To do another Master's, already holding a PhD












11














If a STEM PhD holder applies for a Master's in another STEM major, would this be an advantage or disadvantage in the eye of the admission committee?










share|improve this question







New contributor




feynman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1




    Can you be more specific? Applying to a MEd or speech path masters is going to be very different than llp
    – Azor Ahai
    13 hours ago
















11














If a STEM PhD holder applies for a Master's in another STEM major, would this be an advantage or disadvantage in the eye of the admission committee?










share|improve this question







New contributor




feynman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 1




    Can you be more specific? Applying to a MEd or speech path masters is going to be very different than llp
    – Azor Ahai
    13 hours ago














11












11








11


2





If a STEM PhD holder applies for a Master's in another STEM major, would this be an advantage or disadvantage in the eye of the admission committee?










share|improve this question







New contributor




feynman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











If a STEM PhD holder applies for a Master's in another STEM major, would this be an advantage or disadvantage in the eye of the admission committee?







phd masters application






share|improve this question







New contributor




feynman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question







New contributor




feynman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question






New contributor




feynman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 23 hours ago









feynman

1594




1594




New contributor




feynman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





feynman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






feynman is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 1




    Can you be more specific? Applying to a MEd or speech path masters is going to be very different than llp
    – Azor Ahai
    13 hours ago














  • 1




    Can you be more specific? Applying to a MEd or speech path masters is going to be very different than llp
    – Azor Ahai
    13 hours ago








1




1




Can you be more specific? Applying to a MEd or speech path masters is going to be very different than llp
– Azor Ahai
13 hours ago




Can you be more specific? Applying to a MEd or speech path masters is going to be very different than llp
– Azor Ahai
13 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















16














Surely you're joking Mr. Feynman!



Sorry, but you walked into that joke. Actually, such an application would occur so infrequently that it might result in a few chuckles. But I don't think it would have a lot of effect. But certainly not a big advantage.



In fact, people, including myself, will wonder why a person would bother. After all, the applicant can study and learn effectively and evidenced by the doctorate, so what is the need of a formal program. It might be a disadvantage in some places where the available slots are limited and people would feel they should be given to someone who needs the training more.



On the other hand, if a lab needs particular skills that you have, they might be interested, just for that.



Thus, it is impossible to say in general as local needs/beliefs will dominate such a situation.






share|improve this answer

















  • 4




    I have seen a number of people with multiple Masters on their CV. - The advantage can be getting additional knowledge in a related subject quickly. A Masters takes 1 (UK) to 2 (rest of Europe) years, while a PhD takes at least 3 (UK, 4 years limit) to potentially 6+ years. - In addition, it can be easier for people to do a part time Masters than a part time PhD to extend their knowledge. It also avoids the repetition of the introduction from an undergraduate degree.
    – DetlevCM
    17 hours ago










  • @DetlevCM Perhaps the most prominent example I recall is Michael Griffin, the former head of NASA.
    – user71659
    14 hours ago






  • 1




    @DetlevCM You're comparing a master vs a PhD or undergrad while Buffy is asking why someone who has shown the ability to learn information on their own would need any formal program at all to pick up new information. You can find the books, papers and exercises without troubles online so giving a limited spot to someone who doesn't really need it, instead of someone who has yet to learn all those essential skills might be considered bad use of resources by some (and yes, there are certainly some immaterial advantages to studying in a formal program that you won't get from self-study, I agree)
    – Voo
    13 hours ago






  • 3




    Major cases: to be a licensed engineer you must have a degree in engineering. So if you get all your degrees in a non-engineering field and then decide you need engineering licensure, you have to take a Master's. This also applies to some science fields like geology, you need a degree in the field.
    – user71659
    6 hours ago





















9














If you ever want to leave academia, it could be seen as a disadvantage. It suggests you are a "perpetual student" rather than someone who actually wants to do some (real-world) work.



The main point of a PhD is not that you learned some (random) snippet of new information while doing it, but that you demonstrated you can learn new stuff on your own with minimal supervision.



That is what you should expect to be doing for the rest of your working life, either inside or outside academia, but expecting to keep getting more "awards" for doing that is rather like a kid in school expecting to get another gold star for every good piece of homework they turn in - most people grow out of it.






share|improve this answer

















  • 1




    Very opinion based and narrow minded answer. See the other answer for a bigger horizon
    – Hakaishin
    2 hours ago



















3














In terms of competency, I can't imagine why it would be seen as a disadvantage. If anything - it shows that you are capable of successfully completing an academic program.



The only scenario I could imagine where this may be an issue is if the Master's program is affiliated with some scholarship program, where the scholarship terms & conditions require that the applicant does not hold an advanced degree. If you're applying for a non-scholarship program then I can't imagine why they would reject your application - you are willing to pay good money and are likely to successfully graduate.



Another issue might be if you're applying to a STEM program that's very far from your PhD degree (say, from theoretical physics to zoology). If your bachelor's degree does not fit the prerequisites for the program you may have an issue, and the PhD won't help (but probably won't hurt).



Good luck!






share|improve this answer

















  • 1




    "Huh so the guy finished their PhD and then instead of working in their chosen field and applying their knowledge they decided to instead enroll in a different field, mhmm I wonder why". That's the first thought that would go through my mind if I saw that CV on the stack of job applications. So there's certainly some possible downside to it.
    – Voo
    13 hours ago










  • At the very least it would make me want to interview this person and ask them why, not outright reject them.
    – Spark
    5 hours ago



















3














Not a direct answer to your question, but a personal experience. I got a PhD in EE and am now one semester away from finishing my masters in CS. Three years after my PhD, I changed careers from EE research to a data science. My EE PhD provided me background in linear algebra, partial differential equations and numerical computations. The primary motivation for me going into CS was to develop intuition in certain areas which I wasn't exposed to, but became important in my new career: combinatorics, statistics, probabilistic modeling, optimization, operating/distributed systems, and computer networks to name a few. Following a masters curriculum guided me on what areas are (roughly) considered important and also brought a (forced) discipline to my studies.



If an application of MS followed by a PhD crossed my desk, I'd laud your discipline, but also probe you why you went that route. You need to have a good answer for that.






share|improve this answer








New contributor




RDK is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.


















    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "415"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    feynman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f122106%2fto-do-another-masters-already-holding-a-phd%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes








    4 Answers
    4






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    16














    Surely you're joking Mr. Feynman!



    Sorry, but you walked into that joke. Actually, such an application would occur so infrequently that it might result in a few chuckles. But I don't think it would have a lot of effect. But certainly not a big advantage.



    In fact, people, including myself, will wonder why a person would bother. After all, the applicant can study and learn effectively and evidenced by the doctorate, so what is the need of a formal program. It might be a disadvantage in some places where the available slots are limited and people would feel they should be given to someone who needs the training more.



    On the other hand, if a lab needs particular skills that you have, they might be interested, just for that.



    Thus, it is impossible to say in general as local needs/beliefs will dominate such a situation.






    share|improve this answer

















    • 4




      I have seen a number of people with multiple Masters on their CV. - The advantage can be getting additional knowledge in a related subject quickly. A Masters takes 1 (UK) to 2 (rest of Europe) years, while a PhD takes at least 3 (UK, 4 years limit) to potentially 6+ years. - In addition, it can be easier for people to do a part time Masters than a part time PhD to extend their knowledge. It also avoids the repetition of the introduction from an undergraduate degree.
      – DetlevCM
      17 hours ago










    • @DetlevCM Perhaps the most prominent example I recall is Michael Griffin, the former head of NASA.
      – user71659
      14 hours ago






    • 1




      @DetlevCM You're comparing a master vs a PhD or undergrad while Buffy is asking why someone who has shown the ability to learn information on their own would need any formal program at all to pick up new information. You can find the books, papers and exercises without troubles online so giving a limited spot to someone who doesn't really need it, instead of someone who has yet to learn all those essential skills might be considered bad use of resources by some (and yes, there are certainly some immaterial advantages to studying in a formal program that you won't get from self-study, I agree)
      – Voo
      13 hours ago






    • 3




      Major cases: to be a licensed engineer you must have a degree in engineering. So if you get all your degrees in a non-engineering field and then decide you need engineering licensure, you have to take a Master's. This also applies to some science fields like geology, you need a degree in the field.
      – user71659
      6 hours ago


















    16














    Surely you're joking Mr. Feynman!



    Sorry, but you walked into that joke. Actually, such an application would occur so infrequently that it might result in a few chuckles. But I don't think it would have a lot of effect. But certainly not a big advantage.



    In fact, people, including myself, will wonder why a person would bother. After all, the applicant can study and learn effectively and evidenced by the doctorate, so what is the need of a formal program. It might be a disadvantage in some places where the available slots are limited and people would feel they should be given to someone who needs the training more.



    On the other hand, if a lab needs particular skills that you have, they might be interested, just for that.



    Thus, it is impossible to say in general as local needs/beliefs will dominate such a situation.






    share|improve this answer

















    • 4




      I have seen a number of people with multiple Masters on their CV. - The advantage can be getting additional knowledge in a related subject quickly. A Masters takes 1 (UK) to 2 (rest of Europe) years, while a PhD takes at least 3 (UK, 4 years limit) to potentially 6+ years. - In addition, it can be easier for people to do a part time Masters than a part time PhD to extend their knowledge. It also avoids the repetition of the introduction from an undergraduate degree.
      – DetlevCM
      17 hours ago










    • @DetlevCM Perhaps the most prominent example I recall is Michael Griffin, the former head of NASA.
      – user71659
      14 hours ago






    • 1




      @DetlevCM You're comparing a master vs a PhD or undergrad while Buffy is asking why someone who has shown the ability to learn information on their own would need any formal program at all to pick up new information. You can find the books, papers and exercises without troubles online so giving a limited spot to someone who doesn't really need it, instead of someone who has yet to learn all those essential skills might be considered bad use of resources by some (and yes, there are certainly some immaterial advantages to studying in a formal program that you won't get from self-study, I agree)
      – Voo
      13 hours ago






    • 3




      Major cases: to be a licensed engineer you must have a degree in engineering. So if you get all your degrees in a non-engineering field and then decide you need engineering licensure, you have to take a Master's. This also applies to some science fields like geology, you need a degree in the field.
      – user71659
      6 hours ago
















    16












    16








    16






    Surely you're joking Mr. Feynman!



    Sorry, but you walked into that joke. Actually, such an application would occur so infrequently that it might result in a few chuckles. But I don't think it would have a lot of effect. But certainly not a big advantage.



    In fact, people, including myself, will wonder why a person would bother. After all, the applicant can study and learn effectively and evidenced by the doctorate, so what is the need of a formal program. It might be a disadvantage in some places where the available slots are limited and people would feel they should be given to someone who needs the training more.



    On the other hand, if a lab needs particular skills that you have, they might be interested, just for that.



    Thus, it is impossible to say in general as local needs/beliefs will dominate such a situation.






    share|improve this answer












    Surely you're joking Mr. Feynman!



    Sorry, but you walked into that joke. Actually, such an application would occur so infrequently that it might result in a few chuckles. But I don't think it would have a lot of effect. But certainly not a big advantage.



    In fact, people, including myself, will wonder why a person would bother. After all, the applicant can study and learn effectively and evidenced by the doctorate, so what is the need of a formal program. It might be a disadvantage in some places where the available slots are limited and people would feel they should be given to someone who needs the training more.



    On the other hand, if a lab needs particular skills that you have, they might be interested, just for that.



    Thus, it is impossible to say in general as local needs/beliefs will dominate such a situation.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 23 hours ago









    Buffy

    36.2k7114188




    36.2k7114188








    • 4




      I have seen a number of people with multiple Masters on their CV. - The advantage can be getting additional knowledge in a related subject quickly. A Masters takes 1 (UK) to 2 (rest of Europe) years, while a PhD takes at least 3 (UK, 4 years limit) to potentially 6+ years. - In addition, it can be easier for people to do a part time Masters than a part time PhD to extend their knowledge. It also avoids the repetition of the introduction from an undergraduate degree.
      – DetlevCM
      17 hours ago










    • @DetlevCM Perhaps the most prominent example I recall is Michael Griffin, the former head of NASA.
      – user71659
      14 hours ago






    • 1




      @DetlevCM You're comparing a master vs a PhD or undergrad while Buffy is asking why someone who has shown the ability to learn information on their own would need any formal program at all to pick up new information. You can find the books, papers and exercises without troubles online so giving a limited spot to someone who doesn't really need it, instead of someone who has yet to learn all those essential skills might be considered bad use of resources by some (and yes, there are certainly some immaterial advantages to studying in a formal program that you won't get from self-study, I agree)
      – Voo
      13 hours ago






    • 3




      Major cases: to be a licensed engineer you must have a degree in engineering. So if you get all your degrees in a non-engineering field and then decide you need engineering licensure, you have to take a Master's. This also applies to some science fields like geology, you need a degree in the field.
      – user71659
      6 hours ago
















    • 4




      I have seen a number of people with multiple Masters on their CV. - The advantage can be getting additional knowledge in a related subject quickly. A Masters takes 1 (UK) to 2 (rest of Europe) years, while a PhD takes at least 3 (UK, 4 years limit) to potentially 6+ years. - In addition, it can be easier for people to do a part time Masters than a part time PhD to extend their knowledge. It also avoids the repetition of the introduction from an undergraduate degree.
      – DetlevCM
      17 hours ago










    • @DetlevCM Perhaps the most prominent example I recall is Michael Griffin, the former head of NASA.
      – user71659
      14 hours ago






    • 1




      @DetlevCM You're comparing a master vs a PhD or undergrad while Buffy is asking why someone who has shown the ability to learn information on their own would need any formal program at all to pick up new information. You can find the books, papers and exercises without troubles online so giving a limited spot to someone who doesn't really need it, instead of someone who has yet to learn all those essential skills might be considered bad use of resources by some (and yes, there are certainly some immaterial advantages to studying in a formal program that you won't get from self-study, I agree)
      – Voo
      13 hours ago






    • 3




      Major cases: to be a licensed engineer you must have a degree in engineering. So if you get all your degrees in a non-engineering field and then decide you need engineering licensure, you have to take a Master's. This also applies to some science fields like geology, you need a degree in the field.
      – user71659
      6 hours ago










    4




    4




    I have seen a number of people with multiple Masters on their CV. - The advantage can be getting additional knowledge in a related subject quickly. A Masters takes 1 (UK) to 2 (rest of Europe) years, while a PhD takes at least 3 (UK, 4 years limit) to potentially 6+ years. - In addition, it can be easier for people to do a part time Masters than a part time PhD to extend their knowledge. It also avoids the repetition of the introduction from an undergraduate degree.
    – DetlevCM
    17 hours ago




    I have seen a number of people with multiple Masters on their CV. - The advantage can be getting additional knowledge in a related subject quickly. A Masters takes 1 (UK) to 2 (rest of Europe) years, while a PhD takes at least 3 (UK, 4 years limit) to potentially 6+ years. - In addition, it can be easier for people to do a part time Masters than a part time PhD to extend their knowledge. It also avoids the repetition of the introduction from an undergraduate degree.
    – DetlevCM
    17 hours ago












    @DetlevCM Perhaps the most prominent example I recall is Michael Griffin, the former head of NASA.
    – user71659
    14 hours ago




    @DetlevCM Perhaps the most prominent example I recall is Michael Griffin, the former head of NASA.
    – user71659
    14 hours ago




    1




    1




    @DetlevCM You're comparing a master vs a PhD or undergrad while Buffy is asking why someone who has shown the ability to learn information on their own would need any formal program at all to pick up new information. You can find the books, papers and exercises without troubles online so giving a limited spot to someone who doesn't really need it, instead of someone who has yet to learn all those essential skills might be considered bad use of resources by some (and yes, there are certainly some immaterial advantages to studying in a formal program that you won't get from self-study, I agree)
    – Voo
    13 hours ago




    @DetlevCM You're comparing a master vs a PhD or undergrad while Buffy is asking why someone who has shown the ability to learn information on their own would need any formal program at all to pick up new information. You can find the books, papers and exercises without troubles online so giving a limited spot to someone who doesn't really need it, instead of someone who has yet to learn all those essential skills might be considered bad use of resources by some (and yes, there are certainly some immaterial advantages to studying in a formal program that you won't get from self-study, I agree)
    – Voo
    13 hours ago




    3




    3




    Major cases: to be a licensed engineer you must have a degree in engineering. So if you get all your degrees in a non-engineering field and then decide you need engineering licensure, you have to take a Master's. This also applies to some science fields like geology, you need a degree in the field.
    – user71659
    6 hours ago






    Major cases: to be a licensed engineer you must have a degree in engineering. So if you get all your degrees in a non-engineering field and then decide you need engineering licensure, you have to take a Master's. This also applies to some science fields like geology, you need a degree in the field.
    – user71659
    6 hours ago













    9














    If you ever want to leave academia, it could be seen as a disadvantage. It suggests you are a "perpetual student" rather than someone who actually wants to do some (real-world) work.



    The main point of a PhD is not that you learned some (random) snippet of new information while doing it, but that you demonstrated you can learn new stuff on your own with minimal supervision.



    That is what you should expect to be doing for the rest of your working life, either inside or outside academia, but expecting to keep getting more "awards" for doing that is rather like a kid in school expecting to get another gold star for every good piece of homework they turn in - most people grow out of it.






    share|improve this answer

















    • 1




      Very opinion based and narrow minded answer. See the other answer for a bigger horizon
      – Hakaishin
      2 hours ago
















    9














    If you ever want to leave academia, it could be seen as a disadvantage. It suggests you are a "perpetual student" rather than someone who actually wants to do some (real-world) work.



    The main point of a PhD is not that you learned some (random) snippet of new information while doing it, but that you demonstrated you can learn new stuff on your own with minimal supervision.



    That is what you should expect to be doing for the rest of your working life, either inside or outside academia, but expecting to keep getting more "awards" for doing that is rather like a kid in school expecting to get another gold star for every good piece of homework they turn in - most people grow out of it.






    share|improve this answer

















    • 1




      Very opinion based and narrow minded answer. See the other answer for a bigger horizon
      – Hakaishin
      2 hours ago














    9












    9








    9






    If you ever want to leave academia, it could be seen as a disadvantage. It suggests you are a "perpetual student" rather than someone who actually wants to do some (real-world) work.



    The main point of a PhD is not that you learned some (random) snippet of new information while doing it, but that you demonstrated you can learn new stuff on your own with minimal supervision.



    That is what you should expect to be doing for the rest of your working life, either inside or outside academia, but expecting to keep getting more "awards" for doing that is rather like a kid in school expecting to get another gold star for every good piece of homework they turn in - most people grow out of it.






    share|improve this answer












    If you ever want to leave academia, it could be seen as a disadvantage. It suggests you are a "perpetual student" rather than someone who actually wants to do some (real-world) work.



    The main point of a PhD is not that you learned some (random) snippet of new information while doing it, but that you demonstrated you can learn new stuff on your own with minimal supervision.



    That is what you should expect to be doing for the rest of your working life, either inside or outside academia, but expecting to keep getting more "awards" for doing that is rather like a kid in school expecting to get another gold star for every good piece of homework they turn in - most people grow out of it.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 19 hours ago









    alephzero

    1,984813




    1,984813








    • 1




      Very opinion based and narrow minded answer. See the other answer for a bigger horizon
      – Hakaishin
      2 hours ago














    • 1




      Very opinion based and narrow minded answer. See the other answer for a bigger horizon
      – Hakaishin
      2 hours ago








    1




    1




    Very opinion based and narrow minded answer. See the other answer for a bigger horizon
    – Hakaishin
    2 hours ago




    Very opinion based and narrow minded answer. See the other answer for a bigger horizon
    – Hakaishin
    2 hours ago











    3














    In terms of competency, I can't imagine why it would be seen as a disadvantage. If anything - it shows that you are capable of successfully completing an academic program.



    The only scenario I could imagine where this may be an issue is if the Master's program is affiliated with some scholarship program, where the scholarship terms & conditions require that the applicant does not hold an advanced degree. If you're applying for a non-scholarship program then I can't imagine why they would reject your application - you are willing to pay good money and are likely to successfully graduate.



    Another issue might be if you're applying to a STEM program that's very far from your PhD degree (say, from theoretical physics to zoology). If your bachelor's degree does not fit the prerequisites for the program you may have an issue, and the PhD won't help (but probably won't hurt).



    Good luck!






    share|improve this answer

















    • 1




      "Huh so the guy finished their PhD and then instead of working in their chosen field and applying their knowledge they decided to instead enroll in a different field, mhmm I wonder why". That's the first thought that would go through my mind if I saw that CV on the stack of job applications. So there's certainly some possible downside to it.
      – Voo
      13 hours ago










    • At the very least it would make me want to interview this person and ask them why, not outright reject them.
      – Spark
      5 hours ago
















    3














    In terms of competency, I can't imagine why it would be seen as a disadvantage. If anything - it shows that you are capable of successfully completing an academic program.



    The only scenario I could imagine where this may be an issue is if the Master's program is affiliated with some scholarship program, where the scholarship terms & conditions require that the applicant does not hold an advanced degree. If you're applying for a non-scholarship program then I can't imagine why they would reject your application - you are willing to pay good money and are likely to successfully graduate.



    Another issue might be if you're applying to a STEM program that's very far from your PhD degree (say, from theoretical physics to zoology). If your bachelor's degree does not fit the prerequisites for the program you may have an issue, and the PhD won't help (but probably won't hurt).



    Good luck!






    share|improve this answer

















    • 1




      "Huh so the guy finished their PhD and then instead of working in their chosen field and applying their knowledge they decided to instead enroll in a different field, mhmm I wonder why". That's the first thought that would go through my mind if I saw that CV on the stack of job applications. So there's certainly some possible downside to it.
      – Voo
      13 hours ago










    • At the very least it would make me want to interview this person and ask them why, not outright reject them.
      – Spark
      5 hours ago














    3












    3








    3






    In terms of competency, I can't imagine why it would be seen as a disadvantage. If anything - it shows that you are capable of successfully completing an academic program.



    The only scenario I could imagine where this may be an issue is if the Master's program is affiliated with some scholarship program, where the scholarship terms & conditions require that the applicant does not hold an advanced degree. If you're applying for a non-scholarship program then I can't imagine why they would reject your application - you are willing to pay good money and are likely to successfully graduate.



    Another issue might be if you're applying to a STEM program that's very far from your PhD degree (say, from theoretical physics to zoology). If your bachelor's degree does not fit the prerequisites for the program you may have an issue, and the PhD won't help (but probably won't hurt).



    Good luck!






    share|improve this answer












    In terms of competency, I can't imagine why it would be seen as a disadvantage. If anything - it shows that you are capable of successfully completing an academic program.



    The only scenario I could imagine where this may be an issue is if the Master's program is affiliated with some scholarship program, where the scholarship terms & conditions require that the applicant does not hold an advanced degree. If you're applying for a non-scholarship program then I can't imagine why they would reject your application - you are willing to pay good money and are likely to successfully graduate.



    Another issue might be if you're applying to a STEM program that's very far from your PhD degree (say, from theoretical physics to zoology). If your bachelor's degree does not fit the prerequisites for the program you may have an issue, and the PhD won't help (but probably won't hurt).



    Good luck!







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 20 hours ago









    Spark

    1,21310




    1,21310








    • 1




      "Huh so the guy finished their PhD and then instead of working in their chosen field and applying their knowledge they decided to instead enroll in a different field, mhmm I wonder why". That's the first thought that would go through my mind if I saw that CV on the stack of job applications. So there's certainly some possible downside to it.
      – Voo
      13 hours ago










    • At the very least it would make me want to interview this person and ask them why, not outright reject them.
      – Spark
      5 hours ago














    • 1




      "Huh so the guy finished their PhD and then instead of working in their chosen field and applying their knowledge they decided to instead enroll in a different field, mhmm I wonder why". That's the first thought that would go through my mind if I saw that CV on the stack of job applications. So there's certainly some possible downside to it.
      – Voo
      13 hours ago










    • At the very least it would make me want to interview this person and ask them why, not outright reject them.
      – Spark
      5 hours ago








    1




    1




    "Huh so the guy finished their PhD and then instead of working in their chosen field and applying their knowledge they decided to instead enroll in a different field, mhmm I wonder why". That's the first thought that would go through my mind if I saw that CV on the stack of job applications. So there's certainly some possible downside to it.
    – Voo
    13 hours ago




    "Huh so the guy finished their PhD and then instead of working in their chosen field and applying their knowledge they decided to instead enroll in a different field, mhmm I wonder why". That's the first thought that would go through my mind if I saw that CV on the stack of job applications. So there's certainly some possible downside to it.
    – Voo
    13 hours ago












    At the very least it would make me want to interview this person and ask them why, not outright reject them.
    – Spark
    5 hours ago




    At the very least it would make me want to interview this person and ask them why, not outright reject them.
    – Spark
    5 hours ago











    3














    Not a direct answer to your question, but a personal experience. I got a PhD in EE and am now one semester away from finishing my masters in CS. Three years after my PhD, I changed careers from EE research to a data science. My EE PhD provided me background in linear algebra, partial differential equations and numerical computations. The primary motivation for me going into CS was to develop intuition in certain areas which I wasn't exposed to, but became important in my new career: combinatorics, statistics, probabilistic modeling, optimization, operating/distributed systems, and computer networks to name a few. Following a masters curriculum guided me on what areas are (roughly) considered important and also brought a (forced) discipline to my studies.



    If an application of MS followed by a PhD crossed my desk, I'd laud your discipline, but also probe you why you went that route. You need to have a good answer for that.






    share|improve this answer








    New contributor




    RDK is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.























      3














      Not a direct answer to your question, but a personal experience. I got a PhD in EE and am now one semester away from finishing my masters in CS. Three years after my PhD, I changed careers from EE research to a data science. My EE PhD provided me background in linear algebra, partial differential equations and numerical computations. The primary motivation for me going into CS was to develop intuition in certain areas which I wasn't exposed to, but became important in my new career: combinatorics, statistics, probabilistic modeling, optimization, operating/distributed systems, and computer networks to name a few. Following a masters curriculum guided me on what areas are (roughly) considered important and also brought a (forced) discipline to my studies.



      If an application of MS followed by a PhD crossed my desk, I'd laud your discipline, but also probe you why you went that route. You need to have a good answer for that.






      share|improve this answer








      New contributor




      RDK is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





















        3












        3








        3






        Not a direct answer to your question, but a personal experience. I got a PhD in EE and am now one semester away from finishing my masters in CS. Three years after my PhD, I changed careers from EE research to a data science. My EE PhD provided me background in linear algebra, partial differential equations and numerical computations. The primary motivation for me going into CS was to develop intuition in certain areas which I wasn't exposed to, but became important in my new career: combinatorics, statistics, probabilistic modeling, optimization, operating/distributed systems, and computer networks to name a few. Following a masters curriculum guided me on what areas are (roughly) considered important and also brought a (forced) discipline to my studies.



        If an application of MS followed by a PhD crossed my desk, I'd laud your discipline, but also probe you why you went that route. You need to have a good answer for that.






        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        RDK is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.









        Not a direct answer to your question, but a personal experience. I got a PhD in EE and am now one semester away from finishing my masters in CS. Three years after my PhD, I changed careers from EE research to a data science. My EE PhD provided me background in linear algebra, partial differential equations and numerical computations. The primary motivation for me going into CS was to develop intuition in certain areas which I wasn't exposed to, but became important in my new career: combinatorics, statistics, probabilistic modeling, optimization, operating/distributed systems, and computer networks to name a few. Following a masters curriculum guided me on what areas are (roughly) considered important and also brought a (forced) discipline to my studies.



        If an application of MS followed by a PhD crossed my desk, I'd laud your discipline, but also probe you why you went that route. You need to have a good answer for that.







        share|improve this answer








        New contributor




        RDK is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.









        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer






        New contributor




        RDK is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.









        answered 9 hours ago









        RDK

        1311




        1311




        New contributor




        RDK is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.





        New contributor





        RDK is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.






        RDK is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.






















            feynman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            feynman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            feynman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            feynman is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















            Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f122106%2fto-do-another-masters-already-holding-a-phd%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Trompette piccolo

            Slow SSRS Report in dynamic grouping and multiple parameters

            Simon Yates (cyclisme)