Saw this article USA Today (no, not kidding) about some universities are offering graduate degrees in business, but with an emphasis in science and mathematics.
Many students strong in science and math face similar career dilemmas, fueling a stampede into places like law school just as global wars are being waged in biotechnology, cryptology, nanotechnology, forensic chemistry, environmental science and the like.That has led to the creation of a new master’s degree, the professional science master’s (PSM), which promises to be the hot degree no one seems to have heard of — yet. It’s so new that its first graduates were in 2002. Fewer than 400 students have earned a PSM. But the programs are expanding rapidly and are now offered at 45 universities in 20 states.
The PSM is being called the MBA for scientists and mathematicians. It’s an education aimed at future managers who will be able to move comfortably in the business of science, from a meeting about enzymes to another about intellectual property rights, all the while understanding the goal is not a scientific journal article but marketable products.
The article goes on to explain how the PSM (I guess it’s obvious why it’s a Professional Science Master’s and not a Professional Master of Science, eh?) is a viable and more practical alternative to Ph.D. degrees, which I think makes some sense. You don’t need a Ph.D. for every position in a R&D department any more than you need an MBA in any other one. Some, yes, but not all.
Unfortunately the article kind of devolves into a fluff piece that sounds more like an infomercial for the degree rather than any kind of real reporting. They cite unspecified “experts” (always a red flag) about how much the world needs people with these degrees, and liberally quote the backers of the program, faculty, and people who have graduated with one. I don’t think there’s any dissenting opinion, or even a clue that they tried to find one. Heck, they don’t even really talk about the curriculum or what specifically these people study or what standards they’re held to.
Oh well. We Ph.D.s don’t have anything to worry about, right? Right?
Jamie,
I can’t speak for the quality of the article you cited, but I wanted to make a few comments on the PSM.
As a PSM recipient, I found it to be very demanding and rewarding for my career (research chemist), but definitely not a whole replacement for a Ph.D. Even the Council of Graduate Schools affirms that there is no comparison: “…the doctorate is still the gold standard…” (Communicator, March 2004, pg. 1). Nevertheless, the Ph.D. is currently no substitute for the PSM. It is flexible, interdisciplinary, and welcome for many who decide that the Ph.D. is not for them, and yet still want to expand their knowledge in their specific field and career. To help fill in the resource blanks from the quoted article, an excellent resource on the PSM is http://www.sciencemasters.com.
As far as the degree name, I think they chose Professional Science Masters over Professional Master’s of Science to avoid PMS as an acronym!
Sincerely,
Gabe Kirsch