MSc the new BSc?

[Amp34]

When I was at Uni a lot of friends who did Bachelors degrees in English, History etc, realised that they were going to be unemployable so started on 1 year MSc degrees in IT.

An MSc is for slackers who don't or can't get into work after getting their initial Bachelors degree and know they aren't good enough to go for a proper post graduate degree like a PhD. Employers aren't fooled by this.

It may depend on the MSc but from a couple of friends who are doing them now they essentially work 8+hour days for an entire year and from the open day I went to it's 9-5 structured + further reading after that. Not really a doss.

Does anyone have data to hand on how many BSc, 4-year UG degrees, MSc, PhD were awarded each year?

Say (and I haven't looked this up at all) today 4% of folk get PhDs, how far back in time do we have to go such that only 4% got first degrees? 1960? 1950?

That would be very interesting actually.

What got me first thinking about this was having read http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/feb/16/postgraduate-courses

Where apparently 270,000 are doing post grads, a rise of 27% (in the last year?)

 

[sid]

Does anyone have data to hand on how many BSc, 4-year UG degrees, MSc, PhD were awarded each year?

Say (and I haven't looked this up at all) today 4% of folk get PhDs, how far back in time do we have to go such that only 4% got first degrees? 1960? 1950?

Interested in this as well although the 4% number seems a bit big for phds

Only because I didn't think there was that much funding avaliable

sid

 

[[TW]Fox]

Lots of people seem to have "business sutdies" or "media studies" or "sport science", whilst they are degrees, I don't think you can compare them to a Mathematics degree from a top uni with a good classification. imo.

Whilst I am not going to sit here and argue a Business degree has anything like the clout a Maths degree from Oxbridge does I hardly think it's in the same league as Media Studies and Sports Science. Mine consisted mostly of economics and accountancy - there are harder subjects obviously but it isn't exactly worthless surely?

 

[Amp34]

I think that the Mickey Mouse degree is having the largest impact on the integrity of degrees. I do not believe that MSc is considered mandatory although it is in some fields. However, degrees such as engineering, physics etc are wel respected. Many oil companies require a good 2:1 bachelors degree if you want to be a petroleum engineer. Geoscientists seem to always require an MSc.

Any unfortunately i'm a geoscientist...

However I can see in the future engineering grads needing an MSc in a relevant subject before they are employable at certain larger companies (some already do that).

 

[alex24]

Whilst I am not going to sit here and argue a Business degree has anything like the clout a Maths degree from Oxbridge does I hardly think it's in the same league as Media Studies and Sports Science. Mine consisted mostly of economics and accountancy - there are harder subjects obviously but it isn't exactly worthless surely?

You tell us! How was it finding employment? Was there any feedback on your choice of degree?

 

[Amp34]

Whilst I am not going to sit here and argue a Business degree has anything like the clout a Maths degree from Oxbridge does I hardly think it's in the same league as Media Studies and Sports Science. Mine consisted mostly of economics and accountancy - there are harder subjects obviously but it isn't exactly worthless surely?

The problem is "sports science" can easily range from a micky mouse course to something that really does need a lot of scientific and analytical knowledge, with a good grounding in Biology. How do employers know, unless they have done the course themselves. Business studies can be the same, either micky mouse, or accountancy in all but another name, yet accountancy can also be a micky mouse course or as good as a full on maths degree...

It just gets too hard to tell the difference now.

 

[SoSolid]

The problem is "sports science" can easily range from a micky mouse course to something that really does need a lot of scientific and analytical knowledge, with a good grounding in Biology. How do employers know, unless they have done the course themselves. Business studies can be the same, either micky mouse, or accountancy in all but another name, yet accountancy can also be a micky mouse course or as good as a full on maths degree...

It just gets too hard to tell the difference now.

Where are you studying at the moment?

 

[AGD]

When I was at Uni a lot of friends who did Bachelors degrees in English, History etc, realised that they were going to be unemployable so started on 1 year MSc degrees in IT.

An MSc is for slackers who don't or can't get into work after getting their initial Bachelors degree and know they aren't good enough to go for a proper post graduate degree like a PhD. Employers aren't fooled by this.

If you go to a decent uni then you are very employable with english or history. I suspect the problem is that your friends went to bad unis and or got 2.2s or lower.

MSc's are not for slackers. In sciences (physics, engineering) it is common and sometimes necessary to do a masters before a phd or work. I am doing my current masters because I decided on a different career path and wanted to be able to enter the industry in the quickest time. The way to do this was through a masters.

 

[clv101]

Here's some data if anyone's interested:
http://www.findaphd.com/students/life5.asp

Seems there are around half a million postgraduate students in total. Say the average enrolment is 3 years, we can suggest approx 170k of a given year get postgraduate qualifications.

There are approx 0.8 million 25 year olds in the UK so around 20% get postgraduate qualifications? That sounds about right considering the data includes everything (MSc, MBA, MA, MPhil, PhD, EngD, PGCE, PGDip, etc).

 

[dante6491]

I am doing a BSc in Economics and Business Finance which is turning out to be a pretty good. Consists of accounting, economics, mathematics and corporate finance. A useful degree from a fairly naff uni to be frank, but better than a naff degree from a naff uni, and around the same as someone doing media from a Russell Group uni. I am really looking at doing a MSc in Finance somewhere better when I finish as it seems every man and their dog has a BA/BSc these days.

All that being said Brunel is trying to improve their course. It has dropped 20 odd places in 5 years and they are hoping to turn it around. My degree is being completely restructured next year and is looking quite tasting. Supposedly we also have good business links. I will believe that when I see it.

 

[cymatty]

Threads like this always make me laugh, you can be the most qualified person on earth and still be unemployable.

I went to a non red brick university, through a non conventional method (NVQ) and achieved a 2.2 classification. I was employed by HSBC onto their commercial scheme, after 18 months I decided it was not for me and so I internally transferred to a different scheme which had minimum requirement of a 2.1, which I did not meet. I passed the interview and was one of only 9 people taken on for the role that year.

HSBC are now paying for me to study a diploma in higher education which I will convert into a degree (all paid for). Moral of the story is you need luck and other skills, not just a piece of paper.

 

[clv101]

Threads like this always make me laugh, you can be the most qualified person on earth and still be unemployable.

I went to a non red brick university, through a non conventional method (NVQ) and achieved a 2.2 classification. I was employed by HSBC onto their commercial scheme, after 18 months I decided it was not for me and so I internally transferred to a different scheme which had minimum requirement of a 2.1, which I did not meet. I passed the interview and was one of only 9 people taken on for the role that year.

HSBC are now paying for me to study a diploma in higher education which I will convert into a degree (all paid for). Moral of the story is you need luck and other skills, not just a piece of paper.

Absolutely - having a particular degree from a particular place can help in particular areas... but is very rarely a rigid requirement and never guarantees anything.

 

[Amp34]

Where are you studying at the moment?

I'm not, I graduated last year and studied at Plymouth, which, whilst it isn't a Russell group is a pretty good poly (top half with room to spare). Doesn't really matter too much for me anyway as the reason i'm struggling to find a job at the moment is partly down to the lack of relevant jobs and partly down to the lack of relevant jobs that want anything less than a masters. Although that has only moved my masters application forward a year or two in reality.

Here's some data if anyone's interested:
http://www.findaphd.com/students/life5.asp

Seems there are around half a million postgraduate students in total. Say the average enrolment is 3 years, we can suggest approx 170k of a given year get postgraduate qualifications.

There are approx 0.8 million 25 year olds in the UK so around 20% get postgraduate qualifications? That sounds about right considering the data includes everything (MSc, MBA, MA, MPhil, PhD, EngD, PGCE, PGDip, etc).

20% sounds about what I would think the throughput of undergrad would have been 30 years ago.

EDIT: Looks a good article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/1999/mar/08/johncarvel

(Why is it always the Guardian? I'm googling, honest. )

1960s ~5%
1970s and 80s ~15%
1999 ~30%

So essentially PG earners are in about the same position BSc earners were in in the early 90s.

 

[Amp34]

Threads like this always make me laugh, you can be the most qualified person on earth and still be unemployable.

I went to a non red brick university, through a non conventional method (NVQ) and achieved a 2.2 classification. I was employed by HSBC onto their commercial scheme, after 18 months I decided it was not for me and so I internally transferred to a different scheme which had minimum requirement of a 2.1, which I did not meet. I passed the interview and was one of only 9 people taken on for the role that year.

HSBC are now paying for me to study a diploma in higher education which I will convert into a degree (all paid for). Moral of the story is you need luck and other skills, not just a piece of paper.

Very true, however sometimes with no/little previous experience it can be hard getting on to that ladder in the first place (for certain roles).

Just looking at the stats in my previous post shows that essentially MSc's are now what BSc's were 30 years ago with regards to employability, which is a massive change, considering 30 years ago people would be entering work with very little debt due to grants and now recent/future graduates will be entering up to 5 years later having up to £50-60k worth of debt!

Anyway, this thread isn't particulary about unemployability, more the number of people who are taking UG and PG courses and how this is affecting todays jobs market.

 

[mavers]

MSc (and the other types of masters degree) are becoming more popular, but this isn't necessarily a bad thing. It just means that we have more educated people out there in the UK workforce (if they stay) which is beneficial for high skilled jobs.

The issue isn't really around better and worse universities, its more about the underlying subject. Do maths, physics, chemistry etc, and the skills learnt in these subjects are very desirable from an employers perspective. This doesn't mean that history, english literature etc are bad degrees, it just means from a generic employers perspective the skills learnt are less transferable.

Unfortunately those employers that do big recruitments drives for graduates are where my issue lies, insisting on only graduates with only 2.1 degrees it basically means the people that miss out on this qualification go back to education to try and better their 2.2, 3rd or pass (which are all respectable grades). Hence another reason in the increase in masters.

also just because you go to a good university and get a good grade isnt a guarantee of a good job and success.

 

[Dave M]

Why is it up to the education system to filter candidates for large corporates?

There are of course courses and universities which are easier, but everyone has always known that - it's nothing new.

The problem now is grade x from insitution y is not worth the tick in the box it used to be, as there are too many people with it.

So they ask for higher grades, or more presitigous institutions or even higher levels of qualification? Why, do you need a masters or are they just looking for a different tick in the box so they can whittle people down.

I think the problem is the lack of knowledge and skill in HR departments, people with a business studies degree picking candidates for engineering and science.

If they knew anything about the jobs they were hiring for there wouldn't be this need to filter candidates down to manageable numbers by higher and higher levels of qualifications.

 

[Amp34]

I agree entirely Telescopi, it's not about the ability as such (most jobs probably won't really ever use your subject skill), but a way of distancing yourself from an ever increasing pool of almost identical candidates, especially with regards to large employers with dedicated HR departments (or even worse automated systems).

You could be the worlds best biochemists with a first from oxford, but if all the other candidates have an MSc/PHd then you probably won't get a look in... So what do you need to do? Get an MSc...

 

[alex24]

snip

You make an excellent point, I really think this is part of the issue. The 'box ticking' starts well before employment. Any further education has to whittle down numbers of applicants, and this is done by, say, A-level grades. Now we're getting into the worth of these qualifications and how representative they are of an individual's abilities in the field they wish to pursue. Short answer is, nobody knows for sure, and it's more about convenience for a university or employer in selection of undergrads/employees. A distinction has to be made somewhere. It's not a perfect system, but there seems to be no better way to test it.

HR departments are going to take the easiest route - there's no way they can interview everyone who may be suitable, so they have to be more selective, especially now, with probably higher numbers of applicants to these jobs than in a long time.

Where do we go from here? As someone in education, your best chance lies with getting the best 'quantity' (let's say, MSc at 2:1 or higher) rather than quality. This will help your chances. It's not even a choice if you're chosen line of work employs in such a manner.

 

[Sukh]

Whilst I am not going to sit here and argue a Business degree has anything like the clout a Maths degree from Oxbridge does I hardly think it's in the same league as Media Studies and Sports Science. Mine consisted mostly of economics and accountancy - there are harder subjects obviously but it isn't exactly worthless surely?

Yeh I meant more that the degree title seems to be used widely and is not necessarily representative of the course.
Mathematics is just that, mathematics. But Business Studies can vary from a hard course with solid foundation in quantitative methods to a fairly lackadaisical course where the main focus is HR roles or the history of the modern day corporation.

Similarly with sport science, the degree behind the title can vary widely.

Your degree is worth no more than any other, for most people it is a key that opens doors, past that the individuals abilities, strengths and traits are what I found to matter.

 

[Amp34]

No, the stats show there are more people with degrees, but you have to remember the economy is different to how it was back then... we don't have the industries we had then... have we not now moved further towards high tech industry/finance/services, things which require these extra graduates? (Although I'm not denying there's a surplus).

That's a good point actually, hadn't really thought of that.

However there are also a large number of jobs that didn't used to require a degree, but now apparently do. The jobs have barely changed but apparently the access qualifications have...