ci1717

All three of these schools are great options for film history. They all have great archives, and multiple faculty that do historical research. I'm not so sure about letmein's characterization of USC and NYU. These programs tend to be more wide-ranging in focus, since they are larger programs. (All three of these schools tend to put more money/attention into their production programs than their critical studies programs, and UCLA also has a strong preservation program). Since your interest area is broad enough to benefit from any of these programs at the MA level, I would urge you to also consider issues of department culture/funding/PhD admittance. Some things to think on... NYU takes in a very, very large MA cohort. And NYU is known for giving preference to outside PhD applicants, which is not so of UCLA and USC. I have heard from multiple MA and PhD grads that UCLA has had some structural problems for the past few years (faculty not getting along and things...though this might be changing as of late). Still, UCLA is worthy of strong consideration, along with USC. Both UCLA and USC will give inside applicants stronger consideration in the PhD application process. You should definitely email a couple MA students at each of these programs and ask questions about opportunities to work close with faculty (at the MA level), department culture, and the likelihood of receiving funding in the second year of the MA. And this last one is important, assuming that you haven't been given much of a funding package at these programs (since most people aren't), and you should ask this of the faculty at each program too. I know the strongest MA students at USC can sometimes get TA-ships/fellowships during their second MA year, but I am not sure about the other programs.

I love this, and I love your attitude about grad. school. I have one big goal on my bucket list, and your post is emblematic of it: 1. Thrive. Don't just get by...but thrive. I can't pursue grad school (and thus a whole 5-7 years of their life) as though it is something to merely get through or survive. Life is too short. My goal is to find a way to truly thrive academically and personally...by my own standards of course, not anyone else's.

Hi Darin, If you wanted to work in marketing or management (not academia), that would be a pretty different path than if you wanted to research/write/teach. I'm currently in a PhD program in film/media studies, so I am in a good position to give you advice on pursuing academia: The things you mentioned would mostly be bonuses on a grad school application, not essentials. What matters for grad. school admission are your letters of recommendation, your statement of purpose, your writing sample, and last, your gpa and gre scores (mostly for funding). So what you should be focusing on is READING as much as you can in the field (seriously...READ, READ, READ...everything), learning to write well, doing research, and getting tight with professors in the field. Maybe senior year try to get permission to take a graduate seminar and/or present at a conference (as a side note, you could try to attend some of the academic conferences/colloquiums they have at USC). Let me reiterate, because it is important - get to know professors in the program you are in (professors with PhDs, more than lecturers). Take as many classes as you can with professors in the field, go to office hours, research with them (this is important); once you build relationships with them use them as mentors throughout your time in undergrad. Tell them that you want to pursue graduate school and let them guide you through the process of applying, as well as help you understand more broadly what it means to pursue academia. This field is small, and the programs that accepted me for grad. school told me that my application stood out because I had very great letters of recommendation from people that they knew. You are in a good position, being at USC, because most of the professors there are well-known in the field. You should also get to know a couple of the PhD students at USC. I did this as an undergrad, and they also helped me understand what it means to be a graduate student, how to prepare for graduates school, and they helped me through the application process. And to answer some of your more specific concerns: Get your gpa as high as possible, but know that my gpa and gre scores were mediocre, and it didn't hurt me at all. In all honesty, grad schools won't care that much about your internships, but you should keep doing them anyways -- it's good to keep many doors/opportunities open. Research is more important though. And no need to worry about specific programs now. Be aware though that because of this field's competitive job market, location often has to be (and probably should be) one of the less important factors in choosing a grad program. Hope this helps! Let me know if you have any other questions (or feel free to PM me).

If you have any questions to ask them, that could seem like honest advice-seeking or curiosity, and not schmoozing.

A statement of purpose and letter of intent are the same thing. You should cover what you hope to accomplish in and beyond the grad. program you are applying to, your research interests, professors you want to work with, future plans, etc. A personal statement is usually more personal. It's an opportunity to tell the admissions committee something about yourself that can not be derived elsewhere in your application. ...Usually that is the distinction at least. Typically application instructions list, more specifically, what they are looking for. If not, and if you are at all confused...ask a coordinator in the department.

I am a big fan of David Harvey's The Condition of Postmodernity

Just a couple benefits of Texas: Austin cost of living is much lower thant LA, Texas might be the place to be for gender studies (with Mary Kearney and Janet Staiger - though Janet is retiring), at Texas you do an MA thesis which is great experience if you want to go on to a PhD, Texas often funds students in their second year UCLA is great too though. Their PhD program is extremely renowned, they have many excellent scholars, and the resources of LA are a great benefit. I would suggest emailing some of the current students at each of the programs.

Wow! Congrats, that is so exciting!

This is sound advice. WFG it sounds like you tend toward a formalist methodology. In that case any of the programs you got in would suit you well. Although I might suggest USC. As long as you pick a program that is more "film studies" rather than "media studies" or "cultural studies" you will be taught a formalist methodology (though some, such as Chicago or Wisconsin (film), are more formalist than others).

In each of these programs you will get a substantial grounding in both aesthetic analysis and theory. The department at USC is "CRITICAL Studies", implying that your education will be strongly embedded in critical theory. In fact, theory and aesthetic analysis will be very strong components of any reputable film studies program (same with history). When I list the expertise of the faculty, I mean that these are some of the subject areas that they are known for publshing in/teaching on. Of course, they also employ theory and aesthetic analysis to do this work; in fact, most film scholars employ these two things in almost all of their work no matter what their speciality is. These two things you identified are essential components of all film programs and most film scholarship. You will learn to do them at either school. Perhaps if you can talk a little bit more about your interests (it doesn't need to be that specific) I could help you more? Did you get in to both UCLA and USC? Feel free to PM me.

I will just say this - I have heard from multiple UCLA MA grads that UCLA is currently having some structural issues (the faculty do not necessarily get along), and quite a few of them have stated that this negatively affected their academic experience. That being said, I myself applied to UCLA because the faculty strength in my focus area was enough to warrant atleast a strong consideration. So, if UCLA is the best fit, that's wonderful. I would just advice that you email a few current MA students or recent MA graduates at each program to ask about their experiences.

I am not from USC, I just have a decent knowledge of the department. In terms of research interests, the great thing about USC is that they have faculty strengths in almost any area you can think of. They have a number of faculty working in transnational cinema including Nitin Govil (who they just hired this year), Marsha Kinder (who is retiring, sadly), Aniko Imre, and Priya Jaikumar. In media policy and industry studies, they have Ellen Seiter, Nitin Govil, Rick Jewell, and Drew Casper. Tara McPherson is amazing, and she works on digital media. Todd Boyd does race. David James is an expert in experimental cinema. Bill Whittington is great, and he works on science fiction and sound (and has done work on adaptations). Priya Jaikumar, Ellen Seiter, Iniko Imre, Tara Mcpherson and Kara Keeling do gender studies.

All the time. Networking is extremely important in our field; I take any and all opportunities to meet/talk with any professors I can. In my mind this is an essential skill to develop if you want to be in a good position to get a job down the line. Email him - be genuine about it and sound professional.

It really should be based on your research interests; starting there typically narrows down the options. Once you are accepted the visit helps a lot. I agree though, it is a tough decision - I'm struggling with it myself.

I don't know.... I don't see much use in creating tiers because it all depends on what you want to study. As it happens, your tiers are pretty inaccurate for my subfield, and in terms of placement, some of the older programs have not placed as well in the past year or two as some of the newer ones that you placed lower. In general I would look at where people apply on these boards or look at where people are being hired from. The absolute best bet would be to ask someone in the field. If you are not in a film program I see no reason why you couldn't email a POI (preferably a younger professor) or gradaute student who is successful doing something similar to what you want to do and get their general input.