Accepted for a PhD, only want to earn a Master's

This may be a common question but I could not find any (or perhaps it’s a complicated search) versions of it in this forum.

I have offers from 3 schools, 2 masters 1 PhD
The masters have limited funding and the PhD is fully funded + pay.

During the PhD you can be awarded your masters which is very common. However, is it uncommon for a student to attend the PhD school with the intent of leaving with a master’s just for the funding offered?

Will be skipping answers that mention “it’s wrong because other students miss out”

Thank you in advance for your time!

It is uncommon to enter into the PhD program with the INTENT of leaving with a masters. It’s unethical and fraudulent to the folks funding you to whom you’ve indicated in your application that you INTEND to pursue a PhD.

However, people leave PhD programs with masters all the time, often when they fail their qualifiers, or when they find that research is no longer what they want to do. A PhD is a hard road.

It sounds like you have already know that it is a dicey thing to do and you want someone to tell you it is OK to do it. You are unlikely to find that validation here.

Okay then how about this answer: it’s wrong because you are literally stealing the livelihood of the professors funding your fake PhD. We don’t have unlimited money to give out, and wasting it on a student who is just jerking us around eats up resources we could better spend on a student who actually cares. If every student did what you suggested, I’d never get tenure since funding would dry up since I’d never produce anything of value.

Trying to figure out why you only want a masters. What field?

It would be disingenuous to accept a spot in a PhD program when you have no intention of doing the work necessary to get that degree.

It’s not uncommon for students to begin a PhD program and leave after a Master’s, however this is not usually their plan. Mostly, they just don’t do so well or life circumstances get in the way, and the Master’s is sort of a consolation prize.

Do this and you will probably have a tough time getting a job afterward - your recommendation letters would be very unenthusiastic. I know what sort of letter I would write for a student who pulled this on me, and the sort of phone recommendation I give would be even stronger.

Aside from the cost to the professors and other students - which others have already outlined - there is also a personal cost to you.

Master’s programs are designed for, well, master’s students - students who are going to be there for 2 years max and want non-academic jobs. That means that all the classes, co-curricular and extra-curricular opportunities, networking, and career advising are designed for that cohort of students. You’re going to get advice, opportunities, and coursework that’s specifically tailored towards graduating someone with a master’s and (presumably) a professional career.

PhD programs are designed for students who are in it for the long haul. The expectations, opportunities, career advising (or lack thereof), etc., are all aimed at a student who is expected to spend at least 5 years in the department and who is aiming for a research career.

What does this mean in practice for you?

-In a master’s program, your program advisors are interested in doing career advising from day one because it makes the school look better if you have a job secured at graduation or quickly thereafter. In a PhD program, career advising doesn’t really begin at day one unless you have a really unusual advisor, and in fact, many advisors think it’s better to hold off on really tackling career discussions with their doctoral students until about year 3 or so. (The professors in this forum are excellent about being more proactive, but also - in my experience - unusual.) And in fact, sometimes asking about career stuff too early and too repeatedly, especially non-academic career stuff, can signal to a professor that you are “not serious” and thus not worth their time and investment.

-If research is not your passion and you are not interested in a research career, prepare to be disappointed and perhaps miserable. Doctoral students are expected to do research. You’ll likely have to serve as a research assistant for at least “20” hours a week (but 20 hours is rarely actually 20 hours), and you’ll be expected to chase the kind of milestones that are important for someone preparing for a research career: publications, presentations at conferences, brown bags, etc. You are going to be expected to do that instead of, not in addition to, non-academic professional career preparation. And in fact, many professors will consider any time spent doing non-academic career prep instead of research and writing as a waste of your time (and a signal that you are, again, “not serious.”)

-Master’s students who want a job will do well to do a summer internship somewhere, and perhaps even an internship during the academic year. In fact, your program will try to help you FIND one. Doctoral students are expected to do research during their first summer (especially since summer funding often comes directly out of someone’s research budget). Nine chances out of 10 you won’t be able to do a professional internship anywhere; your program may even forbid it. And 9.9 chances out of 10 you won’t be able to work part-time or do an internship during the academic year. You won’t have time, and your program may even prohibit it formally.

-Sometimes some programs have different classes for master’s and doctoral students. Mine did. The doctoral versions are usually more theoretical and less applied than the master’s classes, and they may be less useful to you. The master’s versions often have practica or simulations attached that you will miss out on as a doctoral student. Trying to take the master’s versions will at best get you long, unwanted conversations with your advisor and at worst blow your whole plan pretty easily.

-If you’re going to a professional program, the non-terminal master’s you get is often different from the master’s that the terminal students earn. For example, I got my PhD in public health. The non-terminal students got an MPH in my field, but the non-terminal master’s we earned was an MA. You could, theoretically, earn an MPH on the way to your PhD, but it was a lot of extra work and planning (different classes; see above) and again would earn an unwanted “talk” between you and your advisor.

There are other things that are less direct but no less annoying:

-In a master’s program all your classmates are also trying to get professional jobs and get out in two years. In a doctoral program, all your cohort-mates are in it for the long haul. This will have an effect on your psyche in a way that’s difficult to explain. Let me just say as someone who completed a PhD program, peer pressure is real.

-It’s really hard to hide your intentions as a doctoral student. When I say hard I don’t mean difficult; I mean psychologically taxing. Doctoral cohorts tend to be small - maybe about 4-8 students on average - meaning in that your entire department, maybe there will be around 20-50 doctoral students. Your professors expect to see you around; they know who you are and they watching you; they are listening to you; they are scrutinizing you. Even if you think they don’t know who you are…they do, lol. Frankly, this is psychologically taxing even if you want the PhD but think you may want to go the non-academic route; I can’t imagine the feeling if you KNOW want to drop out as an MA. (I’m not exaggerating.)

-You’ll be expected to do some longer-term planning, so you’ll have to do a lot of unnecessary work - like prepping your dissertation work early or something.

And lastly, but importantly, sometimes getting that non-terminal MA or MS takes more time than you think. Many professors will (rightfully) assume that the MA is a non-essential stepping stone towards the PhD and frankly will not care when you earn it, precisely; if there are specific steps you have to take towards getting it, they may not care about them as much as you do. I’ll use myself as an example: it took me 3 years to earn my non-terminal MA on the way to my PhD. The reason it did is because in addition to completing coursework I had to write and turn in a paper, but my PI (and I) wanted the paper to become a publication. So rather than turning in something whipped together quickly I spent extra time perfecting it and turned it in super “late”. I did end up publishing it (in a very good journal, actually) and I personally did not care that it took me 3 years because I wanted the PhD. But if my goal was to get out and my PI kept sending me back for more edits, I might have gone insane.

For all of these reasons, my recommendation to students asking this question is usually to go ahead and pay for the master’s degree. Some things are just worth the money.

uggh.

@iTutorMath Read the post from @juillet carefully. Very good points in there.

You don’t mention what field you’re studying, but since the PhD is fully funded I’ll assume its science or engineering.

In the direct-to-PhD programs, leaving with a MS is a nice synonym for failing out of thr PhD program. (Or that’s how it’s interpreted.) Yes, I have some friends who went into the PhD and changed their mind, and left with a MS even though they were absolutely on track to finish their PhD if they wanted to. This was during the tail end of the recession, so maybe some of them only went to grad school because they didn’t know what else to do, but that’s a story for another time.

In any case, you don’t go into a PhD program thinking you’re going to leave with a MS. People can tell. And professors can tell. One guy I knew was really indecisive about what he wanted to study and was more interested in MS-level work/careers. Not a single professor would take him into their lab, and so he was forced to leave with a course-based masters. And no rec. letters other than from the instructors he TAed for. He does not have a “great job in industry,” and certainly does not have a research-related job.

At a PhD program, coursework is generally minimal. Your learning will take place in the lab. Your advisor will give you a project, and it will be of a scope that will take at least 5 years to reasonably complete. And that’s if you’re diligent, a smart and efficient worker, and motivated. And working 50-70 hours a week in the lab, excluding time for courses and teaching resposibilities. It’s a tough enough environment that it can drive people out with a MS, but of course, those who drop out with the MS don’t get the good recommendation from their advisor. You only enjoy a PhD program if you truly deeply love what you’re working on and studying. And if you do, it can really be the best time of your academic life.

“Mastering out” of a PhD program (that’s the term generally given) can take a long time, as juillet mentioned. Anything from 6 months to 7 years from the cases I know about. If you want to leave on good terms with your advisor, usually it will take 2.5 to 3 years because for most PhD programs, you don’t technically reach MS status until you pass candidacy. Candidacy exams are generally scheduled in year 2 or 3. In some programs, the advisor decides when you go up for candidacy, and that can be as late as 1 month before your final PhD defence. And if you get a MS after candidacy, it will be a research-based MS, which means you need to submit a thesis.

If you want a MS, and you want to feel good about yourself, go to a MS program. MS programs are usually designed to prepare you for more practical/applied aspects of your field and therefore have value to particular employers. If you go to a PhD program and leave with a MS, you might feel like you failed, and employers might think you left because you’re not good at research.

One more point: of the people I knew who left with MS degrees, the people who left by choice got jobs based on their BS credentials, and the MS was just counted as work experience for the employer - they were hired in jobs where the requirements were ‘BS in X discipline with 1-3 years experience in Y techniques.’ The people I knew who failed out still really wanted a PhD and started their PhDs again at lower-ranked schools, then got good industry jobs in research/development. Think about what you really want to do with your degree. Maybe you don’t even need that MS degree.

What subject?
Why are you thinking of stopping after the Master’s degree (are you international?) Would you consider trying to get a PhD if it made sense? What sort of career are you thinking of?

This post is very old, but I wanted to say that I did not opt in for the PhD because of course it is extremely unethical, detailed by the answers you provided. I knew it was ethically wrong, but I wasn’t sure if it was a common thing that was “done all the time”. My credentials were not sufficient for a top PhD program, so I elected to get my masters at a top school instead and ended up with full funding anyway, and perhaps afterwords apply to a top PhD program. Thank you all for your time and passion that were put into these responses.

great response and thanks for posting.

btw: my son’s friend entered a PhD program with the full purpose of completing it, but disliked the professor and program, so he asked for the MS. His PI said, ‘fine, but you still have to pass your PhD ‘written quals’ before I’ll sign off.’

@bluebayou That’s a really jerk thing to do by said professor. If your son’s friend really did fully intend to get a PhD and just changed his mind, that’s totally legitimate. The professor is just throwing a tantrum.

^^yeah, he and the Prof didn’t get along, and that was probably a big reason for him not completing the program. Forced him to stay another term

This may be true at some schools or in some programs, but almost all of this could be wrong in others. In my department, terminal Master’s students and PhD students enrolled in the same exact classes, although the PhD students may have needed a few more total credits. Whether you intended to get a MS from the start like I did, or whether the MS was your consolation prize for an ABD, you still got the same exact same degree on your transcript. Professional career advice for terminal MS students was non-existent, except to see you graduated on schedule. If you wanted a summer internship, the department wasn’t going to help you find it or even suggest it was necessary. As a funded RA, I was responsible for research 20 hours/week just like the PhD students. There was very little difference in being a terminal MS student and a PhD student in their first two years of the program.

If your end goal was, in fact, a PhD from another program, then you made the right call. Mastering out of a PhD program may have been viewed differently than attending a terminal masters program by the admissions faculty at the programs you really want to attend. You may have had more explaining to do about why you left and are now applying to different PhD programs. It’s one less concern you’ll have if you do decide to apply to PhD programs later on.

As someone who reviews graduate applications as part of my job, I can say this literally never enters into my calculus on whether I admit a student. If there was a problem, it will show up in the form of their reference letters, otherwise, switching schools between an MS and a PhD is common.

If anything, “mastering” out of a PhD program would be viewed negatively by me if I actually had access to that information. It would imply there were potentially some motivation issues that would give me pause about a student’s odds of completing the program.

That doesn’t mean it won’t matter to any other faculty member at any other program. I suppose if one weren’t to mention they were a PhD student, it couldn’t be an issue unless mentioned in a reference letter or call. However, I’ve seen a peer struggle with interview questions at some - certainly not all - institutions they interviewed at because they did share that they were a PhD student who hadn’t found the right fit and so chose to master out. This led to several follow up questions they weren’t expecting to clarify what happened. Not all faculty will be so open minded or objective.

It might look like just a masters on a CV, but I wouldn’t recommend going to any lengths to pretend that’s all it was if relevant questions arise. It might not be a big deal in most cases, but my point was that in this case it sounds like the OP wanted to use PhD funding to get a masters degree and then trade up. Maybe the new faculty wouldn’t care, but some might question the ethical nature of the student if this were to be suspected. OP avoided the need to find more adequate explanations or put on an act if the need arose.