with my supervisor, she made it clear that I would have the option to leave the Ph.D fast-track program after two years with my Masters if I wasn't feeling enthused about continuing for the remaining three years. The primary reason I was offered the fast-track option was so that I could access the $20,000/year stipend available to Ph.D students - doing so allowed UWO to make an offer that was competitive to that which was put forth by Queen's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradStudent2009 Posted July 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 30, 2009 What I meant is that a direct entry PhD is the fast route that few people take. That means that people who took the regular route may feel that your Phd isn't as good because it took less time, experience and effort (I'm not saying it's right, but since some people spend forever in grad school, it's understandable). If the program is exactly what you want, definitely give it a try. It's disappointing to hear that there are some that could take such a judgmental attitude towards fast-trackers. While the fast-track Ph.D program theoretically takes five years to complete, rather than the estimated six years that would be required to complete a combination Masters/Ph.D program, I have a feeling that those five years will be sufficiently exhausting to ensure that those graduating from the program will have truly earned the right to affix the designation of Ph.D to the ends of their names. Moreover, as this forum can only serve to demonstrate vividly, I tend to believe that the academic road is rarely uniform. We have all come from different backgrounds and have decided to pursue graduate studies for a variety of reasons. Some are using grad school as their personal purgatory on the journey towards medical school, others are going to grad school because they don't know what they want, and many more will go because they dream of spending their lives in academia. In the end, I don't believe that any of us has the right to pass judgment concerning another's choices. To be frank, if dealing with elitist academics is the worst thing that grad school puts me through, I'll consider myself blessed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riskbreaker Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 Hey but you should be weary of these fast tracked programs into phD, a lot of ppl in my lab specifically look down upon it, but that is mainly because they are all planning on staying in academia. What I meant is that a direct entry PhD is the fast route that few people take. That means that people who took the regular route may feel that your Phd isn't as good because it took less time, experience and effort. Uhhh... I'm not sure where you heard this, or for what program, but this is absurdly false. If you are sure you want a PhD for a career in research, biotechnology or the like, it would be foolish not to enter into a PhD program directly. You may take your comprehensives a year early, but that doesn't tarnish the experience, and it certainly isn't "cutting corners". And if you fail those, you'll drop out the program into a "terminal Master's". Any judgmental attitude towards such a practice has no basis in fact, and seems to be more about personal justification of one's own degree. I wonder then, what some would think of MD/PhDs, as the PhD in this case only takes 3 years to achieve. To the OP, what Master's program were you originally applying for at UWO? If it was neuroscience, as was for Queen's, the minimum stipend is $16,000 plus extra through scholarships and TAing. I know the program in ACB was base $19,000, and up to $25,000 with OGS alone. Regardless, congratulations on your choice and your upcoming research career. But you should note that it will be difficult for you to get scholarships and such at least in the first year because you will be competing against people who have done a one year masters, with lots of results, and are planning to switch to a phD... This however, is good advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkles3288 Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 Uhhh... I'm not sure where you heard this, or for what program, but this is absurdly false. If you are sure you want a PhD for a career in research, biotechnology or the like, it would be foolish not to enter into a PhD program directly. You may take your comprehensives a year early, but that doesn't tarnish the experience, and it certainly isn't "cutting corners". And if you fail those, you'll drop out the program into a "terminal Master's". Any judgmental attitude towards such a practice has no basis in fact, and seems to be more about personal justification of one's own degree. I wonder then, what some would think of MD/PhDs, as the PhD in this case only takes 3 years to achieve.. Not the OP, but this attitude from those in academia is definitely legit. I've seen this many times in my own lab and research settings. People believe that those who complete a masters + PhD have a more comprehensive, diverse, and complete education than those who simply did direct entry. The reasoning may be faulty, but it is a common conception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riskbreaker Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 Interesting. Then this is certainly a Canadian phenomenon, as it is quite unusual to obtain a Master's degree before progressing to a PhD in the USA. PhD studies in almost every case are direct-entry from undergraduate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laika Posted August 11, 2009 Report Share Posted August 11, 2009 I'm with Riskbreaker on this one (and I'm from Canada)... I don't know what departments or programs ontariostudent and sparkles3288 have spent time in. From my experience, direct entry PhD programs are definitely not frowned upon by anyone in academia. The past half dozen faculty hires in my old dept were all direct entry PhDs. Top programs in the US don't even offer official master's programs, and will only give the degrees to those students who flunk out of PhD programs. Sure, doing a MSc + PhD will give you additional research experience. However, from a career perspective, I think you're better off spending the same amount of time in a PhD + postdoc. OP: I don't think a PhD will give you much of an advantage for med apps. In any case, don't discount the direct PhD route because of any stigma spouted on premed101. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satsuma Posted August 12, 2009 Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 Are you sure about the 10k stipend at UWO? I did grad school at UWO several years ago now, if I recall at the time the minimum was 15k. Not all of that had to come from your supervisor. So could be made up by TAing, departmental scholarships etc. If you get a national scholarship then UWO will cover your tuition. I don`t know what your circumstances are, but you can probably gather even a few smaller scholarhips, say the 3-5k ones and add that to your income. Also keep in mind scholarships aren`t even taxed anymore! (I had to pay tax on mine...grrr) I think once you are there you might find more funding opportunities. I did fine accumulating scholarships. And the nice thing is one you get 1 decent one it is easier to get another. Once you acculumate enough scholarhip funding, your supervisor may feel he/she doesn`t need to pay you as much, but then you can just work out maybe the lab covering conference costs etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.