Advice please - MSc in Software Design and Development (NUIG)

joeKel73

Hi all,

I'm considering starting a masters degree in software design and development in NUI Galway. Has anyone here completed it? If so, what are you working at now?

The course has no prior computer experience requirements which worries me a bit. I have a fair bit of web devopment experience myself, self-taught over the years. Nothing in software development though, apart from short C++ and Fortran modules as part of my Civil Eng undergrad.
It's a two year course and I think the first year is to bring everyone up with the fundamentals.

I'd be interested to hear the opinions of those of you experienced in the sector, have you heard of this course? Is it highly regarded? And would you expect graduates to be genuinely skilled enough to be employed in software development?

Course content: http://www.nuigalway.ie/information_technology/programmes_masters_science.html

Thanks for any advice!
Joe

firebug_guy

I completed the course a few years back. I had little programming experience before starting it (you have more with your engineering background) and am now working as a programmer - so from that point of view - I wouldn't be too worried. The first year of the course is taught, with the second being research (writing your thesis).

If I could go back, I would have only done the Postgrad Diploma (1 yr) as in the second year you don't learn anything new (apart from what you research yourself). Also, I found the people doing the 1yr experienced more than people doing the 2 year course - as they had a project, extra modules etc while we had "research" lectures and a mini-research project instead.

You can message me if you want more information.

toiletduck

I did the one year H. Dip. which overlaps a lot with the first year of the M. Sc. The first year is taught modules and getting a flavour of research interests. Second year is working on your chosen project.

I've actually tutored a few labs for the classes. Some people have had zero programming experience, others a lot. There's a lot of threads on this over in the NUIG forum which is probably worth a search.

Feel free to drop me a pm if you have any specific questions.

Sianery

Dragging up a post from the past, but-

I've been accepted into this MSc, but have absolutely no experience in programming or anything math/computer-related.

I'm obviously willing to work at it, considering I applied for it, but I don't know where to start! I'm planning on reading up etc during the summer before September, anyone any ideas on good books/websites/anything to gently ease me in?

Thanks guys

fergalr

Sianery wrote: »

Dragging up a post from the past, but-

I've been accepted into this MSc, but have absolutely no experience in programming or anything math/computer-related.

Honestly, its not great that you were accepted into an MSc in Software Design and Development, with 'absolutely no experience in anything math/computer related'.


Like, wtf is going on there?

Sianery wrote: »

I'm obviously willing to work at it, considering I applied for it, but I don't know where to start! I'm planning on reading up etc during the summer before September, anyone any ideas on good books/websites/anything to gently ease me in?

Thanks guys

There is a lot to learn about programming.

I'd say start here:
http://www.udacity.com/overview/Course/cs101/CourseRev/apr2012
http://www.coursera.org/course/cs101

It should be hard to go wrong with those two courses. After you've done those courses, you'll have more info.

conor.hogan.2

This is essentially a conversion course except they do not seem to use that word. It is designed for people who have a degree in some other non technical field.

fergalr

conor.hogan.2 wrote: »

This is essentially a conversion course except they do not seem to use that word. It is designed for people who have a degree in some other non technical field.

Ok; I see on the website that its aimed at people with 'with little or no IT experience'. I would understand it more if it required that people come from a discipline with math courses, or had done a little work on their own time first.

I guess it boils down to what you expect from a "masters in software design and development".

I would have expected that it means that people have skills to a higher level, in software design and dev, than someone with a BA/BSc would.

conor.hogan.2

fergalr wrote: »

Ok; I see on the website that its aimed at people with 'with little or no IT experience'. I would understand it more if it required that people come from a discipline with math courses, or had done a little work on their own time first.

I guess it boils down to what you expect from a "masters in software design and development".

I would have expected that it means that people have skills to a higher level, in software design and dev, than someone with a BA/BSc would.

Yep, they should have Conversion in the title. Without it it gives a false impression and is just silly.

But by the looks of it it is a Conversion course in all but name but focused on programming.

Sianery

Yes fergalr, I expected you to either read the course description or assume that no masters designed for people with previous experience would accept someone with no experience. And you could have done either of those things without being rude.

But thanks for the links anyway, and thanks for clearing that up Conor!

MagicRon

Sianery wrote: »

Yes fergalr, I expected you to either read the course description or assume that no masters designed for people with previous experience would accept someone with no experience. And you could have done either of those things without being rude.

In all fairness Sianery, it's a bit rich that someone can be awarded and leave with a Masters in Software Development having no undergraduate degree in anything remotely related to IT or software development. :rolleyes:

Sianery

MagicRon wrote: »

In all fairness Sianery, it's a bit rich that someone can be awarded and leave with a Masters in Software Development having no undergraduate degree in anything remotely related to IT or software development. :rolleyes:

As explained, it's more like a conversion course which then leads on to some research and a thesis in the second year. So I don't really understand what the problem is?

MagicRon

Sianery wrote: »

As explained, it's more like a conversion course which then leads on to some research and a thesis in the second year. So I don't really understand what the problem is?

That is misleading. If its more of a conversion course, then the title should only say conversion course and not Masters.

My point is that I don't think someone who does some research and a thesis in the second year should deserve the award of Masters in Software Development when that same person has started that research with absolutely no knowledge or foundation in IT.

The title Masters should be reserved for students who have done the groundwork, have that starting knowledge and then go on to specialize in some area ---- not for beginners students who got their level 8 in equestrian studies and now fancy themselves as programmers.

Maybe you disagree but that is my opinion.

conor.hogan.2

I agree it is misleading if I did that course I would specify conversion is brackets on any CV just to prevent questions and misunderstandings that happened in this thread.

I am surprised they did not add it to the title, they should have really.

MagicRon wrote: »

That is misleading. If its more of a conversion course, then the title should only say conversion course and not Masters.

Or say MSc CS (Conversion) which is what the actual title of the UCD one is iirc.

As for the rest of what you said no company has ever had that "problem" with me.

Sianery

What you think is completely irrelevant to the topic, my posts and the questions I asked. The program awards a Master's degree in Software Design and Development and does not require applicants to have an undergraduate qualification in IT. Feel free to contact NUI Galway and tell them how angry you are, but aiming so much aggression and bile at a stranger over the internet suggests you're not likely to do so anytime soon. If you feel like you're entitled to your elitist attitude because you did an undergrad, at least tell someone who wants to hear it.

Still appreciate any helpful links to websites, courses or resources for introductory level programming for anyone who is not going to turn this topic into "I can't believe they let people without an undergrad in IT into this, something something witty equestrian studies joke attempt" repeatedly

edit: This speculation about what I should write on my CV is getting ridiculous, it's quite clear what my undergraduate and other qualifications are already, please just stay on topic or take the anger elsewhere

fergalr

Sianery wrote: »

Yes fergalr, I expected you to either read the course description

I did.

Sianery wrote: »

or assume that no masters designed for people with previous experience would accept someone with no experience.

That is orthogonal to my comment.

I don't think its great that there is a course in NUIG that is awarding an "MSc in Software Design and Development", after 2 years, to people that join it with zero "programming/math related" experience.
I think you have to wonder what "MSc" means, when it is awarded in such circumstances - unless all the students are geniuses.

I stand by that.
I think the standard of many CS MSc degrees should probably be higher. I don't think an MSc should be awarded as a conversion qualification.

That's not a criticism of you. I wish you the best of luck in your studies. I did provide you with helpful links, which I went and looked up for you.



I'd just like to address one or two of your comments, which are mainly to other posters:

Sianery wrote: »

What you think is completely irrelevant to the topic, my posts and the questions I asked.

I don't think anyone means this to be personal.
This is a public public discussion forum.

I think that a discussion of whether it makes sense to take completely new people into the MSc is relevant here.
The OP (not you - "J o e") actually raised this originally:

The course has no prior computer experience requirements which worries me a bit

so I do think its reasonably on-topic.

Sianery wrote: »

The program awards a Master's degree in Software Design and Development and does not require applicants to have an undergraduate qualification in IT. Feel free to contact NUI Galway and tell them how angry you are, but aiming so much aggression and bile at a stranger over the internet suggests you're not likely to do so anytime soon. If you feel like you're entitled to your elitist attitude because you did an undergrad, at least tell someone who wants to hear it.

Still appreciate any helpful links to websites, courses or resources for introductory level programming for anyone who is not going to turn this topic into "I can't believe they let people without an undergrad in IT into this, something something witty equestrian studies joke attempt" repeatedly

edit: This speculation about what I should write on my CV is getting ridiculous, it's quite clear what my undergraduate and other qualifications are already, please just stay on topic or take the anger elsewhere

You are mentioning 'anger' and 'bile' there.

I don't think people mean this to be personal about you.
I think there is some miscommunication here, as I think the other posters are really talking about the properties of the course itself, and don't mean the discussion to be about you.

Even the comment about the CV seems abstract to me. I don't think anyone is telling you what to write on your CV - you can, of course, write whatever you like.

But isn't it legitimate for posters to discuss under what circumstances it makes sense to award an MSc degree in a course, and what the title should mean?

MagicRon

fergalr wrote: »

I don't think its great that there is a course in NUIG that is awarding an "MSc in Software Design and Development", after 2 years, to people that join it with zero "programming/math related" experience.
I think you have to wonder what "MSc" means, when it is awarded in such circumstances - unless all the students are geniuses

Yes.

fergalr wrote: »

I don't think people mean this to be personal about you.
I think there is some miscommunication here, as I think the other posters are really talking about the properties of the course itself, and don't mean the discussion to be about you.

And yes, I don't mean anything in any kind of personal way. It is a criticism of the course title / award.

_Puma_

Having just finished the 1st year of the "Masters" I thought I'd add my 2 cents.

I was in the same situation as the op last July, finished an undergrad, spent a year working in my field and decided that I wanted to change careers and applied for the MSc in Software Design and Development.

I had little IT experience save for a genuine interest in IT and a few modules in programming in my undergrad. Got accepted into the masters due to my undergrad result and and the fact that I came from a "technical" background.

It is fair to say that at the start I regarded this course as a conversion course (I thought the title of the course was a bit generous) but after completing the 1st year taught portion I can understand why just calling it a conversion course might not be completely accurate.

You really do cover a lot, probably too much for only a 1 year period. The way I saw it was they were cramming all the important programming and computer science courses from a 3 or 4 year undergrad (cutting out the likes of the Maths, Statistics and the like as it was expected that you had these from your undergrad) into a 1 year period with the addition of a final year project that had to be submitted at the end of the year.

I have now got a paid internship for the summer as a developer (having got through 2 interviews) and if I was to leave the the course at this stage I would have a level 8 Higher Diploma. Fair enough the same same level as my undergrad but if I was to continue on and do the Research year next year I would hope to be coming out with a proper masters degree. Some of the past years masters projects are up on display in the IT building of NUIG and am under no illusion that the quality of some of theses projects are masters standards.

Some of my class mates have been offered junior developer roles at this stage as well so I believe that if you haven't done a Bachelor in Computer Science or IT and are serious about getting into it this is a really good course!

Kellzer

Hi Puma-Congrats on the internship. That's great. I'm thinking of doing this course in September. It looks well thought out and really good. A lot of the other courses that are on offer in other universities and IT's don't seem to go into the same depth as this one. Did you manage to pick up the programming fairly quickly? How did you and your class mates all fair jobs wise after you finished given that some time has now passed? Did most people get working after the HDip or did a lot end up staying for the MSc afterwards? How did you get on after your internship ended?Did you stay with that company or did you move somewhere else? Also are all the internships paid? Would be great to be earning money once the exams ended. Do you know if it was competetive for places getting into this? I have a 1.1 Civil Eng degree from NUIG so Im hoping that gets me in. Any inside information that you can give me would be greatly appreciated as I am really interested in doing this but I am anxious of signing up for a course that doesn't lead to a job!(although there are no certainties in this life!)

starWave

I've just accepted a place for this course for September.

I did my degree in mechanical engineering, and I used to do a lot of coding in Excel VBA, but would like to learn proper OOP, and this course seems to be the business.

Do they still do C++ on this course? Think I saw something in another thread about it being changed?

Seems its a fairly intense course. Does anyone know how many hours a week the lectures and labs take? In year 2, do you just do the thesis on your own time? I suppose a lot of people get software jobs and do the study in the evening or as part of the job?

ChRoMe

fergalr wrote: »

Honestly, its not great that you were accepted into an MSc in Software Design and Development, with 'absolutely no experience in anything math/computer related'.

Retarded is the term I'd use.....

Still it explains why I see people with these "qualifications" who fail mid level job exams.

Kellzer

starWave wrote: »

I've just accepted a place for this course for September.

I did my degree in mechanical engineering, and I used to do a lot of coding in Excel VBA, but would like to learn proper OOP, and this course seems to be the business.

Do they still do C++ on this course? Think I saw something in another thread about it being changed?

Seems its a fairly intense course. Does anyone know how many hours a week the lectures and labs take? In year 2, do you just do the thesis on your own time? I suppose a lot of people get software jobs and do the study in the evening or as part of the job?

Hi, I just got accepted to this course today as well! Looks like it should be really good. I was talking to the person running it and it's not C++ anymore. It's Java and .NET which is where most of the jobs are at the moment.

Kellzer

ChRoMe wrote: »

Retarded is the term I'd use.....

Still it explains why I see people with these "qualifications" who fail mid level job exams.

I have been talking to a number of people high up in software companies who have all said they love getting people who have come from different backgrounds because they are open to learning and have different ways of thinking and analysing problems. Something they also said is that often people who come straight from programming/IT undergrads leave college thinking they are experts and geniuses in their field, and are unwilling to learn anything new and are often a very arrogant and hard to work with. I have also spoken to a number of people who have done conversion courses like this who have gotten on very well in their new careers. The subjects offered in this conversion course are the same as those offered in an undergrad except they have cut out all the maths, communications etc and focus on the IT subjects in an intense way. People are more mature and willing to work hard in a course like this when they are a little older and it is possible to learn a lot in a year if you work hard and the course is good. Who cares what the course is called or if conversion or masters is in the name-people will know that it's a conversion course when they read our CV's. Also, you can do a masters in almost anything in one year (not just IT) once you have an undergrad!

fergalr

Kellzer wrote: »

I have been talking to a number of people high up in software companies who have all said they love getting people who have come from different backgrounds because they are open to learning and have different ways of thinking and analysing problems.

Diverse backgrounds is good.
I didn't ever say anything against that.

Kellzer wrote: »

Something they also said is that often people who come straight from programming/IT undergrads leave college thinking they are experts and geniuses in their field, and are unwilling to learn anything new and are often a very arrogant and hard to work with.

Your argument seems to be that there's a systemic problem that people who do CS degrees are very arrogant and hard to work with, and so you are better off with people who have different undergrads.

You are entitled to your opinion, but that claim is too strong for me to take seriously.

Kellzer wrote: »

I have also spoken to a number of people who have done conversion courses like this who have gotten on very well in their new careers.

Brilliant - great to hear - there is huge demand for IT people at the moment - wish them all the best. I don't think anyone here would wish grads anything but the best of luck. What people are objecting to is the nature of the qualification. I'm sure everyone would have a lot of time for the individuals who do it.

Kellzer wrote: »

People are more mature and willing to work hard in a course like this when they are a little older and it is possible to learn a lot in a year if you work hard and the course is good.

Maturity, and being willing to work hard on a course is great.

At the same time, lets not forget that some people also worked hard during the four years of their undergrad.

Kellzer wrote: »

The subjects offered in this conversion course are the same as those offered in an undergrad except they have cut out all the maths, communications etc and focus on the IT subjects in an intense way.

And here is where we start to differ.

The stuff that gets cut out isn't in the undergrad for the craic.
Its useful. When you cut out the maths, for example, you miss something.

There isn't a 'royal road'. You don't do in 1 year what the CS undergrads do in 4.

If you think you do, I would say you are kidding yourself. Thats where we differ.

Kellzer wrote: »

Who cares what the course is called or if conversion or masters is in the name-

If the course was an uncredited training course, would it be as valuable to you?

The name is supposed to mean something. The bone of contention is that some of us think a masters in a subject should mean more than a 1 year conversion course.

If the same course awarded a PhD in C.S., would that be ok?

No? Because the names do mean something.

Kellzer wrote: »

people will know that it's a conversion course when they read our CV's. Also, you can do a masters in almost anything in one year (not just IT) once you have an undergrad!

Maths? Physics? Any masters courses I've seen in those disciplines require a solid undergraduate education - as I believe, and previously argued, it should be.

fergalr

PS: I recommend you get used to discussions about the names of things ;-)

starWave

fergalr wrote: »

And here is where we start to differ.

The stuff that gets cut out isn't in the undergrad for the craic.
Its useful. When you cut out the maths, for example, you miss something.

There isn't a 'royal road'. You don't do in 1 year what the CS undergrads do in 4.

If you think you do, I would say you are kidding yourself. Thats where we differ.




If the course was an uncredited training course, would it be as valuable to you?

The name is supposed to mean something. The bone of contention is that some of us think a masters in a subject should mean more than a 1 year conversion course.

If the same course awarded a PhD in C.S., would that be ok?

No? Because the names do mean something.



Maths? Physics? Any masters courses I've seen in those disciplines require a solid undergraduate education - as I believe, and previously argued, it should be.

I don't see the problem here. The course has minimum entry requirements, 2.1 honours degree, etc.

Lots of people do MSc's in areas which aren't strictly related to their undergrad degree. I would guess most of the people who apply for this course have some technical background anyway.

And it will be quite clear to future employers what the undergrad degree is and what the MSc is, and sometimes the employer is looking for someone with a mix of skills, or someone who can adapt to new things quickly.

I know people who work in software companies, writing software, and they only did a degree in engineering (civil, mechanical). They learned programming on the job.

I wouldn't get hung up about titles or letters. If you have the knowledge, you can do the job, regardless of if it was a degree or MSc or whatever.

Kellzer

fergalr wrote: »

Diverse backgrounds is good.
I didn't ever say anything against that.



Your argument seems to be that there's a systemic problem that people who do CS degrees are very arrogant and hard to work with, and so you are better off with people who have different undergrads.

You are entitled to your opinion, but that claim is too strong for me to take seriously.




Brilliant - great to hear - there is huge demand for IT people at the moment - wish them all the best. I don't think anyone here would wish grads anything but the best of luck. What people are objecting to is the nature of the qualification. I'm sure everyone would have a lot of time for the individuals who do it.



Maturity, and being willing to work hard on a course is great.

At the same time, lets not forget that some people also worked hard during the four years of their undergrad.



And here is where we start to differ.

The stuff that gets cut out isn't in the undergrad for the craic.
Its useful. When you cut out the maths, for example, you miss something.

There isn't a 'royal road'. You don't do in 1 year what the CS undergrads do in 4.

If you think you do, I would say you are kidding yourself. Thats where we differ.




If the course was an uncredited training course, would it be as valuable to you?

The name is supposed to mean something. The bone of contention is that some of us think a masters in a subject should mean more than a 1 year conversion course.

If the same course awarded a PhD in C.S., would that be ok?

No? Because the names do mean something.



Maths? Physics? Any masters courses I've seen in those disciplines require a solid undergraduate education - as I believe, and previously argued, it should be.

In reference to arrogance-I agree that I over stated it but felt a tone of arrogance coming from you. Of course not everyone in the industry has your attitude.

This course looks for people coming from a numerate background, with a degree already ("solid undergraduate education"). I did an engineering degree and have covered a lot of maths already. Almost all undergrad courses have communications built in to them now as well. I know from my undergrad that the subjects that we covered were very general in 1st and 2nd year and only in the final two years did we specialise. For that reason, I see no reason why a 1 year intensive course can't bring you to a good standard, assuming the foundations have been laid in your undergrad.

With regard to the name of the course, of course it means something. It would be stupid to suggest that this could be called a Phd in the same way. This course is a HDip (Level 8-same as a degree) and it takes 2 years to get a masters (Level 9). You can get a masters in software development in 1 year through a conversion course in Queens University (to name but one) so this course is actually pushing you harder for the same qualification. I know people who have done conversion masters in 1 year (and landed jobs successfully) converting from very different disciplines such as finance to psychology in 1 year from different Universities all over Ireland and UK. At the end of the day you learn more in your first year in a job than you ever do in college and employers know this.

Anyway-I just said I would reply because it annoys me when people hijack threads when they have nothing constructive to add and when it really doesn't concern them. This thread is for people looking for information and discussion on this course, not for people coming in to argue about the name of the course and to point out how useless this is compared to a CS undergrad.

ChRoMe

Kellzer wrote: »

This thread is for people looking for information and discussion on this course, not for people coming in to argue about the name of the course and to point out how useless this is compared to a CS undergrad.

You have just spectacularly contradicted yourself.

The course's validity in comparison to a CS undergrad is "discussion on this course".

fergalr

Kellzer wrote: »

In reference to arrogance-I agree that I over stated it but felt a tone of arrogance coming from you. Of course not everyone in the industry has your attitude.

You had said you talked to people 'high up in software companies' who said people from 4 year CS degrees were arrogant - but you were really just talking about me?

Well, that makes more sense - its much more plausible to find an individual arrogant, rather than people who do tech undergrads in general.

Kellzer wrote: »

This course looks for people coming from a numerate background, with a degree already ("solid undergraduate education"). I did an engineering degree and have covered a lot of maths already. Almost all undergrad courses have communications built in to them now as well. I know from my undergrad that the subjects that we covered were very general in 1st and 2nd year and only in the final two years did we specialise. For that reason, I see no reason why a 1 year intensive course can't bring you to a good standard, assuming the foundations have been laid in your undergrad.

Yeah, I'd totally agree with you there - if you have an engineering degree, I would imagine a 1 year intensive course could definitely bring you up to a good standard.

Don't engineers even have intro programming modules in most engineering degrees these days?

But in fairness, that is a very different context, to that of the posts I made.
I was very clearly referring to the scenario of doing an MSc without a relevant background.
As you can see if you read the thread.

Kellzer wrote: »

With regard to the name of the course, of course it means something. It would be stupid to suggest that this could be called a Phd in the same way. This course is a HDip (Level 8-same as a degree) and it takes 2 years to get a masters (Level 9). You can get a masters in software development in 1 year through a conversion course in Queens University (to name but one) so this course is actually pushing you harder for the same qualification. I know people who have done conversion masters in 1 year (and landed jobs successfully) converting from very different disciplines such as finance to psychology in 1 year from different Universities all over Ireland and UK. At the end of the day you learn more in your first year in a job than you ever do in college and employers know this.

Well, perhaps we will just differ about what a 'masters' should mean.

Not knowing much about the domains, I'd have the same issue with the finance->psychology scenario. I don't think it makes sense to give a masters to someone who does psychology for 4 years, and then does a 1 year masters; but also give a masters in psychology to someone who does finance for 4 years, but then does a one year course in psychology.

That just doesnt make sense to me, in terms of what a 'masters' should mean.
Unless finance and psychology have more overlap than I would guess.

Kellzer wrote: »

Anyway-I just said I would reply because it annoys me when people hijack threads when they have nothing constructive to add and when it really doesn't concern them. This thread is for people looking for information and discussion on this course, not for people coming in to argue about the name of the course and to point out how useless this is compared to a CS undergrad.

That is simply an unfair characterisation of my posts.

No one is saying the course is useless compared to a CS undergrad - just that its not going to be possible to cover all of the same important stuff in 1/4 the time.

I would guess it'll still be a great course, and that those who do it will get a lot out of it.
This is a great time to be studying IT.

Kellzer

Yeah I definately accept your point about converting from something like psychology to something completely different like finance and being awarded a masters. I think it's a serious leap and change of direction but if you have a degree it seems to be possible to convert into any area. I'm sorry for taking you up wrong on what you were saying about people converting into CS from appropriate backgrounds because I think we're in agreement on that front.

starWave

For anyone who genuinely wants info on this course, there is another thread about the Diploma version, which is the same as Year 1 of the MSc course.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056761572

Regarding the discussion, what constitutes an MSc or not an MSc, I'm sure there are strict criteria which universities have to follow to award a degree, masters, diploma or pHd or whatever.

All the bashing here is uncalled for, and unhelpful.

Seems to be a lot of people here with IT or CS degrees who think their degree is being undervalued by this MSc course. It doesn't reflect on any degree course, and its not a big deal that a technical person can get an MSc in software in two years. Its "software design", its not covering or trying to cover a computer science degree or IT degree, which I imagine covers a whole lot more than software design (networks, operating systems, database technologies, electronics, etc). So its not unreasonable that you can obtain an MSc in two years as pointed out by Kellzer.

When you work in the real world for a while, you realise experience counts for a lot more than postgraduate qualifications.