This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Postgrad degrees?

Scroll to see replies

why have you classified durham, cambridge and oxford (in that order) as the best universities for english? why not kings, york, bristol, edinburgh or leeds? im assuming you have more substance for departmental positioning than ambiguous league tables.

Reply 21

loggins

I consulted the Times Good University guide (*braces self for enslaught*). I also took into account university prestige and general personal preferences.

Reply 22

hobnob

What areas are you interested in, by the way?

Reply 23

loggins

Late 18th Century and 19th Century literature is what interests me most, how about yourself? (I take it you're an English student?)

Reply 24

ChemistBoy

loggins

I consulted the Times Good University guide (*braces self for enslaught*). I also took into account university prestige and general personal preferences.

I'm going to be nice this time :smile:

.

Any university league table is a bit dodgy when considering research degrees as there are many completely irrelevant statistics included in them. I recommend getting someone in your department who researches the area to recommend some good people to you.

Reply 25

hobnob

loggins

Late 18th Century and 19th Century literature is what interests me most, how about yourself? (I take it you're an English student?)

Hmm, there are quite a few people who specialise in Victorian literature, I think, but I'm not so sure about 18th century... I'd suggest that you take the time to have a look at the list of faculty members, see whether any of those sound familiar/are people you think you'd like to work with and then check with your tutors at Durham whether they'd recommend people from that list. Or better still, as ChemistBoy suggested, ask for a general list of names - you might find that the experts on the author/topic you're thinking about are not necessarily all at Oxford or Cambridge.

Oh, and I'm mainly interested in late medieval to 16th century stuff. :smile:

Reply 26

Fazorme

I can only really talk about where I know, so - Bristol's got a certain strength in C18th - C19th (A Centre for Romanticism, and is hosting the BARS/NASSR conference this year - quite a coup) and, as said, checking the tutor lists will show you particular specialisms.

Oxford does, I think, tend to be seen as something of the Holy Gail for studying traditional English, with Cambridge being slightly more up to date/trendy/theorised. I've applied to Oxford with quite an average 2.1, and I don't expect to get in for this reason. Go for it, though =)

Reply 27

hobnob

It might also be worth checking out where the relevant archives and library collections are, because that's another factor to take into account if you want to do research on a certain topic. Birmingham is definitely worth considering for people who want to study Shakespeare, for example, because they have the biggest Shakespeare collection in the UK and they cooperate closely with the Shakespeare Institute at Stratford (which is also conveniently close, so students can use their library as well).

Reply 28

the_alba

I'm on the English MSt in Oxford now and it's pretty rubbish, frankly. I'm doing 20th century stuff though, and we seem to have by far the worst deal. It's slightly better if you're in the 19th century MSt, because there are far more faculty members in that area, there's proper research going on (very little of it in my field...), and teaching is generally very geared towards historical manuscript studies etc, whereas us Modernists are lumped into classes about Walter Scott simply because they don't have enough to say (it seems) about the 20th century. It's twisted!

Sorry to digress.

Reply 29

the_alba

So to cut a long story short I'm off to York for my DPhil. York is not only one the best (if not *the* best) department for modernist studies (esp Joyce), it also has the best supervisor I could hope for. And that matters far more than the instituion, as any academic worth his or her salt will tell you :wink:

Reply 30

hobnob

the_alba

Now that you mention it, I've heard similar things from another person who did the 20th century MSt, actually. She said it felt like a wasted year and she'd never have done it if she hadn't been forced to. Then again, for anyone doing stuff up to the 18th century, those manuscript and paleography topics can be quite useful, I suppose - it just doesn't seem sensible to make them compulsory for every period... :confused:

Reply 31

The Boosh

loggins

I consulted the Times Good University guide (*braces self for enslaught*). I also took into account university prestige and general personal preferences.

no enslaught - im in a good mood today. once you scratch below the superficial league table surfaces you start to realise how dreadful they are.

your application may be strengthened by taking on the views expressed here - looking at who teachers where, who publishes what, who specializes in what etc. like many competitive courses and jobs the 'why us?' question shouldnt be answered with 'because youre great!', rather, you need to show some understanding beyond reputation. if you are interested in doctoral work/academia, then you career may be enhanced by not studying at oxford if better work is being conducted elsewhere (that has certainly been my experience). as an undergrad searching for postgrad courses i started taking an interest in who publishes the books i was reading and from there on started to find clusters of familiar universities/people (especially in references).

Reply 32

the_alba

hobnob

Bah! Ever since the course started former MStuds have been telling me what a nightmare it was for them - if only this inside info was available beforehand! It does feel like wasting a year of your life, and the worst thing is, all the tutors know this and keep making apologetic excuses, but don't actually accept any criticism or try to make it better in any way. Bah!

The manuscript side wasn't wholly pointless for us 20th century guys - the only thing I've really learned or enjoyed here is the transcription/ bibliography course (only lasted 6 weeks though), and that will prove useful for future research etc. The rest they can keep - it stinks.

Reply 33

The Boosh

where did you do your first degree?

Reply 34

Alan Smithee

Lol @ this guy destroying bare people's dreams.

Reply 35

hobnob

the_alba

Maybe the darker purpose of the MSt is just to test how committed people really are to academia? :biggrin:

Reply 36

The Boosh

hey pbf - ive just been flicking through the interface of tsr and found my old warnings - bet you cant top this:

"Next time I catch you doing this I will ban you. You have avoided the swear filter, spammed and insulted a member in one sentance. I am not impressed."

I have no idea what this sentence was! I see you spend most of your time with warnings - you show me yours and ill show you mine...

Reply 37

Alan Smithee

The Boosh

LMFAO, I've had some funny ones. I'll have a look if I can find em.

Reply 38

ChemistBoy

hobnob

Maybe the darker purpose of the MSt is just to test how committed people really are to academia? :biggrin:

It's quite good then.

Feelings of inadequacy .... check.
Feel like you are wasting your life ... check.
Feel like no-one cares what you think ... check.
Feel like there's always something more exciting going on in another field ... check.

Sounds like excellent preparation to me.

Reply 39

hobnob

ChemistBoy

What a shame I can't rep you for that...
When I told my tutor I wanted to apply, she gave me a sad look and mumbled something about research being a lonely business and how sad it is when you realise you're the only person who knows or cares what you're doing your research on and whether I was sure that's what I wanted to do with my life. :smile:

Anyway, it's probably just a matter of time until a bunch of recent Oxford acceptees to jump in and argue that the Oxford MSt is indeed the preparation masters degree that makes you feel more inadequate than any other - because as we all know, Oxford is best for everything, from academia to catfood. And then of course they'll be followed by a bunch of recent Cambridge acceptees to contradict them and argue that Cambridge catfood is in fact far superior. :p: