Cambridge "Institute of Continuing Education" (International Relations)

Graduate School
1

How “legit” is a master’s from Cambridge University’s “Institute of Continuing Education” considered? I’m about 10 years out of college and interested in this program for no other reason than its flexibility as I work full-time (six, 2-week residential blocks, followed by a thesis): https://www.ice.cam.ac.uk/mst-ir

That said, I’m generally hesitant about these type of programs at otherwise reputable schools because of the bad rep places like Harvard Extension and Johns Hopkins AAP have received.

Is a graduate degree from Cambridge’s ICE considered parallel or equivalent to any graduate degree from Cambridge or would it be looked at as similar to a master’s from Harvard Extension of Johns Hopkins Advance Academic Programs?

2

Maxzee,

It is best to consider the ICE as a ‘wrapper’ that create academic courses for ‘adults’ on a hierarchy of academic levels. The top of this pyramid lie the Masters’ (MST) programmes; the academics that teach on this programme are drawn from Cambridge’s full time undergraduate and postgraduate programmes and most are also PhD supervisors. The academic standard required on the Masters’ is no different than on any of the full time programmes (including the bureaucracy!), however, the cohort will be older, wiser and a tougher challenge for the academics. On the current MST in IR, one of our Professors has stepped down from full time lecturing and elected to remain on the MST, because of the diversity in the cohort drawn from business, law, policy, institutions, military and development (rather than the MPhil, who tend to be fresh new graduates).

The MST is a bona fide Cambridge graduate degree and many regard it as the part time equivalent to the MPhil. You belong to a college as all other degree students do, and have a Director of Studies and tutor at college. Apart from the organisation and logistics, the ICE have no involvement in academic matters. Regarding the MST in IR programme itself, it has an unrelenting brutal workload, and the span of modules will test your resiliency, and oh, there are the exams…so, there are no kid gloves and you can be assured to its legitimacy. The course will require the candidate to be highly motivated and interested in IR, so if your selection criteria is purely it is part time, I would be concerned, you should be aware that a significant number of the cohort have given up work and moved to Cambridge to study full time on this ‘part time’ course.

3

Maxzee,

I have to concur with the comments made by my classmate in the MSt program in that this program is a bona fide Cambridge degree. To expound, this program grants degrees with all the rights and privileges as a full time MPhil or any other degree granted by the University of Cambridge. The ICE is merely a conduit for students that pursue part-time certificates and degrees at the University of Cambridge (the degree is from the University of Cambridge not ICE). Graduates of the program may continue into the PhD (should they earn the requisite high marks to matriculate). For reference, this program is not an extension program like the ones you have mentioned. As students, we are granted full access to all university resources including access to all libraries and collections for research (and free entry with our student ID to most museums and libraries in Europe as a student studying at a university within the EU).

Again, this is the University of Cambridge founded in 1209. No fillers, no substitutes, this program is exceptionally challenging from the admissions process to examinations. Best wishes on your decision.

4

I did this programme at Cambridge a few years ago now. I don’t know anything about the equivalent Harvard programmes, but in some respects at least the MSt is the real deal. The exams and dissertations are very similar to the full-time MPhil programme, which the MSt shadows, and if anything harder given that one has to reach a similar high standard with less time / energy / facilities to play with. The teaching is pretty cursory, but no more so than on the taught programmes at most British universities, including Oxbridge, who obviously think that their postgraduate students are, er, stupid. The real problem is that the MSt cannot be done without significant chunks of free-time, often in two-week blocks, yet is not recognised as a bona fide mid-career programme by relevant employers, cf the MPhil, or MBA / MPA type programmes at equivalent institutions. That makes it difficult for the right people to do, and means that the student body as a whole is pretty weird and wonderful, with the emphasis on the (very) weird, people who would never get into Cambridge via any other medium - retired lance corporals in the US Army of the most exquisite imbecility, who think they’re qualified to comment on the conduct military operations; second-rate diplomats from third rank nations who think they’re “international lawyers” just because they’ve got an LLM from god-knows-where; mediocre photographers who think they’re Annie Liebovitz; supposed parliamentarians from unknown states whom one would avoid at the bus stop. With grim inevitability all the same form a clique to monopolise social and learning time. If you can deal with all that you are laughing.

5

Unless I’m reading this incorrectly (jicboy), it sounds like the MSt is essentially an international freak show?

I was kind-of on the edge about this as it has a slightly “JHU AAP” vibe about it in their materials, but I think your comment does settle it in my mind; I’ll maybe look elsewhere. Thank you very much for this direction!

6

Wow, not sure what chip jicboy has on his shoulder. Yes, there are people on the course who would not have got into Cambridge via the normal route, but there are also a good number of people who are on the course via Ivy League and top UK instititutions (Oxford and LSE); moreover, a number of people already have postgrad degrees including a few PhDs. jicboy also seems unaware that UK universities in general aren’t as snobby as he is about degrees from “third rank nations” but look at achievement in those rather than looking down on people who do not happen to be born in New England with silver spoons.

That aside, a few comments on the original post as I looked into doing an ALM at Harvard Extension some years ago so I can maybe compare. I may not have quite remembered everything about HES 100% though so forgive any errors. Firstly, unlike HES, this is not an open enrollment program, so that is already one issue with HES dealt with. I believe the current applicant:places ratio is about 4:1. Second, this is not taught in the Cont Ed department but in POLIS itself, by many of the same lecturers who lecture the fulltime MPhil (most of whom claim to enjoy teaching the MSt far more). This also means that unlike HES, you are sharing your lectures only with others on the same course, not an assortment of people variously auditing or doing it for either undergrad or postgrad credit - so everyone puts effort in. Again unlike HES, where your classmates may or may not be doing an ALM - and may take years and arbitrary combinations of courses to do so even if they are - the course is properly structured so you have a proper cohort that you study and graduate with. Another difference is that Harvard graduates by school, you are presented for graduation by HES, and the degree is from HES. At Cambridge, all the degrees are simply from the University of Cambridge, and one is presented for graduation by one’s college along with all other degrees, full or part-time, graduating at the same date. As others have already mentioned, you also have full benefits of being a university student and a college member. So it seems the entire experience, right from application to graduation, is completely different.

As for how well the degree is accepted - an objective way is to do a LinkedIn search with the degree name as a keyword. It seems pretty much equivalently accepted at that face value.

7

[QUOTE=""]

Yes, there are people on the course who would not have got into Cambridge via the normal route

[/QUOTE]

That’s often a bit of a red flag in identifying these cash register degrees, but I’ll keep looking into it. Thanks.

8

They have more than enough applicants to fill the course. They are not scrabbling to fill it and dropping standards as a result. The ones who may not have the usual stellar academics have other assets they bring - jicboy apparently doesn’t think significant experience in the military or as diplomats is useful for an IR course for some reason - others disagree. Incidentally re the comment about second rate diplomats from third rate countries - the Harvard MPA has these too. It even calls them a special name (Mason Fellows). By the way off the top of my head (and I do not know the alma maters of everyone) on the current course we have graduates from Oxford, LSE, Cambridge itself, MIT, Princeton, Columbia, UC Berkely, GWU…

I understand why you ask the questions, but I think one anonymous jaundiced opinion on the net is not really a sound reason to base a decision on. You can get for any ‘top’ program too. As I said before, I reckon an unbiased way to look at the outcomes is to see where graduates of the program have ended up.

9

I have to be honest I am slightly amazed at the comments by jicboy and would confirm the overwhelming message posted to date that a) this is not a cash register degree, b) has full standing and c) provides a demanding and valuable educational experience. My year of the Mst had mid-career diplomats, (US and UK), former UN permanent staff, Military (US, UK, Aust) all in current career and a wide selection of people from top tier colleges. The unifying factor was that we were mostly older than the normal Mphil intake as we are doing the degree for a range of reasons, including the advancement of existing careers. Most people learned a great deal from their colleagues. The course is over subscribed and rigorous selection does apply. You also have to work extremely hard. Good luck in your choice.

10

A good course challenging particularly making the transition from private sector consultancy reports to properly written academic essays. Teaching is in blocks, out of normal term time and variable (as at any university). Interseting mix of people - military, intelligence, ex World Bank, WTO, NGOs, finance, academic lecturers, law, economics etc

11

The M.St International Relations course is basically the 2-year part-time equivalent of the 1 year full-time MPhil. You are a student of Cambridge University, join a college where you will be based during your studies (my classmates joined a mix of colleges including Clare, Queens, Selwyn, Sidney Sussex, Wolfson…etc), study at POLIS and have pretty much the same rights and privileges as a full-time student of the University, including being able to attend all lectures that Cambridge University offer. You are assigned a thesis supervisor relevant to your chosen topic at the start of your course (mine also happened to be the Vice President of my college).

The course is specifically designed for working professionals who come from a diverse mix of backgrounds. So in my case there were around 50 classmates who were also working full-time at the foreign office, various banks, UK, US and Australian military (ranging from a Lieutenant Colonel, Intelligence Officer, ex-special forces…etc), NATO, UN, diplomats, economists, an MP, lawyers. Classmates worked at NGO’s, in the media, as lecturers… etc and had both a mix of academic credentials (including from Cambridge, Oxford, Harvard, MIT, LSE… etc) including previous Masters degrees and PhD’s, or direct relevant professional experience in their respective fields.

The course is very deliberately designed to bring together a diverse mix of students, from very different backgrounds, who travel to Cambridge for the intensive 2-week sessions from all over the world including the USA, China, Russia, Japan, Australia, Brazil, Nigeria, Kenya, Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan…etc. It’s rigorous, challenging and intense. If you do decide to apply - be prepared for a harsh grading system and come to it with an open mind (jicboy clearly this course was not for you). As the course is for working professionals they can occasionally be flexible with exams and deadlines (for example, one student got permission to sit an exam at the UN in Geneva and I think another at Bagram air base) but also be warned that they have been known to ask people to leave the course or postpone who have not met the required standards.

I can’t really compare this course to any other - except to say that in my experience, it’s tough and challenging, but also a really good laugh - we went out pretty much all the time in Cambridge and there are regular formal halls, dinners, parties, balls… etc etc. My class graduated last year and we still keep in touch and regularly meet up wherever we are. Classmates have gone on to progress in their chosen fields, a few stayed on for more punishment - to do to a PhD - (ok actually I’m a bit jealous) best of luck to them.

Ultimately this course is what you make it. Good luck whatever you decide.

12

I completed the MSt in 2013 and felt privileged to be part of my cohort. There was indeed diversity in terms of career, nationality, previous academic background and age but I saw a unifying factor in the humility and positivity with which fellow students, often at very senior levels in their professional careers, listened to each other and contributed to discussions. I also really enjoyed the content of the course and made some great friends.

Degrees from Cambridge are well-regarded and graduates of the university sought after by many employers. I’m not sure if it is ranked No.1 in the world this year but it has consistently been in the top three for as long as I can recall. POLIS also ranks very highly as a faculty in its own right. However, I think most would agree that rankings are low down the list of reasons of apply. If you can attend an open day or visit the city, you should be readily persuaded of what makes Cambridge special.

Admission is competitive but I would encourage anyone who has a genuine interest in international politics and a passion for academic research to apply. I note one dissenting voice on this forum but everyone I know enjoyed a wonderful and rewarding experience on the course.

13

Sorry to have been jaundiced and provocative - but I bet (most) people in that year would recognise the description. I hope I made clear that the course was rigorous and demanding and indeed, as another has observed, what one makes it. It’s been useful for me. But there were some serious points in there. There are good people on the course, certainly, but relatively few in my year from other equivalent universities - yes I realise that’s not the be-all-and-end-all, but, having done other (full time) degrees at Oxbridge / London universities, does make a difference to the tenor of the course. The people are also of very varying seniorities in their chosen professions. I have worked in both military and central government, including at very/relatively junior levels - I would not have been suitable / qualified for the course on the basis of that junior experience; I also know a total Walter Mitty when I meet one - eg the US Air Force PR guy(!) who enjoyed boasting that he had the top security clearances going. Their business equivalents would not have been on quality MBAs, which must be a major benchmark. The extensive class-participation element of the course suffered accordingly. Some government departments / NGOs may recognise the programme, and give time off accordingly - but in practice there was only one UK diplomat in my year. The course is doubtless over-subscribed, but by whom? If your employer doesn’t recognise and support it and or you are senior / busy, the inflexible time commitment involved is prohibitive - hence the risk of attracting randoms. It’s a difficult balance for Cambridge to get right - they want to maximise engagement (up to a point - i.e. quite to let you be taught by other postgrads) and don’t want to go down the distance learning route, yet want to get the right people from a range of areas. They haven’t got the balance right.

14

Jicboy - did you speak to everyone in your class? It sounds like you didn’t get to know your classmates very well and have been judging a book by its cover (or in this case, perhaps where they studied previous degrees)

From my year, 2011 - 2013, there were two UK diplomats from the Foreign Office, another at the Cabinet Office, NATO, a couple working for the UN. Classmates had previously worked at the Pentagon, UN Security Council, NASA, for the US Foreign Service, UK Foreign Office (with 30 years + experience), DOJ… etc etc. To give a few specifics, our class took time off busy schedules as a barrister in Australia, for the UN in Iraq, global investment banks, UNIFIL in Jordon, NATO in Brussels, The UN and NGO’s in Sudan, Brazil, China, global law firms in Geneva, a hedge-fund in the city, different governments, one student also worked full-time at Cambridge University, another as an economics lecturer at Oxford University. It’s definitely a challenge time-wise and everyone had to schedule time off well in advance with their respective employers, but due to the flexible nature of the course, we were all able to take time off to travel to Cambridge for the intensive sessions.

The beauty of the course is the diversity of class mates. They deliberately select candidates who will have different (sometimes opposing) perspectives and opinions to encourage open debate and discussion. The most interesting conversations happened after class in Cambridge dining halls, in pubs, at formal halls. The key thing we all had in common was a humility and openness to listen and learn, both from the lecturers and each other. Everyone I know came to this course with an open mind, aiming to be challenged and meet others from a wide variety of backgrounds, professions and experiences, from all over the world. This is kind-of the point of the International Relations Masters.

15

Hello,

I have applied for the course in question, am yet to hear back on whether I will be offered a place.

I did a lot of research in order to determine how suitable the course was, as well as how well regarded it is - partly because I had similar concerns as you do. Easiest way to do that is via LinkedIn, doing a search with the key words. I was generally impressed with what alumni had either achieved prior to studying, or had achieved since - the fact it is awarded by POLIS/Cambridge obviously says a lot, ICE appear to be more of an administrator.

My main reason for applying is the belief International Relations will shape the world in which we live over the next decade - whilst you can probably say this about most times; with the current economic environment we live in, this is certainly going to be more important over the next few years.

A big attraction was the 25,000 word thesis, I wrote my research proposal on the various actions of Central Banks over the past few years, in the hope of looking at how relations may be affected by these events - if I am offered a place. Certainly what Japan are doing with their currency is unlikely to be pleasing the Chinese, as just one example of what Central Bank policies might lead to. In addition, the sanctions placed on Russia have had many repercussions and perhaps with what is going on with Greece at the moment, we might be about to witness the first nation leave the Euro.

I have opted for this course ahead of the LSE Finance part-time MSc as I think this area is so fascinating, albeit they are obviously very different subject areas. As for my background, I have a MSc from the Department of Management at LSE with Distinction and am currently working for a Hedge Fund in London. From looking at previous cohorts, the course appears to attract people from a wide background with impressive credentials, I hope to be studying with them later this year!

Thanks,

Tim