Masters before PhD??

eZe^

Hey, I've currently just entered my final year of studies as an undergraduate student. Now is basically the time for me to start applying and looking at different post graduate opportunities. My plan was always to go straight onto a PhD (I plan on applying to UCL and Imperial College), but today I put some thought into the prospect of doing a Masters beforehand.

I know that going straight into a PhD would essentially negate the need to get a a masters qualification, but there are a few significant benefits. At the moment
I'm in UCC, and while a very good academic institution, it would be much easier to go into a PhD at Imperial/ UCL if I've studied and 'proven my worth' over there (although my grades are high enough to meet the PhD requirements). Also, it'd be a nice short term way of finding out if the institution is a place I'd like to do my PhD, and similarly with London, do I like the city and would I like to live there, etc...

So at the moment I'm warming to the idea of doing of Masters, but the draw backs are obvious, if I got accepted into a PhD there would be no real need to do a Masters, also, it's quite expensive, as doing a PhD would include a grant that would pay for fees and basic living expenses (about 16,000 a year). Is there any form of grant/ funding an Irish student could apply for to do a Masters over in England or am I only clutching at straws?


Cheers anyway for taking time to read this, and I appreciate any feedback you could provide!

graduate

You don't say what field you are in. In the sciences, e.g. Chemistry a PhD after undergrad is usual enough and you can have a PhD when 24. In social sciences, business etc it is more usual to do a Masters and only then look to a PhD.

eZe^

Oh apologies, I'm a physics undergraduate. Didn't think it'd be that relevant, sorry!

mr.interested

I think it all depends on your career objectives. If you want to get a real job, then a master’s degree would give you more qualifications, and once you have it, you can then do a PhD possibly on the part-time basis? If you want to be a researcher in academia, then do a PhD straight away. However, if you want to be a lecturer, then again I think you would be better off with a master’s degree beforehand (because this means that you have broader knowledge on the postgraduate level, meaning you have more opportunities in lecturing). Having said that, 2:1 for doing a master’s degree first. But then again—that’s my opinion. Your call.

PS It's a "master's degree", not "masters"—unless you intend to do two or more master's degrees.

eZe^

Well I've no real desire to anything part time. I'm quite driven and would like to dedicate myself to physics research for a few years. Down the line I would probably like to end up becoming a professor, but doing a post-graduate and post-doctorate will obviously be essential for that anyway, so either way a PhD is on the cards.

I just think it's difficult for any undergraduate to be certain about what they want to spend the next 4 years studying, and considering PhD's are so specialised, it's a very big risk imo. That's why at the moment doing another year may give me adequate time to see where I'd like to specialise, and it seems most of my professors/ senior researchers would agree seeing as most of them have an M.Sc too.

El Siglo

eZe^ wrote: »

Hey, I've currently just entered my final year of studies as an undergraduate student. Now is basically the time for me to start applying and looking at different post graduate opportunities. My plan was always to go straight onto a PhD (I plan on applying to UCL and Imperial College), but today I put some thought into the prospect of doing a Masters beforehand.

Right you should.

I know that going straight into a PhD would essentially negate the need to get a a masters qualification, but there are a few significant benefits. At the moment
I'm in UCC, and while a very good academic institution, it would be much easier to go into a PhD at Imperial/ UCL if I've studied and 'proven my worth' over there (although my grades are high enough to meet the PhD requirements). Also, it'd be a nice short term way of finding out if the institution is a place I'd like to do my PhD, and similarly with London, do I like the city and would I like to live there, etc...

I'm afraid that whole paragraph, while well meaning is rather nieve (i.e. it's bollocks, apologies but allow me to elaborate). Going straight into a PhD doesn't necessarily negate the need of a masters, if it's a taught masters for example there's a certain amount of stuff covered that wouldn't be covered in a PhD. Secondly, institutions don't matter a fuck. Nobody, not least the people in these places give a fuck. The only thing that matters which is summed up in one word; FUNDING. There's easier ways of finding out what London's like, I worked there for a while, that was a lot handier than doing a masters/PhD. Also, a year might be short term but it's not an easy year.

So at the moment I'm warming to the idea of doing of Masters, but the draw backs are obvious, if I got accepted into a PhD there would be no real need to do a Masters, also, it's quite expensive, as doing a PhD would include a grant that would pay for fees and basic living expenses (about 16,000 a year). Is there any form of grant/ funding an Irish student could apply for to do a Masters over in England or am I only clutching at straws?

Yes, but there's stuff in a masters that you wouldn't do in a PhD. I was in the same boat over a year ago. Got offered a PhD and a masters, went with the masters which without it, would have meant I'd have done a shit project in my PhD (i.e. I got clarity and more training in techniques with the masters). Going to another institution is great, that'll crown you. But just because a masters isn't a PhD doesn't mean it's ****. On the contrary it means you've another year of hard work and it might help bridge the gap between undergrad and PhD. And there's nothing for Irish/EU students in the UK, trust me on that one.

Cheers anyway for taking time to read this, and I appreciate any feedback you could provide!

It's like this, you can pick the colleges etc... but it goes on funding and a good supervisor. Once those two things are sorted then everything is sorted (more or less). In a matter of speaking you don't pick the college, you pick the supervisor.
Secondly, the jump from undergrad to postgrad (let alone PhD) is tough at the best of times. No matter how well you do in the undergrad, nothing (and I mean nothing) will prepare you for what a PhD entails.
Finally, don't discount the power of a taught masters. It gives you another set of skills and another few letters on the cv. Also you make some contacts, which is probably the best thing you can do in a PhD.

As mordant as my post appears, I've been in the same boat and in fact I'm still in it. If I was told this before I'd have been delighted (would've saved more time and money). Good luck in any case.

Alliandre

I'm also in physics and I just finished my masters and will be starting a PhD soon. I would recommend doing one before a PhD as I found it invaluable. I know a lot of physics PhD students that find it very difficult to adjust to the research, having gone straight from undergrads. A masters (mine was mostly taught) gives you a little more time to learn the ropes before jumping into a PhD.

eZe^

El Siglo wrote: »

I'm afraid that whole paragraph, while well meaning is rather nieve (i.e. it's bollocks, apologies but allow me to elaborate). Going straight into a PhD doesn't necessarily negate the need of a masters, if it's a taught masters for example there's a certain amount of stuff covered that wouldn't be covered in a PhD. Secondly, institutions don't matter a fuck. Nobody, not least the people in these places give a fuck. The only thing that matters which is summed up in one word; FUNDING. There's easier ways of finding out what London's like, I worked there for a while, that was a lot handier than doing a masters/PhD. Also, a year might be short term but it's not an easy year.

I think you've taken me up wrong. I didn't mean that it makes the master's a useless qualification, just that more and more in the physics field you see that people with good enough marks go straight onto a PhD after getting their UG degree. In alot of cases (here anyway) the students who do a master's are the ones who didn't get high enough marks to obtain the necessary funding to go straight into their PhD's. So that's more what I meant with that statement.

On London, I don't want to defer my post graduate studies by a year just to see if I like the city. So from evidence here, getting a taught Master's seems to be a very useful, especially if I plan on going down the lecturing side of things (which is an avenue I'd would like to be possible in the future). If I go to London, it would be because I got accepted to do a Master's or a PhD. So another advantage of doing a Master's is that the year would be an excellent opportunity to see if I could acclimatise for living there over the next decade or whatever.

Yes, but there's stuff in a masters that you wouldn't do in a PhD. I was in the same boat over a year ago. Got offered a PhD and a masters, went with the masters which without it, would have meant I'd have done a shit project in my PhD (i.e. I got clarity and more training in techniques with the masters). Going to another institution is great, that'll crown you. But just because a masters isn't a PhD doesn't mean it's ****. On the contrary it means you've another year of hard work and it might help bridge the gap between undergrad and PhD. And there's nothing for Irish/EU students in the UK, trust me on that one.

That's very encouraging news to hear. I would enjoy going on to study some physics topics in more detail (QFT for example), and if I'm being honest, I'm stilll quite unsure exactly what area of physics I'd like to specialise. So in that way a Master's would make sense. Again, I'm not saying that a Master's will be a walk in the park, but I know I'm dedicated enough and enthusiatic so I'll work my ass off regardless.

The grant side of things is a bit sh*t, but I guess when it comes to education you gotta do what you gotta do. Hello bank loan...

It's like this, you can pick the colleges etc... but it goes on funding and a good supervisor. Once those two things are sorted then everything is sorted (more or less). In a matter of speaking you don't pick the college, you pick the supervisor.
Secondly, the jump from undergrad to postgrad (let alone PhD) is tough at the best of times. No matter how well you do in the undergrad, nothing (and I mean nothing) will prepare you for what a PhD entails.
Finally, don't discount the power of a taught masters. It gives you another set of skills and another few letters on the cv. Also you make some contacts, which is probably the best thing you can do in a PhD.

Ya, I've been in correspondence to a number of possible supervisors, again, it's just difficult to know what specific area of physics I want to specialise in for the next 4 years (and beyond when I go on to do a post-doc, etc..).

Also, I'm well aware of the gap between undergraduateand postgraduate level. I've worked essentially as a PhD student on summer research projects. So I know how difficult the experience can be, but again, I'm willing to put in the work, and hopefully reap the rewards.

As mordant as my post appears, I've been in the same boat and in fact I'm still in it. If I was told this before I'd have been delighted (would've saved more time and money). Good luck in any case.

Nah, I can take criticism, and you're advice was very very helpful. You answered all of my specific questions and I appreciate that, thank you very much.

Alliandre wrote: »

I'm also in physics and I just finished my masters and will be starting a PhD soon. I would recommend doing one before a PhD as I found it invaluable. I know a lot of physics PhD students that find it very difficult to adjust to the research, having gone straight from undergrads. A masters (mine was mostly taught) gives you a little more time to learn the ropes before jumping into a PhD.

Would it be brash of me to ask you where you did your undergraduate degree, Master's, and where you plan on doing your PhD? Also, how did you do in your UG degree marks wise? Did you do a Master's by choice or did you have to do it get to be granted funding for your PhD?

At the moment I'm really leaning towards doing a taught Master's before going on to do my PhD, from what's been posted here, it seems it will stand to me in the future. I'll set up a meeting with a few lecturers and ask their advice too.

Einstein?

eZe^ wrote: »

Hey, I've currently just entered my final year of studies as an undergraduate student. Now is basically the time for me to start applying and looking at different post graduate opportunities. My plan was always to go straight onto a PhD (I plan on applying to UCL and Imperial College), but today I put some thought into the prospect of doing a Masters beforehand.

I know that going straight into a PhD would essentially negate the need to get a a masters qualification, but there are a few significant benefits. At the moment
I'm in UCC, and while a very good academic institution, it would be much easier to go into a PhD at Imperial/ UCL if I've studied and 'proven my worth' over there (although my grades are high enough to meet the PhD requirements). Also, it'd be a nice short term way of finding out if the institution is a place I'd like to do my PhD, and similarly with London, do I like the city and would I like to live there, etc...

So at the moment I'm warming to the idea of doing of Masters, but the draw backs are obvious, if I got accepted into a PhD there would be no real need to do a Masters, also, it's quite expensive, as doing a PhD would include a grant that would pay for fees and basic living expenses (about 16,000 a year). Is there any form of grant/ funding an Irish student could apply for to do a Masters over in England or am I only clutching at straws?


Cheers anyway for taking time to read this, and I appreciate any feedback you could provide!

Do share about the 16,000 & grants - from where and how?

D-Generate

PhD funding in UCL was around £16k for the guys I know pursuing it.

OP I was in a similar position as you two years ago. As I was finishing my undergraduate degree I was debating PhD or a Masters degree. I really couldn't decide if the PhD areas and topics available to me were ones I would be interested in 4 years down the road and in the end I decided to do an MSc in UCL. Looking back I now think that it was definitely the right decision for me.

A number of guys in my class decided to go on to do PhDs in UCL having completed the MSc but I decided not to for two reasons,
A) London is expensive and spending my mid-20s as a broke student is not fun
See A
Seriously, I am not exaggerating this. Unless you are in love with your topic, being broke in London will sap the life out of you.

I think you should do an MSc in UCL or Imperial rather than going straight to PhD. It will give you time to explore new research areas and see if you really want to pursue the PhD. You could always do your thesis in conjunction with your future supervisor and maybe shave a year off the length of the PhD. It will also allow you see if London is for you before you commit to a long period of studying there.

eZe^

That's a fantastic post D-Generate. Thanks so much, really helpful. Could I ask you a few questions though? What degree and what university did you apply to UCL from? How did you do in your UG degree? How complicated and difficult was the application process? And how good was the teaching quality at UCL? (a million times better than somewhere like UCC I bet..) What are you doing now?

Sorry for all the questions, I'm just really curious right now, and want as much advice/ comforting/ encouragement as possible.

Odysseus

El Siglo wrote: »

Finally, don't discount the power of a taught masters. It gives you another set of skills and another few letters on the cv. Also you make some contacts, which is probably the best thing you can do in a PhD.

That would basically sum up the answer for me. I'm in no rush to do my PhD, but I completed my Research MA in 2002. I decided to take a good long break develop my clinical skills. Anyway, I have just started a MSc and plan another one in a cognate area before I tackle the PhD.


I know this means I will have 3 Masters degrees before I start my PhD, but I do think they will enrich my work, additionally I am picking these particular MSc's as they cover areas I know will be of benefit to me and I will use on the PhD.

OP I'm not saying you have to do more that one Master's, but I do think it would be of benefit for you later on when you start your PhD.

D-Generate

I did Elec Eng in UCC. Had high percentage first class honours every year and published two papers in my final year so I had above the 2:1 requirements no problem.
I applied to do an MSc in Machine Learning which is quite mathematical and not Elec Eng so despite having good grades they sent me a maths test to complete and send back in to them. The application process was grand and the department I was in contact with were excellent. They were really quick to respond and were quite apologetic in getting me to do the test, its just as far as I can imagine, outside of Trinity they haven't a notion of the Irish academic system. Unfortunately I don't have my letter of motivation with me at the moment but I will try and dig it up and send it on to you so you can see the crap that you have to write.

The teaching quality was different from Elec Eng in UCC but that could be also attributed to it not being Engineering. The lecturers were definitely leaders of their field and many of them were authorities on Machine Learning so was excellent to have the well known characters teaching us and what you were learning was on the cutting edge. In UCC I had a few spoofers who you could tell weren't either interested in that area or hadn't a clue about that area. That being said though, they were less approachable than lecturers in UCC and there certainly was less of the friendly, fun banter that I had in lectures in UCC.
Nonetheless I was there to learn and I wouldn't have got the same quality of sources on Machine Learning anywhere else in Europe.

On our masters and I imagine its similar for others, groups of 6 are assigned a tutor and you meet them every week for an hour or so. The tutors are senior lecturers too rather than just PhD students so it was quite helpful. I was fortunate enough that I got a kick ass supervisor for my dissertation also which helped a lot.

My class was quite diverse, in so far that out of 25ish or so people only 4 were native English speakers. UCL prides itself on having high percentage of international students and it certainly was the case here. It is cool to get to experience different cultures but I found them on the whole to be quite dry and not down for going to a pub every now and then. For instance, after handing in the thesis only about 8 showed up for celebration drinks and it should really have been called celebration drink.
Out of the 25 only about 10 of us were fresh from undergraduate level and it was certainly noticeable that those fresh from UG struggled more during the year. I attribute that partially to having the culture shock of moving to London and having to settle in.

Well I finished my thesis a few weeks ago and having UCL on your CV is quite a magnet for employers. One week after handing in my thesis I had two job offers and in a few weeks I will be starting a job in Trade Support/Trader Assistant for a large Investment Bank.
A lot of the guys in the class are off to do PhDs in UCL and around the place and a lot of the others just went back home to find jobs in their own respective countries. Of the ones who wanted to live and work in London they have all been successful in getting decent jobs.
One guy pursued a PhD with the Physics department as part of the Great08 Challenge or might be Great10 challenge now. Its in astrophysics and classification of galaxies and stuff. His stipend is £16k I think and I also believe that it goes up each year and can get money from teaching too.

Any other questions just ask away!

breadmonkey

Hi D-Generate. I just had a quick google of "Machine Learning". Do aspects of that discipline relate to your forthcoming job or were they simply interested because you had an MSc from a highly regarded university?

eZe^

Hi D-Generate, thanks so much for disclosing so much information. Really really helpful. I met up with the 4th year physics module co-ordinator and he also recommended that a taught master's would be a very good idea.

It looks like I'll go ahead and apply to both UCL and Imperial so. Looking through their website, the application process is very similar for both. However, when did you send in your application D-Generate? Did you wait until you got your 4th year exam results? If possible I'd like to send in an application soonish. I expect to graduate with a 1,1 also, and over the summer worked on a paper so I'll be a co-author when that goes to be published in October.

I wouldn't expect anything other than a load of dryballs from a place like UCL or Imperial. Luckily one of my best mates from my course also wants to head to London to do a PhD, so I'll have someone to get up to a bit of devilment with while I acclimatise. I worked in Tyndall over the summer so I'm well aware of how anti-social most postgrads in physics/ engineering can be!

How was your project actually? It's a short term one ya? Was it on a similar level to the projects you worked on in Elec Eng that ended up being published? Or were you much more independent?

Fair play on getting employment by the way. I am quite open to the idea of 'selling out' (no offense meant here by the way, it's just that's how our lecturer described it when he worked for an investment banking company back in the 80s for a few years) for a while and working for a bank. Make the benjamins! Hahaha. Another important question D-Generate, how did you fund your MSc? Did you get a scholarship or funding or anything like that? Looking like a bank loan will be on the cards for me!! :P

D-Generate

I haven't started yet, they are still going through all that references/background check stuff but the job won't be related to Machine Learning as I won't be building models (unfortunately).
My job will be booking vanilla options/swaps, calculating payments of options/swaps, fixing errors, getting coffee.... That being said though, it requires a quantitative background and programming (VBA, yes I know, not real programming). The other members of the team are all maths and engineering grads, interviewers were engineers and last person they hired had masters in Maths from Oxford.

Ideally I would have liked to go into a quant position and develop trading models but unfortunately you usually need either a PhD or experience in finance to get those positions. As I had neither and had no notion of doing a PhD I chose to go for this position. It gives me good exposure to traders (sitting on their desk) and quants (sitting on the next desk) and it is basically a gateway to either position. Projects are conducted with quants and hopefully when I am involved in those I can get to bring up my Machine Learning and kinda shoehorn it in there.

The problem with Machine Learning is that it might be a bit too new altogether. Artificial Intelligence is well known, statistical modelling is well known, regression is well known but Machine Learning at the moment is not a commonly used term to describe an encapsulation of all those. I think that over the next few years as it becomes more in demand it will stand me well to have had an MSc in it and have had the experience of working with structured products. To keep on top of my skills I will need to make sure I really put myself out there for any quant projects that crop up. It is a slight worry that if I don't then my MSc might go to waste.

In regards to applying, I applied for UCL around Christmas of 4th year. I had firsts all along and was expecting a first in 4th year so they sent out a conditional offer, conditional on me getting a 2:1. I think they stopped taking applications around June or so, so definitely apply as soon as possible. It will take about a eight weeks anyway to go through the complete application process so get cracking! I am not sure how important references are, I used a VP in UCC who so happened to be my 4th year project supervisor which might have helped.

I was fortunate enough to have my parents fund my little adventure over to London. Well like give a zero interest loan but I also took out a little loan myself. Fees were £3950, Rent for me was £470 (incl bills) a month, Transport £80 a month so that is around £10k. Then about another £5k or so, probably less to live on. They don't really give scholarships to people from UK & Ireland, or even the EU for masters but I am sure if you dig about you might find one.

My project was from May until September, around 60-70 pages long or so. For my project I decided to build a statistical model to identify the skill of each player in the Premier League and also to bet strategically so as to produce a good return. Basically extending Elo ratings to account for teams of individual players. I also threw in a few other factors other than that. My supervisor liked it and it wasn't incredibly complex to be honest, as such i was able to implement every single thing I wanted and extend the project a bit more than the objective. Oh there is certainly a step up in difficulty level in exams over here. In UCC my average mark each year was always greater than 82%, in UCL I averaged around 61%. Pass is 50% and around 50% of the class failed one module or more. There are no repeats until the following year so most definitely don't fail!!!

NeuroticMonkey

Hey! Cheers for posting...having exactly the same dilemma myself. But I'm leaning more towards a masters myself as I'm currently on a year off after a pretty stressful final year last year (for personal and academic reasons). Looking forward to seeing the responses you get to this!

NeuroticMonkey

mr.interested wrote: »

I think it all depends on your career objectives. If you want to get a real job, then a master’s degree would give you more qualifications, and once you have it, you can then do a PhD possibly on the part-time basis? If you want to be a researcher in academia, then do a PhD straight away. However, if you want to be a lecturer, then again I think you would be better off with a master’s degree beforehand (because this means that you have broader knowledge on the postgraduate level, meaning you have more opportunities in lecturing). Having said that, 2:1 for doing a master’s degree first. But then again—that’s my opinion. Your call.

PS It's a "master's degree", not "masters"—unless you intend to do two or more master's degrees.

Mr. Interested, just curious what you mean by "Having said that, 2:1 for doing a master’s degree first. But then again—that’s my opinion."

Do you mean that if you are on a 2:1 you'd be better off doing the Master first?

Fremen

eze^: if you want to work in mathematical physics, you should apply for part III of the tripos at Cambridge. I know a few of the mathematical physics PhD students at Imperial, and a good number of them went through that program. I only know of one guy who went straight from undergrad to PhD, and he went to Imperial as an undergrad, so he knew most of the lecturers.

mr.interested

NeuroticMonkey wrote: »

Mr. Interested, just curious what you mean by "Having said that, 2:1 for doing a master’s degree first. But then again—that’s my opinion."

Do you mean that if you are on a 2:1 you'd be better off doing the Master first?

My apology, I've misspoken. Let me rephrase: You would be better of having a master's degree in at least 2 out of those 3 routes I've mentioned. In other words, 2:1 for doing a master's degree first.

fillmore jive

Fremen wrote: »

eze^: if you want to work in mathematical physics, you should apply for part III of the tripos at Cambridge. I know a few of the mathematical physics PhD students at Imperial, and a good number of them went through that program. I only know of one guy who went straight from undergrad to PhD, and he went to Imperial as an undergrad, so he knew most of the lecturers.

How good of a degree do you need for part3? Im in the same boat as the op, graduating this year and not too sure whether to do a masters first before phd.

Rosita

El Siglo wrote: »

"institutions don't matter a fuck."

"Going to another institution is great, that'll crown you."

Sorry, can you clarify this please?

El Siglo

Rosita wrote: »

Sorry, can you clarify this please?

"institutions don't matter a fuck."

I meant this point in regards to rankings, league tables etc... and that these don't make the institution great, having a great supervisor who has interest in his/her students does. E.g. going to do a DPhil in Oxford just because it's Oxford, whereas doing your PhD in Sheffield because it's got a better department/supervisor etc... in your field.

"Going to another institution is great, that'll crown you."

Going to another institution is great because you pick up more contacts, experience how things are done differently in another setting. There's a rather controversial term for staying at the same institution for your PhD as well as your undergrad, it's called "academic incest". I don't buy into it, but I'm in my third university now so branching out has only been beneficial than if I had stayed put where I did my undergrad.

D-Generate

El Siglo wrote: »

I meant this point in regards to rankings, league tables etc... and that these don't make the institution great, having a great supervisor who has interest in his/her students does. E.g. going to do a DPhil in Oxford just because it's Oxford, whereas doing your PhD in Sheffield because it's got a better department/supervisor etc... in your field.

Depends what you want to do after the PhD. If it is to lecture in your field then yeah who your supervisor was is the all important but say if you want to work as a quant in a bank... well lets just say that the Sheffield guy need not waste his time writing a CV as it won't have a hope against an Oxbridge student even if the Oxbridge student had a brutal thesis and did sweet **** all.

El Siglo

D-Generate wrote: »

Depends what you want to do after the PhD. If it is to lecture in your field then yeah who your supervisor was is the all important but say if you want to work as a quant in a bank... well lets just say that the Sheffield guy need not waste his time writing a CV as it won't have a hope against an Oxbridge student even if the Oxbridge student had a brutal thesis and did sweet **** all.

Yeh, but what if the Sheffield guy has great referees, a few peer reviewed articles under his belt etc... I know a chap that did his undergrad in Keele, masters in Salford and PhD in Reading. He's written over a hundred articles and several books, he's worked with the World Bank, NERC, UN etc... Now, I worked with a chap who did his BA in Oxford and PhD in Cambridge, he's teaching English in Italy with a TEFL cert he did 25 years ago. So really, it's all relative at the end of the day and the institutions didn't make much difference to these people or their employers.

eZe^

Master's it is lads, cheers for the advice! It's between an MSc at Imperial in Quantum Fields and Fundamental Forces, and MSc in Durham in Particles, Strings, and Cosmology, and Part III at Cambridge. Let's hope things go my way!

Cool Mo D

El Siglo wrote: »

Yeh, but what if the Sheffield guy has great referees, a few peer reviewed articles under his belt etc... I know a chap that did his undergrad in Keele, masters in Salford and PhD in Reading. He's written over a hundred articles and several books, he's worked with the World Bank, NERC, UN etc... Now, I worked with a chap who did his BA in Oxford and PhD in Cambridge, he's teaching English in Italy with a TEFL cert he did 25 years ago. So really, it's all relative at the end of the day and the institutions didn't make much difference to these people or their employers.

I would agree - if you want a decent academic job after a PhD, it doesn't matter in the slightest if you went to top university, or a second rate one. If you have published a lot of good work, gone to conferences, given a few good talks, and made yourself known to people working in your field, that will really stand to you.

Much better then landing a spot at a prestigious university is finding a good project with a good supervisor, who is committed to helping you get a good PhD.

And I would disagree with the advice to get a masters pre PhD, at least in the sciences or engineering. If you know you want to do a PhD at some stage, that is a 4 year commitment. Spending an extra year doing a masters, and paying for the privilege seems like a bit much.

If you want a change after your undergraduate course, try and get a job related to your field would be better. That way, you get paid, and get experience outside academia. Since there's a big push from funding bodies for commercialising research, the fact that you have industrial experience can give you a bit of an edge.

Enkidu

eZe^ wrote: »

Master's it is lads, cheers for the advice! It's between an MSc at Imperial in Quantum Fields and Fundamental Forces, and MSc in Durham in Particles, Strings, and Cosmology, and Part III at Cambridge. Let's hope things go my way!

MSc at Imperial in Quantum Fields and Fundamental forces!

Over the last six years a lot of people who I have known went into the Part III detested it, where as nobody from the Imperial Masters did. They also allow you to do a thesis instead of just an essay.

Honestly I think the Imperial Masters leaves you with a deeper knowledge of theoretical physics, especially quantum field theory and the standard model (i.e. particle theory). The only way I would recommend the Part III is if you wanted to get into General Relativity.

Fremen

I was based at Imperial for a couple of years, and got to know some of the physicists there. Dorje Brody described the fundamental forces MSc as one of the hardest in the UK. I reckon if you do well in it, the world's pretty much your oyster.

I really think doing an MSc before a PhD is a wise choice. You'll grow a *lot* in that one year.