Should I pursue MEng or should I start working?

  • Thread starter Thread starter geft
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Graduating with a BEng in Electronic Science and Technology from the University of Liverpool opens the choice between pursuing a master's degree (MEng) or entering the workforce. The MEng is increasingly seen as the standard for engineering careers, essential for chartership and generally more desirable than a BEng alone. It is important to note that the MEng is classified as an undergraduate degree, despite its master's level designation, meaning students do not graduate with a BEng if they continue to the MEng.There is debate regarding the necessity of an MSc, with some arguing it is unnecessary unless switching fields, as many MSc programs lack accreditation and may serve primarily as revenue sources for universities. The UK has introduced "undergraduate master's degrees" to align with European education standards, resulting in degrees like MEng that last longer than traditional bachelor's programs. Professional institutes, such as IMechE and IET, provide accreditation lists, revealing that many MSc programs are not accredited, further questioning their value.
geft
Messages
144
Reaction score
0
I'm graduating in BEng Electronic Science and Technology next year in University of Liverpool. I can then choose whether to continue doing my postgraduate studies or to just start working. It's either higher starting salary or 2 years of experience. Would a master's degree be worthwhile?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, the MEng is practically the standard route into engineering these days. You need it for your chartership and it's overall much more desirable than just a BEng.

However, the MEng is still an undergraduate degree. It's not a postgraduate degree and if you continue you won't graduate with a BEng, you'll just continue all the way through.
 
An MEng is an undergraduate degree? Does that mean I need an Msc? Which is better in your opinion?
 
You don't need an MSc - an MEng is already a masters degree, just an undergraduate one.

In my opinion an MSc is a waste of money if you're not trying to switch fields. A lot of MSc degrees aren't accredited either, and function as money spinners for the university as they know that there are a lot of foreign students willing to pay fairly heft amounts to put certain brand names on their CV.

I would just do the MEng and get all of the required academia out of the way.
 
You don't need an MSc - an MEng is already a masters degree, just an undergraduate one.

Question. What does that even mean? Undergraduate by its very definition means prior to graduation. Is this another instance where Europe does things differently?

A lot of MSc degrees aren't accredited either

And where did you get this?
 
Angry Citizen said:
Question. What does that even mean? Undergraduate by its very definition means prior to graduation. Is this another instance where Europe does things differently?

In the UK there now exist "undergraduate masters degrees". These are essentially a full undergraduate degree integrated with a masters degree at the end, so they last a year longer than a standard undergraduate degree and the end award is at masters level, e.g. MEng or MSci, rather than bachelors level.

They were introduced to try and reduce the disparity between a three year English bachelors degree and four year ones elsewhere in Europe. And in Scotland where degrees are a year longer this means that some degrees are five years long!

And where did you get this?

The professional institutes e.g. the IMechE and IET have lists on their websites of all the degrees they accredit and a lot of MSc degrees offered by universities are not on these lists hence they're unaccredited.
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...

Similar threads

Back
Top