5 ms·
There is in fact two things here. Most continental EU countries used to have a different system before the Bologna Bachelor/Master system. In the prior case, m
by zwaps 8y ago
There is in fact two things here.
Most continental EU countries used to have a different system before the Bologna Bachelor/Master system. In the prior case, many countries simply did not have a Bachelor equivalent. In France, Spain, Netherlands and Germany, you'd by default do a Masters-level degree. As such, a Masters is more continued education - it does not imply a big cut from a "practical degree" toward research.
Therefore, your assessment is correct.
But it is only half correct, because the other side is that in Europe, research universities and their degrees are meant to be for academic purposes. Most countries, especially German speaking countries, have entirely different systems (Vocational, applied universities) for students studying for a job.
In contrast to English-speaking countries, a vocational career is very much a proper thing to do and need not imply "failure" in any way. In fact, the strength of the German economy (and why firms moved back there from China), is the extremely high qualification of the median "technician".
It is still the case that many jobs (like nursing) are not taught at a university, simply because there is no path to academic research. On the other hand, the vocational education is not in any way inferior to a college degree in English-speaking countries.
A university was meant to prepare for academic research. That is why despite the first point, degrees in continental Europe were often more focused on research than on succeeding in a job.
An indicator of this can be seen by the lower rate of college graduates. This is often understood as a negative indicator internationally, but it is not really true. Yes, less people do college degrees, but college degrees are not the only possibility of qualification.
From my own experience, and I think many would agree, I think that the very high quality vocational education (and the fact that it is officially recognized) is equal if not sometimes better to prepare for a job. Especially the dual system, where you learn while working in a company for half the time, and go to a school the other half.
There is no doubt that this system is one of the reasons why the engineering sector in continential Europe has been doing much better than in the UK.
So in closing yes, the Master is a continuation degree. But, from the start, university is much more research focused.
These things, of course, are changing now.
- chrisseaton 8y ago> It is still the case that many jobs (like nursing) are not taught at a university, simply because there is no path to academic research. You can do research as a nurse. There are nurses with PhDs even.
- mistrial9 8y agoin the US there are practicing nurses without a college degree, right now.. also nursing is not always unionized, especially in the South..
- chrisseaton 8y ago> in the US there are practicing nurses without a college degree, right now.. Ok? So what? I was replying to 'there is no path to academic research', and there is. Saying not everyone follows it is irrelevant to whether or not it exists. > also nursing is not always unionized, especially in the South.. What on earth does that have to do with whether you can do research or not?
- roel_v 8y agoYes there are nurses with PhD's. There are janitors and Uber drivers with PhD's, so what? You probably mean that some people, with nursing degrees, have done PhD research on nursing. That still doesn't mean that nursing is something that is inherently meant to lead towards research.
- user5994461 8y agoCan confirm for France. Engineering degrees are 5 years. Usually 2 years studying somewhere, then 3 years somewhere else. That's a master degree at the end.
- roel_v 8y agoYes, this is an accurate elaboration on the situation. That doesn't take away from my point - that the stresses people are complaining about, in Anglo-Saxon 'graduate level studies', can be compared to continental masters programs. Some of it is similar in continental PhD programs, but the GP's anecdote of experiencing this in a continental masters program is simply misunderstanding the situation. The fundamental problem here is that research is inherently uncertain, subjective and requires lots of creativity and independent thought (ideally - whether or not that actually happens is a different discussion). It's very different from undergraduate studies, which are usually 'do as you're told and you'll be fine'. Not everybody is suited for so much independence; in fact, often that do best in the rigid undergraduate system are those that are fundamentally wired to not do all that well in a more free form environment. None (at least, very little) of that exists in continental masters programs. You just take your courses, do well on your exams, and you're good. So that's what I meant as the fundamental difference between masters in continental vs Anglo-Saxon systems.