Jump to content

sugarplum

Members
  • Posts

    6
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sugarplum

  1. Cookie, I am doing research. I am actually doing it while I waited for answers. But it is never a bad choice to just ask. Plus, it would give me even more information regarding my problems. I also do have information regarding schools, school's rankings, professors, etc. I didn't want the "correct" way of choosing but more the experimental part, the How-to of the choice making process. I also believe life is more than just researching, you have to consider other things like living expenses, study possibilities, society's affinity with your topic (specially in social sciences), etc. Anyways, I appreciate the help. GeoDUDE!, thank you.
  2. Well, According to different websites, UCL is more student friendly; while KCL seems to be more academic driven (being considered one of the five top Universities to study in UK). I think you should probable read the programs courses and staff and decide based on the following questions: 1) Which school's courses do I feel will be more useful for my degree's purpose (whatever you plan to do with it when you graduate) 2) Which professors seem to know more about the topic I am truly interested (whichever it is) 3) Where would I get more of an experience for my money (work, internship, student life, etc.) And finally, 4) Which are the cons and pros of each of them. Hope it helped you.
  3. So, I read a lot about U.S.A Universities but almost near to nothing from Europe and Asia. Is it really that unworthy or is it just that nobody is interested in going there? I'd like to consider places somewhere outside the American continent (which include North, Central and South America). Which universities would you recommend? I am looking for a PhD focused on research, my interest being Human-Interaction Communications. I was also considering Social Psychology, but I am not sure if it is a viable option since my background is in Communication Studies. I am hoping to read a lot of answers
  4. I am searching for a PhD in Social Sciences, maybe focusing on Communication Studies since that is my background, but I am not really considering the U.S.A yet. I am thinking about Europe, mainly Germany, UK and Finland. I am hoping to find a Human-Computer Interaction program. If anyone knows about a research center with those qualifications, please let me know. Also, Hnotis, I think that UCLA has a lot of research on those topics and also the University of Wisconsin would be a great choice, specially since they just accepted homosexual marriage (California too, I think). That way you'd be able to do a more deep and open research. Nx3763, I think universities in Texas have a lot of research on those topics, as well as the University of Arizona. However, I recommend more University of Austin-Texas since I have known of a lot of great professors who are teaching/graduated from there and are excellent in Politics and Communication.
  5. Well, I might be hated for this but I actually agree with GenerativeIR -all his points of view- and find his example to be quite illustrating about the problem we face in the Communication's field. It shouldn't come as a surprise to us that there is no certain way to explain what do we do as Communication Students. Yes, it sounds harsh and pathetic, but is is true. Our field is based on other disciplines, we don't even have our own methodology, we do not have our own area of study and the only think I kinda believe we do possess for ourselves is our perspective: communications. That said, I love my area, I think that understanding communications is like understanding the chemistry of human relationships (maybe the physics, if you study well enough) but I am not blind to the fact that Communications, alone, has no way to define itself. Communications is the mixture of sociology, psychology, arts, economics, politics, and so much more humanistic and social sciences. Nowadays, we seem to also add some mathematics, statistics, physics, astronomy, and other hard sciences (numerical sciences). I once had a professor who told me that the problem our career had was that we never really established what made Communication Studies different from other studies. And it is told, in books and essays, that the origins of Communication Studies come from a group of people who started wondering about communication processes and media, thus borrowing research, methods and knowledge from other fields. So, yes, there is NO CORRECT way to say what do we do in Communication Studies. However, we can be sure that: > Communication encompasses many other areas which are related to human behaviors, relationships, society, culture and media (and others, but they didn't pop into my mind right now). > Communication is intended to: 1) create people who are skillful in the media fields (TV, radio, cinema, etc.); 2) educate people who are hoping to pursue a career in public relationships and politics; and 3) communication can also focus on research as long as this is made under the communication's perspective. And THERE is where I believe GenerativeIR is completely right in his "accusations". [Geez, I took so long to make my point, don't I?] Why is GenerativeIR right in my own opinion? Because as Communication Students, lacking our own well defined area (we lack our own personal area liked the rest of the sciences, and YES we mostly borrow our study fields from sociology) we must be very careful on how we decide to study a phenomenon. We can't just go and say "I want to study the economics of [insert group of people here]" if we don't have an economics background, neither can we say "I am going to understand how computers provide happiness to [insert other group of people here]" if we are unable to fully understand how emotions are created. We might be able to do it, yes, but it will take years -a lot of years- of study to understand phenomenons from those perspectives, and even then our research will be lacking two components: fully understanding and a Communications approach. And no, I am not saying that we should only focus on media, TV, games, etc. All I am sayings as that the studies we make have to be related to our field: Communications and Communications related things only. In GenerativeIR's example the PhD candidate is studying the "economics of video games". And I can't help but wonder, does he hold a B.A. in economics? How are economics related to communication? Did he used an phenomenological or critical approach? Qualitative or quantitative method? How did he approached the problem? Was he studying how economics variation affect users? Was he studying how certain games affect the websites economy? And...well...how does Communication relates to economics? How did he mixed both topics? Which theories did he used to explain the phenomenon? Where is the communicative approach? How did he justified the use of economics in his topic...and why did he choose to add economics into his research if he doesn't truly understand it. Can you imagine an engineering student using the Uses and Gratifications theory in order to explain a house remains stand? And who (oh, please tell me) hasn't feel offended whenever someone from other disciplines uses communication theories without really understanding them, to say thing like "Media manipulate us" or "Communicators are always hiding information by framing because they are non-ethical themselves"? I also agree with GenerativeIR's point of view that you just can't talk about a topic you haven't fully understand. And if you do so, you have to be careful enough to point out the deficits and delimitation of your research. Because you're compromising your results and, thus, the whole investigation. However, I'd have to know more about the PhD candidate's work to say if he was indeed correct or he was just "lost in translation" between communications and other sciences. Last, I'd also like to add how important it is for us -Communication students- to be honest with our field and admit we can't study all (as most people seem to think). We have to be able to say: "I am a Communication student with media orientation" or "I am a Communication student with a research passion" or even "I am Communication student focused on journalism and printed media". In doing so, we are not know defining an area (still fuzzy but at least more defined), but we are also limiting our study topics. Because no matter how wonderful things like "How hospital's staff handle stressful environments" sound, that is not Communication but Sociology or Psychology. We can, however, study: "How hospital's staff communicate during stressful environments" or "How stressful environments in hospitals affect communication between the staff, this affecting the organizations social policies". For now, we should understand Communications not as a field or area of study, but as a perspective. That is, in my opinion, the only way to truly be able to define what Communication Studies are about.
  6. Three things before we start: 1. I am certain about my choice to study a PhD. Please don't try to argue with me about whether I should work or study. 2. Yes, I know my question sounds silly and answering "just choose what your heart wants" is THE most obvious answer. However, I'd like to hear your stories and decision making which helped you along your journey. 3. Although I appreciate everyone's opinion, I'd like to hear mostly about PhD current, future or previous students. Why? Because I think that the process of deciding for a grad school is different between Master and PhD prospects. How? Well, just for an example, Masters tend to last less than PhD so you might want to keep that in mind when thinking where to spend the next 4-5 years of your life. Ok, I've done saying what I had to say. Sorry for the previous points, I just wanted to narrow the kind of responses I might have. Also, I have rode a lot lately about "why not pursue a PhD" and "reasons why PhD sucks" and even though I agree with some of the things those texts said, I know I want to study my PhD and it feels a little bit bad when people say you shouldn't just because the regret it, had a bad experience, didn't find it useful, etc. So I am trying to avoid those negative comments Then, my problem is this: I am a recently graduate student for a Master's in Communications. I am not too proud of it, because of the title (Communications Studies), but it helped me acknowledging that I want to dedicate my life into research. Specifically, into research on Human-Computer Interactions from a social sciences perspective. For this -and other reasons- I decided to continue studying a PhD. However, when it was time to start looking where to study I just...well, this is kind of embarrassing but, I just couldn't decide for a place. Please don't get me wrong, I did knew some places where I wanted to study but I was never sure. I kept wondering from one place to another, surfing the web until late hours, wondering "Would this place be fine?", "Is it good here?", "Should I live here for the next 4 to 5 years?". And once I started asking those questions on Google my doubt became even bigger, and new questions arise. I started wondering: > How important was the University's prestige? > Was it more important the Advice than the University? > Are there really bigger future benefits if I study in U.S.A.? > Should I choose a place I like over a prestigious place? > What about my future plans of marrying? And the list goes on. As you might have guessed, I missed last year's deadlines to apply for a PhD starting this year so I am now currently waiting for this years enrollment season so I can start my studies on Fall 2015. And even though I do got some answers back from universities like Kings College London and Stockholm University, to which I was unable to find a scholarship for this year, I am thinking of applying for other schools in other countries. BUT (Oh, the horrible 'but') I don't know how to choose a university to study my PhD. Should I focus on the place or the adviser? The University's rank or its campus? Should I plan ahead or just decide for the momentum? I'd love to hear the stories of those of you who have already decided where to study. Please let me know what did you took into consideration and what did you found to be most important. So far, I have only figure out the following: > I really don't want to do the GRE, but if U.S.A seems like the "best place" to study...well, I might just take them and hope I pass well enough. > I'd love to live somewhere in Europe, but I am not sure if it is a good choice or I am just in love with the idea of waking up in the Old Continent. > I once consider living in Asia, but someone told me it was really hard to get into a school there. > I've been told to consider places like India or Russia, which are not to expensive to live and have good education, but I am doubtful since I haven't really find a lot of information regarding PhD in social studies in those countries. Anyway, I appreciate any help and advice you can give me. I am also sorry for the long post but, hey!, I figured that since we are all Grad Students here we are might as well used to long-long texts Hehe. Once again, thank you!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use