phd at LSE or ma at Columbia?

[uccio82]

Hi there, I need some counseling here...I got in a phd at the LSE and to the MA only at Columbia (both political science). Many have told me that US phds are better because they have more money and they supervise you much better. So my goal would be to go to a top ten us grad. This year I was rejected from all top schools but the lse and I would like to try again. Should I go for first year phd at the LSE and then seek to transfer or go for the MA at Columbia and reapply next year?

My profile:
International student
toefl ibt 113
gre quant 760
gre verbal 600
undergrad gpa 3.96/4
undergrad gpa major 4/4
Msc at the LSE with merit but won department prize for the best dissertation


any advise welcomed
thanks

[Demisel]

Since your goal is a top-10 US program, you might as well go to Columbia now. I doubt that their MAO program is better than LSE's PhD program (first year) in terms of educational quality, but you'll be leaving after a year anyway, and faculty members might be more willing to write a recommendation letter for a Master's student going on PhD rather than a PhD student transferring to another PhD program. I don't imagine that getting into Columbia's PhD program from their MAO program would be too hard either, although I could be wrong.

[sikaba]

I suggest that the Phd is a good idea. Two years ago I spurned an offer to read a Phd in Europe and instead opted to do a Masters in the USA, hoping to read a Phd later. My experience has been that, it is not automatic that you will get into a Phd program after your masters. There are so many factors: funding, the type of faculty available to supervise you, etc that could thwart your advancement to the Phd. In your case, LSE is a top school. If you want to be known in US academic circles, one word is the key: publish. By presenting your work in US journals, academia will hear of you. To sum up, getting into the Columbia Phd is not guaranteed. Do you want to take a chance?