Duna

Well yes, in that case you want to mention stuff that demonstrates your preparedness. So either something that is methodologically related to what you are planning on doing or something that has lead you to being interested in your proposed research areas. Or, if that is something completely new, which is fine too, you can highlight a paper that you did by yourself maybe and presented somewhere and say: I know how to do research. Done it. Here. Now, I'm trying something new but I know how.

Hmm. What does research experience really mean? I think the definitions here have a huge range. Do you define research experience as "I've done some extensive reading / lit review on this topic!" or "I took two classes and wrote two 20 page papers about it" or "i've conducted a survey on this topic and found XXXX for a class" or "I worked with a research group on a grant doing this and was XXXth author on a paper" or "I've done this amazing research project on this topic, I went to ICA and presented on it" or "Actually, I've done research on it and it was published in". See, when I came to the US, only the last 3 counted for me as "having done research on something" because the rest, well, that's not really something I would have considered as research given my own background (I come from a family of academics and grew up handing out conference packages to people and the like". So, to me, it meant to actually have engaged in research and received recognition for it. Then, during my first classes in the US I was freaking intimidated because people introduced themselves telling me they've "done research" on things and I was blown away. Hmm. Well, there are pretty amazing and intimidating people at my school and a bunch of them fit into the last categories but still, people would define "research experience" very loosely. Say, you define it as referring to the first few statements. Then I would mention it if it has something to do with what you wanna study now. If you took 2 classes on SNA and you apply to a school saying you want to do SNA, yeah, mention that you've collected a dataset and know methods for analyzing it briefly. But if it does not directly relate to what you are planning on doing and it's not a conference presentation you gave or hasn't been published, I probably would not waste so many words on it. Cause, well, the past is in the past.

I think I can shed some light on that process but I am not 100% sure if they changed it AGAIN. However, last year, a bunch of people who the committee found interesting and admissible candidates were invited to visit for a few days. I believe the purpose of this visit is not only to interview candidates but is also supposed to give the applicants the chance to meet with professors and figure out whether they think USC would be a good fit for them. And I think it should be around the same time as last year (check the results pages).

Hmm. I have 5 years to do that during which I am completely funded. So what exactly are these resources that HK universities offer that are beyond what PhD programs in the US offer?

Free of charge. How generous

Don't worry about the MA thing. I had not even started to write my MA-thesis by the time I was accepted... Just make sure to have some documents outlining your good progress

Yes, send both scores. Most schools accept that I think.

Yeah sorry, that was a very cynical statement lacking a reference there. However, I can't find the damn publication right now. But take a look at the NCA doctoral programs list, go through the faculty and look at the schools. You can look at a ranking (based on pubs e.g.) and then start with number 1. I promise you that 80% of the schools will show up again and again... http://www.natcom.org/DoctoralProgramGuide/ http://www.cios.org/EJCPUBLIC/022/1/022122.html http://www.unco.edu/aca/JACA%20Vol%2032%20Nos%201-2%202013.pdf 55 and onward

People! That's the problem with not taking such a statement of purpose example (!!!) with a grain of salt... Right now, you both seem to be making your assessments about the quality of your own SOPs based on pure anecdotal evidence of one (!!!) SOP. And this SOP could be complete shit for all we know because maybe (I am very sorry, you already have your spot and all is well, so please don't take this the wrong way rufus) they only admitted him/her after 3 other people declined and the fit of the research interests was great although the presentation in the SOP was crappy. Who knows?! And that's the point: Most of us don't have a clue whether our SOPs were helpful or not for getting into our programs. And they give you FIVE pages now. WTF! That's amazing. My own 2 cents on this: Your research interests do not develop out of thin air. You are not some compilation of theories in a data collection machine that spits out theories or applied research or whatever hovering somewhere in a vacuum. Somehow you must have come into contact with your object of study or your favorite theoretical framework and I think that it's a transactional process that shapes such interests. So yes, imho you are allowed and probably supposed to mention why you have been influenced by certain people / methods / theories and why this is the kind of research you want to do and why YOU will be fucking awesome at doing it. I'm a mixed methods person and this is reflected in all I have been doing my whole life. The big picture of what I'm doing and why I am doing these things goes together with what I've studied before and worked on and so on. However, I do not think that this SOP is supposed to be some kind of prose piece sprinkled with a bunch of GRE words to show off how intellectual you are. FFS, it's obvious you can learn 1000 words on a list, you got this far, you are not a complete idiot. "Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius -- and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction." (Albert Einstein) I think that dude nailed it. And that is also how I try to write because honestly, I don't need to prove through using highly sophisticated language that what I'm saying is smart. Or at least I hope I do not. That's my goal. So yeah. Some terminology is obviously needed to create common ground within a discipline and avoid ambiguity but apart from these terms I try to stay the hell away from talking like an old German philosopher. And I am German.

In comm it's like 15 schools that play musical chairs with their graduates. Choose your poison.

i'd like to add to what JLRC said... I feel like you've probably started out by approaching the application process wrong, Rose and that might be one of the major reasons you did not end up in one of your desired top ranking programs. 1) people on admission committees are super smart people, they all have PhDs and have been in this business for quite some time. They won't be easily fooled. 2) a school with high ranking / great reputation etc. knows about that and they are no idiots (refer to point 1), they know that they will only continue to produce top graduates if they find very good candidates that have very good fit. 3) People on admission committees have probably seen it all and they will be able to spot people applying to top programs only for the sake of applying to a great program. Why would they not want these people? I think in the long run, you will need to do this PhD thing for the sake of loving research and, depending on where you're studying and how you're funded, teaching. While I understand the desire to go to a top ranked school, in the end, whether you will be able to pursue the research you love will determine whether you will be successful. Are you from the US, Rose? (I am asking because I can see how some cultural differences could complicate things but could be that I'm totally on the wrong path here)

Uhm, yeah? Sure... If you talk about a specific theory you're interested, you'll have to cite your source. Sounds to me like: If you include specific theories, please make sure to cite your sources properly.

One could think that's ETS business model. Huh. Weird.

So, based on your own observations while playing one or several RPGs, you can now tell that his hypotheses are crap? And his professors are too dumb and old to read up on something? Hmm.

Wow, I think I can imagine how happy you must be right now! Enjoy it. Congratulations!

Ok, so I will spell my thoughts out in more detail: Let's say one of these schools wait listed or even accepted you or maybe tried to contact you to inquire whether you're still interested or that something is missing or whatever. Then you have not responded to them. They know your name. They will be at the same conferences and they will know your professors. Comm is a tiny field. Subgroups are often only a handful of researchers. You don't want to burn bridges and you don't want to talk about it on a public forum in a tone that sounds sort of arrogant. At least I wouldn't. Or maybe they have rejected you. I still wouldn't talk about it in a certain way on a public forum. And no, this is not anonymous. Even if you picked your name well and the midwest is huge.

Well, they know your name. They will still be researchers in your field. They will see you at conferences. They might be your reviewers or the people who will hire you later. You will need to decide if you're in the position, you sort of see yourself here, to judge them based on all the assumptions you made. And yeah, I don't have any thoughts. There are a million (ok, but like 10) possible scenarios for why this has happened. I'm not the guessing type you know, trying to do research.

Uhm. Call them ASAP. If you would like to go there. You've never heard anything from them at all? And you did not think about emailing them or calling them some time earlier? I mean, earlier than a day before the deadline?

I think it is amazing that you got a fellowship for an MA. Very well done! I think the first thing you will need to figure out is if it is important to you to be in a program where it is guaranteed that you can move on to your PhD and have funding for that ( I am assuming that's the case /w Madison, right?). I will FB / email you a name of someone here who got her MA at UIUC and was working with Scott. I do not know Catalina but I do "know" Scott and he is amazing. Super smart, extremely experienced, well known and crazy nice. He's helped us a lot writing a grant and given great feedback to projects. Really cool teacher and person.

This is amazing news! So proud of you! Well done.

I think there are several reasons. Another really important one is that you might think you love research after undergrad but this can a) change since you're still in the process of growing up (yaya, I know, with 22 you're an adult. You will most likely feel different about that statement in 5 years) and I think the MA is a good way to experience graduate school in a short amount of time and with less stress. If you loved it, come back. If you did not love it: Apply for great jobs in industry! oh and you did know if you can cope well with the workload, the actual way things work etc after undergrad. Two different worlds. When I look at the syllabus from classes our juniors and seniors take, it's really just a little tiny part of the amount of readings and writing you will do. Therefore, bridging with an MA can't harm. It's fine to not want to do it, but arguing there is no reason for first going into an MA program is not sensible imo.

I think you'll just hang with us! Looking forward to meeting you people. Let me know if you have questions although I can't say much about the visit cause I wasn't invited Which leads me to my next point. Don't give up on USC just yet, VioletAyame!

If you got everything else in and send them an unofficial copy via email, so that they can start reviewing as early as they want to, I do not think that this will be the reason why you won't be accepted. But I do get the frustration and the anxiety. They are probably already on vacation and you might not even hear back. However, I don't think all is lost.

I agree with you... As soon as the first person posts here that they got admitted to a comm/media program or invited to an interview, you will get to know that dear little friend insomnia very very very well :/

Hmm. Brutal honesty: Sounds to me like an ad-hoc decision. If high school burnt you out and college seemed tough because you procrastinated, I do not really see why you would ever want to go to grad school. To me, this sounds a bit like: Wow, hiking up that hill was damn exhausting and I felt like I couldn't get to the top. So now I will go and climb K2. But hey, I don't know you and I don't know your situation, so if this is what you want to do: go for it! But be sure to not have any illusions. It will be way more readings, way more working, way more constant pressure than anything you could have experienced in college.