MSci or BSc?

[CornishGem1975]

Can someone briefly explain what is the difference between the two, and what benefits one has over the other?

Do you mean an MSc? Or something like an MChem or MEng? An MSc is a postgraduate degree, usually a one year taught programme. A BSc is a three year (England) undergraduate degree. MChem, MEng, MMath etc are undergraduate integrated masters courses, a year longer than BSc programmes and equivalent in lever to a first degree plus an MSc (more or less).

An MSci incorporates a BSc (undergraduate) degree and a MSc (masters, postgraduate) degree and normally cover 4 years and can have a placement aspect. They're great if the field you want to study and work in often requires you to have a postgrad qualification.

I should say that my knowledge of MSci courses is limited to psychology, not sure what these courses look like for other sciences!

As PP said, the MSci will be four years and includes the BSc plus an integrated masters. Very useful if you wish to go on to a PhD afterwards because you don't have to do a standalone MSc first and in terms of funding it's generally better to apply for the MSci and you can change to the BSc during the course of you wish - it's a bit trickier swapping the other way.

BSc: 3 year basic undergraduate degree.
Pros: shorter duration, lower cost overall.

MSci: 4 year course which includes a master's degree.
Pros: For some subjects, this is the level required for professional/chartered qualification e.g. Physics (at some institutions it will be called MPhys) or Chemistry (MChem). More information is available from the accrediting body e.g. Institute of Physics or Royal Society of Chemistry.

If the career aim is to be a scientist, then the MSci (or equivalent) is the way to go.

DD is doing Msci, the biggest advantage is funding and knowing she can change her mind. Entry was one grade higher and she has to achieve 2:1 and above. The con would be that she cannot browse other university or other masters options unless she changed to BSc. Also many students are now opting for various 4 year degrees mostly sandwich so it’s quite competitive so the extra qualification helps.

As I understand it the four year integrated masters attracts similar funding for the fourth year as the undergraduate degree, whereas for a standalone masters year you can borrow the fees but not the maintenance part. And you can switch to three years if you don't want to go ahead with the fourth year I believe, but check that.

Yes, pros to the integrated master’s is the funding. It’s just an extra year on top of the BSc. You can drop down to the BSc if you want or if grades aren’t high enough throughout your degree, or if your grades are adequate, you may be able to move up to the integrated master’s from the BSc.

Cons, you are stuck with the uni you start with.

Pros for the separate MSc, choice of courses once you have finished your BSc. Doesn’t have to be immediately after your BSc, though often is.

Big con is the funding. Max of 11k or so for fees and maintenance. And worse, it’s paid back in parallel to the undergraduate loan, so 9% ‘tax’ for undergrad loan above whatever the threshold is PLUS 6% for the master’s loan on top.

So basically if DS applies for BSC courses on his UCAS form would he have to reapply for a Postgraduate loan (with much less funding) if he wanted to do a MSC course? Or could he just do an extra year at the same institution and move up to the MSC providing he does well enough and still receive funding at the same level as at undergraduate level? Just wondering whether DS should change his UCAS form now as he is early entry and submits it tomorrow once he receives his school references?

Thanks al - that's really helpful. DD is in Year 11 and we're just looking at A Level options and uni courses etc to work out the best path to get to where she (currently) wants to be. She'd like to go on to PhD so sounds the MSci might be a good option for her to aim for and it's good that she can switch to BSc if needed.

@Gizmo98765, it depends on the uni. It might be on their website or he might need to ask. Sometimes the entry requirements for the integrated master’s are one grade or so higher as well. I know my DS who was at Warwick could have transferred on to the MMath after his second year as his grades were high enough (often a 2:1 or a high 2:1 occasionally) at that point.

Also your DS could apply for just Oxbridge now and add the other 4 in a few weeks after more research. (Assuming that’s why the school deadline is so early.) I’m not sure if unis pay any attention to the fact you are an ‘early entry’ candidate, though.

Thanks @MatildaJayne he is applying for Oxbridge. Predicted grade AAAA and A EPQ. His school are pushing them to apply to all 5 choices at once. Which I know isn’t right and is far from ideal, he is recovering from covid and he has only managed to visit one of his choices.

Check what the fourth year involves. MSci fourth year will be 120 credits. MSc is 180 credits as the extra 60 credits is a dissertation or research project. If she wants to do a PhD then a separate MSc is often better because she'll have had the opportunity to do a research project. She may well also find that the area she wants to specialise in isn't offered at her UG uni - and until you start you really don't know enough about what the disciplines involve.

@Gizmo98765 With those grades he could easily apply for the integrated master’s now and drop back during uni if he changes his mind and wants to get a master’s elsewhere.

Thanks he still has to get those grades

She'd like to go on to PhD

OP, if your DD is already thinking along these lines, you should look into the best route carefully – not all the top universities are keen on the MSci, many prefer the 'traditional' route of BSc followed by an MSc (not all of them, but some certainly). My understanding is that not all of them feel the MSci is quite at the same level as BSc + Msc..

This also enables your DD to switch universities after her undergrad, which many universities see as a positive, proactive move, though I appreciate that it is cheaper to do an MSci or stay at the same university for a Masters if cost is a major consideration.

I do speak from a position of recent experience as DD has just (as in 10 days ago) finished a STEM MSc at a world-leading university and is now looking into PhDs.

I do speak from a position of recent experience as DD has just (as in 10 days ago) finished a STEM MSc at a world-leading university and is now looking into PhDs.

Mine too!

Okay great - thanks @thing47 that's a really useful insight. A PhD isn't a given but I think she'd at least like it to be an option in the future, should she choose to go down that road (she's looking at psychology/neuroscience so I am assuming a PhD would be considered a good move in that arena).

I'm obviously still at the info-gathering stage at the moment as we're only at A-Level picking time, but there's so much to consider and take in. I want her to be able to make a really well-informed decision and not just a knee jerk one.

Apologies titchy I see you'd already made the same points as me!

OP, that's not DD's field at all (she's in vector-borne diseases), but I think you're right in that any of these research-heavy STEM fields a PhD is probably desirable, if not a necessity.

No problem thing!

OP also note if she does Psychology there are taught doctoral routes if she decides to go for something like Clinical Psychology.

I can’t help in the psychology area, but in the sciences fields I am more involved in, an MSc is more of a career-specific thing, more focussed in a particular specialism, whereas an MSci is more of a continuation of extra topics at undergraduate level. And an MSc isn’t seen as a requirement (or particularly desired) for a PhD, but an MSci would probably be. Plenty of people went on to PhD from MSci courses, but those who went off to do MSc tended to go off into employment afterwards, in the area of the MSc.

And an MSc isn’t seen as a requirement (or particularly desired) for a PhD, but an MSci would probably be.

That's really not the case for most STEM subjects. An MSc is better preparation than an MSci simply because the former includes independent research whereas the latter doesn't.

And the majority of both MSc and MSci grads will go into employment rather than PhD study!

An MSc is better preparation than an MSci simply because the former includes independent research whereas the latter doesn't.

The later statement isn't universally true. For instance, MPhys (or MSci Physics) courses typically involve a 40+ credit independent research project in the final year. In the cases where an MSc is better preparation for a PhD than an MSci, it's often because of the larger number of specialist taught modules.

Our MSci had a large chunk of independent research, a bit less than the MSc but probably similarly weighted in the overall grade. The main difference for us was that the MSci was more undergraduate material covering additional topics in the broad category of the degree course, but the MSc was far more focussed in one particular area. For my area (geology) an MSc is generally preparation for a particular career, and most PhD students will have gone straight in from undergrad (MSci or BSc). The only PhD students I know who also have a MSc (rather than an MSci) are ones who did an MSc and then the job market was v poor so they did a PhD to wait for it to improve!! But I can’t speak for other areas, and I’m just speaking from my personal experience of colleagues and study.