Masters by Research

The demise of the research masters (in the sciences) is a bit of a pity I think. Sadly, it is now almost seen as a sign of failure – something one receives if you’re not making it at PhD level. As a holder of an MS from Cornell, I sometimes wonder if people who know the American system think that I flunked my PhD qualifiers!

In a field like engineering, there are lots and lots of problems that are ideal for an 18 – 24 month project and I can immediately think of half a dozen of good masters projects in my own area of research. (I’d imagine that this is not true of all fields where there might be  a very large learning curve). Personally I found completing a masters a huge learning experience both in terms of learning how to think independently but also in terms of writing a thesis and writing for a journal.  When I started my PhD, I was much more capable and confident than a raw graduate. In fact, I think industry generally would benefit greatly from having people who have done masters by research and I’m not sure whether there is a huge amount to be gained (for industry) by looking for people with PhDs.

A lot of research these days is done in large groups, often in centres of excellence where the students seem to be very closely supervised by a postdoc and it seems to me that this is the perfect environment for doing masters projects. I sometimes wonder if it is always the best environment for doing a PhD where the student should technically take ownership of the project but, at the same time, the group or centre as a whole might have to meet specific targets. I don’t know – I’m not an expert on these things by any means.

Anyway, what sparked these thoughts was the fact that I have been involved in various examining roles in a number of PhD theses recently and I have to say, I have had some concerns. It seemed to me that all the PhDs I examined tried to cover a lot of ground but in an often quite superficial way. It almost seemed that the projects were too ambitious and needed to focus a little better on fewer aspects of the problem in much greater depth. I thought that some chapters were simply left with too many unanswered questions before moving on to the next one. Perhaps it was because of the way the project was funded but there was a sense of ‘where’s the PhD stuff?’. It was almost like the thesis was a few masters-like projects stuck together.

Sadly, I don’t think there’s a solution to this. The rise of the taught masters which can be completed in a calendar year means that the masters by research will continue to disappear.


About Greg Foley

A lecturer in Biotechnology in Dublin City University for more than 25 years. Trained as a Chemical Engineer in UCD (BE and PhD) and Cornell (MS). Does research on analysis and design of membrane filtration systems.
This entry was posted in education. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Masters by Research

  1. Pingback: Ninth Level Ireland » Blog Archive » Masters by Research

  2. The elitism at some univeristies is annoying in how it gets in the way of science. The Masters by Research is as you say, a great way to complete a short focused project. I started mine but chucked it in with 3 months to go due to a conflict in ethical principles at the uni I was working for. The Masters by Research is also a great way to prepare for a larger project, such as can be done with a PhD.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s