undergraduate masters vs post graduate masters

[geletine]

Does Studying a 4 year undergraduate masters course (usually realated
to maths ,science and engineering) mean you pay for 3 years and get one
year free as far as fees are concerned and recieve a masters degree?

In the same subjects there have original bachelor courses which are 3
years and the same course as a 1 year post-graduate masters course, of
course there is a new fee for that.


What i am unclear about is why have a undergraduate course either
bachelor or masters consisting of the same subject, I understand many
subjects don't cover enough detail in 3 years,(or bachelor is too
common while searching for work,masters being a added bonus in a
interview) why not scrap the bachelor and just have undergraduate
masters courses, and then separate research or phd degrees.

Maybe i have not understood the diffrence between a undergraduate
masters and a post - graduate masters course.

[Dr A. N. Walker]

Post by geletine
Does Studying a 4 year undergraduate masters course (usually realated
to maths ,science and engineering) mean you pay for 3 years and get one
year free as far as fees are concerned and recieve a masters degree?

No, you pay for 4 years.

Post by geletine
[...] why not scrap the bachelor and just have undergraduate
masters courses, and then separate research or phd degrees.

Many [indeed, most] students do not want the fourth year,
do not want to come that close to research, etc. Also, there is
usually [always?] a "hurdle" -- the fourth year is really not at
all suitable for weak students, and even "average" students are
quite likely to flounder.

Post by geletine
Maybe i have not understood the diffrence between a undergraduate
masters and a post - graduate masters course.

It's not that clear that there is one; it's a very grey
area. It's possible that the "Bologna Process" [ie, the EU moves
towards harmonisation, mostly but not entirely along UK lines]
will resolve the whole issue.

[K. Edgcombe]

Post by Dr A. N. Walker

Post by geletine
Maybe i have not understood the diffrence between a undergraduate
masters and a post - graduate masters course.

It's not that clear that there is one; it's a very grey
area. It's possible that the "Bologna Process" [ie, the EU moves
towards harmonisation, mostly but not entirely along UK lines]
will resolve the whole issue.

Meanwhile for UK students there is a significant difference from the funding
point of view. Fourth u/g years are funded like the others (i.e. means-tested
help towards tuition fees, loans/grant towards maintenance). For a
postgraduate course, generally speaking, you're on your own.

Katy

[geletine]

"Meanwhile for UK students there is a significant difference from the
funding
point of view. Fourth u/g years are funded like the others (i.e.
means-tested
help towards tuition fees, loans/grant towards maintenance). For a
postgraduate course, generally speaking, you're on your own. "

Thats the answer i was looking for , i guess thats the reason
undergraduate masters came about to make it easier for the student
financially.

If you succeed in the three years surely the forth year will be like
extra research, obviously there are grades to be met to study a
masters, its not getting to the third year weather one does well or not
and then moving on to the forth year.

[Dr A. N. Walker]

In article <***@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
geletine <***@hotmail.com> wrote:
[KE:]

Post by geletine

[...] For a
postgraduate course, generally speaking, you're on your own.

This should not be taken as meaning that most PGs are left
without money! Rather it means that it is *your* responsibility to
seek out funding [research councils, scholarships, ...].

Post by geletine
Thats the answer i was looking for , i guess thats the reason
undergraduate masters came about to make it easier for the student
financially.

No. There were several reasons, of which student finances
were no part at the time [if only because we did not know in advance
what govt/LEA attitudes would be, other than in very broad terms].
In some subjects and at some univs, there was a general "malaise"
in the MSc courses, leading to a push towards innovative ways to
revive a rough equivalent. There were worries that the 3-year BSc
courses were not very good indicators for PhD [or research generally]
suitability. There was pressure from the EU to harmonise, and a
general feeling that the much longer degree courses in France/Germany
etc gave their graduates an edge. In subjects like maths and physics,
there was a feeling that UG courses did not always go far enough;
that there is a lot of [eg] maths that is accessible, that staff
would like to teach, but for which there is simply no room in the
standard 3-yr course. Other reasons as well, at least in some cases,
eg to do with internal politics of the university.

Post by geletine
If you succeed in the three years surely the forth year will be like
extra research, [...].

"Extra"? How much "research" do you think there [normally]
is in either a 3-yr or 4-yr UG programme? It takes five or more
years from A-level [unless you are truly exceptionally gifted] to
get to the frontiers of knowledge.

[geletine]

Its possible to study for a PhD or research with a BSc and not a
master, i am curious why that is the way too. The quicker route would
be to study for a BSc then continue to a PhD, skip the master degree, i
am presumming there is quite a knowlege gap between BSc and PhD , being
the reason masters exist.

University study abroad in non-speaking English countries is longer,
My girlfriends brother is studying in Prague and the years seem to be
endless, he is studying a computer science discipline I think , I may
be wrong.

Of course in england there are great achievers with our short
university studies, education must be for all though, and in extending
the courses, can only help students in general understand there subject
without too many leaving the course in the middle.

I meant by the last paragraph, that BSc degrees in alot of subjects are
the foundations to the discipline, and work can be found with BSc
alone.
There are subjects that without a PhD, work can not be obtained.
Studying beyond BSc provides the student with more knowlege and
research, not necessary alien to (s)he as the BSc hopefully has
covered most of the subjects that will be covered in more detail after
the BSc.

I hope you understand my points a little easier.

[Dr A. N. Walker]

Post by geletine
Its possible to study for a PhD or research with a BSc and not a
master, i am curious why that is the way too.

History. Each university set up its own schemes. Some
univs kept MSc's and PhD's quite separate, some used the MSc as
the first year of their PhDs, some enrolled all postgrads as MSc
students and allowed only a few to continue onto a PhD. Then
there were things like the Cambridge "Part III", and a variety
of [postgrad] diploma schemes, etc., etc. Allow all this to
evolve for a century or so, factor in things like the relatively
new undergraduate masters, and you get the somewhat chaotic
state we are in today.

Post by geletine
The quicker route would
be to study for a BSc then continue to a PhD, skip the master degree,

Depends on whether the PhD "includes" an MSc component, and
other structural things within the programmes; but yes, even now
there are students going straight from a 3-yr BSc onto their PhD.

Post by geletine
i
am presumming there is quite a knowlege gap between BSc and PhD , being
the reason masters exist.

Historically, an MA was more a "survival" badge. You got
your BA [even in science subjects] as a sort-of provisional licence,
and the MA merely said you had now been practising for three years.
The more modern form of MA/MSc, as a postgrad qualification after
a year of advanced tuition, is the newcomer. The gap between BSc
and PhD is indeed large; but that's what you would expect of a
bright student who has been immersed in a highly-specialised part
of a discipline for three or four further years.

Post by geletine
University study abroad in non-speaking English countries is longer,
My girlfriends brother is studying in Prague and the years seem to be
endless, he is studying a computer science discipline I think , I may
be wrong.

No, that is the [current] continental pattern. The Bologna
Process is trying to put all univ qualifications [certificates and
diplomas as well as degrees] onto an agreed footing across the EU;
for the UK, there are lots of consequences for masters degrees in
particular, but for first degrees it's more France/Germany/etc being
brought into line with us. Come back in a decade ....