http://www.nationalacademies.org/morenews/20080711.html.
REPORT RELEASE: The Board on Higher Education and Workforce announces the release of “Science Professionals: Master’s Education for a Competitive World.”
=====================
Well, when the National Academies talk, you've gotta listen, I guess. But I'm a little suspicious of this. Higher academia has been getting it wrong for years about what skills and credentials are actually associated with the whole picture of technology happening, and they like having second-class citizens to be lab assistants, working in the machine shop, etc. when people with the same credentials could be valued first-class citizens in industry, developing new materials, computers, ships, aircraft, etc. or in technology policy or regulation.
There are a lot of disincentives to go for a long-term graduate degree in the natural sciences - in terms of financial and lifestyle choices. This looks like the academic departments are, in a more kind interpretation, trying to become relevant, or in a less kind one, trying to start a new racket in the booming part-time master's degree market - all those physics and chemistry majors getting master's degrees in engineering and all that mid-career business going to engineering departments, maybe.
This looks like a new kind of bogus second-class-citizen credential to keep more of the academics employed. Some of this academic wampum may be interesting but a lot of it may be difficult for potential employers to decode.
I think it's better to be a first-class citizen in business or industry than a second-class citizen in academia. One should watch this carefully to see how the credential community evolves before investing any tuition in it. If you're a science major, check out engineering, law, or business before going with one of these.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Professional Science Master's (PSM) degree programs come in all shapes and sizes. Certainly your reservations are valid, but look at the wide variety of PSM programs and modalities.
There are full-time and part-time programs, residential and distance-learning programs. Many are configured specifically for mid-career professionals who work full-time.
I can't speak for all PSM programs, but at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, our programs are consciously designed to be on par with non-PSM degree options.
Additional PSM information is available from the Council of Graduate Schools (http://www.sciencemasters.com/) and from the National Professional Science Master's Association (http://www.npsma.org/).
Best regards,
Kevin Sightler
Director, Illinois PSM
http://psm.illinois.edu/
Thank you for your quite valid comment, and for the additional information. Your PSM websites are hotlinked below:
http://www.sciencemasters.com/
http://www.npsma.org/
http://psm.illinois.edu
I will check them out, and I encourage others to do the same. I seem to be developing some de facto criteria as a consumer of mid-career graduate degree programs. These are entirely personal, so others may have different criteria:
1. They should be accessible, in the sense that the person doesn't have to quit their job, relocate, or get a second mortgage to make them happen. Cheap is good. So is a short ride to class.
2. It should be realistically possible to complete them within a reasonable period of time. Maybe this is part of 1.
3. A degree program is a somewhat risky investment of your time and your (or someone's) money. There are no guarantees with degrees, but there should be at least a faint possibility of the degree offering some interesting new vocational options.
In my limited observation, the people I know pursue such degrees hoping to reinvent themselves or to at least explore a new path for a career switch.
4. Or there should be some kind of very good personal reinforcement.
5. Maybe there's another good reason to pursue a mid-career graduate degree, but I can't think of one right now. If neither 3 or 4 are true of the degree program, it might not be the right program.
Post a Comment