Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Misperception of masters could hit UK recruitment
22 May 2008
One-year degree at risk of 'misguided' comparisons with two-year programmes, writes Melanie Newman
Suggestions from overseas that UK masters degrees are too short and lack credibility pose "a real danger" to international student recruitment, according to a report from the Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi).
The report on the Bologna Process, which aims to harmonise university qualifications across Europe, says the UK's one-year masters courses are being judged "inappropriately" against two-year masters offered elsewhere in Europe.
The two-year masters degrees are seen as preparation for a PhD, but the UK masters serve a different function. Bologna ministers have agreed that UK masters are compliant with the harmonisation process, but not all countries agree, Hepi says.
"It would be a serious matter if these perceptions - however misguided - damaged the currency of these qualifications," Hepi says. "There are undoubtedly some that are trying to undermine the credibility of our one-year courses," the report notes.
In 2006, the Norwegian quality assurance agency, NOKUT, published a paper comparing Norway's two-year masters with those in the UK. The report said: "It is not clear at the moment what this difference (in duration) exactly means in practice regarding the skills and competencies of graduates."
But NOKUT concluded: "We are still of the opinion that the difference in duration leads to a substantial difference in learning outcomes, that interferes with degree equivalence for both the taught and the research masters degree."
In its response to the report, the UK argued that Norway's refusal of degree equivalence was at odds with the Bologna Process.
In its report, Hepi says of the NOKUT paper: "The study did not on the whole compare like with like and was largely disregarded by the UK partners of the study." But it adds: "The paper did reflect the sentiments of a number of administrations in the EHEA (European Higher Education Area) and needs to be taken seriously."
Objections such as those of the Norwegians "pose a real danger even if they are nakedly protectionist or ill-founded", Hepi continues. "The NOKUT paper suggests, in public, a concern that the UK one-year masters degree is less rigorous than other EHEA member variants."
The ramifications of this are "potentially troubling", Hepi says. "Our strength lies in the knowledge that Bologna ministers have endorsed our approach ... nevertheless, external perceptions of the value of UK HE qualifications have clear commercial implications for export-orientated UK HEIs, many of whom rely on international student fee income for their viability."
Bahram Bekhradnia, Hepi's director, told Times Higher Education that there were "whisperings in the margins of European Union meetings" criticising UK masters.
A recent article in The Sunday Times reported complaints from China about the "very poor quality" of some UK masters courses taken by Chinese students.
David Zweig, director of the Centre on China's Transnational Relations at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, was quoted as saying: "Finding employment has become increasingly difficult as many returnees have an MA from very poor universities in England." He said Chinese officials had asked him to "kick the Brits" over the issue.
melanie.newman@tsleducation.com.
Readers' comments
Generally international students in UK sees UK masters as business gambling on the part of the schools. Even some conversion courses like IT, MBA and Project management which would have required at least 24 months periods are packed to be done with in 12 months. After whcich the graduating students are pushed out to face the new entrants with exorbitant international fees. <p>If masters in UK are made 2 years, international students will decrease for the 2 reasons below. In the first place students who are employed like small period to get back to work and might not go for the course if it will run for more than 12 months. Again british schools would be faced with either charging one off fee for completing a 2 year masters or they would charge per year which will make the Masters much more unbearable and less people will come to UK for school. <p>What is more important to the providers of those degrees is perhaps the money. That may be why it has been difficult for me to get further education in netherlands with UK Masters merit score.
Of course, some master's level degrees in England are rubbish. One University, just North of London, along M1 has even been slated by QAA for its master's level degree (especially its MBA in OMAN and INDIA). It was awarded 'Limited Confidence'. Thus even had to change its name!. In February 2004, one of the professor's from Liverpool (I think was an external examiner at this University) published in Daily Telegraph that this University is probably the worst University in England. Universities like these should have their degree awarding powers withdrawn! But the Labour government is too feeble in its duties to do anything. Charles Clarke - Labour Education secretary - even called the University "BLOODY BRILLIANT". That also shows how ignorant this government is. This government in the last ten years have ruined the education in this country. No wonder overseas students/firms are complaining. Close down some of these Universities (former Polytechnics and Colleges of further education). Start with the one along M1 and all the 'new' universities in London. I know I have in HEI for over 2 decades. I can see the progressive decline in the standards. I came to UK from Africa in the 70's to study. If I was overseas now and had to sent my children for studies, UK would NOT be my 1st choice.
One year masters degrees are rare in the U.S., where I did my studies in a four-year masters programme. With fees as they are, especially for international students, there's very little possibility that students will come to the UK to study in longer programmes. This is, in part, because the quality reputation for UK masters degrees has declined. Hence it will be a long struggle to get us back to being competitive were we to go to a two-year system. The government should take action by lowering fees for postgrad programmes in order to stimulate recruitment during a transition period of two-year programme introduction.
I am a former lecturer on Masters courses at a top UK university. The students embarking on these courses usually did not have a BSc in the same area and thus the 1 year MSc course was more like a crash course in the subject to bring students up to the level of BSc graduates rather than allowing them to become true "masters" of the subject. <p>In addition I had the impression that the attraction of high course fees (in particular by overseas students) leads institutes to accept candidates who are not suitable for such a course and to award qualifications to students who have not achieved sufficiently. In particular I know of a few cases where students have blatently plagerised from textbooks or the internet for assignments but (despite protests by the academics who have marked these) have still received a pass. I feel that this devalues the achievements of others who have really worked hard for the qualification.
One important point that I think is being overlooked here is that a Masters does not stand alone, under the Bologna Process. There are changes to Bachelors degrees too. <p>I am seeing this first-hand, since I started a degree program in Ireland last September: my program is relatively new, and designed to fit the process. It is a 3+2 course, where older Engineering courses at the same university are 4+1: either way, it is still a 5-year commitment. In my case, if I do the Masters (which I hope to), I will have the option of working for a semester (and summer) for credit - and I expect I will need the money by then. (Post-graduate students in Ireland get no government funding.)