Courses similar to physical natural science ?

Which courses are similar to physical natsci at Cambridge where you can take variety of sciences in first the gradually specialise later on ?
I've also liked the thought of taking biological modules such as work similar to neuroscience. I know many scottish and american university operate via this system of later specialisation. I like that the cambridge course is also accredited by a variety of societies i.e bps, rsc,rsb but I can't get in due to my grades. Also I'd like to graduate with a degree title that says what I specialised in rather than natural science bsc since it would be too vague.
I'm interested in a variety of chemical sciences and psychology topics but would like to start studying before committing to a science speciality. I hope to go into research in the future.
Would these degrees allow me for further study at master's level in a specific area of what I specialised in ?
Thanks for helping !

Reply 1

Theloniouss

Universities Forum Helper

Any natural sciences degree would be a bit similar. Unfortunately, Cambridge's course is pretty unique so you'll have no luck finding anything the exact same. I don't really see why your degree title is especially important when you can just say what you specialised in.

Reply 2

Luminayala

Original post by Theloniouss

Would employers view someone who has a natsci back different from chemistry bsc or physics bsc. Also would having a natsci degree restrict you in the options of master's degree you can apply to. Say would a person you had a straight chemistry degree have the same master's options available to them as someone who has a degree in natsci specialising in chemistry ?
I'd really like to go into research but I just don't want to pigeonhole myself into one science when I'm not sure.
I hope I worded question correctly

(edited 3 years ago)

Reply 3

Theloniouss

Universities Forum Helper

Original post by Luminayala

It depends what modules you choose (and are offered), but you should theoretically be able to do the same modules as someone with a physics or chemistry degree. You'd get the same options for a master's degree (possibly limited according to your module choices, but that'd be the same for anyone doing a physics or chemistry degree).

Reply 4

vyper47

Take a note here: Cambridge has the most Physics Nobel laureates, and the 2nd highest number of Nobel laureates. Cambridge scientists who did their BA studied the NatSci tripos - and then went on to specialise in their fields, sometimes other unis. Many people graduate from Cambridge NatSci and move on to Caltech, MIT and the other kewl places for research (Cambridge itself is kewl too!!)

NatSci tripos is simply amazing (an applicant here! :biggrin:

). You can study many things - great for multi-disciplinary research. And since it's accredited, you can rest assure you'll be valued a lot. Heck, you're a CAMBRIDGE grad if you study NatSci there - what more can someone want?

Reply 5

R T

Original post by Luminayala

Usually a natsci degree is simplified into a single subject degree. So a Natsci who specialised in chemistry (at cambridge) has done as much Chemistry as someone who only studied chemistry elsewhere (and in fact for chemistry specifically, i can promise you that you actually do more and this has very powerful implications for doing a masters wherever you want to).

In terms of employers, typically the same thing happens. I say I did chemistry under natural sciences on my CV and I will say I studied chemistry at uni in conversation. In reality, I've done about 70% of a biochemistry degree and I've done about 45% of a physics degree as well as doing 100% of a chemistry degree.

For other natural sciences at other universities - the same does not apply. For example UCL or durhams courses would put you behind a single subject graduate. The way around this would probably that you would have to go and do a masters before a PhD, and the masters would be seen as evidence of specialisation.

The best way to avoid pidgeonholing yourself is to stay as abstract as possible for as long as possible. A graduate chemist could easily apply themselves to a biology lab or PhD. So could a Physicist (to chemistry or biology). Going "backwards" is very difficult. If a biologist wanted to do heavy research into protein folding, they'd probably have to spend at least a year trying to specialise back into chemistry, physics, maths or computer science. As for people who want to do physics - I'd actually recommend applying for Maths, not physics.

This is the reason why most natural scientists apply for a single subject elsewhere. e.g. someone with mixed bio/chem interests would apply to chemistry at imperial, etc. Someone with mixed phys/chem interests would probably apply for Physics elsewhere. This is also what I would recommend.