What Master's Degree Should I Get Quiz

How the Scales are Structured
Who Usually Takes This Test?
See How You Compare
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.
Example Questions From the Test
- I would rather switch to a reliable alternative than investigate it
- I try a few settings or search for a straightforward fix
- I work through likely causes until I understand the problem
- I investigate if the tool matters to a larger project I care about
- Developing deep expertise and contributing mainly as an individual specialist
- Coordinating a small project while sharing major decisions with others
- Leading teams or organizations and making consequential resource decisions
- Managing selected initiatives without wanting broad organizational responsibility
- Designing and testing a market-entry plan for a real organization
- Creating a lesson sequence for learners with different needs
- Analyzing a dataset to uncover a useful pattern
- Reviewing how workplace decisions influence employee wellbeing
What Master's Degree Should I Get Quiz - Description and methodology of the test
People comparing graduate study can use this profile to connect preferences with academic directions. The What Masters Degree Should I Get Quiz is intended for readers weighing fields without a chosen program. It highlights the problems, responsibilities, and working relationships that feel engaging, while leaving room for experience, finances, prerequisites, and long-term plans. Asking what should i get my masters in is the practical question this quiz helps organize.
What This Assessment Explores
Scenarios cover technical, organizational, learning, wellbeing, public, and environmental problems. They indicate preferences behind five master's-program affinities, not aptitude or guaranteed occupation. This quiz helps answer which masters degree should I get before researching programs.
These five dimensions show where current interests are concentrated:
- Business & Management (0-12) reflects affinity for strategy and markets; Different Direction 0-4, Possible Fit 5-8, Strong Affinity 9-12.
- Data, Computing & Analytics (0-12) reflects affinity for systems and data; Different Direction 0-4, Possible Fit 5-8, Strong Affinity 9-12.
- Education & Learning (0-12) reflects affinity for guiding learning; Different Direction 0-4, Possible Fit 5-8, Strong Affinity 9-12.
- Health & Helping Professions (0-12) reflects affinity for wellbeing and support; Different Direction 0-4, Possible Fit 5-8, Strong Affinity 9-12.
- Policy, Society & Environment (0-12) reflects affinity for institutions, communities, and governance; Different Direction 0-4, Possible Fit 5-8, Strong Affinity 9-12.
Methodology and Evidence Base
The response format uses situational choices rather than adjective ratings. Options present different approaches to technical faults, learning needs, wellbeing concerns, organizational processes, and public problems. Responses combine into five category scores; displayed bands describe affinity within this questionnaire, not admissions thresholds.
The profile translates preferences into study themes for reflection before program research; its masters degree quiz result does not claim one field is objectively correct. A high result is most useful when checked against curriculum, prerequisites, accreditation, cost, supervised training, and work you would want to repeat. It can support a decision about whether graduate study fits present goals.
The O*NET Interest Profiler offers a conceptual comparison for interest-based exploration, not evidence validating this questionnaire’s custom categories or scoring. Its development research, reliability work, and manual concern the Profiler, while Holland and Nichols likewise connect interests with educational direction.
This online self-report has no stated norms, reliability estimates, or diagnostic cutoffs. Current circumstances, self-awareness, and socially desirable answers can shift results, so interpret the pattern as a reflection prompt and verify it against your preparation and plans.
- Lewis, Phil, and David Rivkin. Development of the O*NET Interest Profiler. National Center for O*NET Development, 1999.
- Rounds, James, Cindy M. Walker, Susan X. Day, Lawrence Hubert, Phil Lewis, and David Rivkin. O*NET Interest Profiler: Reliability, Validity, and Self-Scoring. National Center for O*NET Development, 1999.
- Rounds, James, Kevin Hoff, and Phil Lewis, editors. O*NET Interest Profiler Manual. National Center for O*NET Development, 2021.
- Holland, John L., and Robert C. Nichols. "Explorations of a Theory of Vocational Choice: III. A Longitudinal Study of Change in Major Field of Study." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, vol. 43, no. 3, 1964, pp. 235-242. 10.1002/j.2164-4918.1964.tb02667.x
Updated: