Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Are Science degrees valued the same as Humanities; I think not watch

    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Implication)
    i'm just about to finish a masters degree in a natural science and there's has been a negligible amount of this in any of my science classes. in fact there was far more of this in half a term of my psychology a-level than in my entire science 'career'!
    Where the **** are you lol?

    I went to a ex-poly (boo, hiss etc) doing a biological degree and we spent a good section of the final year ripping scientific papers to shreds, having to explain why we think their conclusions could be flawed, even if they're correct how could the findings be made more concrete, did they make points in their discussion which their data doesn't really point to, do they or anyone involved in their paper have any sort of bias or were any sources of funding impact what they'd "find" from their results etc.

    Hell we did it first and second year to a degree. I mean how else do you quote a lot of scientific papers in assignments otherwise? A lot of it is playing them against each other, Stubbs et al finds X happens, but Bartel et al founds X is not significant, Stubbs methodolgy is questionable due to Y, **** sample size, using Z as a measure instead of Q etc etc.

    You must be taught to question to a pretty significant degree I'd have thought...albeit I've not done a Masters, but with it being a glorified dissertation, again since you're likely researching something new, you'd be using a lot of current stuff in the lit review and saying what areas they missed, what you're contributing, maybe what you think is an improved methodology etc.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joey11223)
    Where the **** are you lol?

    I went to a ex-poly (boo, hiss etc) doing a biological degree and we spent a good section of the final year ripping scientific papers to shreds, having to explain why we think their conclusions could be flawed, even if they're correct how could the findings be made more concrete, did they make points in their discussion which their data doesn't really point to, do they or anyone involved in their paper have any sort of bias or were any sources of funding impact what they'd "find" from their results etc.

    Hell we did it first and second year to a degree. I mean how else do you quote a lot of scientific papers in assignments otherwise? A lot of it is playing them against each other, Stubbs et al finds X happens, but Bartel et al founds X is not significant, Stubbs methodolgy is questionable due to Y, **** sample size, using Z as a measure instead of Q etc etc.

    You must be taught to question to a pretty significant degree I'd have thought...albeit I've not done a Masters, but with it being a glorified dissertation, again since you're likely researching something new, you'd be using a lot of current stuff in the lit review and saying what areas they missed, what you're contributing, maybe what you think is an improved methodology etc.
    I imagine this is because implication studies mathematical physics, so when looking at papers, say for a proof, it is either a full proof, partial proof or incorrect. There isnt any/much time looking at observations in mathematical physics, ideas are built up from a more rigid set of definitions so being able to analyse the same results in different ways to draw different conclusions is unlikely to crop up like in a experimental science
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joey11223)
    Where the **** are you lol?

    I went to a ex-poly (boo, hiss etc) doing a biological degree and we spent a good section of the final year ripping scientific papers to shreds, having to explain why we think their conclusions could be flawed, even if they're correct how could the findings be made more concrete, did they make points in their discussion which their data doesn't really point to, do they or anyone involved in their paper have any sort of bias or were any sources of funding impact what they'd "find" from their results etc.

    Hell we did it first and second year to a degree. I mean how else do you quote a lot of scientific papers in assignments otherwise? A lot of it is playing them against each other, Stubbs et al finds X happens, but Bartel et al founds X is not significant, Stubbs methodolgy is questionable due to Y, **** sample size, using Z as a measure instead of Q etc etc.

    You must be taught to question to a pretty significant degree I'd have thought...albeit I've not done a Masters, but with it being a glorified dissertation, again since you're likely researching something new, you'd be using a lot of current stuff in the lit review and saying what areas they missed, what you're contributing, maybe what you think is an improved methodology etc.
    my course is an undergrad masters so integrated 4 year course. basically you do 3 years, if you want you can take the bachelors and go after that or stay for an extra year and get a masters. it's an MSci not an MSc and not as research-focussed as a postgrad masters might be. i've had 40 credits of 'project' work the entire course, and dissertations only worth 40% of that.

    i go to notts, but as someone else has said my course is mathematical physics so is very rigorous with less room for subjectivity (I don't mean to imply that more objective subject matter is 'better'). I think that might be the way of it though - the more subjective the subject matter, the more you have to employ these critical thinking skills that aren't really developed in very mathsy courses.

    it's not quite this simple, but a lot of the papers i've dealth with pretty much go 'hey, here's a mathematical model. look at the physical predictions it makes. great, it matches reality well here! oh no, it's not so good there! i wonder if it's because...' i think there's just less room for qualitative debate around the accuracy, validity, reliability etc. etc. of the results
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by floury)
    Science students are not taught to question, but rather accept what is told to them. Whereas it is the opposite for English and History students.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Did I seriously just read "science students are not taught to question!?"

    OP you clearly have absolutely no idea how scientific fields work or about how they are generally taught. SCIENCE IS QUESTIONING, the entire thing is simply people asking questions and then using the scientific method to test out their ideas. Science requires you to put faith in nothing and to question everything, all else is scholasticism not science.

    In every subject you get people who are always questioning what they're told and you also get people who only chose the subject because of job prospects, who sit there rote learning it. This is true of every subject and no subject encourages this. However, I would argue that it's discouraged more in scientific subjects than in humanities simply due to science being what it is.

    As for the thread title, that's a no brainer. The sciences always have and always will be of greater use and importance to humanity than humanities. The sciences built the modern world and the economy of tomorrow will most likely be centered around research and technology. The sciences give us everything we have. For instance, the ability to write poetry won't help us combat famine, but genetic engineering will (and does).

    The sciences and humanities will never be of equal value. Personally, I'd be very offended if my future research in the materials sciences is regarded as important as a soppy little poem.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by floury)
    Science students are not taught to question, but rather accept what is told to them. Whereas it is the opposite for English and History students.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    nice meme

    this is what arts students unironically think
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.