Hello all,
I would like to know your thoughts as I have already read some of "the internet´s". For what I have found, apparently a Master of Science is the best for those who want to pursue a researcher/academic career because of the depth of the dissertation, the data handling and -, followed by the Master of Arts in a lower level…
It also seems that those who don’t have any experience teaching would do an M.A Education whereas those with experience and looking forward to moving in their teachers’ careers would do a M.Ed. A M.Ed. has somehow more practical stuff and as you are required to have teaching experience I am guessing (a guess here) that if you hold a M.Ed. it means you have a certain amount of teaching experience, whereas you could have no teacher experience at all and hold a M.A.
I get that if your bachelor's degree is in a specific subject (for example, Mathematics, or Chemistry) and you are looking for master's degrees you would then do an M.A or M.Sc. in your specific subject as opposed to an M.A. /M.Sc. /M.Ed. in Education.
But if your Bachelors is not a popular/useful subject to teach, and you are teaching Primary, and you already have teaching experience, is it more sensible to go for a M.Ed. instead of a M.A? Does it really make a difference which type of masters it is? Quoting PsyGuy here… “a Masters is a Masters”.
If you had both options and if you liked both universities and both programmes on the same level. Does it make a difference in your CV whether the masters is an M.A. Education or an M.Ed ?
The M.A is from University of ----- and the M.Ed. from ----.
For some context I would never be able to teach in a first-tier school, I don't have any teaching license, I have a PGCE (IDL) from Sunderland University (online but with a mentor from my school and two teaching practicums, six weeks each) and I’m not an English native speaker. I do have two years of teaching experience after the PGCE and this will be my third. (Fifth year teaching in an international school.)
I feel a Masters is useful for non natives as an extra proof of our English proficiency and it also serves (though not sure how much) for marketability, not to mention of course that the programmes seem useful for the content.
I cannot get a teaching license unless I stop teaching (I live in Asia) but if I did that then I would not have the money to study… though I can only study online. I am quite lucky in terms of "learning from the field" as my colleague who teaches in a grade higher than me is super experienced, has QTS and is very eager to give me support and ideas.
Thank you for reading!
M.A Education, M.Ed or M.Sc. Education?
Response
Most of the differences dont matter much. The most substantial one, is that if your goal is to pursue a research based doctorate (Ph.D/D.Phil.) the MS/M.Sc is the clear choice. It will provide you a foundation for conducting research.
To give you some context on the differences:
1) MA (in some Edu or Edu adjacent field): These tend to be more pedagogical. They focus on addressing the 'why' in edu. Why do we assess, why is one assessment more suitable for this application than this other. A lot of your writing and discourse is going to be about 'whys'. They tend to be more qualitative driven rather than quantitative. You use research but you do so from the perspective of 'consuming research' so that you can reflect and answer those 'whys'. You often here of the scholar-practitioner model used in advanced edu programs. MAs tend to balance the two, enough scholarship to make a competent consumer of research and data.
2) MS/M.Sc: These tend to be more quantitative rather than qualitative, as the goal is to create research of your own. The goal of research is to produces data and contribute to the body of knowledge in interpreting that data. The major detractor from this definition is an increase in Ed.Ld programs that are MS/M.Sc programs that justify the research component as leaders needing often times to have the strongest background in research methods and statistics that you find in an IS, thats the rational anyway. These programs tend to weigh heavily on the scholar side of the scholar-practitioner model.
3) M.Ed: These programs are more often attached to or contain a credentialing component. You utilize research but the goal of research is to inform instruction. Youre using research to produce something instructional or pertaining to instruction, whether its a lesson, assessment, etc. These programs weigh heavily on the practitioner side of the scholar-practitioner model.
While it can seem that the MA is a lower level, its not really the case, its simply an approach that tends to be lighter on the quantitative aspect, and thus is criticized as less rigorous by people who are basically statistics nerds.
Admission requirements for M.Ed and MA/MS programs tend to be about the same. Youre more likely to find inexperienced edus as students in M.Ed program because these programs are more likely to incorporate a credentialing component in their program. Though you can find MA edu adjacent programs that have little to do with primary, secondary or even tertiary edu.
There are also M.Ed programs that have little to do with edu as well. Its often seen as an "easy" masters in the corporate world for either a promotion or salary increase. You can get an M.Ed in Entrepreneurship that barely touches on edu and is more a business degree but doesnt have all the requirements the various accreditation agencies require for say an MBA. Educational Psychology is another misnomer as it has little to do with edu and more about the psychology involved in learning, theres little that will make anyone a better edu in such programs.
Not really. Very few subject matter Masters degrees are orientated towards the edu sector. The content level of KS/K12 isnt very high and the ability to transfer knowledge is of keener interest than advance level content.
It would depend what the MA was in. Most M.Ed programs tend to be very general, they touch lightly on a broad number of topics. While an MA can also be very generalized youre more likely to find specialized programs that are MAs rather than M.Eds. An MA in Teaching for example (MAT) may be more marketable to a primary IT than a generalist M.Ed (though both are likely to get you the same salary band increase).
It might matter in a few niche scenarios (such as your pursuing a doctorate) but the subject of the degree (Ed.Ld as opposed to C&I for example) is more relevant to IE than whether its an MA, MS, or M.Ed.
Perhaps the most significant and relevant aspect of the difference is going to be what components are part of the programs. For example, a longer M.Ed may be more marketable than a short MA, if that MA falls short of the hours required to be recognized in some other regulating authority or IS. The status of the Uni matters more if one of those Unis is a Global Ivy. Your interests, cost and resource expectation are more important than the type of degree for most scenarios.
To give you some context on the differences:
1) MA (in some Edu or Edu adjacent field): These tend to be more pedagogical. They focus on addressing the 'why' in edu. Why do we assess, why is one assessment more suitable for this application than this other. A lot of your writing and discourse is going to be about 'whys'. They tend to be more qualitative driven rather than quantitative. You use research but you do so from the perspective of 'consuming research' so that you can reflect and answer those 'whys'. You often here of the scholar-practitioner model used in advanced edu programs. MAs tend to balance the two, enough scholarship to make a competent consumer of research and data.
2) MS/M.Sc: These tend to be more quantitative rather than qualitative, as the goal is to create research of your own. The goal of research is to produces data and contribute to the body of knowledge in interpreting that data. The major detractor from this definition is an increase in Ed.Ld programs that are MS/M.Sc programs that justify the research component as leaders needing often times to have the strongest background in research methods and statistics that you find in an IS, thats the rational anyway. These programs tend to weigh heavily on the scholar side of the scholar-practitioner model.
3) M.Ed: These programs are more often attached to or contain a credentialing component. You utilize research but the goal of research is to inform instruction. Youre using research to produce something instructional or pertaining to instruction, whether its a lesson, assessment, etc. These programs weigh heavily on the practitioner side of the scholar-practitioner model.
While it can seem that the MA is a lower level, its not really the case, its simply an approach that tends to be lighter on the quantitative aspect, and thus is criticized as less rigorous by people who are basically statistics nerds.
Admission requirements for M.Ed and MA/MS programs tend to be about the same. Youre more likely to find inexperienced edus as students in M.Ed program because these programs are more likely to incorporate a credentialing component in their program. Though you can find MA edu adjacent programs that have little to do with primary, secondary or even tertiary edu.
There are also M.Ed programs that have little to do with edu as well. Its often seen as an "easy" masters in the corporate world for either a promotion or salary increase. You can get an M.Ed in Entrepreneurship that barely touches on edu and is more a business degree but doesnt have all the requirements the various accreditation agencies require for say an MBA. Educational Psychology is another misnomer as it has little to do with edu and more about the psychology involved in learning, theres little that will make anyone a better edu in such programs.
Not really. Very few subject matter Masters degrees are orientated towards the edu sector. The content level of KS/K12 isnt very high and the ability to transfer knowledge is of keener interest than advance level content.
It would depend what the MA was in. Most M.Ed programs tend to be very general, they touch lightly on a broad number of topics. While an MA can also be very generalized youre more likely to find specialized programs that are MAs rather than M.Eds. An MA in Teaching for example (MAT) may be more marketable to a primary IT than a generalist M.Ed (though both are likely to get you the same salary band increase).
It might matter in a few niche scenarios (such as your pursuing a doctorate) but the subject of the degree (Ed.Ld as opposed to C&I for example) is more relevant to IE than whether its an MA, MS, or M.Ed.
Perhaps the most significant and relevant aspect of the difference is going to be what components are part of the programs. For example, a longer M.Ed may be more marketable than a short MA, if that MA falls short of the hours required to be recognized in some other regulating authority or IS. The status of the Uni matters more if one of those Unis is a Global Ivy. Your interests, cost and resource expectation are more important than the type of degree for most scenarios.
-
Tol_Eressea
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2021 1:36 am
Re: M.A Education, M.Ed or M.Sc. Education?
Thank you so much for your answer, as always. "Statistic nerds" cracked me up. No, I am not interested in a PhD.
The M.Ed. I am interested in is a “M.Ed.” with nothing else added: Master of Education. I reckon this is probably not a good sign. This might also be because it is fully online? All of my choices are fully online by the way as I live in Asia. So the M.Ed. doesn't have any subject specified on it. There is only one optional module, and from the available options the one I am really interested in is "Content Developer". But its only 20 credits, which lasts 3 months (15-20hs workload per week).
I compared the three (now it is three lol) programmes and as you said, the MA has less subjects but slightly more time in each subject. The other MA at Exeter is even more focused (literacy) but nothing specific about assessment, curriculum, technology, pedagogy, etc anywhere else but in reading and writing. I know that “less is more” but focusing so much on reading and writing isn’t as interesting to me, maybe because I lack the formative years that going to university for a teaching license gives you. My bachelors is in Image and Sound design and I have always been interested in developing content, so the M.Ed. sounded really good to me... until I realized it was not a M.A. and that was how I learned that there are also M.Eds.
One of the MA (Teaching and Learning) has more or less the same content though a bit more of time per subject and less subjects. I would be missing either assessment or curriculum or technology, but whichever I choose I would have a bit more of insight I suppose, than having all the subjects with the M.Ed. Some of the modules in the M.Ed. last 6 weeks which is not much time I reckon... Though I could be wrong. I personally wouldn't want to spend any more time in some of those modules.
In terms of rankings (though I know this might be irrelevant at this point):
Times Higher Education: Bath 251-300, Exeter 137, Essex 301-350.
Interestingly, the only one I didn’t like in terms of user friendliness was Exeter. It says on the website the workload is 30hs/week though through email they say it is 20… I pointed out the discrepancy by email months ago and haven’t heard from them again (I resent the email threads last week with no answer).
If anyone is curious or also looking for a masters online:
Essex (M.Ed.): https://online.essex.ac.uk/courses/mast ... estructure
Bath (M.A. Teaching and Learning): https://www.bath.ac.uk/guides/ma-educat ... -learning/
Exeter (M.A.Language and Literacy/generic M.A.): https://www.exeter.ac.uk/study/online/c ... education/
Such a long email.. thank you for reading!!
The M.Ed. I am interested in is a “M.Ed.” with nothing else added: Master of Education. I reckon this is probably not a good sign. This might also be because it is fully online? All of my choices are fully online by the way as I live in Asia. So the M.Ed. doesn't have any subject specified on it. There is only one optional module, and from the available options the one I am really interested in is "Content Developer". But its only 20 credits, which lasts 3 months (15-20hs workload per week).
I compared the three (now it is three lol) programmes and as you said, the MA has less subjects but slightly more time in each subject. The other MA at Exeter is even more focused (literacy) but nothing specific about assessment, curriculum, technology, pedagogy, etc anywhere else but in reading and writing. I know that “less is more” but focusing so much on reading and writing isn’t as interesting to me, maybe because I lack the formative years that going to university for a teaching license gives you. My bachelors is in Image and Sound design and I have always been interested in developing content, so the M.Ed. sounded really good to me... until I realized it was not a M.A. and that was how I learned that there are also M.Eds.
One of the MA (Teaching and Learning) has more or less the same content though a bit more of time per subject and less subjects. I would be missing either assessment or curriculum or technology, but whichever I choose I would have a bit more of insight I suppose, than having all the subjects with the M.Ed. Some of the modules in the M.Ed. last 6 weeks which is not much time I reckon... Though I could be wrong. I personally wouldn't want to spend any more time in some of those modules.
In terms of rankings (though I know this might be irrelevant at this point):
Times Higher Education: Bath 251-300, Exeter 137, Essex 301-350.
Interestingly, the only one I didn’t like in terms of user friendliness was Exeter. It says on the website the workload is 30hs/week though through email they say it is 20… I pointed out the discrepancy by email months ago and haven’t heard from them again (I resent the email threads last week with no answer).
If anyone is curious or also looking for a masters online:
Essex (M.Ed.): https://online.essex.ac.uk/courses/mast ... estructure
Bath (M.A. Teaching and Learning): https://www.bath.ac.uk/guides/ma-educat ... -learning/
Exeter (M.A.Language and Literacy/generic M.A.): https://www.exeter.ac.uk/study/online/c ... education/
Such a long email.. thank you for reading!!
Reply
@Tol_Eressea
First, its not an M.Ed in nothing else, its a M.Ed in Education and it might help your brain to think of it as an M.Ed in General Education because its very typical of what a non-clinical M.Ed program looks like and is composed of. Its almost stereotypical textbook (depending on the textbook).
Its not a bad sign, this type of program design wouldnt be typical if it also wasnt common. Theres nothing wrong with being common, typical, or even stereotypical. When you ask a lay person what they thing a classroom edu should know, youre going to get things that you see in this program, if you ask a not so lay person youre going to get responses that hover around the trinity of meds/peds/asst, and thats good because thats the equivalent of saying and edu should know something about edu beyond what the lay person would know from their experience as a a student. So not bad, just not special or noteworthy beyond the program does what it is supposed to and should do.
Its also not indicative of being an online issue, you can find 'vanilla' Gen.Ed programs available both online and on site. You can do a lot of specialized subjects in edu through distance, everything from tech. to SPED/SEN/LD.
Second, you cant (well nearly cant) escape an advance edu degree program without meds/peds/asst. Its the backbone, the foundation, the substrate of what makes edu, edu. If there arent discreet courses/modules of them specifically than they are going to be integrated into the courses and modules that are part of the program.
Rankings dont matter in this case, but even if they did, none of your Unis are even in the top 100 much less the top 10 and none of them are one of the Global Unis in edu.
Youre pulling a lot of conclusions from the program descriptions. Thats not a bad thing considering there isnt a lot (if any) other material to draw from. When a Uni creates a program and has it approved theres a document called the "master syllabus" that sets out whats to be studied and for how long. Thats where the prospectus draws the time commitment from because thats what the various accreditation and regulating authorities use. When a program rep. responds to you what they are saying is "this is what the book says" (30 hours) but in the experience of the department and faculty they see, by some measure of central tendency that their students are taking less (20 hours). Thats an observation not a conclusion, some students might take longer and some students might take a shorter period of time in their weekly commitment. Individual differences is a very substantial factor that varies considerable among individuals.
Based on your previous posts Im going to present two options for your considerations.
1) The Portsmouth M.Res in Edu. It can be accomplished entirely online and has only one taught module, how to do research, and then your writing project (thesis/dissertation, etc). Its similar to a a research based M.Phil in Edu., except instead of being entirely based on the writing project and assuming you already know how to do research this program assumes you dont and so commits a substantial portion of the program to teaching that followed by the writing project.
An M.Res is more a niche degree than what you see in more common Edu Masters but this programs M.Res is still a Masters and still in Education. All the while providing you the ability to curate your own degree program. If you want to write about the efficacy of digital learning technologies in literacy development you can very much do that, or anything else thats edu appropriate.
2) Your background and interests sound much more aligned to a Masters in Ed.Tech (Educational Technology). Some Unis add curriculum design into their program. Many in this field either go on to work for curriculum developers outside the classroom or eventually aspire to being an ISs Ed.Tech Director/Leader, a senior leadership position. Various US states (IE. NY) even have have credentials for Ed.Tech.
First, its not an M.Ed in nothing else, its a M.Ed in Education and it might help your brain to think of it as an M.Ed in General Education because its very typical of what a non-clinical M.Ed program looks like and is composed of. Its almost stereotypical textbook (depending on the textbook).
Its not a bad sign, this type of program design wouldnt be typical if it also wasnt common. Theres nothing wrong with being common, typical, or even stereotypical. When you ask a lay person what they thing a classroom edu should know, youre going to get things that you see in this program, if you ask a not so lay person youre going to get responses that hover around the trinity of meds/peds/asst, and thats good because thats the equivalent of saying and edu should know something about edu beyond what the lay person would know from their experience as a a student. So not bad, just not special or noteworthy beyond the program does what it is supposed to and should do.
Its also not indicative of being an online issue, you can find 'vanilla' Gen.Ed programs available both online and on site. You can do a lot of specialized subjects in edu through distance, everything from tech. to SPED/SEN/LD.
Second, you cant (well nearly cant) escape an advance edu degree program without meds/peds/asst. Its the backbone, the foundation, the substrate of what makes edu, edu. If there arent discreet courses/modules of them specifically than they are going to be integrated into the courses and modules that are part of the program.
Rankings dont matter in this case, but even if they did, none of your Unis are even in the top 100 much less the top 10 and none of them are one of the Global Unis in edu.
Youre pulling a lot of conclusions from the program descriptions. Thats not a bad thing considering there isnt a lot (if any) other material to draw from. When a Uni creates a program and has it approved theres a document called the "master syllabus" that sets out whats to be studied and for how long. Thats where the prospectus draws the time commitment from because thats what the various accreditation and regulating authorities use. When a program rep. responds to you what they are saying is "this is what the book says" (30 hours) but in the experience of the department and faculty they see, by some measure of central tendency that their students are taking less (20 hours). Thats an observation not a conclusion, some students might take longer and some students might take a shorter period of time in their weekly commitment. Individual differences is a very substantial factor that varies considerable among individuals.
Based on your previous posts Im going to present two options for your considerations.
1) The Portsmouth M.Res in Edu. It can be accomplished entirely online and has only one taught module, how to do research, and then your writing project (thesis/dissertation, etc). Its similar to a a research based M.Phil in Edu., except instead of being entirely based on the writing project and assuming you already know how to do research this program assumes you dont and so commits a substantial portion of the program to teaching that followed by the writing project.
An M.Res is more a niche degree than what you see in more common Edu Masters but this programs M.Res is still a Masters and still in Education. All the while providing you the ability to curate your own degree program. If you want to write about the efficacy of digital learning technologies in literacy development you can very much do that, or anything else thats edu appropriate.
2) Your background and interests sound much more aligned to a Masters in Ed.Tech (Educational Technology). Some Unis add curriculum design into their program. Many in this field either go on to work for curriculum developers outside the classroom or eventually aspire to being an ISs Ed.Tech Director/Leader, a senior leadership position. Various US states (IE. NY) even have have credentials for Ed.Tech.