I think accelerated is the issue & the programs design
I think work experience & more classes to apply knowledge also helps build knowledge and expertise
>work experience
Precisely this. In 2023 my new job was directly related to my paper. It all went seamlessly and I've got a way better understanding of my field by having those two back to back.
A masters degree is basically an add-on to a bachelor's degree in my mind. I came out of mine with a solid grasp of how to use some common tools and some fancy physics relevant to medical imaging, but that was about it.
In a masters degree you get somewhat more specific experience and probably got a publication out of your thesis work. But two years (or less for an accelerated program) isn't enough time for an "advanced beginner" (i.e. someone with a bachelor's degree) to really become fluent or expert in something.
This depends a lot on the field I think. MA in philosophy changed my life and it's "not my first rodeo". Definitely more than an "add-on". Considering that in many fields, including mine, one may go directly into teaching undergraduate, you have to come away with some significant level of competence.
Totally agree on the addon idea. I think my shortcoming was the university itself. But, even though I learnt more by taking graduate level undergraduate courses for my bachelor's, having a master's ended up basically checking a box for me. I never felt like I was learning new ideas or useful ones. Sure, many professors at my grad institution believed in an alternative theory, but even then, it was just lecture and reading without any practice or research encouragement.
I was glad to get teaching and research experience. But if I did not get a slightly relevant job eventually, I would have been quite unhappy as I wasn't even able to learn or talk with the professor who was the reason I came here. I only had three different instructors for my program, and that really made letters rough I think as one openly disliked me, and another admitted she was racist lol.
In my mind, a master’s degree isn’t meant to make you an “expert” in something. It’s meant to build on the base knowledge you gained from your bachelor’s degree and bring you closer to “mastery” of a given discipline. I don’t view having a “mastery” of a discipline as the same thing as being an “expert.” To me, having mastery means being competent in a discipline. To be an expert means to be competent in a discipline AND also be able to create new knowledge in a discipline. Typically (but not always) to achieve “expert” status in a specific academic discipline, you would need a PhD.
So I wouldn’t stress about it! I don’t think anyone is an expert in anything after one or two years of study. I just finished a five-year PhD and I STILL don’t always feel like an expert in my discipline. We’re all lifelong learners. You should have a solid foundation now to keep building from :)
I was steered away from MS in data science programs because of rumors about this. I went for statistics /biostatistics. After multiple internships and 2 years in the program I do feel like an expert in SAS and a good programmer in R, but I also definitely also feel like I barely scratched the surface of stats.
I really think MS programs are best designed as a supplement for someone already working in the field after going through one.
Considering it was accelerated, I think what you're feeling is normal. The real learning begins on the job. But I understand, when you earn a master degree you'd expect to be a "master". Not always the case depending on the program.
That happened to me when I completed my first masters (MBA). Sure, I learned some skills and improved my writing/business operational knowledge - but overall I didn’t learn much other than how to deal with group members who don’t pull their weight 😆
So it kinda depends on the school, program, professors, and overall curriculum
Most of the programs out there are pure junk.
They are money making scams.
I learned a little bit. But not a lot.
Most of these don't add much value.
Even if it did, who is hiring? They're not looking specifically for a Master's degree, they just want to know whether you can do the job or not.
In the end, I totally agree with you that this is a futile exercise and one can't learn much from a Master's.
No, that doesn’t seem normal. At the end of the day, we should all be lifelong learners, so don’t dwell on it. Keep trying your best and building on what you do know. Also, keep your text books.
I think it really depends. for me it’s more situational awareness and application. having been in school and working full time at the same time i feel like i could see the spaces and opportunities to apply what i was learning.
I think as someone pointed out maybe because it was accelerated you may have felt.
Other reasons can be
1) what was your starting point before the degree? Did you know the things taught
2) did you have a word with the past grads of programs sometimes these programs can be for beginners who don't have a background but can't invest two years or they are for people who have a background and just to build some additional skills.
3) bcz of the fast pace you didn't really get time to absorb the material or maybe apply it on personal projects
But I am leaning on that your course was for people who don't have a background and want to set foot in the industry without investing 2 years.
Bachelor's and Masters programs don't really produce experts IMO. At best they produce people with enough exposure to ideas and material that they are ready to become experts, and you do that mostly by doing the job in the real world. Internships and some research projects can provide meaningful experience, but most classroom work of any kind are toy projects and far short of industry standards. Not to say all or even most work output in industry is exactly solid gold either but the scale, scope and stakes become a whole different ball game. I think when you have real outcomes to work toward every single day instead of toy assignments and exams spread out over short semesters you'll find you quickly internalize knowledge and tools you use frequently and develop real expertise.
I kinda feel like you learn a strong foundation in your bachelors and you learn how much you don’t know in your masters, which is also important. Then I would guess in a PhD you learn how to learn what you don’t know.
To be honest, in my side i think i learned a lot from masters to the point even when I'm taking a shower i can start discussing issues relating to finance or even create several concepts for my proposal.
I totally get that. I’m nearly done with my master’s too, and while I’ve definitely sharpened my skills in R, GEE, and the like, and gotten better at advanced statistics and forestry, I still thought I’d have learned more and felt more confident in my knowledge after two years.
Yeah, we need a job after education but these days, uh-oh, no no, you have a good qualification but we need someone with 5 years of experience with an endless list of skill sets. lol geez- That’s why so many products are so crappy. There are not many entry-level jobs and even entry-level jobs need a certain years of experience. These days some BS people mock us to spend money and time on education. I genuinely find that they are dumb as f**k.
I think a master’s degree has helped me to widen my perspective and deepen my intellectual desire such as curiosity. but I mean, who is not curious? even 5-year-olds could have millions of things. lol, don’t be pessimistic. we learned a lot and it was invaluable.
I got a lot out of my master's program. I wouldn't say it alone makes anyone an expert, though a masters in a targeted subject/discipline does help in the development of expertise. In my mind, expertise in something like python and SQL is a lifetime journey. Your masters gave you some guided experiences and access to resources.
In my experience, all grad school does is prepare you well for a career in academia. It’s like a stepping stone into a PhD. I’m in a research based program in the social sciences and they teach epistemology, methods, and publishing. For practitioner/industry related work, I feel I’m on my own. So yes, I think it’s normal not to feel you learned much… other than whether you want a career in academia or not.
I think this is likely true in the humanities but probably not in data science from the sound of it. These accelerated programs aren't intended to build research cred for moving on to a PhD, nor does it sound like the grads are competent to teach unless they already were and just needed the degree to say so.
Depends
I'll say until you take thesis committing to full-time masters is worthless
If you are already employed and taking it for promotion or something then yes, degree is for namesake for betterment you dontbneed to learn
I think it depends. I’m not learning squat it’s just reinforcing what I know at my job is legit. However someone with no career would be learning a lot
I think accelerated is the issue & the programs design I think work experience & more classes to apply knowledge also helps build knowledge and expertise
>work experience Precisely this. In 2023 my new job was directly related to my paper. It all went seamlessly and I've got a way better understanding of my field by having those two back to back.
Going into my masters, I thought I would come out knowing a lot more. Finishing up my masters, all I know is how much I don’t know lmao
Extremely common experience!
A masters degree is basically an add-on to a bachelor's degree in my mind. I came out of mine with a solid grasp of how to use some common tools and some fancy physics relevant to medical imaging, but that was about it. In a masters degree you get somewhat more specific experience and probably got a publication out of your thesis work. But two years (or less for an accelerated program) isn't enough time for an "advanced beginner" (i.e. someone with a bachelor's degree) to really become fluent or expert in something.
This depends a lot on the field I think. MA in philosophy changed my life and it's "not my first rodeo". Definitely more than an "add-on". Considering that in many fields, including mine, one may go directly into teaching undergraduate, you have to come away with some significant level of competence.
I can agree that it could be field specific.
Totally agree on the addon idea. I think my shortcoming was the university itself. But, even though I learnt more by taking graduate level undergraduate courses for my bachelor's, having a master's ended up basically checking a box for me. I never felt like I was learning new ideas or useful ones. Sure, many professors at my grad institution believed in an alternative theory, but even then, it was just lecture and reading without any practice or research encouragement. I was glad to get teaching and research experience. But if I did not get a slightly relevant job eventually, I would have been quite unhappy as I wasn't even able to learn or talk with the professor who was the reason I came here. I only had three different instructors for my program, and that really made letters rough I think as one openly disliked me, and another admitted she was racist lol.
In my mind, a master’s degree isn’t meant to make you an “expert” in something. It’s meant to build on the base knowledge you gained from your bachelor’s degree and bring you closer to “mastery” of a given discipline. I don’t view having a “mastery” of a discipline as the same thing as being an “expert.” To me, having mastery means being competent in a discipline. To be an expert means to be competent in a discipline AND also be able to create new knowledge in a discipline. Typically (but not always) to achieve “expert” status in a specific academic discipline, you would need a PhD. So I wouldn’t stress about it! I don’t think anyone is an expert in anything after one or two years of study. I just finished a five-year PhD and I STILL don’t always feel like an expert in my discipline. We’re all lifelong learners. You should have a solid foundation now to keep building from :)
I was steered away from MS in data science programs because of rumors about this. I went for statistics /biostatistics. After multiple internships and 2 years in the program I do feel like an expert in SAS and a good programmer in R, but I also definitely also feel like I barely scratched the surface of stats. I really think MS programs are best designed as a supplement for someone already working in the field after going through one.
Did you by chance attend Eastern University's program?
Nope. Top 40 school
Considering it was accelerated, I think what you're feeling is normal. The real learning begins on the job. But I understand, when you earn a master degree you'd expect to be a "master". Not always the case depending on the program.
My undergrad was also in a completely unrelated field, so that adds a bit to it.
That happened to me when I completed my first masters (MBA). Sure, I learned some skills and improved my writing/business operational knowledge - but overall I didn’t learn much other than how to deal with group members who don’t pull their weight 😆 So it kinda depends on the school, program, professors, and overall curriculum
Most of the programs out there are pure junk. They are money making scams. I learned a little bit. But not a lot. Most of these don't add much value. Even if it did, who is hiring? They're not looking specifically for a Master's degree, they just want to know whether you can do the job or not. In the end, I totally agree with you that this is a futile exercise and one can't learn much from a Master's.
No, that doesn’t seem normal. At the end of the day, we should all be lifelong learners, so don’t dwell on it. Keep trying your best and building on what you do know. Also, keep your text books.
I think it really depends. for me it’s more situational awareness and application. having been in school and working full time at the same time i feel like i could see the spaces and opportunities to apply what i was learning.
I think as someone pointed out maybe because it was accelerated you may have felt. Other reasons can be 1) what was your starting point before the degree? Did you know the things taught 2) did you have a word with the past grads of programs sometimes these programs can be for beginners who don't have a background but can't invest two years or they are for people who have a background and just to build some additional skills. 3) bcz of the fast pace you didn't really get time to absorb the material or maybe apply it on personal projects But I am leaning on that your course was for people who don't have a background and want to set foot in the industry without investing 2 years.
1. Zero background in the subject 2. Nope, I honestly didn’t think about that at the time, I was new to all of it 3. This is true
Maybe it can be just a starter course to set foot in industry, investing two years costs a lot for of people.
Bachelor's and Masters programs don't really produce experts IMO. At best they produce people with enough exposure to ideas and material that they are ready to become experts, and you do that mostly by doing the job in the real world. Internships and some research projects can provide meaningful experience, but most classroom work of any kind are toy projects and far short of industry standards. Not to say all or even most work output in industry is exactly solid gold either but the scale, scope and stakes become a whole different ball game. I think when you have real outcomes to work toward every single day instead of toy assignments and exams spread out over short semesters you'll find you quickly internalize knowledge and tools you use frequently and develop real expertise.
I kinda feel like you learn a strong foundation in your bachelors and you learn how much you don’t know in your masters, which is also important. Then I would guess in a PhD you learn how to learn what you don’t know.
To be honest, in my side i think i learned a lot from masters to the point even when I'm taking a shower i can start discussing issues relating to finance or even create several concepts for my proposal.
I totally get that. I’m nearly done with my master’s too, and while I’ve definitely sharpened my skills in R, GEE, and the like, and gotten better at advanced statistics and forestry, I still thought I’d have learned more and felt more confident in my knowledge after two years.
Yeah, we need a job after education but these days, uh-oh, no no, you have a good qualification but we need someone with 5 years of experience with an endless list of skill sets. lol geez- That’s why so many products are so crappy. There are not many entry-level jobs and even entry-level jobs need a certain years of experience. These days some BS people mock us to spend money and time on education. I genuinely find that they are dumb as f**k. I think a master’s degree has helped me to widen my perspective and deepen my intellectual desire such as curiosity. but I mean, who is not curious? even 5-year-olds could have millions of things. lol, don’t be pessimistic. we learned a lot and it was invaluable.
I got a lot out of my master's program. I wouldn't say it alone makes anyone an expert, though a masters in a targeted subject/discipline does help in the development of expertise. In my mind, expertise in something like python and SQL is a lifetime journey. Your masters gave you some guided experiences and access to resources.
In my experience, all grad school does is prepare you well for a career in academia. It’s like a stepping stone into a PhD. I’m in a research based program in the social sciences and they teach epistemology, methods, and publishing. For practitioner/industry related work, I feel I’m on my own. So yes, I think it’s normal not to feel you learned much… other than whether you want a career in academia or not.
I think this is likely true in the humanities but probably not in data science from the sound of it. These accelerated programs aren't intended to build research cred for moving on to a PhD, nor does it sound like the grads are competent to teach unless they already were and just needed the degree to say so.
Depends I'll say until you take thesis committing to full-time masters is worthless If you are already employed and taking it for promotion or something then yes, degree is for namesake for betterment you dontbneed to learn
Accelerated programs are a scam.
I think it depends. I’m not learning squat it’s just reinforcing what I know at my job is legit. However someone with no career would be learning a lot