The Student Room Group
Reply 1
I always thought all postgraduate programmes required a first degree?:confused: Anyway, if the university thinks you're sufficiently qualified for the programme even without one, I can't see why employers should have a problem with it. They might ask you about it in an interview, though, I suppose (I probably would).
Reply 2
it's not unheard of, particularly at masters level, but it's by no means common.

regarding employability, the answer will be vague until you can be more specific about which employers/industry. plenty of people study an bachelors degree in one subject then a masters in another. in fact, we have various masters degrees which are conversion courses allowing you access to jobs which you couldn't have applied for without the masters. it's about what you know, so if you have developed a strength at postgrad above and beyond the bachelor level then you have nothing to worry about. theoretically, when applying for graduate jobs which require a 2.1 or above, you have to sell yourself in a different way, which doesnt matter if it works.
If you got accepted because of years of experience, you could argue this makes up for not doing a bachelors.
Reply 4
in all fairness, experience is often more valued than a bachelors. employers want employees, not academics...
The Boosh
in all fairness, years of experience is often more valued than a bachelors. employers want employees, not academics...

Well for jobs in my field, most of the time both are just as valued.
Eubacterium
Well for jobs in my field, most of the time both are just as valued.


Not strictly true I'm afraid. Everyone in science has the qualifications so they become a basic requirement, experience is still the greatest asset you will possess.
Reply 7
Sorry about lack of details before; We're talking about the IT industry, specifically network, system, and security administration.

I've got about 3 years experience and a couple of professional certifications, so the unis in question seem to be quite happy for me to undertake postgrad qualification.

The reason for the degree is that soon that metaphorical glass ceiling is likely to be hit. For senior management/executive level jobs, they prefer you degree educated (especially when applying for new ones!)

I guess the question is as to whether a masters will tick the right boxes for those positions, or whether it'd require 3 years out for a PhD.

Finance is more iffy, and will probably constrain me to UK. As I understand, there's virtually no funding for home students on taught computing courses.

Thanks for the help guys.
Reply 8
A doctorate is the highest academic qualification in the country and that, combined with a masters, should (theoretically) be more than enough. With a PhD, there's a good chance that you'll find yourself more academically educated than your employer. This, in addition to relevant work experience, makes you an attractive employee. The big question is whether or not spending 4 years out of work will have a negative impact on your job opportunities. Given that you have your foot in the door, is it sensible to leave and come back in several years clutching new qualifications? (I don't know - my PhD is a basic requriement to get me into academia, whereas the world of work may be completely different...)
Reply 9
I guess a fundamental question here, is whether the MSc would be enough to convince those corporate employers, or whether it'd require a PhD.

A year out is a lot, but it's fine because I'm enthusiastic about learning the subject and think it would be fun etc, whilst maintaining industry contacts. Three years loss of earnings though piles up to 150 grand (read: a house) so is probably a lot less feasible. (From a financial viewpoint as well as a practical one...in that time you tend to lose the 'cutting edge' and several contacts.)
I imagine an MSc should be more than enough to convince the average corporate employer of your academic suitability.
I have been working in the IT industry for over 9 years, during which time I've been involved in graduate interviewing. Invariably, I would only look at the details of someone's undergraduate/postgraduate degree if I wanted to ask someone questions about a particular aspect of something undertaken on their course, e.g. some C++ questions if the application form said they had achieved 70% in an OO programming course in C++. Most of the competencies which are sought [to provide evidence of a candidate's suitability] tend to be easier to demonstrate via work experience than via academic study.

If you can get your employer to help with the costs, Oxford do a part-time MSc in Software Engineering and relevant experience might compensate for a lack of formal qualifications. Whether or not 3 years is enough experience is difficult to say, however if your sysadmin skills are valuable enough to your employer, I don't see why the won't stump up the cash.
Reply 11
I am currently studying a MSc without a full undergraduate degree but have over 2 years experience within industry. However, I was first enrolled onto the Pg/Dip and then pending on how I do on in semester 1, I could then move over into the MSc. Which is doing the dissertation to receive the full masters. Saves money and time if you get miminum theoretical and practical experience.
Reply 12
Original post by Miles841
I am currently studying a MSc without a full undergraduate degree but have over 2 years experience within industry. However, I was first enrolled onto the Pg/Dip and then pending on how I do on in semester 1, I could then move over into the MSc. Which is doing the dissertation to receive the full masters. Saves money and time if you get miminum theoretical and practical experience.


This thread is nearly ten years old. The dilemma has been long since resolved.
Going to close this thread because it's so old! If you have a question like this, please start a new thread here :h: