Grands said:
I've seen that a lots of people end his carrier as a student without doing the master degree, and my question is, how much this one in important in the USA?
For example in Italy is very hard to find a job with only a bachelor's degree, and probably it will be underpaid, cause the bachelor's degree is seen as half of the academic carrier that a person need to have.
A lots of american student that came to study in Italy told me that do not intent to take the master degree, because in they opinion is useless.
We had a previous thread on the value of an MS in Physics. That thread got highly convoluted because of the different responses from US and non-US members. Since you asked specifically about the US, let me reinforce an important point that sympolipoint raised.
In the US, an undergraduate program typically leads to a bachelor’s degree (such as a BS) in 4 yrs. Upon receiving a BS, you have the following options:
(1) Get a job
(2) Go to grad school for a master’s degree (such as an MS). This typically takes 1 or 2 years.
(3) Go to grad school for a doctor’s degree (such as a PhD). This typically takes 4 – 7 years. It is important to note that in the US a student can directly enter a PhD program with only a BS, an MS is not needed; this is a critical distinction from practice in other countries. Depending on the school, students may get an MS upon completion of certain requirements during the initial phase of the PhD program; but in some schools, they do not.
Upon completion of an MS, you have the following options:
(1) Get a job
(2) Continue in grad school (either the same one or a different one) for a PhD degree.
In the US, you can get a job with a BS, an MS, or a PhD. The functions, tasks, and pay, of course, vary with the degree. So your question really boils down to “What advantages does an MS give you over a BS?” There is not a simple answer; it depends on a number of factors, such as:
(a) Major (e.g., physics, chemistry, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, computer science, ...)
(b) Industry (e.g., microelectronics, telecommunications, consumer electronics, petroleum refining, software, ...)
(c) Company size (e.g., startup, small, medium, large, mega ...)
(d) Organization (e.g., research, development, manufacturing, customer support, ...).
A major consideration is also whether you are satisfied with a support role or want a lead role. For example, if you work in optoelectronics, do you want to be designing an improved laser, or do you want to be taking measurements characterizing the laser (using a test set designed by someone else)? As another example, if you work in computer science, do you want to develop the Next Big Algorithm, or do you want to write code for a module of the next Big Algorithm?
So, if you are satisfied with a support role, you can stop with a BS. If you want a lead role, you need to determine whether an MS will afford you significant opportunities, or whether a PhD is required. That will depend on the factors I’ve listed above. For example, if you want a lead role in the research division of a microelectronics company, you will probably need a PhD. But if you want to be a manager in the manufacturing division of the same company, you can probably get by with an MS (or stop with a BS and get an MBA instead of an MS).
As a general rule, my guidance is that it is worthwhile to get a masters in computer science or any engineering field, because a masters will open up substantially more opportunities for a lead role (over a BS). But it is not worthwhile to get a masters in such fields as physics, chemistry, or biology, because typically a PhD is needed to open up substantially more opportunities for a lead role (over a BS). Usual caveat: there are always exceptions depending on specific combination of factors (and people always point out that Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard and started Microsoft, but I consider Bill Gates an outlier).
With respect to physics specifically:
(1) Traditional grad physics programs have been geared towards a PhD. In some schools, you pick up a masters upon completion of X credits of coursework. Also, in some schools, you get a masters as a consolation prize if you do not complete your PhD program (e.g., you do not pass your qualifying exams, you do not complete your thesis work, ...). This dilutes the value of a masters in physics.
(2) Some schools have recognized that there is a need for a graduate program in physics that is not geared towards a PhD. Towards this end, they have started “professional masters” programs. I don’t know anyone who has completed such a program, and I don’t know how well such degrees are received by employers. Perhaps others here do.