Most masters are only like 2 years?

by Anonymous 10 months ago

I spread mine out an extra year for my capstone and a course I wanted wasn't offered at the right time. The length of time doesn't really matter much IMO.

by Anonymous 10 months ago

If the length of time doesn't matter than why are shorter masters less valid?

by Anonymous 10 months ago

OP is proof that degrees ≠ intelligence

by Anonymous 10 months ago

Oh really? Explain.

by Anonymous 10 months ago

Ops reply is further proof

by Anonymous 10 months ago

If they get you a job that requires a master's degree then it's close enough for me

by Anonymous 10 months ago

That's kind of my point though. I'm being a bit of an elitist I guess but I always worry about my field being watered down with poor quality engineers. It's happening more and more I've noticed, and now I've noticed the accelerated master degrees produce lower quality engineers than a traditional masters does. We do advanced stuff professionally and academically and rely on quality engineers. It also lowers how much I can get paid to an extent. the higher ups just looks at the number of masters and phds and bachelors. If the company starts producing worse results with the same amount of engineers they'll pay us less.

by Anonymous 10 months ago

So essentially, this is about limiting other's potential to protect your income?

by Anonymous 10 months ago

Accelerated degrees don't usually mean you're taking less classes. You're usually taking the SAME NUMBER of classes but just in a SHORTER PERIOD of TIME. - Disclaimer: All four of my degrees are traditional time degrees so I have no bias here.

by Anonymous 10 months ago

First of all: >Accelerated **Master's** degrees are NOT real **Master's** degrees >I went the traditional route and ~~grinded~~ **ground** my way through my undergrad, then ~~grinder~~ **ground** even hard**er** for my **master's**. It took nearly 7 years in total with THREE capstone projects and nearly 60 courses across the 2 degrees. >I know ppl now that are getting their accelerated **master's** with ONE capstone project and not even 50 courses. >I came out with so much more experience and knowledge than them because of my path and ~~I~~it's insulting that they get to claim the same accolade. Call it a pseudo **master's** or whatever you want, but don't just say it's a **master's** degree! Second: accelerated degree programs require you to take on more courses at once, to complete the degree more quickly. Students can even complete bachelor's and master's degrees simultaneously. An accelerated program does *not* automatically mean that students are just taking fewer courses and doing less work.

by Anonymous 10 months ago

If someone can get the same degree faster and potentially with less work then good for them, even if they do end up with less overall experience. I know there are some people who pursue degrees for the knowledge it can provide but most people use higher education as a stepping stone into a career. It makes sense for most people to take the most efficient route possible.

by Anonymous 10 months ago

I do agree with you, its a good thing to have. but I dont think it should be called the same thing is my point. I applaud anyone who does it either way, and encourage everyone that wants to do any schooling to do it! I just think there should be a distinction in the degree because there is 100% a distinction in the level of their knowledge. and its funny you point it out as a stepping point, because this is actually why I started noticing the difference between accelerated/traditional masters. I'm part of the hiring process for my engineering company, and I've noticed the ones that did the accelerated programs are not as knowledgeable as their traditional counterparts.

by Anonymous 10 months ago