masters in a different subject to bachelors?

Original post by Epoch157

This kind of stuff is already (and should be if it isn't) a part of a lot of undergraduate degrees.

But it doesn't mean it's sufficient. But it does tell you the nature of research, so yes, it's a good introduction to research.

Whilst I concur that there are huge fundamental differences between doing an undergrad degree and a PhD, I would not agree that, across the board, a Masters is crucial.

I agree.

For some subjects, yes you're right. If you've had little experience in conducting your own research at undergraduate level (all aspects of it), then a Masters will provide you with these skills. However, if (like me) you're sure that you want to study for a PhD in the same area as your undergrad degree, and you've already had some of the necessary experience, then spending a year on a Masters course really is a waste of time and money.

I agree. Especially on the bolded part.

I did an MSc once. Found out 100% of the MSc modules are from the undergraduate MEng degree. So I had to take classes with the undergraduate students and learn subjects meant for undergraduate students. The only difference is my project is 3 months longer than the MEng project. Now tell me, if this a rip-off or a money sucking scheme from the Uni!?

Please don't give me crap that the MEng == MSc. No it's not. I did a 4 year BSc and the MEng is just a collection of 4th year modules for us that did a 4 year BSc.

Original post by Craigy_Boy

I'm sorry, this is terrible and ill-informed advice, possibly the worst I've seen on here for a long time. I'm a first-year PhD student in the social sciences, so I have some idea of what I'm talking about.

Master's degrees are not primarily designed to introduce you to a new subject at all. In most cases their role is to allow you to specialise in more detail in a subject which you have already encountered (perhaps even only tangentially) at the undergraduate level, acquainting you with the more advanced debates in the field, introducing you to methodological disputes and potentially preparing you for the transition into doctoral study. Whilst it is certainly true that many post-graduate courses have flexible entrance requirements (indeed, I myself completed a master's degree in a field that was different, albeit related, to my undergraduate discipline), it is not their primary purpose to transfer people between fields, even though this may happen sometimes.

LOL! Look at my above experiance with a so called MSc degree where you called it as " their role is to allow you to specialise in more detail in a subject which you have already encountered (perhaps even only tangentially) at the undergraduate level, acquainting you with the more advanced debates in the field, introducing you to methodological disputes and potentially preparing you for the transition into doctoral study"

Owh, and by the way, I did the MSc in a top 5 Uni in the world. Some quality :rolleyes:

Master's degrees are absolutely crucial in paving the way from a bachelor's degree to doctoral study. There is a whole world of difference between doing a BA and a PhD - in fact, some people who do very well at undergrad go on to become very mediocre doctoral students, and vice versa. It's certainly true that not all students, even those who seem the brightest, possess the talents that wil enable them to make a novel and interesting contribution to their field when it comes to writing a doctoral thesis.

Your own opinion, and I disagree. Look at the above.

The master's provides you with the opportunity to test your mettle, so to speak, in terms of graduate level education. It assesses your potential to engage with the material in your subject at a higher level, and also gives you an impression of what it's like to live the life of a graduate student (not always a fairytale, I assure you), to see if it's really for you. Trust me, I knew plenty of people who intended to do PhDs, but changed their minds on the basis of their experiences as master's students, as well as others like myself who only became confident that they were capable of doing a doctorate once they had completed a taught post-graduate course before hand.

Well, that's a matter of maturity and objective. If they don't want to do the PhD after trying it, fine. Nothing's wrong with it.

There are people who did Masters but left their PhD program or failed it. So what's your point? You're generalizing too much. Some PhD candidate you are :rolleyes:

Though this may vary by field (perhaps it's different in psychology?), in my opinion going straight from an undergraduate program into a doctorate is, in most instances I would say, far from desirable. In fact, it's not always even possible, since most reputable departments would only allow exceptional candidates, those types of people with starred double firsts and very clear and well-defined research goals, to do this anyway.

Source? I have a First in a Sciences and I can go directly to a PhD which I did a couple of months ago.

Original post by Craigy_Boy

But it does mean that someone with more experience than you might be better placed to offer advice.

I smell arrogance here. Get off your high horse.

Perhaps that's what you meant, but that's not what you said. You said "one of the main reasons they exist ...", which to me sounds pretty close to talking about their primary purpose, not how they are treated by others.

One of the many reasons == MANY reasons; but just one of it; A, B, C, D ... Z can be the main reason. Choose one of it!

Primary purpose == I see it as one.

Not at the requisite level for advanced study. This is something you'll realise only with the fullness of time; undergraduate degrees (even of the most rigorous sort) really only offer you a sample of the more advanced "meta-debates" and research methodologies (and for obvious reasons - an undergraduate degree is merely an introduction into the discipline).

Source? Is this your own experience?

Since your field is psychology, a rather odd discipline that is largely social scientific but also closely related to the medical sciences, I'm not sure you are equipped to make statements "across the board". I've sort of moved between the humanities/social sciences, or have at least danced around on the border, and have a number of friends working on doctorates in both, so I feel confident that my advice holds true in most cases for them. I would, however, not seek to extend my advice to the natural sciences; certainly I know nothing about them.

And who are you to criticize a field far older then your own grandparents?

"Undergraduate research" is a different kettle of fish to doing graduate work. Even if you enter a doctoral program straight from undergraduate, it's highly likely you'll first be registered as an MPhil student and be required to take methods seminars, which would seem to suggest anyway that your prior undergraduate training is certainly not sufficient.

Source?

Perhaps, in which case you ought to have been a little more explicit about qualifying your initial advice.

Thank God I'm not ignorant. I won't listen to people like you.

***

Original post by ChemiEng

Masters degrees are not crucial if you want to do a PhD, especially in sciences and engineering. I wish people would stop propagating the crap you are.

I agree. I think people like this Craigy_Boy have this superficial, over inflated idea of what higher education should be. This guy really needs a slap to reality.

Original post by TBD

I'm sorry, this is terrible and ill-informed advice, possibly the worst I've seen on here for a long time. And all that from a first year Phd student :rolleyes:

Masters degrees are often taken to change fields eg. a subject without prospects -such as social sciences- to one that has more chance of subsequent employment, reinforce abilities or specialise in a different field.

You may not consider it to be their primary function, but unless their (the universities' ) objective is to entice all potential Masters students into a Phd then you are very much mistaken.

In the context of the first "probationary" stage of a PhD then you would have to consider whether the effort required is justified or even a distraction. Of course at many universities it is an expected Waypoint and an exit award for those who do not wish to continue.

TBD

Agree as well.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 22

Original post by ChemiEng

???

That is simply not true.

Also, aside from one or two unis within the UK, scientists and engineers are not awarded BA's, they get a BEng or BSc.

And lastly, I know loads of people that've done a 3+3 e.g. BEng + PhD. or BSc + PhD.

That is why I put an :wink:

behind that and yes they are called BEng, and? (In continental Europa, a BA is often also used as abbreviation for Bachelor, thus I am not used to be specific.)

My point was: They obviously don't consider it worth to let their students finish with an Bend/Bsc, thus when they continue to PHD they will all be fully qualified with a Master's degree.

Reply 23

Original post by Smack

As far as I am aware neither of those three universities even offer BEng degrees.

That was somehow the point I was trying to made, but my irony and sarcasm, which were part of this post, too, weren't understood.

Reply 24

username445084

13

This thread is 6 years old...

Reply 25

Original post by charlie9872

This thread is 6 years old...

This is from the 14th January of 2012:
Hey guys i was just wondering if it is advisable to do a masters in a course that is different from your bachelors degree. For instance, applying for a masters in marketing, having done psychology at an undergrad level? Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thank you! (:

Reply 26

username445084

13

Original post by Nathanielle

This is from the 14th January of 2012:
Hey guys i was just wondering if it is advisable to do a masters in a course that is different from your bachelors degree. For instance, applying for a masters in marketing, having done psychology at an undergrad level? Any advice would be greatly appreciated, thank you! (:

No... its from the 17th of Feb 2006, go and look at the OP. Some obviously posted something on the 14th without realising this.

Reply 27

catoswyn

Re: the masters first argument. Don't forget about funding! A Masters Degree that includes research training may be funded. Four year programmes are usually Masters followed by PhD in effect. The point is that it seems there are differences between different fields as the arguments on here show. There is no single answer and routes are varied.

In Social Science the ability to re-focus your studies may be greater than in some other fields. In any case you may find that during your degree some aspect or another grabs you enough to make you want to research it further via the Masters/PhD route. It is early days.

Reply 28

Original post by charlie9872

No... its from the 17th of Feb 2006, go and look at the OP. Some obviously posted something on the 14th without realising this.

Later in the thread someone posted a new closely related question on the 14th of January 2012, which I quoted.

Reply 29

Sir Fox

I'll just hijack this thread for my own related question :smile:

I have understood that it is not that difficult to go for a Master which is somehow related to your Bachelor's degree, i.e. for example the mentioned Family Work and Sociology.

I am probably going to study Psychology in Scotland (i.e. 4 years BSc). Still, I am very much interested in Politics and International Relations, so the decision has been a tight "race" between those. In the end I just found Psychology to be thrilling, the subjects I'll study are very interesting and loved the lectures I visited. Since the Scottish system allows (and requires) you to take other subjects alongside your main subject in year 1 and 2 (not just a couple of courses out of fun, but a considerable part of the degree), I've planned to almost entirely fill that modules with Politics and related stuff. Due to own experiences I am interested in working for international organisations (preferably in Africa) in the future and although Psychology is not so far off, I might want to further qualify myself by doing a Master's degree in Politics or International Relations.

Since Psychology and Politics are not really related fields, would it still be possible to enter a Master's degree in Politics with a degree in Psychology and a bunch of elective modules in Politics? A friend of my mother who lectured in Leeds also told me that if you take all of the elective modules in one subject, your official degree title will be BSc in 'Main Subject' with 'Subject of the elective modules' (the with being similar to the and in joint honours degrees), for example BSc in Psychology with Politics. Have you ever heard of this?

Reply 30

Sir Fox

I also might to be able to add something to the original question from 2006 :biggrin:

In Australia universities distinguish between ordinary Bachelor's degrees (i.e. 3 years) and "Honours Degrees", the word "honours" having nothing to do with grading but meaning that the cours lasts for 4 years, like Scottish degrees. These are meant to provide a better grounding in research and therefore enable you to skip the Master's degree and directly start a PhD.

Reply 31

kka25

Original post by Sir Fox

I also might to be able to add something to the original question from 2006 :biggrin:

In Australia universities distinguish between ordinary Bachelor's degrees (i.e. 3 years) and "Honours Degrees", the word "honours" having nothing to do with grading but meaning that the cours lasts for 4 years, like Scottish degrees. These are meant to provide a better grounding in research and therefore enable you to skip the Master's degree and directly start a PhD.

So a 3 year BENG wouldn't be good enough for them?

Reply 32

Sir Fox

Original post by kka25

So a 3 year BENG wouldn't be good enough for them?

It took me some time to figure out what a "BENG" actually is, sounded more like a comic sound effect :biggrin:

Well, here you have some Wikipedia information about Bachelor's degrees in Australia.

I don't really know what you mean by "good enough for them", Australians would consider a 3 year degree to be exactly as good as their own Bachelor's degrees, since the 4 year Bachelor is a rather uncommon route for people who know that they want to go into research, thus the degree enables them to skip the Master.

So no, Australians would not look down on your degree, but you would also not be able to directly rush to a PhD after that.

Reply 33

MasterMcIntosh

Hello, I was wondering, can you take a masters in a different subject to your first degree? I have recently graduated from the Glasgow School of Art with a Masters of European Design in Product Design. Throughout my course I felt a strong bond towards Architecture. I was wondering if I could apply to Masters level in Architecture with my MEDes in Product Design? If so... How long will the postgraduate take for Architecture? I am aware that Undergraduates take on average 7 years to complete their degree.

Reply 34

Suubi

Yes you can I did a B.A in Philosophy and this September im studying a
masters in social research. I want to work for a think tank so I need a qualification and some experience of research methodology. I volunteered at a local charity which was undertaking a qualitative research project. The experience I gained plus the reference they provided on my application was invaluable.

Reply 35