Most US universities have a combined masters and Ph.D programs. The masters goes on for 2 to 3 years.  The early years enable the student to know the requisite tools  and concepts so as to capacitate her/him to do the research work after that. Usually, the masters in such cases is very rigorous, and the students concerned are able to gain tremendous knowledge and confidence in carrying out the research later on. The students also are able to know more critically the area in which s/he should choose to do her/his research, depending upon the interest and proficiency. I support this type of programs. 

Most US universities have a combined masters and Ph.D programs. The masters goes on for 2 to 3 years.  The early years enable the student to know the requisite tools  and concepts so as to capacitate her/him to do the research work after that. Usually, the masters in such cases is very rigorous, and the students concerned are able to gain tremendous knowledge and confidence in carrying out the research later on. The students also are able to know more critically the area in which s/he should choose to do her/his research, depending upon the interest and proficiency. I support this type of programs. 

Dear Mahfuz,

Unfortunately, I have no experience and no information about this combination. I am glad if I can match separately the master and PhD teaching standards.

I agree with Andras. I'm a little conservative on this issue. A Master's is a Master's and a Ph.D. is a Ph.D. A Doctorate is an entirely different business!

Dear @Mahfuz, I think that there is no such practice in Europe.Master degree is just prerequisite for Ph.D studies! 

As mentioned earlier about US Universities, I have attended Ph.D studies in USA and it was combined program. They recognized me a lot of credits that I have brought from Yugoslavia (MS).

My opinion is that these two types of graduate studies should have separated curriculum!

Many US and UK universities offer a combined masters and Ph.D programs in some fields. However, I agree with all my colleagues in that the masters program equip students with tremendous knowledge and new tools and concepts so as to make them capable and confident in doing research work after that in the Ph.D program. Thus I am against such combined Masters/PhD programs.

I have not experienced it, but I have friends who told me about it, it is like a masters degree continued to a doctorate degree. Once a student has hurdled the longer, very rigorous masters level, he can proceed to a "shorter" doctorate. I think it has some advantages, like a shorter total duration.

I also agree with András  and Marwan on being conservative on this issue. Today most areas of study require depth which a consolidated program does not offer. To acquire knowledge, the student must progress incrementally and be able to absorb the material presented to become an expert on his field. The type of programs that consolidate Master's and a PhD programs usually require less credits (at least the ones that have caught my attention).

Education should not be taken through the path of least resistance but through the path to knowledge.

Just an opinion.

I am not familiar with any program that offers combined MS/Ph D. In our university we have separate programs and MS is required for admission to Ph D. In some rare cases, direct admission to Ph D after BS is granted but not common. Normally we see a student who is close to completing MS would plan to continue for Ph D to work in the same area as extension of his/her MS thesis. It would be nice to see if you can give the actual example of a University which offers such a program and what are their requirements.

In my opinion separate MS is always preferred.

There is such programs in the EU, but you have (or your University) to serch to find out.

I believe that the options is of great expectations. 

although many university offered a combined Ms and PhD program, I personally believe it should be separated and not in a row. I also prefer getting the two degrees from different schools. Sometimes school do not distinguish between courses offered in Ms and PhD, thus a combined program will be better and time efficient. the question of the quality and research experience is subject to doubt.  

Both international joint and dual degrees may have a range of benefits to students, giving them a global perspective and experience, providing a credential that may be recognized in more than one country, and, in some cases, giving them exposure to faculty expertise or resources they would not encounter if studying at only one institution, Kent says.

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/articles/2013/03/13/maximize-graduate-school-with-a-dual-degree

Combined Masters-Doctorate degree is an excellent program! I studied in a combined Masters-Doctorate program myself in Washington University. We were given a 'course only' option in Masters and take up the 'thesis' work to doctorate after completion of Masters program. So, this helped us to study all the core courses in Systems Science (my field) & some mathematics papers also from Maths Department to enrich the foundations. So, when we started the research work, we were able to take off smoothly under the guidance of our supervisors.

Best wishes - Sundar

We have one former student having that kind of combination in one of the faculties in our university. But the procedure was not transparent enough, that even us initially thought there was a special agreement going on. It will help if the transfer condition was highlighted in the university's website. However her course took equivalent number of years combining master and PhD. So, I think it is no problem except that, the addition of years might disrupts the planning of our employer, especially if we are given in service training, unless its part time.

Judging from your answers, I think that you are not well informed, at least about the situation in Europe. Please follow the following links"

http://www.aegean.gr/aegean/en/joint_progs.htm

http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/erasmus_mundus/programme/action1_en.php

http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/erasmus_mundus/results_compendia/selected_projects_action_1_joint_doctorates_en.php

http://www.enc-network.eu/joint-master-degree/

Thank you Costas for the attached links which tells us about the Joint Programmes including scholarships  In the second link http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/erasmus_mundus/programme/action1_en.php

"This Action will foster cooperation between higher education institutions and academic staff in Europe and Third Countries with a view to creating poles of excellence and providing highly trained human resources".

As society changes so does its needs. new innovative programs and new means of doing things are part of progress. Most of us want things to remain the way we are used to, however, that is the sort of thinking that kills innovation. As far as the quality of the research is maintained the methodology is not so important.

Joint Masters and doctorate programs as well as joint programs between various institutions are new tools aimed at providing quality education and meet the needs of a variety of students who may not be well served or served at all in the old modality.

It is good to have such programmes so that the research outlook can be started at the early stage and progress to mature with continuation. The flexibility with separate Masters and PhD programme, the candidate has the choice to go in either for employment or again continue research. There could be many compelling situations, why they prefer employment at first, but at that stage this is distorted as the continuation of research is only a second option.  

Dear @Mahfuz, if it is a serious program that combines Master and PhD. together without negative impacting the syllabus, then I think it is a good program that graduate with strong knowledge in a specific field.

Dear Abedallah,

The Master and PhD. combination syaalbus should be compared with the syllabus of the two programs when they are not combined.

It's a marketing gimmick and devalues the PhD.  Doctoral studies were once focussed on bringing new knowledge to society by highly focussed research under the supervision of an expert.  Taught doctorates are useless.

Do you want to form 'true specialists' (Master and PhD combined, Master followed by PhD on same topic) or generalists (e.g. Master and PhD not combined, a student changes topic after the Master program)?

Dear Marcel,

You have raised a good debatable point on forming 'true specialists" or "generalists".

Perhaps an example for discussion:

Education in human versus non-human sciences

Students from non-human sciences usually receive university formations lasting three to five years, occasionally followed by a PhD formation lasting maximum two to ca. four years. Students from non-human sciences rarely or not continue to work in the same field with the same model system or model species after the end of Master or PhD formations. By contrast, education in human medicine might take at least seven years, with the additional option to focus for years on one aspect of the human body (e.g. one organ or body part) or pathology (e.g. allergy, metabolism) to become so-called ‘medical specialists’. Should focus in education approaches used to form medical specialists also be used to form specialists in non-human sciences (e.g. biologists, ecologists, ornithologists)? Perhaps true specialists in non-human sciences might limit research (Master/PhD level), and eventually education, to not more than one or two model species or a single aspect (e.g. color or vision) of a limited number of model species or systems. Some people claim it might require 10 or more years to form a scientist, but then this will obviously depend on how many different topics, model species or model systems the individual scientist is willing to cover

The basical differences in Master and PhD is a contribution to the cretion of the new knowledges. The main aim of the Master degree is just a learn of existing knowldges and Master degree mean that student was able to read and undesrtand scientific results, lean appropirite methods and has some scills in writing.

However, in the case of PhD student have to crete realy new knowledges, what must be publish in peer-reviewd journal.

And, of course, these points may have some differences in theroreticall and experimental science.. 

There are several studies that indicate what will be the future of education. One of the objections is that the system is too bureaucratized. We enclose a powerful study of the OECD scenarios..

Best Regards,

Kiril

http://www.oecd.org/site/schoolingfortomorrowknowledgebase/futuresthinking/scenarios/scenariosforthefutureofschooling.htm.

Although there are several types of degrees you can earn in graduate school, the most common are the master's (MA, MS) and doctor (PhD, EdD, and others) degree. So, what's the difference between these two degrees? Can both be combined into one? Before asking this important question, let me say something about these two different degrees.

Master's Degree:

A master's degree generally takes 2, sometimes 3, years to complete. The program entails coursework and exams, and, depending on the field, an internship or other applied experience (for example, in some fields of psychology). Masters degrees prepare a person for a range of pursuits through specialized study of a field. Whether a thesis is required to obtain the master's degree depends on the program. Some programs require a written thesis; others offer an option between a thesis and comprehensive exam.

Masters degrees are more versatile than doctoral degrees, and have a wide range of professional and academic applications.

The value of the master's degree varies by field. In some fields, like business, a master's is the unstated norm and necessary for advancement. Other fields do not require advanced degrees for career advancement. In some cases, a master's degree may hold advantages over a doctoral degree.

Research masters enhance a student's research skills, prepare them for a Ph.D. program, and may help qualify them to teach in elementary, secondary, and community education settings. Professional masters degrees teach students skills they will need as practitioners in their respective fields, and may lead to credentials necessary to practice in the field.

PhD Programs:

A doctoral degree is obviously a more advanced degree. However, it takes time. Depending on the program, a PhD could take 4-8 years to complete. Typically a PhD in North American programs entails 2-3 years of coursework and a dissertation, which is an independent research project designed to uncover new knowledge in your field and be of publishable quality. Some fields, like applied psychology, also require an internship of one year or more.

The most common doctorate is the Doctor of Philosophy or Ph.D. Ph.D.s and other research doctorates prepare students to initiate new projects that add to the collective knowledge base of the field. Candidates for and holders of Ph.D.s often seek careers as professors and researchers, but many also go on to varied roles in the nonprofit, public, and private sectors.

As can be seemed from my previous comments, Master's degrees and PhD degrees certainly differ, with advantages and disadvantages to each. Usually, the master’s degree is more classroom-based than the Ph.D., which is more research and teaching-oriented. A combination of the two can prepare a student well for a future career in academia. Moreover, these programs are more common than students might initially assume: many prestigious universities award a master's degree while a student is on the Ph.D. track. In this case the Master and PhD programs should be clearly differentiated.

I agree with those who support the idea and dare to go even further. Some fields are more competitive than others and some people are more innovative and prolific than others, why not give them the chance to graduate or start a research earlier. 

The University of Copenhagen is now launching the Graduate Talent Program: a 3+5 scheme - Bachelor's students can apply directly for a PhD position http://phd.ku.dk/english/overview/  

Such scheme (3+5) is very promising and allow students to have a continues education. I think that results shluld be quite good because studetnt save a lot of time for the "enetering in the topic".,

Dear Taras,

I agree with you in that results should be quite good because students save a lot of time for the "entering in the topic".

For those students who are really keen to go in researches only, dual degree program (MS+PhD) is very beneficial in terms of saving their precious time.

In my opinion, this is a good initiative, and it should be appreciated in a positive way.

In Industries we try innovative ways to retain talent, one such tool is use of "further Education". We tie up with Institutions or universities and offer customized Programmes with Masters; for which the organization parts 75% of the tuition fees while the Employee takes care of 25% and remits a bond to serve 2 years after the completion of the course.

Scope with options are there to cover PhD under this programme so that a deserving few can be motivated to be retained.

Dear Krishnan,

Thank you for the valuable and rich information you have in your post.

It has both the side..

Its good because without any break in your study you can complete 2 degrees..

But it should be done with Interest not as a compulsion or requirement for some job or say 

At the end of the day these hybrid qualifications will be judged on their merit.  In the job market the Master/PhD will have to compete with the traditional forms such as masters and PhD where the degrees are separate.  It will encounter difficulties because there is already concern over the plethora of so called doctoral programmes filling the market.

A PhD should be achieved from long term research and result in a substantial thesis which is published in the meme of increasing our knowledge.  The Undergrad qualifications have for a long time been suspect and some are rightly regarded with suspicion.  If PhD's can be cobbled together from bits of this study and bits of that then what is its intrinsic value.

I agree with Dhara that if this is being done for fun or interest it really does not matter but if we use university qualifications as a sign of excellence and quality we need confidence that that is what they are.

I may be old fashioned but I am always wary of gimmicks and especially 'appearance over substance'.  Give me the substance of dedicated research any day!

Yes, dear Barry. "In the job market the Master/PhD program will have to compete with the traditional forms such as masters and PhD where the degrees are separate."

I have participated in such a program, but after the MPhil diploma was given, the PhD procedure had nothing to do with the initial promises (only one candidate had the chance to take his PhD in two more years, all other people had to wait and wait until the professor decide to "give them" their diploma...)

So, it is a good option, provided that they will keep their promises.

One can mix UG and PG degree programs, as they are for fixed time duration and for a specific syllabus coverage. You may think of such a combination up to M.E./M.Tech. or M.Phil. If you combine Ph.D. to this, University will be bound to issue a Ph.D. degree at the end of every second or the third year.

My personal opinion is NO for this idea. However, ideas will differ from person to person.

Regards,

Dr.S.Ravindran

I think it is a good idea to combine master and phd programs, it could save time for the students and for the research program; However students should be chosen on specific criteria for this program. No matter that universities could handle the two methods: master and phd separated and combined. The objective purpose of master and phd programs is to prepare future good researchers for the job market; so if some students are able to follow the combined program, universities should be able to offer it.

Sirs, 

Try to encourage your staff to undergo PhD activities.  If the terms "Good Researchers' and "Job Market" are seen together, people shall think of Selling PhD degrees and find a good market.  Soon the Concept of RESEARCH will be seen with low level. values.  

Universities may consider an option:  If a researcher discontinues his/her PhD at the end of the 3rd or 4th year (due to some personal problems), the University may consider awarding a Master degree to the candidate.  But this should not take place in the other war around.  

Regards, 

Dr.S.Ravindran

Scientists who attain a PhD are rightly proud — they have gained entry to an academic elite. But it is not as elite as it once was. The number of science doctorates earned each year grew by nearly 40% between 1998 and 2008, to some 34,000, in countries that are members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

In some countries, including the United States and Japan, people who have trained at great length and expense to be researchers confront a dwindling number of academic jobs, and an industrial sector unable to take up the slack. Supply has outstripped demand and, although few PhD holders end up unemployed, it is not clear that spending years securing this high-level qualification is worth it for a job as, for example, a high-school teacher. In other countries, such as China and India, the economies are developing fast enough to use all the PhDs they can crank out, and more — but the quality of the graduates is not consistent.

David Cyranoski  et all (2011), Education: The PhD factory, The world is producing more PhDs than ever before. Is it time to stop?,  Nature 472, 276-279 (2011), doi:10.1038/472276a 

If your plan is to pursue PhD in future, I would suggest to go for integrated PhD because of few Positive aspects, namely

1. Less course work requirement for PhD

2. Quick graduation time

3. Literature survey part of your PhD becomes easy and takes less time as you extend your MS work and it's most likely if you continue working under the same supervisor

4. Well acquainted with the research environment and prerequisites before starting your PhD work

Fellow Researchers, 

Pl don't mix Ph.D. with any other educational program.  One may mix UG and PG programs.  In India, we have MS by research (5 year) program.  

During 1980s, I.I.T., Bombay, had Ph.D. candidates with UG qualifications.  They used to do little more for qualification, in terms of credits, but Ph.D. was a separate program.  

In my opinion, Research should not have any shortcuts.  I suggest, that if an institute has a mix / shortcut, they may make suitable corrections soon.  

I am a PhD Student at Drexel University. In most US universities, PhD programs offer the students the possibility of getting an MS along the way.

In Europe, from what I know, MSc (2-3 yr. degree) is a requirement for a PhD (3-4 yr. degree) and PhD consists almost entirely of research-only work. For eg. if I have an MSc. in Mechanical Engineering, I can still spend only 3 yrs. for my PhD in Biomedical Engineering. 

In the US, an MS is usually just coursework (2 yrs). And a PhD is 5 yrs. which includes the coursework equivalent to that of a Master's. That's why an MS almost means nothing in STEM fields, and the only degree that matter for research in US is a PhD. Because of Master;s level coursework embedded in a PhD program, the MS degree has been undervalued naturally. For eg. if I am a Master's in Mech. Engg., even with exception credentials I will still need to the coursework for Biomed. Engg. in order to earn a PhD in that field. 

I prefer the European system, where an MSc is valued, because that's how it should be. The US system is made to suit students who take up PhD right after BS - one of the ways US ensures max. no. of PhD graduates. But in my opinion, it is a waste of time and money. Many BS graduates with little knowledge sign up for PhD and end up disillusioned about research by the time they're done.

Is Ph.D. research that simple?  It it real?  Can you really fix time duration for a research work?  3-4 year for two degrees MSc and Ph.D.  

May be, I should have contacted Dharma Teja Varapula before my Ph.D. work.  Anyway its too late.  May be I can plan to send my students.  

I fully support the combined MS/PhD system of US Universities. Many get benefited by this 5-years program, and other countries may follow this good system as well. If one cannot complete PhD in the scheduled 3-years duration, extension up to 1-2 years can be easily obtained with the consent of the Advisor / Dean.

Best wishes, Sundar

I do not think the rigor of PhD research has come down. It just became more competitive. Majority of PhDs enter the industry in 21st century. Therefore, time is very valuable and students struggle to make it within the duration - some take 3 yrs., some others up to 6 yrs. Few decades ago, the focus of almost all the PhD programs was academia-oriented. It has changed now.

Note: As far as I know, there is no MS+PhD that lasts just 3-4 years. (Some individuals manage it in 4 yrs. too) The average minimum is 5 yrs. in the US.

Yes, it is a good idea.

Sirs, 

I present my personal opinion.  We have seen the effect of the clustering of Engineering Colleges in Tamil Nadu, one can find that there are not many taker and seats are not filled in many colleges.  

At least in Tamil Nadu, India, the respect / value of a Ph.D. holder has come down.  If you bring in time bound duel degrees of M.E / M.Tech. with Ph.D,, I am afraid, the respect for Ph.D. degree and the degree holders will be gone, in may be another decade.  

I am sorry to present my personal opinion for the second time.  Ph.D. degrees should not be sold at the cost of time or money.  Many Universities, Chancellors, Vice Chancellors, Deans and other officials are there to plan on the matter.  Each University can have its own decision on such topics.   

Regards, 

Dr.S.Ravindran

Yes, I agree with Ayesha and Debi. Most UK and European universities have a combined masters and Ph.D programs too.

Some universities design their curriculum such that student ma could start from a masters degree and without break proceed to a doctoeal degree if such a student ia successful on the masters degree with a PhD grade. I first had my masters degree and commenced a PhD under the same Msc project supervisor For another 4 Years. In my circumstance, the first year of my PhD was accessed (Mphil), I had to demonstrate strong researching competence and show good understanding of my PhD work packages. the route was useful in that my MSc work also served as a background for my PhD although wiek I completed mt PhD I felt the msc was just a child’s play. in conclusion, continuing from Msc to PhD has some advantages if the assesswnr procedure is thorough.

It was a novel idea, to introducing Duel B.E. Degree during 1970s; for example : Mechanial and EEE, ECE and Instrumentation Mechanial and Automobile, CSE and IT. Due to some problems, it was dropped with in a short time.

Another idea of studying additional subjects, three or four subjects to pass a B.E. or B.Tech. Degree program with 'Honours'. Due to some problems, this idea also was dropped after implementation.

Nowadays, the trend is to introduce need based PG degree programmes. Idea is to join a huge Industry and educate the students as per the needs of the industry. In Tamil Nadu, India, many private Universities have come forward to introduce such P.G. / P.G.Dip., programmes. With the permission from Govt of India, (UGC / AICTE), institutions can initiate joint National or International P.G. Degree programmes.

All these were tried in the same level, that is, either in UG or PG level only.

But; in my opinion, if twining is planed in the Ph.D. degree level, it MAY bring in a disaster in the research activities. It could be an academic / industry or academic / application based Research.

To publish a paper in the Int. Journal like ASME and few other good journals, it takes 2 years. In a time duration of 3 to 4 years how can the scholars finish two degrees.

By clubbing up P.G. & Ph.D. degrees; students, guides and the managements of the implimenting Institutions will be very happy; but the so called QUALITY of research MAY be diluted.

Dr.S.Ravindran