To want to do an MA when I don't have a first degree?

[Noquals]

I'm not sure if this is unreasonable or possible?

There are a few issues/subjects that I am very interested in and pretty knowledgable about- built up from voluntary work and campaigning rather than employment.

I have done a couple of OU courses over the years, but the subjects I am interested in are much more specific than any courses or degrees I can find.
On the OU courses I didn't feel at all that I was on a learning curve, they didn't hold my interest and the last one I abandoned.

I have looked at MA's and (I think) you can research your own subject, this feels more like what I would like to do, but they seem quite strict about needing a first degree.

Is it possible?

Hi Noquals,

I currently work in postgraduate admissions at one of the top 5 Universities in the UK, so hopefully I can help you out!

In my experience, we have taken on MSc students without a BSc, however it helps hugely if they have been working in the field they wish to study as you will most likely need to provide references, and we usually would request Academic references, or references from professionals in the particular field.

The best thing you could do would be contact the University directly. Don't 'pop in' as no one will be able to drop what they are doing and help, and its probably better if you don't phone them, for the same reason.

Compose a simple email (don't waffle, it drives folks like us mad!) covering your questions, and I imagine you will be directed towards an appropriate Academic who you can discuss research interests with. They will advise you whether they would be willing to Supervise you, which will give you a very strong indication whether you should apply.

Feel free to PM me if you want more boring info about selection processed etc.

Hope that helps!

*Not that I was implying your OP waffles - I just get a lot of waffly emails from applicants!

Cocktail The MAs that the ancient Scottish Universities (and Oxbridge) dish out aren't postgraduate level qualifications. They are Masters degrees in title only.

Funny thing is, that to distinguish their undergraduate from postgraduate degrees Edinburgh describe them as MSc. I have an MSc in history. (Absurd I know!)

I did not know that - so do you not do four years' worth then? I always assumed they were like Cambridge Part III courses, so you did the BA and then carried on straight into a master's.

(Sorry OP, sure this isn't that relevant, just curious. )

Cambridge just give you an honorary Masters if you wait a year or so after the original undergrad degree, that's why they are meaningless. I think you have to apply for a certificate.

Yep, but they also used to do masters that followed straight on from the undergrad degree. I only know cos my brother's got one, I've absolutely no idea if they still do it or not. It's not the same thing as the honorary whatsit.

I'm confused. My MA WAS my first degree! (In Scotland.) Is that not the case in England? I did a Master of Arts in English Lit and Language.

An MA was my first degree too - we probably attended the same uni.

I did a Masters in a completely unrelated subject to my first degree - I didn't find myself at any disadvantage compared to the people that had done 'relevant' subjects. But I think jumping straight into the Masters without having learned how to study in the first degree would have been much more difficult.

LRD You do four years as an undergrad at Scotland, but you go to University at the age of 17 and the first year of the Scottish undergrad degree is below the level of an English first year undergrad. So Scottish students don't get an extra year of education, they just that enter university earlier and at a lower level.

I feel marginally less ignorant. Thanks!

Sorry for derail, OP.

That's alright. I didn't know that either until I moved to Scotland.

I think a Scottish MA is equivalent to an English BA... no reflection on the merits of either education system, it's just a cultural difference.

OP: what subject are you interested in? If it is something humanities/social sciences related, then I would say that the majority of people would struggle on an MA course without a first degree. The first degree is used quite a lot as a grounding and there are all kinds of practical research/writing skills that you need. But if you work in a science and have a lot of practical experience in a field and a lot of practice at writing up data and reports, it might be different and maybe you could go straight to an MA.

Also, in relation to humanities/social sciences, bear in mind that there is a difference between taught MAs and research MAs. Research MAs are often not recommended even for students who are quite confident at finding their way through sources. The taught MA offers more of a mix of teaching to broaden your knowledge base and more extensive research than people have done over a degree dissertation. It's kind of a softer introduction to self-guided work before the humanities/social sciences PhD, which is as much a test of psychological nerve as intellectual ability, and frankly not something anyone sane should ever undertake (I overheard a student complaining to a colleague at university that all of the lecturers seemed a bit 'obsessive and weird'. 'Ah', he replied 'That's because they've all been through PhDs, and they are still mentally traumatised as a result.'!)

Well, I've worked with graduate trainees and in a field where a degree was usually required but jobs were sometimes advertised as requiring 'a degree or equivalent' but where the 'equivalent' route was rare and many people started with post-graduate qualifications.

What I think a degree gave people and demonstrated, aside from knowledge, was:

• Self-motivation, ability to organise their time and see through a complex project fairly independently (asking for help, discussing and reporting on their work when relevant).
• research skills. Ability to look into something, seek out a number of sources of information, evaluate, make a recommendation. Perhaps statistical analysis skills too.

Before thinking about it and working with the trainees - and one or two non-graduates for contrast - I might have taken these skills for granted myself and just seen them as part of growing up but actually university study was a big part of it.

These skills are essential for an MA too. So, can you demonstrate that you've acquired them from your other activities? Do you have referees who will say this convincingly?

Your comment about dropping an OU course because it didn't hold your interest rings alarm bells. On the one hand, if it was a course taken for interest and leisure, or it was misrepresented, fair enough. But...

Committing to a course / job and seeing it through, even through the inevitable boring bits or if it doesn't turn out to be quite as expected is precisely one of the reassuring abilities achieving a degree over three or four years demonstrates. Researching in advance what something really is, so you don't get too many surprises is another one.

ComposHat, are you sure about this: You do four years as an undergrad at Scotland, but you go to University at the age of 17 and the first year of the Scottish undergrad degree is below the level of an English first year undergrad. So Scottish students don't get an extra year of education, they just that enter university earlier and at a lower level.

Do Scottish pupils not do Sixth Year Studies any more then? I did - and they were equivalent to A levels. Six years at secondary school - most Scottish uni students are 18 before they start uni (unless they get enough Highers to start uni after fifth year...)

Sorry for derailing!

Seven years at secondary school in England.

That was always my understanding of the Scottish / English systems too, albeit from 20 years ago. More general first year courses in Scotland, specialising from the second year the way that English courses do from the start. English students with good A-levels could often start in the second year of a Scottish course.

Didn't know any Scottish Universities did the 'handing out MAs for BA level work' thing that Oxbridge does though. Is it St Andrews and related to ancientness and its sense of its own superior status? (not trying to cause offence there - that was my understanding of the Oxbridge version from a former Oxford student. Essentially that they think they do more and higher quality work for their degrees and that their naturally enquiring and high functioning students will continue to think good academic thoughts after graduating, so should be rewarded with an MA. The official explanation may be different!)

I am not an authority on this (other than living in Scotland and doing my Masters at a Scottish University) but people I know students to have gone directly from their Highers to University in Scotland. Usually taking five highers.

To get into University in England they may have to take Advanced Highers (which replaced the 6th year studies a few years aboack) if they want to study at an England University. Most decent English Universities won't accept Highers as an entry requirement, considering them the equivalent of an English AS-level.

If you have Advanced Highers you can sometimes proceed directly to the second year of a degree at a Scottish University.

From Wikipedia, which isn't the most reputable source but gives a decent summary:

The most able candidates in S5 typically take five Higher subjects, and matriculation requirements for courses are specified from a range from CC to AAAAA depending on the course and university. English universities may require students to study to Advanced Higher level, given that the Higher is equivalent to AS-level on the UCAS tariff. As Scottish university courses traditionally have a duration of 4 years, the loss of one year's schooling is compensated by an additional university year.

Oh, just to add confusion, there are four year courses that award only a Masters in England. I've only heard of them in engineering, where you end up with a more specialised qualification but do have to commit to the four years at the start.

Go for it- I'm currently in my first year of Uni straight after finishing A-Levels and am doing MSci :) good luck!

I've known a few people to go straight on to MA courses as they've had enough professional experience and were mature students, so I'm sure it's possible.

One thing to be cautious of, though, is that there is a rule about ELQ (Equivalent/Lower Level Qualifications in higher education). It means that you can’t get a tuition fee loan, maintenance loan or grant to study towards a qualification that is lower than one you already hold, except for a few excluded subject areas. So once you get an MA (which would probably have to be self-funded) and later decided you wanted to do a BA/BSc, you couldn't get the typical student loan package and would probably be charged a higher fee. You might not feel like you want to pursue a BA now but you could really regret it later if you decide you want to career change and find that you've ruled out the possibility of getting funded for a BA level degree by self-funding your own MA.

I'm on a Law course which will finish with me holding both an LLB and a Masters in Law. It's not an LLM but it is a Masters. And it's funded throughout by Student Loans!

My daughter is on what's called an MSc degree course 4 years plus 1 in industry, she will get awarded her BSc after her third year but will continue straight on to do the MSc without having to re enroll. It just means she gets funding for the full 4 years. Unlike my sister who had to get bursaries and find a uni to do her MSc at after she finished her BSc about 20 years ago.