Higher Degree or Experience 7

[chestud08]

Hello,

I'm just wondering whether or not I should just go straight to work with a bachelor's or go for a master's? Is it better to work to gain more work experience than to get a master's? If employers say "master's preferred," would they still prefer bachelor's with more work experience than a master's with no experience? Does that hold true for the environmental engineering companies? Also, is it better to work and go for a PE license with a bachelor's than to get a master's?

Thank you,
j

 

[Twoballcane]

Check out "

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=197596&page=1"

Tobalcane
"If you avoid failure, you also avoid success."

 

[jistre]

My personal experience is that unless you are planning to go into general engineering, the Master's will be of far less value to you than two years of solid feet on the ground, dirt under your nails experience. Typical companies value that you know how to actually do things, not that you possess two more years of esoteric knowledge. Any esoteric knowledge you'll need for your day to day activities will be picked up during that two years you weren't getting your Master's.

Now, if you're planning to go into a more highly demanding technical field where you're going to need that level of esoteric knowledge as a bare minimum to get in the door, then I'd say that the Master's is again not the best option, and the Ph.D. would serve you better as it only takes another year and looks much better than the Master's.

Of course, I'm toying with the idea of getting my Master's degree, but I'm coming up on five years of experience out of school. At this point, I can more directly focus the learning of esoteric information to maximize the usefulness to the job. Five years ago, I'd be throwing darts in the dark trying to learn something I could apply now.

Of course, I'm often wrong.

 

[jistre]

My personal experience is that IF you are planning to go into...

There. I fixed that.

 

[HgTX]

Where does a PhD only take 3 years with no MS beforehand??

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[GregLocock]

Cambridge (well, it used to)

Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[KENAT]

HgTX, there's an entire world outside of the US with different education systems.

In the UK to get a Masters will typically take 1 more year of full time study than bachelors. To get a PHD around 3 more years full time.

This on top of the fact that the bachelors only took 3 years.

So starting at 18 straight out of high school you can have:

Bachelors by 21
Masters by 22
Doctorate by 24



KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[swivel63]

go with a master's first. the allure of that steady paycheck might stop you from going back.

 

[JamesBarlow]

Why not do both.

My employer is paying for my graduate work %100, including books and any other fees. I think that most would agree that kind of coverage is unusual but many employers these days will offer to pay at least some part of your education.

Going directly to get a Masters and you will have more debt and no experience.

 

[swivel63]

not if you can get a fellowship or assistanceship

 

[HgTX]

KENAT--2 more years or 3 more years from master's to PhD? You say three but then go from age 22 to 24.

And the comment that there's a whole world out there goes both ways. Blithely assuring someone that a PhD only takes one more year than a master's doesn't work Over Here.

Hg


Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[KENAT]

HgTX I didn't say that, I was just following on from Greg. You said "Where does a PhD only take 3 years with no MS beforehand??" I suppose I took it a little out of context and thought the double ? implied that you thought the idea of a phd in 3 years was ridiculous.

It's not quite set up the same but if you started doing a research masters and then moved into doing a Doctorate then it would take about 2 years extra from what I recall.

However, work was getting to me so I was probably a bit grouchy, sorry for any offense.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[Gymmeh]

Star to James,

Why pay for it when your company will and pay you at the same time?

 

[jistre]

Wow, look at what I started! What I meant was what Kenat said. You do a research Master's and your dissertation would be the full treatment of the research so you can sort of make double use of your time.

This is in distinct contrast to my suggestion on going to work first and getting the Master's to accentuate your skills later when you know what you need. At that point, you probably won't be able to get a research Master's due to the time constraints of the job you'd have. The Master's I was talking about was definitely a straight coursework Master's with no thesis.

I didn't mean to imply that I'd wait to go to work first before getting a research Master's. If I were going into something requiring a research Master's, I'd just go the full Ph.D. route and get it done with.

 

[jistre]

Also, I just checked the LSU School of Engineering, where I'm considering enrolling for my Master's. To get a Ph.D. starting from a Bachelor's degree requires 60 hours of class/dissertation research. Full-time in graduate school is 9 hours spring/fall, 6 hours summer. Optimally, you can complete 24 hours a year. That's where I got my three-year figure. If you don't go full time, it necessarily takes longer.

 

[Sideswiper]

I got my master's degree before getting engineering experience.

Now that I have an engineering job everything is great.

However, getting an entry level position is difficult with a master's... yet getting a higher level position is also difficult if not inappropriate! Also, I didn't know what information would be important to my future career. Having the best intentions to learn "everything" isn't quite as helpful as knowing what's important to you.

 

[jpankask]

jistre, Are you sure it's only 60 hours from a bachelor's. The PhD programs I have looked at are 90 hours from a bachelors or 60 from a masters. I good bit of that is research/dissertation so that the extra classes beyond a BS amounts to 50-60 hours.

Chestud08, I would definitely recommend getting a job and then doing a master's degree while working. You will have an entirely new perspective of your classwork and you will be able to apply new knowledge immediately. In my case, I was able to sometimes use something I learned the very next day. That helped very much to reinforce the understanding. Also, some of your undergraduate classes may be enlightened by your experience. Make sure that your prospective employer offers tuition reimbursement for the MS program you are looking at. After you have your 4 years experience, go for your PE if it will help you. It really depends which employer you are talking about whether they value BS/PE, BS/MS, or MS/PE and what are your career goals. I think in the chemical world, you can never go wrong with a MS/PE and neither one will get any easier as you get older. Good luck!

 

[Maui]

Chestub08, the answers to the questions that you originally posed are dependent upon your own personal and professional goals, and the industry and type of job that you envision for yourself. I earned my PhD in Materials Science at the University of Rochester back in the early 1990s. The requirements of that program were representative of most university PhD science and engineering programs at the time in terms of the credit hours required for graduation, which totaled 90 minimum. I had 72 hours of course work, and 18 official hours of research credits under my belt when I walked into my dissertation defense. In order to graduate, you must write a PhD dissertation and then successfully defend it in front of a committee that is composed of your thesis advisor, professors from the department in which you are enrolled, and at least one faculty member from outside your department. The apparently minor detail or writing and defending a thesis seems to be absent from most of the posts above, yet represents the majority of the time and effort required to earn the PhD. After the coursework is done, the real work begins. I actually did the calculations several years ago, and estimated that after earning my Bachelor's degree I spent an average of 60 hours a week for 5 years studying and working toward the PhD. I went straight through from the BS degree to the Master's, and then to the PhD before landing my first full time job. And I observed many people who studied part time for their advanced degrees. They had no life outside of work and school. It took them much longer to earn their degrees because they were employed in full time positions, and they were only able to juggle at most two classes per semester along with their job and their family. I can't imagine going back to school to earn my degree with the responsibilities and time constraints that are placed on me now.

How your potential employer views the Master's degree depends upon the requirements of the position and their expectations. If the job that you apply for lists a B.S. degree as the minimum educational requirement, then the M.S. degree will provide you with some distinction from the rest of the employment pool when you go for that first job. For the most part it should be considered as an advantage. And unlike the PhD, you are usually not viewed as being overqualified when you have the M.S. degree. If the minimum educational requirement for the job is a Master's degree, you will have to have it if you expect to even be considered for the position. What this usually means is that the employer is looking for someone with more specialized knowledge and ability than the B.S. degree candidate would normally be expected to demonstrate, and the bump in pay over a B.S. can be significant in this type of circumstance. If they typically hire lots of PhDs (think national lab for example) then the Master's degree is looked upon as more of a consolation prize that was given to someone who did not have the drive or ability to earn the PhD. Note that I do not condone this point of view. It was expressed directly to me by one interviewer, and I believe that it is not an uncommon sentiment in some work places.

Having the Master's degree will pay dividends for you as you progress forward in your career. In upper level management, it is sometimes a requirement of the position to have an advanced degree. And getting the Master's when you are younger is much easier than trying to earn it later in life. Lots of things like job responsibilities, family issues, and life in general have a tendency to get in the way of reaching that goal. If you plan to go into environmental or civil engineering, a PE is a worthwhile investment of your time and effort. Whatever your decision, I wish you good fortune.

Maui

 

[chestud08]

Thanks everyone for your time and advices.
j

 

[spongebob007]

As we move further into the 21st century, the Masters will be come the new Bachelors. Here is the hard truth in U.S. Private industry: When you graduate with a B.S. and go looking for a job you are now going to be competing with people in India and China who have more education than you do and are willing to do your job for 1/10th the salary you are looking for. You simply can't compete with that. In another 10 years a BS in engineering will probably just get you a job a Starbucks.

Lower level engineering jobs are leaving the U.S. every day, and it looks like thay won't be coming back any time soon. If you want to have any hope of a career, you need to set yourself apart. Getting an advanced degree is a start. Anybody can be a SolidWorks jockey and your prospective employer isn't going to pay you 70K a year to do it when he can get someone in India to do it for 7K a year.

Having an advanced degree and becoming a specialist are in my opinon, the key to success. Now more than ever you need to show an employer that you can add value in order to command a salary.

I have my MS in Mechanical Engineering and I am a specialist in strucural dynamics and acoustics. An advanced degree was important for my line of work.