It really depends on what's typical for your program. My masters program admitted two students who went straight through and fourteen of us with experience. You could easily tell who had "real-world experience" and who could add to discussions. They were also the last two to find jobs upon graduation. They, like the poster above, received two degrees in two years (gotta love the one-year Masters) but they had no job experience to speak of in interviews aside from their assistantship.

thats the thing im worried about...my prof has been pushing me to apply for a phd program (im about to get my ba) instead of a masters bc they are more likely to pay for you to go to school and give a stipend if you are getting your phd...but that means i wont get the "real world" work exp.

yea...ive seen a number of programs that are like this at least in the history and sociology fields...

She probably is doing a BS/MS program or something similar.

From what I hear, it's actually not that uncommon. Quite a few holders of masters degrees actually got them in the process of doing a doctorate.

I took off 3 years between undergrad and law school. I wish I could have started law school earlier, but it worked out better money-wise in that I could save money to pay for my law degree.

This is my story too, and I feel that I definitely was able to better appreciate the whole experience because of my time off.

Of course, when I took my time off, I knew that I would be going back the following year. Part of the trick for me was to not create a lifestyle that would be difficult to maintain once I was in graduate school full time. I had heard from a few friends that doing so can create a trap, i. e. you can't go back to school because you now have a lifestyle that you have to maintain. I didn't go out a rent a really fancy apartment; I didn't buy a big expensive car; I didn't run up credit card debt (marriage and children can factor into this too). So when I transitioned back to a full-time graduate student, with a graduate student's stipend, I was still able to live rather comfortably.

For me, I figured it was best to go ahead and get my degree while I was young and unfettered, and so I knew that I was not taking more than a year off. However, as others have said, you have to weigh it out, consider yourself and your personality, and decide whether the time off will be a deterrent or the boost that you need to be successful in a graduate program.

thats a really smart idea...thats something im trying to keep in mind especially since i know im a bit irresponsible with money

I know this is typical for Clinical Psychology. When I started my first Master's program, I hadn't done my research well and found out afterward that my school didn't have a PhD program and any of the PhD programs in the area were going to make me essentially re-do my whole Masters if I went for the PhD. My daughter came along unexpectedly so it all became a moot point, but I was NOT happy initially when I found out I couldn't just go do a PhD later at some point.

It's literally a fully year, not just an academic year - we take two summer sessions (one with 2 classes, one with 3), 4 classes in the fall semester, two of which have a fieldwork portion, a winter session course w/field work, and a spring semester w/ 1 class and student teaching. So it's a jam-packed, stressful year, but in the end less expensive then doing it over two years (which they do also offer).

It's not a BA/MA program, unfortunately - none of my undergrad classes will apply to the MA (even though I took some education classes, bah!). As for doing it in one year straight through w/no "real-world experience" - in a lot of fields, that's a problem. It'd be a HUGE problem if I was going into a program in my field of undergrad study, anthropology. For education, though, it's not so much of a big deal - you get the 'hands on experience' through student teaching and they don't expect much experience outside of that (although I am hoping to start subbing as a senior in college, for the experience, the foot in the door and the extra cash!).

I think taking time off between undergrad and grad school is a personal choice and really depends on what you want to do and how you feel. If you're burnt out, not quite sure what program you want to go to, or aren't in a financial situation to start grad school, taking time off may be the best bet. However, if you plan to go to grad school, remember that most take into account what you did during the time you were away (it's not a huge factor, but I believe it carries some weight when they look at your application). I personally took time off after school since I didn't know what I wanted to do, and now I'm working for a start up and I love it.

Also, just to give you some motivation, my friend from high school graduated with a Poli. Sci. degree and decided to take two years off. In that time, she worked in the justice system, got experience, and took her LSATs. She applied last year, and is now a law student at Univ. of Washington (her first choice school). She's also a SK :)

I think you also need to consider what type of graduate education you want to pursue. From what I learned, PhD programs are geared towards research, theoretical learning, and higher education positions such as being a professor. Masters programs are geared towards real-world experience, and prepare you for positions in for-profit (and non-profit) companies (rather than universities). You shouldn't go for a PhD just because of the money... also, grad. student stipends can include teaching or research assistant positions during your education that are required.

I was one of those people who went straight through to graduate school after undergrad. I wish I had taken some time off.

Why did I go straight through? For one, I thought the economy was pretty bad my senior year in college, and knew that I might have a hard time finding a job period, let alone in my field. Secondly, I listened to my father, who insisted that going straight through would be the best option. Third, I knew a Master's would be the only way I could be taken seriously in my field.

My graduate program is essentially a cash cow with a high acceptance rate and I didn't see it as being especially challenging. In some ways, I found my HS curriculum to be more intellectually rigorous! My classmates were, for the most part, nowhere near as prepared for graduate work as I had expected. Even though I had taken similar classes and had a lot of work experience, they wouldn't let us place out of any of the classes. As a result, for most of the first year, I ended up being bored out of my gourd. I was pretty burnt out after four years of college, and twelve years of hard work in order to get into college. So, I was not nearly engaged as I thought I would have been, but if I had actually worked in the field for a year or two, I would have been even more disenchanted with the experience.

Luckily, I had worked during summers and semesters in my field, so although I ended up going straight through, I had more experience than most of my classmates, even those a few years older than I am. I was one of the first people to have a job; I also had no problem getting an internship (which was required during the summer). Finding subsequent jobs hasn't proved to be a problem, either.

So, the decision to take time off, or go straight through, is a really personal decision. I would recommend, though, that you find out how necessary a Master's is in your field before charging right through. In some fields, experience is more valuable.

Being burnt out is just one of a few factors of deciding to take a year off. A semi-major reason that has me leaning toward taking a year off is that if I were to go straight through to grad school I would be dealing with three major life changes [ being alone in a new city, being newly married to someone who is in the military and overseas, and dealing with the demands of being a 1st year law student] at roughly the same time.

As far as work, ideally I would prefer to just volunteer or canvass for some political issue that I'm passionate about since positions like that are designed to be short term anyway.

Thanks for all the feedback, while it is a personal decision, it's great to hear about the experience of others.

Ditto. I just graduated (December 2009) with my Master's and I'm going back for my PhD in Fall 2010. So I get 8 months. I took no time off after undergrad. This wasn't originally in the plan, but I'm glad it worked out this way. I'm burnt out after my MA and I think having 8 months off will help me be fresh and focused when I start again. Even though I need this recooperation time now, I don't regret going straight through after undergrad (though I do regret the school I chose).

I was always afraid to take a year off, thinking I might not go back. But honestly, it depends on you. If you want this degree, you'll do your best to go back no matter what's come up or how long it's been. There may be things in your life that make it seem impossible, but you'll either work around them or wait till you're in a better place.

I didn't take any time off, and I'm tired. I wish that I could just go home & relax after work, but I always have something to do for class. I have 6 credit hours left, and cannot wait until I'm finished!

I think it really depends on if you plan to work while you're in grad school. If not, then time off may not necessarily be needed. If you will work, I suggest a break.

You may have already stated this; I did not read all of the 2nd page of the thread.