What are the big differences between degree and Masters level?

talksalot81

misskool wrote:

They also do twice the amount of work required.

I teach some undergrads and in a typical term week, they have lectures and labs and others like anyone else at other universities as well a 2-3 tutorials (singles or in pairs) where they have to write an essay and discuss the topic.

I never understood how much work it was (and was rather miffed by it) but in a strange way, they do deserve it.

That rather depends! I was not Ox-bridge but through my own desire and motivation, I worked pretty much all I could. I wouldnt have worked any harder had I been at oxbridge (because it wouldnt have been possible).

In some senses this leads us back to discussions about some form of normalisation between universities...

Gabriel-Ernest

studentphil wrote:

It gets on my nerves, I can not decide if to apply for a Masters or to leave it a year and see what happens when I graduate. I am very very bad at making up my mind!

I've got to be honest and say I haven't seen anything from you so far to make me thing you're really cut out for academia, so if you asked my opinion, I'd say 'Get a job instead.'

studentphil

Gabriel-Ernest wrote:

I've got to be honest and say I haven't seen anything from you so far to make me thing you're really cut out for academia, so if you asked my opinion, I'd say 'Get a job instead.'

I am not going into academia. I still have many more things I want to learn about and skills I want to develop though.

melancholly

Just for the record, all Oxbridge graduates automatically get their BA upgraded to a MA 7 years after they started, and at Cambridge it's definitely free. The rights and wrongs of this have been debated at ridiculous length already on here in the last few months - anyone who wants to go off on that tangent might want to find the old threads and have a look at what was said (personally, I believe 24 3000-word essays in an 8 week term beats what most first year students do, but I'm clearly biased!).

phil - I'd wait and decide if you really want it - not because of the work involved and whether you can do it, but beacuse it costs a lot of money and in terms of 'moneysaving', going into a huge amount of extra debt when you're not really sure seems unwise!

Voyager2002

Gabriel-Ernest wrote:

It's been a very long time since I was at Oxford but talking to contemporaries at other universities at the time, I did double the amount of work in my 8-week terms to what they did in 12 weeks. I have never bothered to convert my degree to an MA.

The latest National Student Survey seems to confirm this. It appears that most students spend less than 25 hours per week studying (in most cases less than 20 hours) while at Oxford and Cambridge the 45-hour week is the norm.

Voyager2002

talksalot81 wrote:

That is definitely not how any Dutch colleague ever described the system to me! Nor any other country in Europe for that matter. They do a basic university degree, typically then a diploma (which they have always equated to a masters) and then PhD.

Now this rather depends how you are equating. In terms of time spent, then maybe. But if you talk in terms of levels (i.e. undergrad- masters- phd) then your equating is wrong. If a european 'bachelors' degree equates to the same level as our masters, then the diploma must be more along the lines of our phd and their Phd has no equivalent. In reality, the european phds are much the same as our own, they simply take longer to do them. We do exactly the same level of research, we are assumed to be similarly competent etc.

My Dutch colleagues told me that after secondary school, they went to university to do a Master's degree. Bachelor's degrees were available, but in technical subjects and generally were a less academic and lower status alternative.

talksalot81

Voyager2002 wrote:

My Dutch colleagues told me that after secondary school, they went to university to do a Master's degree. Bachelor's degrees were available, but in technical subjects and generally were a less academic and lower status alternative.

Yeah... so their 'normal' university degree is what they referred to as a masters. That does not mean it equates necessarily to a good masters in the UK. It just happens to be what they call it. I havent yet encountered a foreign language speaker who has the slightest idea what a bachelors degree means - so you need to do the equating yourself.

While I say all this, I do in fact believe that a European 'normal' degree is harder and requires more work than our own. Likewise I think their diploma is similarly tougher compared to our masters. Probably the closest is the phd, but the simple reality of the Euros being given more time to do it probably means the outcoming graduates should be more experienced and more mature... but that isnt exactly suprising given they will have spent longer studying and will be older as a result! However, it should be noted that UK phds (at least in physics) have no problem gaining employment in the European mainland. So the employers clearly think we are capable enough!

Need_More_Money_2

eventer wrote:

There is a lot less 'spoon-feeding' of ideas, and generally they are assesed on your ability to generate new thinking, rather than at degree level where you learn the answers and can do well even if you only read the reading lists.

This is an interesting comment. I'd always considered the bachelor's degree as the first point where there isn't 'spoon feeding' of ideas rather than Masters. When I was applying to University, polytechnics still existed and I was told (by a lecturer from a poly) that the big difference between doing a degree at a poly and a uni was that at a poly it was more taught (a.k.a. 'spoon feeding') but at University you were expected to do more for yourself. I suspect it varies a lot between Universities.
I'm did my BSc at Liverpool (there seems to be quite a few of on here!) and my MSc in Glasgow. The main difference to me was that the MSc was more specialised and involved a significant component of research. I don't think the workload was THAT much higher, but it is hard to judge as I did it part time whilst working full time. PhD is a MUCH bigger jump.
I still think the biggest jump in difficulty was between GCSE and A-level though, but I don't know if that is still the case with all the changes that have happened to these.

michelley

I have to agree that it's definitely down to the university and the subject studied - any medical subject at the University of Nottingham is reputed to be the equivalent to a higher qualification elsewhere - but it still doesn't alter the fact that you have an undergraduate degree from England whichever way you look at it.

greyster

studentphil wrote:

It gets on my nerves, I can not decide if to apply for a Masters or to leave it a year and see what happens when I graduate. I am very very bad at making up my mind!

I can understand why it's getting on your nerves - its a tough call. Mine was made easy as it was my backup plan to if I didn't get into the Navy for about 6 months.

My thoughts are that you should go for a Masters only if you feel its a real investment. Financially it costs a lot and if you are only thinking its an OK decision you may want to reevaluate it. My year cost about 10k and relied on access to learning fund and a studentship to bring costs down. I already had a 15k student loan from my undergrad.

Is it going to help your career? Its fact that masters degrees statistically don't help you get a job. In this world its all about experience. Obviously there are some exceptions like where a masters is required for the job or where an employer really favours them (but rarely - infact i see employers being more interested in my a levels in the first instance). It's just another string to the bow.

However is there a new line of work you are interested in and that a masters (conversion degree) could help you enter? This is going back to the investment thing again.

It's quite common for students to stay on for another year of studentland - just because they can. The debt is seriously not worth it. It's just a year and your friends will have paid off a lot of their undergrad debt and have a year more experience than you when you graduate again.

Remember you don't have to do your masters right now. You can always go to work. Personally though I would not be able to return as work and academia are quite different - i worry I would not make the transition back very smoothly! I now work hard in mornings as opposed to doing nothing and actually have weekends because I don't need to cram. I got a structured life and money to save - the only thing I miss are my uni social circle.

I'm trying to spark some decisions here. Good luck in whatever you decide.