Hacker News Reader

Comment by toddm | Hacker News Reader

Good question. It's specific in my case to the school/department that awarded it.

When I earned my M.A. at the University of Texas at Austin in 1995, the M.A. was the option for coursework and original research in the form of a thesis. The M.S. was reserved for the coursework-only option (rarely awarded).

In 1996 (I believe), the department changed the thesis-based Master's to an M.S. degree and did away with any no-thesis degrees higher than Bachelor's. This decision short-sells the awardee, unfortunately.

In general, an M.S. in STEM fields indicates a coursework-only degree (typically 6 classes, no thesis or original research) and an M.A. indicates a more rigorous course of study and research.

My Master's thesis, btw, is "Desorption of High Explosives from Soil: Thermodynamics and the Role of Soil Organic Carbon."

View on HN

> In general, an M.S. in STEM fields indicates a coursework-only degree (typically 6 classes, no thesis or original research) and an M.A. indicates a more rigorous course of study and research.

I did not know that. Thanks for the explanation!

I don’t know that this is a reasonable generalization. Certainly in my CS department one could write a thesis to receive an MS, and no MAs were offered. Just one data point, from a very large state school; YMMV.

You're correct, it's not a reasonable generalization. See my reply above.

The essence of my answer is based on the way things were in my graduate programs at my university when I was in school there; and some observations from so-called terminal Master's degree programs.

I should clarify that the M.S. is available in some departments as a terminal degree, or is awarded along the way towards a Ph.D. upon completion of coursework and admission to candidacy (oral/written exams), as is the M.Phil. The main thing is knowing what the degree was awarded for at the end of the day, which may or may not matter to the degree holder or the employer.

In my doctoral program in chemistry, the M.S. was "awarded" to Ph.D. candidates who did not pass orals and was referred to as "the booby prize." Having been admitted to candidacy and completing my doctorate, I have only a Ph.D. in chemistry and not a Master's of any kind.

Having said all that, almost every M.S. I've seen during interviews over the past 20 years has been a terminal degree lacking a thesis - but I am a scientist, and I see mostly physics/chemistry/geology/mathematics resumes and not engineering or CS ones.

What goes into becoming a fully licensed geologist? I'm curious how it compares to engineering.

Generally speaking, though it varies by state, Engineer in Training after passing the Fundamentals of Engineering exam, then you must work under a Professional Engineer (PE) for $x years and pass the PE exam to officially call yourself an engineer.

Almost exactly the same process.

For the PG (Professional Geologist):

https://tbpg.state.tx.us/licensing/p-g-licensure/p-g-licensi...

and, for the GIT (geoscientist-in-training):

https://tbpg.state.tx.us/licensing/geoscientist-in-training-...

In my case, I took and passed the Fundamentals of Geology (ASBOG) exam in 2014 (and have at least a Bachelor's degree AND a minimum of 30 hours of geosciences coursework). I've held and renewed (continuing education) my license (GIT-98) yearly.

What has stopped me from getting my PG is that I haven't accumulated enough time working in the geosciences since earning my degree almost 30 years ago!

But I very much would like to, and that's a different story.

This reminds me of a bunch of people trying to claim that Elon Musk didn't have a degree in Physics because the degree was a B.A. instead of a B.S.

That is strange and interesting as it seems counter-intuitive since a B.A. in say, physics, is less rigorous than a B.S. from a pure physics/mathematics standpoint.

That depends a lot on the issuing university. At some of the medieval university, e.g. Cambridge, the only undergraduate degree is a BA, regardless of subject. Likely because the naming of the degree predates the modern usage of the word science.

Few would argue that a BA in physics (which would actually be in Natural Sciences) from Cambridge is "less rigorous"

Sure, that's "old-fashioned" as a friend once told me (who was a Rhodes scholar.) At the two universities I've attended, the B.S. in physics required more rigor and the B.A. offered more breadth and didn't require as many courses starting in "PHY". I'm guessing it's an American thing too.

Cambridge and Oxford and a few others also then grant students an MA more or less automatically¹ a handful of years after graduation², a process sometimes referred to jocularly as the "MA for FA"!

¹ There's a fee...

² https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_of_Arts_(Oxford,_Camb...

Sir you owe me a new pince nez because mine just shot across the room.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com