The Student Room Group

Do you have to do a Masters degree before you do a Phd?

Hi, I was just wondering if you have to do a masters degree before you can do a Phd?

Thanks.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
No.
Reply 2
No, you don't have to.
Reply 3
What's the difference?
Reply 4
Technically, no, but it could be in more practical terms that the answer is yes.

There is a big diffference between subjects. It seems to be the case that scientists sometimes can go straight from BSc to PhD, whereas humanities students have to take the BA, MA, PhD route. I have a friend who at this second is applying for a PhD and he doesn't have a master's degree, he's a biologist. My ultimate goal is a PhD too, but I'm currently applying for a master's because PhDs are simply too competitive and underfunded in the humanities to possibly be considered without a master's (in my experience).

A few decades ago, skipping the master's was fairly common. It seems to be increasingly important, as they wish to see evidence that you have previous experience in research. My supervisor even snorted at the idea of (in humanities) applying for an MPhil without having an MA first.
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 5
Original post by Craig_D
My supervisor even snorted at the idea of (in humanities) applying for an MPhil without having an MA first.


Why would you want an MPhil after an MA anyway? Please excuse my ignorance! But why wouldn't you do BA -> MA -> PhD (or BA -> MPhil -> PhD)?
Reply 6
Not in the sciences, although doing a 4 year undergraduate course (MSci) will generally help your application.

The 3 things that will really help your PhD application are a) grades, b) research experience, and c) letters of recommendation. With a BSc you will generally only have a), since you probably wont have done many research projects (which means your letters of recommendation may be a bit generic). Doing an MSci or MSc gives you experience working on a large scale project, which can help. But on the other hand, if you can do summer research experience as part of a BSc (or have research experience in industry), that will significantly enhance your application too.
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 7
Original post by Pryda
Why would you want an MPhil after an MA anyway? Please excuse my ignorance! But why wouldn't you do BA -> MA -> PhD (or BA -> MPhil -> PhD)?


It's rare to want to do that I agree, but I've heard of people who considered the PhD too long, too expensive and too much work, and felt that that the MPhil would be a high enough degree to get the job they want. As far as I've been told, the MPhil (like the PhD) is so competitive (especially with regards to funding) that getting accepted without having an MA first is next to impossible!

To make things even more bizarre, at my university (and I think in all probability a lot of others too) in humanities they never accept people straight onto the PhD course, they put you onto the MPhil course first, and after a year they analyse the progress of your research and, if it's progressing well, they then upgrade you to the PhD course. This system is designed because they found that a lot of people on the PhD course weren't capable of the work, and they ended up leaving with nothing, this way those people now stay on the MPhil course and get that instead. All that said, it does mean that the current recommended route to a humanities PhD (in my department at least) is BA -> MA -> MPhil ^ PhD. (I've decided that ^ means upgraded to :lol:). That makes things even worse for those who already have an MPhil and then want a PhD, as that means their path would have to be BA -> MA -> MPhil -> MPhil ^ PhD. And to think, my friend in biology is simply doing BSc -> PhD.
Reply 8
I have a masters degree and going to start my phd soon in engineering. I would say it is really beneficial to do a masters before a phd as many of my colleagues have. The masters degree prepares u for the phd. The level of difference between phd and bachelors degree is too much
Reply 9
Original post by Craig_D
It's rare to want to do that I agree, but I've heard of people who considered the PhD too long, too expensive and too much work, and felt that that the MPhil would be a high enough degree to get the job they want. As far as I've been told, the MPhil (like the PhD) is so competitive (especially with regards to funding) that getting accepted without having an MA first is next to impossible!

To make things even more bizarre, at my university (and I think in all probability a lot of others too) in humanities they never accept people straight onto the PhD course, they put you onto the MPhil course first, and after a year they analyse the progress of your research and, if it's progressing well, they then upgrade you to the PhD course. This system is designed because they found that a lot of people on the PhD course weren't capable of the work, and they ended up leaving with nothing, this way those people now stay on the MPhil course and get that instead. All that said, it does mean that the current recommended route to a humanities PhD (in my department at least) is BA -> MA -> MPhil ^ PhD. (I've decided that ^ means upgraded to :lol:). That makes things even worse for those who already have an MPhil and then want a PhD, as that means their path would have to be BA -> MA -> MPhil -> MPhil ^ PhD. And to think, my friend in biology is simply doing BSc -> PhD.


Thank you for the detailed explanation, Craig. The thought of "BA -> MA -> MPhil -> MPhil ^ PhD" is sickening! So you start the BA when you about 18 and finish the PhD just before retirement!? I'm in criminology and criminal justice and will hopefully be going from BSc to PhD (only applied to 1 university), but with a year of industry research experience in the middle (I couldn't cough up £6k for an MSc :frown:) -- but I'm quite worried about funding because an MSc is worth more than a year's research experience. Going off on a tangent now, but thanks!
No. My friend at Manchester University went from a Bachelor's in chemistry to a doctorate in the same subject. He graduated with first-class honours.
Reply 11
Original post by philistine
No. My friend at Manchester University went from a Bachelor's in chemistry to a doctorate in the same subject. He graduated with first-class honours.

He must have had a tough time in his Phd studies i think
Original post by Stano123
Hi, I was just wondering if you have to do a masters degree before you can do a Phd?

Thanks.


Depends on university, applicant, supervisors requirements from PhD students and funding options.

Some have managed to jump from undergraduate straight to PhD due to outstanding undergraduate marks, so no.

For my PhD scholarship, I needed an MSc in Research Methods accredited by the ESRC to be eligible to apply, so I needed an MSc.

Some departments and supervisors insist on MScs, although others don't!

I had 2 MScs prior to my PhD, but I think I'm a rare exception.
Reply 13
Original post by addh
He must have had a tough time in his Phd studies i think


Why?

I'm the same. First class bachelor's in Engineering, then straight into a PhD. Not finding it any more difficult than the other guys who started alongside me who had masters degrees and some industrial experience as well...

In fact, I'm doing better than them in some respects, especially as I'm also a decade their junior.

In short, the answer is that very few PhD positions officially require a Masters degree to be considered for admission to the programme.

In practical terms, people who do masters degrees probably have more success in getting the positions than those who don't, simply because their CV includes more experience, etc.

However, if you leave with a decent degree and have other impressive things to include on your CV, then there's no reason why you can't get a PhD position straight after your undergraduate degree.
No you don't. The requirement for most PhDs is a 2.1 bachelor's degree. I agree that people without one may struggle to get a position/funding because of competition.

I do also have to say that doing a PhD is not only about being good at your subject. There are also a lot of personal attributes that are required in order to get through the process of doing a PhD which one may have with or without having a masters degree.

In my field you could make up for not having a masters degree by getting lots of research experience and maybe getting yourself published. I went straight from my undergrad degree into a PhD. I don't think a masters degree would have helped me academically but it may have been easier for me to get a PhD position if I had one.
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 15
Original post by oo00oo
Why?

I'm the same. First class bachelor's in Engineering, then straight into a PhD. Not finding it any more difficult than the other guys who started alongside me who had masters degrees and some industrial experience as well...

In fact, I'm doing better than them in some respects, especially as I'm also a decade their junior.

In short, the answer is that very few PhD positions officially require a Masters degree to be considered for admission to the programme.

In practical terms, people who do masters degrees probably have more success in getting the positions than those who don't, simply because their CV includes more experience, etc.

However, if you leave with a decent degree and have other impressive things to include on your CV, then there's no reason why you can't get a PhD position straight after your undergraduate degree.


The PhD degree is really meant to be a 3rd level of degree. I trust u must b doing well in ur Phd. Naturally if one skips the masters step then they loose that element of knowledge. So u might not find it tough but u might have found it easier if u had the masters. Just my opinion.
Reply 16
Original post by addh
The PhD degree is really meant to be a 3rd level of degree. I trust u must b doing well in ur Phd. Naturally if one skips the masters step then they loose that element of knowledge. So u might not find it tough but u might have found it easier if u had the masters. Just my opinion.


Well, as I pointed out already, there are PhD students who started alongside me with masters degrees and industrial experience and I am not noticing any significant differences between us in terms of how well we are doing.

I don't know where you got the idea that the PhD is somehow intended to be a 3rd level of degree, and that it is somehow nominal to go up through each level consecutively. I've never been made aware of this by anybody I've spoken to.

I sought advice from a wide variety of academics before I decided to leave with a bachelors to begin a PhD, and they all had generally the same advice - that there's no reason why a bright pupil can't go from bachelors to PhD with ease, and that although a Masters degree can be helpful to a PhD candidate, it is not necessary nor is it a hindrance NOT to have it.

I don't regret not doing a Masters. I'm 22 and will have a PhD aged 25, which is quite a young age for it... which means I'll be reaping the benefits of the PhD for a lot longer than most of my peers. So even if the PhD WAS tougher without the experience of a Masters degree, I think the benefits associated with removing that additional year of study and getting into the job market quicker far outweigh the increased difficulties one might come across.
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 17
Original post by oo00oo


I don't regret not doing a Masters. I'm 22 and will have a PhD aged 25, which is quite a young age for it...


Interesting, seeing as your profile says you are 28. (Then again you have also claimed to be male on other threads despite the female gender symbol.)
Original post by oo00oo


I don't regret not doing a Masters. I'm 22 and will have a PhD aged 25, which is quite a young age for it... which means I'll be reaping the benefits of the PhD for a lot longer than most of my peers. So even if the PhD WAS tougher without the experience of a Masters degree, I think the benefits associated with removing that additional year of study and getting into the job market quicker far outweigh the increased difficulties one might come across.


Wow, impressive! I'll be 31 when I finish my PhD (assuming my examiners accept my thesis corrections following my viva last year) and hopefully be around 33 when I complete my current practitioner training/professional doctorate.

Most people in my department seem to be in their late 20s to mid 30s on completing a PhD. Best of luck with your PhD oo00oo :smile:

I needed my MScs in order to obtain PhD funding and progress onto practitioner training, so all in all, depends on career paths and to some extent, the candidates academic profile etc.

However, I've met someone who completed a BSc in Psychology (with a first class honours), an MSc in Research Methods in Psychology, a PhD and a Doctorate in Clinical Psychology all by the age of 30 (Yikes!).
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 19
Original post by sj27
Interesting, seeing as your profile says you are 28. (Then again you have also claimed to be male on other threads despite the female gender symbol.)


I'm a 22 year old male. My profile is full of nonsense to retain anonymity.

Quick Reply

Latest