[to_ni]

(Original post by *Corinna*)
Would you be Ok with option No3? You'd still have Cambridge in your CV and a PhD from a less well known uni. Option No2 is of course the worst one and it's not that unlikely to happen. However, if you apply to many unis for your PhD then you have a decent chance to get funding from somewhere, even if it's not your top choice.
You have to decide whether the name of Cambridge is worth the risk of not doing a PhD. No one can tell you that a scholarship from cam for your masters guarantees one for your PhD. I had funding from Oxford for my masters but didn't get anything for my PhD. But admittedly it does put you in a good position. I managed to secure partial funding from a London uni and full funding from Cambridge and I believe my previous funding from Oxford was a massive help in securing that.

Hi,

I could live with option No. 3. I mean I should be able to secure funding anywhere else in the world. However, I am wondering whether the Cambridge Mphil + the scholarship I got to do it on the CV will count, when doing a PhD, let´s say, in Germany afterwards. Will companies look differently on my application even if it´s ´only´a Mphil degree from Cambridge? Does it really matter that I have been there that much???

M main concern with the Mphil is that I won´t be able to publish my research project since it seems to me that it´s only 3-4 month of research. In fact my Master´s thesis lasted nearly two years and we were able to publish my work in a renowned journal. So it maybe would be a disadvantage to do the Mphil with regards to the comparably small research dissertation I will carry out.

Regards

toni

[to_ni]

(Original post by Cora Lindsay)
In technical areas of industry, people will be well aware which supervisors and groups are doing good work, wherever they are. If you really change direction and go into something non-technical, Cambridge could give you an edge, though I am not convinced it would be a massive one over UCL.

So you would say my supervisor at Cambridge is just posing? I am just shocked that he went to ICL, which is a great institution and is saying that it´s meaningless outside the UK... I am from abroad and thus, I can´t rely on the prestige UCL and ICL are having in the UK. Although I knew that ICL is a good institution. ON the other hand I wasn´t aware that UCL is that good in science since it is ´only´ranked 30th (as far as I can remember) in physics.

[Observatory]

(Original post by to_ni)
Do you think it´s dumb to turn down a fully funded PhD at UCL for a fees-only funded Master at Cambridge. I am coming from a science related field (Physics/Chemistry).

Yes.

[to_ni]

(Original post by py0alb)
There is no point in doing a physics PhD if you don't intend to take a highly technical job, and the kind of people who interview you for highly technical jobs are not stupid. They will not go "OMG Cambridge!!! Hire dis guy, he must be a jenious" They will almost certainly have PhDs themselves and therefore understand that PhDs from Cambridge are no better than PhDs from any other reputable physics department.

But isn´t it true that most big companies hire recruitment companies who select candidates beforehand? I guess that this people aren´t physicists and so the name of Cambridge could be an advantage to secure a place on the short list for a job, right?

[Nichrome]

(Original post by to_ni)
But isn´t it true that most big companies hire recruitment companies who select candidates beforehand? I guess that this people aren´t physicists and so the name of Cambridge could be an advantage to secure a place on the short list for a job, right?

That may be true for your bog standard graduate job, but for a highly technical job type that requires a PhD in Physics, the people selecting you are much more likely to be much more versed in your subject with a PhD themselves (as Pyoalb said). In this case, it really won't matter in the slightest where your PhD is from, what will matter is the topic and quality of your research, and supervisor references.

If you're hoping to go for an academic/industrial job, for gods sake just take the UCL offer. The Cambridge guy is talking crap.

[Cora Lindsay]

(Original post by to_ni)
So you would say my supervisor at Cambridge is just posing?

Yes, completely.

(Original post by to_ni)
I am from abroad and thus, I can´t rely on the prestige UCL and ICL are having in the UK. Although I knew that ICL is a good institution. ON the other hand I wasn´t aware that UCL is that good in science since it is ´only´ranked 30th (as far as I can remember) in physics.

If you see yourself following a technical career, institutional 'prestige' matters far less than that of the supervisor for whom you did your PhD. Personally, I wouldn't touch the Cambridge Masters with a bargepole if the alternative is a reasonably interesting funded PhD at UCL.

[*Corinna*]

(Original post by py0alb)
There is no point in doing a physics PhD if you don't intend to take a highly technical job, and the kind of people who interview you for highly technical jobs are not stupid. They will not go "OMG Cambridge!!! Hire dis guy, he must be a jenious" They will almost certainly have PhDs themselves and therefore understand that PhDs from Cambridge are no better than PhDs from any other reputable physics department.

The OP is not British though. Outside Britain and perhaps the US, I am not convinced that everyone really knows how to evaluate a PhD other than the name of the institution. Anyway, I cannot speak about all countries, but I can say for sure that for my country most people are educated in that country and all they know about foreign universities are the big names. Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, Princeton.

[Cora Lindsay]

(Original post by to_ni)
But isn´t it true that most big companies hire recruitment companies who select candidates beforehand? I guess that this people aren´t physicists and so the name of Cambridge could be an advantage to secure a place on the short list for a job, right?

Not for specialist jobs. What is the point of paying a recruitment agency a large sum of money if they don't know where to look for appropriate candidates and miss or discard entirely suitable applicants because of some stupid prejudice about an address?

[Cora Lindsay]

(Original post by *Corinna*)
The OP is not British though. Outside Britain and perhaps the US, I am not convinced that everyone really knows how to evaluate a PhD other than the name of the institution. Anyway, I cannot speak about all countries, but I can say for sure that for my country most people are educated in that country and all they know about foreign universities are the big names. Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, Princeton.

But the OP is quite clear about following a technical career. Are you sure that overseas physicists have no idea about the quality of PhDs from UCL's or Imperial's Physics departments? OP's application will not be assessed by non-specialists who, I entirely agree, might not understand the subtleties.

[Cora Lindsay]

(Original post by Nichrome)
If you're hoping to go for an academic/industrial job, for gods sake just take the UCL offer. The Cambridge guy is talking crap.

[to_ni]

(Original post by *Corinna*)
The OP is not British though. Outside Britain and perhaps the US, I am not convinced that everyone really knows how to evaluate a PhD other than the name of the institution. Anyway, I cannot speak about all countries, but I can say for sure that for my country most people are educated in that country and all they know about foreign universities are the big names. Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, Princeton.

I think it´s exactly the same for Switzerland. I really don´t know why but even my Master´s supervisor here only knew about Oxbridge and ICL. He has heard of UCL though but just like he knows about LMU Munich.

Isn´t that sad? Why is this????

[Flip1]

Both of them are great institutions. It depends on what qualification would be most useful for your future.

[to_ni]

(Original post by Cora Lindsay)

OK, so you guys think that even if I am aiming for a career as a technical manager or the like, it´s enough to have a good PhD from UCL rather than a MPhil from the big name Uni of Cambridge, right?

I truly hope that´s true because I am afraid that the ugly truth is the opposite.
As far as I have experienced it here in Switzerland you only get the WOW effect if you come from a very prestigious UNI like Oxbridge or ETH Zürich here in my hometown. And that also applies to academics I know.

[to_ni]

(Original post by Flip1)
Both of them are great institutions. It depends on what qualification would be most useful for your future.

The problem is I am not quite sure yet. ATM I feel like I want to go to industry because I made very disappointing experiences during my Master´s time in Switzerland. Including things like not being the first author of my own work which was publishes in a renowned journal and the like of such bad things....

[*Corinna*]

(Original post by Cora Lindsay)
But the OP is quite clear about following a technical career. Are you sure that overseas physicists have no idea about the quality of PhDs from UCL's or Imperial's Physics departments? OP's application will not be assessed by non-specialists who, I entirely agree, might not understand the subtleties.

I think if he stays within the field of physics then they would know, but if he decides (or is forced) to leave the field altogether and go work in a more or less unrelated field (or even a related one that is not as research based, say for example if he wants to teach physics at a school...) then the name will matter more.
The reason I tend to side with the OP in wanting the Cambridge MPhil is because coming from another country I know what a DRAMATIC difference there is in public opinion between Cambridge and UCL. I do not applaud the situation, just to clarify, but it's as it is. If the OP is certain about managing to stay in the research side of things then UCL is the safest choice. But for anything less than that, for any job where PhD is not a requirement, I'd be very reluctant to reject a (partially funded -let's not forget that! That's still better than most masters students-) Cambridge offer. If financial aspects are not as crucial in the OP's decision and he could still afford the maintenance for the one year at Cambridge, then considering to accept it is in my opinion understandable. As long as he is ready to face the fact that in order to secure funding he will have to apply to many, many instructions for his PhD, and that he always faces the chance of ending up with nothing. One thing that the OP might consider is the US. Since PhDs there are almost always funded, and since the funded Cambridge masters will give him a fair advantage, and since there are so many good institutions in the US.

[Dirac Delta Function]

people will judge you on your background - be in no doubt about that. However, regardless of reputation of uni, the overriding factor in your success will be what you can do.

[*Corinna*]

(Original post by to_ni)
I think it´s exactly the same for Switzerland. I really don´t know why but even my Master´s supervisor here only knew about Oxbridge and ICL. He has heard of UCL though but just like he knows about LMU Munich.

Isn´t that sad? Why is this????

I don't know why that is, but it's a fact. The problem is that you are asking in a British forum and most people here are obviously only aware of things within the UK and I've noticed that they are generally very reluctant to accept that many amazing unis in the UK are just not recognized outside the country.
It is indeed a terrible thing that our academics/employers are so unaware of the reality of the academic situation in the world. It's insane that a university like UCL is not considered nearly as good as Oxbridge. But as citizens of these countries we must unfortunately comply and play by their rules if we want to maximize our chances of finding a job.
My professors back at my university were also very dismissive about great UK unis like KCL and UCL and they used to tell me if I can't stay at Oxbridge to go to the US...what can I say...it's just how things are.

[Cora Lindsay]

(Original post by to_ni)
OK, so you guys think that even if I am aiming for a career as a technical manager or the like, it´s enough to have a good PhD from UCL rather than a MPhil from the big name Uni of Cambridge, right?

To my mind, a PhD is essential if you want a senior technical role. I do a good deal of work with major industries in the UK and overseas, and almost everyone in a senior position has a PhD. The only exceptions are people who have 20 years or more experience in the industry.

[Dirac Delta Function]

(Original post by *Corinna*)
I don't know why that is, but it's a fact. The problem is that you are asking in a British forum and most people here are obviously only aware of things within the UK and I've noticed that they are generally very reluctant to accept that many amazing unis in the UK are just not recognized outside the country.
It is indeed a terrible thing that our academics/employers are so unaware of the reality of the academic situation in the world. It's insane that a university like UCL is not considered nearly as good as Oxbridge. But as citizens of these countries we must unfortunately comply and play by their rules if we want to maximize our chances of finding a job.
My professors back at my university were also very dismissive about great UK unis like KCL and UCL and they used to tell me if I can't stay at Oxbridge to go to the US...what can I say...it's just how things are.

yeh I agree. If you want to play the reputation game, it's either Oxbridge, LSE or go to the US.

Fact is, there are great places like ETH Zurich that people don't know about. Reputation and quality don't always go hand-in-hand.

[Fresh Prince of]

Interesting