What percentage of B&M doctoral programs offer fellowships?

The title says it all. I was reading a thread on a different forum where a couple people were saying that a PhD you pay for can only be gotten by a school that doesn't respect you. And that it is always better to choose the lesser university that will give you a fellowship than the better university that will make you pay. Further, they said that a PhD you pay for is the equivalent of buying a degree rather than earning one.

Thoughts on this or the title question?

 

Opening statement: Every B&M doctoral program I've looked at has had some combination of stipend and fellowship opportunity but I think I'd want to clarify something based on my understanding:

A stipend assumes that you're a student that will be doing TA work.
A fellowship assumes that you're a student that may very well be lecturing or fully running courses.

Now granted that's probably just semantics but I've also seen programs that will guarantee a stipend but not a fellowship, I've seen programs that call it one thing and some that call it the other and it means exactly the same thing. I've also seen programs that take applicants and don't guarantee either but offer either/both to quality candidates.

Of course I have an opinion about the "degree you pay for" statement. It is that the people making those statements are a-holes if they're speaking about the person with the degree. I'd be stating that regardless of whether or not I was pro or against distance ed where tuition is paid.

Why? it's called ethics.

Is there any reason why someone who chose to give up potential earnings to work on a stipend and eventually get a PhD, needs to belittle someone who chose to work full-time and get the same credential? No, there isn't. It's petty.

Assuming of course that they're not backhanding the degree instead of the person. I'll fully support the fact that a B&M doctorate from a good school is better than an online doctorate from a good school when the academic job hunt is considered.. then I'd not have an argument.

 

Who is "they" and why listen to "them"? Your posts are always good for a laugh - thanks.

 

I said who "they" were and I didn't listen to "them". Do you know where you are right now? Should I call an EMT?

 

You said, "...I was reading a thread on a different forum where a couple people were saying..." This is who "they" are? A couple of people? Why don't you just say "they" also say the moon landing never happened. Where did you say you did not listen to them? I must have missed that part. Again, you are always a good laugh.

 

Very true. Whoever was the OP got it backwards. At a "better" school, there is almost always funding available for grad students, even at the masters level. You just have to make it in. Not so much at a "lesser" school.

Typically, with an "assitantship" (or stipend), a grad student is required to perform research or TA work. A "fellowship" is like a scholarship and is harder to get. Schools vary, but generally there is no work requirement. You just have to show up and be making progress in your program.

No one should ever pay out of pocket for a PhD. Get an assitantship, fellowship, or use an employers tuition reimbursement program. It just blows my mind the outrageous debt people are racking up to do a for-profit online program.

 

If I directed you to their authorized biographies, how would that information change anything? Who "they" are is of absolutely no consequence: the questions stand on their own. Why are you being hyper-defensive?

I didn't say I did not listen to them, but I also didn't say that I did. Why would you presume I would? Odd. Your whole reactionary response is odd.

...

 

Interesting. It seems like the demand for PhDs outweighs the supply of assistantships/fellowships/stipends, particularly when it comes to online PhDs. So, in your opinion, you think there is never a ROI for a PhD that isn't supported by external funding.

 

I was not reactionary or hyper-defensive. I asked a question - Who is "they" and why listen to "them"? I prefer to understand the background and position of the information I am reading. If Steven Hawking provided a theory about space travel and future predicts of the rotation of the earth wouldn't you be more inclined to listen then if Miss Cleo said something along the same lines? I would think who "they" are is of absolute consequence. Anyway, I think this exchange has run its course.

 

Randell brings up a good point.

- The OP likely wants general opinions unaffected by popularity or relationships between posters here and posters on the other board.

- Randell likely realizes that by offering an opinion openly with his name on it on a forum, the OP could likely use some of these posts on the other forum as a defense to whatever argument he's making, thus muddying other people.

I don't necessarily give two cents about the Hawking vs. Cleo argument as the point of the academy is to argue regardless of personality.. but I do think we all need to be careful answering open-ended questions without clarity for fear of being misconstrued via the Interwebs.

 

That's an interesting, albeit a little paranoid, perspective but certainly not a point Randell was making, at least not explicitly.

This is private forum with public access, and what you say here can be used and misused by users of other forums. If you felt somehow endangered or threatened responding to this thread, I would recommend not responding. That would be a little paranoid though, like I said.

 

If Miss Cleo published a theory about space travel in a respectable peer reviewed journal, I think it would be worth a listen, don't you? Arguing from authority is a classic fallacy of faulty induction.

 

Absolutely, that is why I asked who said it, maybe I should have asked "where" it was said also.

 

Did you have anything to add to the conversation at hand or were you just in here to be reactionary and disruptive?

 

nothing to add - I am done.

 

Thanks for dropping by.

 

Eh, I agree it sounds paranoid, but I know the attention span of the average person and feel I've got a good handle on the average person's ethical compass and tendencies; especially where the Internet is concerned.

Of course you may be exceptional in both cases. No ill will meant.

 

He will not be replying for a while.