Is having one year of work experience more beneficial than doing a masters?

darbar

I was wondering could I get opinions on this, I'm in 4th year in college and have approximately 6 months left.Out of the 12 modules I will do this year I have a keen interest in one of them.I would like to do a masters (paying for it myself) in this subject to gain a broader understanding of it.

My dad however is of the idea that I should try and find work first in this field and if needs be travel abroad.As he is of the opinion that someone going for a interview with a degree in the same subject and one year of work experience would be at an advantage compared to me if I had a masters. I can see where he is coming from,I'm just wondering has anyone faced a similar situation and what did they ultimately end up doing?

Nino Brown

darbar wrote: »

I was wondering could I get opinions on this, I'm in 4th year in college and have approximately 6 months left.Out of the 12 modules I will do this year I have a keen interest in one of them.I would like to do a masters (paying for it myself) in this subject to gain a broader understanding of it.

My dad however is of the idea that I should try and find work first in this field and if needs be travel abroad.As he is of the opinion that someone going for a interview with a degree in the same subject and one year of work experience would be at an advantage compared to me if I had a masters. I can see where he is coming from,I'm just wondering has anyone faced a similar situation and what did they ultimately end up doing?

I'd say do the masters, where I work they don't hire engineers with just degree's anymore, you need a masters or PHD. It depends on the subject of course.

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

Tordelback

Reckon there's at least two sides to this.

First, getting some experience in your field will give you a far better idea of what you actually want to do by way of post-grad courses, as well as giving you a better perspective on the subject when you return to study than going into it with just a student's eyes.

Second, there's always a risk that once you enter the world of work it will seem less and less attractive to go back to college, and you'll keep postponing it. You may well find yourself several years down the line wishing you had done that Masters while you were on a roll, and as an earlier poster has said, a Masters is really the starting point for qualification in many fields these days. Meanwhile, a year's experience is nothing over the span of a working life.

Worth thinking about these things, and if possible talking to potential employers/professional associations about the advantages or otherwise of post-grad qualifications.

PhoenixParker

As an engineer with both a Masters and a PhD I say very firmly that your Dad is right, go and work first.
What you think you're interested in doing as work will change a lot in your first year or two of working.
A subject can be very interesting to study at an academic level, but very boring to actually work in.

The opportunity cost of doing a Masters is huge - one year when you could be earning a salary + the money it costs you to a do a masters.
You need to take time to make sure that it's what you really want to do and no matter how you feel now, you need some real experience to know the answer to that.

Take the year or two working to experience the real world then decide which part you want to focus your career into.

shygal

Perhaps seek a summer internship in your desired field. Then start the masters in September.

This way you get work experience and a taste of working life, folowed by a masters

Mrs OBumble

I'm not sure where the engineering slant to the answers came from?

Anyways, I'd be firmly of the opinion that in most fields on year's work experience is more valuable than a masters.

Do the masters later on, ideally while you're working for a company that will sponsor you to do it.

(Maybe I'm biased 'cos I once worked with a masters graduate with a business degree .. and it transpired that he couldn't even use a spreadsheet. Must have paid someone to do his assignments for him.)

PhoenixParker

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I'm not sure where the engineering slant to the answers came from?

Anyways, I'd be firmly of the opinion that in most fields on year's work experience is more valuable than a masters.

Do the masters later on, ideally while you're working for a company that will sponsor you to do it.

(Maybe I'm biased 'cos I once worked with a masters graduate with a business degree .. and it transpired that he couldn't even use a spreadsheet. Must have paid someone to do his assignments for him.)

I've just realised you're right, OP doesn't say he's an engineer in his original post. My answer goes almost double for other fields of study.

I see universities selling students on the idea of a masters straight out of college as:

"you've spent 3-4 years studying this topic, but despite the thousands of euros and hundreds of hours of time you've spent and we've spent, you still don't quite know enough about the subject to be employable, why not give us more of your money and more of your time so that you'll be truly worth hiring . . ."

This is what doing a masters in your subject field straight out of college really is. I really question the value of that approach, especially considering like Mrs O'Bumble I've seen graduates who are completely clueless. How can someone with a recent degree and a masters in Business in this day and age not know the basics of setting up a website? Surely that's fundamental to setting up any business in the modern world.

Instead, what a masters should be is a great way to cleverly re-orientate your career and make yourself a unique and standout candidate a few years out of college.

Have a degree in engineering, do a masters in business and suddenly you're the guy in the office who actually knows how to make a profit from your clients.

Have a degree in physics, do a masters in engineering and suddenly a whole range of new jobs open up.

Have a degree in English, do a masters in website design, now you're the website manager for a large company.

A degree in an area + a masters in a particular field of that area makes you very narrow straight off the bat. You should be very sure (through work experience in the field) that that's the route you want to take.

A degree in one area + a masters in a totally different area makes you both broad and narrow at the same time. It can really make you a stand out candidate, and a masters at the right time can move you from a field where there's a job shortage to one where there's a job boom.

Save the money and time for a masters until it's clear it'll really help you get exactly where you know you want to go.

Mr. Loverman

Do the masters. Over the lifetime of your CV, it stands out more than one year of work.

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

The Buster

I would be of the opinion to get the work experience and consider doing a part-time Masters in 2 or 3 years time. I think a Masters is more beneficial when you have some work experiences to apply your learnings to

thegreatgonzo

Hi OP I was asking myself the same question as you last year.
I opted to work and postpone the masters (probably for at least 2 years in my case). My situation is probably different to you, I was a mature student and very anxious to get back working as I felt I had been out of the workplace too long. I was also wavering between 2 different masters. My degree is in science and I think I'll benefit from having extra time to decide on the best thing to do. I was offered one course in the UK and I'm not sorry I turned it down and I'm getting some (paid) work experience for my CV. I am a bit concerned that it will be difficult to go back to college to do the masters but I know if I do it will be for the right reasons.

modmuffin

As an employer of graduate positions in a small company, it really doesn't matter much if you have a degree or masters as we provide specific training on the job.

We are actually now focusing on hiring degree grads and supporting further education through our employee development programme, which is win-win for employees and the company.

I also believe a masters is much more beneficial if you go back to do it after 2-3 years experience as you can relate the learning to the real world experience

shruikan2553

I was warned that by working first you may find it more difficult to go back and do the masters as you get used to getting a salary and you keep putting it off. Although on the other hand your employer may fund your masters part time. While it's a lot of work you would still be receiving your wages and getting a masters. It depends on if the masters would be beneficial to the company though.

Tarzana2

PhoenixParker wrote: »

How can someone with a recent degree and a masters in Business in this day and age not know the basics of setting up a website?

A great many graduates wouldn't know how to do that. That's quite specific and many business degrees wouldn't be tailored to it.

skallywag

If you have the opportunity of decent and interesting work in your chosen field then take it, don't give the masters a second thought.

As someone who hires both graduates and experienced professionals, recent relevant industrial experience is the number one thing which I will look for. I don't mean to belittle those who carry on to do further study in any way, but good industrial opportunities for fresh grads can be fairly thin on the ground these days, and I would be very reluctant to turn down an exciting opportunity, should one come up.

In general I would certainly hire the candidate with degree + 1 year of relevant work experience over a candidate with a masters, unless of course the focus of the master itself is where my key interest is, and there is a lack within the industry on this topic.

Mrs OBumble

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Many people can indeed learn to use a spreadsheet from a tutorial - if and if only they have the mindset to do so.

Unfortunately delegation was not a particularly useful skillset for someone hired as an entry-level data analyst in a market research team: in that role, being on the receiving end was pretty much the only exposure someone has to delegation.

I had changed jobs fairly soon after, but heard that he left saying that he felt he had learned all he could from the role. I understand that all his colleagues at the time nodded sagely and agreed that indeed, his learning capacity had been reached.