Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: BloodEagle on January 27, 2009, 02:42:14 pm
-
Courtesy of MIT.
http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Comparative-Media-Studies/CMS-603Spring-2008/CourseHome/index.htm
Course Description:
The television landscape has changed drastically in the past few years; nowhere is this more prevalent than in the American daytime serial drama, one of the oldest forms of television content. This class examines the history of these "soap operas" and their audiences by focusing on the production, consumption, and media texts of soaps. The class will include discussions of what makes soap operas a unique form, the history of the genre, current experimentation with transmedia storytelling, the online fan community, and comparisons between daytime dramas and primetime serials from 24 to Friday Night Lights, through a study of Procter & Gamble's As the World Turns.
-
And then you realize you're paying $50,000 a semester
-
This has to be a joke.
-
And then you realize you're paying $50,000 a semester
lol college.
-
Depends on the content of the class rather then the subject. If your spending your class watching Days of Our Lives for 1.5 hours a day clucking about who is boinking who then yeah its kinda stupid . On the other hand if they are taking a serious look at analyzing the genre in context with society, marketing and development then yeah I could see how it would be a legitimate class. Think of it this way replace soap opera with Victorian era serial publications and it's basically the same as a Lit class. The subject matter doesn't really need to be "fancy" to provide important info, for example you could learn a lot about technological development of the home entertainment and the internet by studying the pornography industry.
-
I actually took a class last semester with a couple of grad students in MIT’s comparative media studies department. They’re among the smartest people I know, and I’ve been astounded more than a few times by their critical capacities.
Besides, if you’re trying to get a good look at culture and how it works, it’s important to look at the media people are actually consuming and not just the stuff that seems worthy to the academics.
-
All universities are loaded with odd classes (and departments, for that matter) like this. I did one myself at one point to satisfy some requirements. :p
-
Somehow, I think that this course is deeper than meets the eye.
-
These are the sort of classes that can make school enjoyable, even bearable. As a physics major, I easily count the History of Rock class I took in my last semester of senior year as the most enjoyable out of my four (and counting, I suppose) years.
-
Besides, if you’re trying to get a good look at culture and how it works, it’s important to look at the media people are actually consuming and not just the stuff that seems worthy to the academics.
This. Marshall McLuhan would commend you. This isn't a class for people fascinated by soap operas; it's a class for people fascinated by people fascinated by soap operas.
-
There was a great bit of psychological research done recently.
Experimental confederates worked in South America or Africa (can't remember which) to put pro-contraceptive, pro-family planning, pro-safe-sex messages in local soap operas.
Subsequently, visits to family planning clinics skyrocketed.
Soap operas can do real good work.
-
By which you actually mean people do what the TV tells them to do.
-
By which you actually mean people do what the TV tells them to do.
No, the evidence here suggests that people emulate their TV role models.
If characters in the soap operas began having a lot of unprotected sex and a lot of babies, that doesn't mean people would do that.
Be careful not to draw broad claims from a pool of data without an analysis of effect size and variance.
-
By which you actually mean people do what the TV tells them to do.
Thats whats largely called the "hypodermic needle theory" (or magic bullet theory) and its been shown time and again to not add up properly. TV and media in general do have influence but most theories now realize that the decision making processes of a population in relation to media are complex (everything from established tradition to people who are in effect opinion leaders). People rarely do or emulate what they see on TV exclusively.
I've taken a few classes like the one described in the original post. If it is presented like the classes I was in then it will be a very academic look at soap operas. Its not likely to be a fluff course and its likely to dive into the statistics, ratings, cultural significance, gender roles, class/socioeconomic status, race, and so on. Or at least all of those kinds of things are on the table. When you look into media and communications...studying this sort of thing is actually very relevant academically. But its not likely to be a great class for people who love soaps as the shows will likely be methodically pulled apart.
I remember a lecture on gender roles in TV sitcoms. That was a challenging lecture actually.
-
People spend so much time watching TV that it becomes their main source of infomation on everything.
-
People spend so much time watching TV that it becomes their main source of infomation on everything.
It may seem that way but if you think about the influence of media in general then the impact of TV is not nearly the whole picture. You have to factor in things like advertising, billboards, the rise of the internet, and more important than all of those things is that people are still social creatures and the opinions of someone you know has significant weight. Particularly if you categorize that person as an opinion leader.
The Internet is quickly displacing the TV as a source of information. Thats complex because the Internet has fewer gatekeepers and many more sources of information than TV does. Its easy and relatively cheap for me as a user on the net to disseminate my message and I could do it in a very media rich sort of way with comparatively little knowledge versus me trying to get time on at TV station or run a TV station.
Also what country you're in also makes a big difference here.
EDIT: Oh and I forgot to add...its been generally thought that whenever a new media type (and ultimately a source of information) arrives on the market that it displaces the old sources of media. This also doesn't seem to be the case. TV never displaced radio which never displaced newspaper. All of which still exist although in modified forms...newspaper is still very important as an authoritative source of information, however, its often now available in online format. So I'd say that TV is not the only source.
-
Also your socioeconomic class matters. Lower class folks use the internet for MySpace. And occasionally YouTube. They're the reason TV is still around. :P
-
IceFire is saying good things here.
-
He's saying a lot of things here. I don't have my glasses.
-
He's saying a lot of things here. Some of them even true.
Fixed.
Not that I disagree with Icefire, I just couldn't pass up the opportunity. :)
-
People spend so much time watching TV that it becomes their main source of infomation on everything.
Conversely, People spend so little time watching TV that they forget about it completely. :rolleyes:
Without any sort of statistic, that statement is pretty meaningless. For exactly how many people is the TV the main source of info on everything?
-
Hyperbole. I've just heard way too many people say "well, I saw it on ___"
-
He's saying a lot of things here. I don't have my glasses.
Might want to put them on :)
-
Hyperbole. I've just heard way too many people say "well, I saw it on ___"
Odd. I haven't.
-
They're all the way upstairs. *whines* *eats more cheetos*
Hyperbole. I've just heard way too many people say "well, I saw it on ___"
Odd. I haven't.
Well then maybe everyone in my classes are retarded.
-
They're all the way upstairs. *whines* *eats more cheetos*
Hyperbole. I've just heard way too many people say "well, I saw it on ___"
Odd. I haven't.
Well then maybe everyone in my classes are retarded.
You're in high school, that is quite typical.
-
But my classes are almost all AP. -.-
-
But my classes are almost all AP. -.-
Then say bye bye to the future of the us
-
But my classes are almost all AP. -.-
Then say bye bye to the future of the us
Right, because clearly we have a representative sample here.
-
But my classes are almost all AP. -.-
Then say bye bye to the future of the us
Right, because clearly we have a representative sample here.
I hate to be a pessimist, but Enloe used to be one of the top schools in North Carolina (went there myself, before everything started getting crappy)
-
But my classes are almost all AP. -.-
My personal experiences were not much different.
Then say bye bye to the future of the us
Right, because clearly we have a representative sample here.
-
But my classes are almost all AP. -.-
Then say bye bye to the future of the us
Right, because clearly we have a representative sample here.
Uhm. Well, it is still the top high school in the state... So it's not a representative sample of my age group as a whole. It's a representative sample of the *best and brightest* of my age group.
@Turambar: Academically, we're still on top of any public high school in NC. It's just not as much fun to be a student as it was 32095709683083 years ago when you went here. :P
-
*snip*
Uhm. Well, it is still the top high school in the state... So it's not a representative sample of my age group as a whole. It's a representative sample of the *best and brightest* of my age group.
@Turambar: Academically, we're still on top of any public high school in NC. It's just not as much fun to be a student as it was 32095709683083 years ago when you went here. :P
Academic standards (somewhat disregarding mathematics and its respective fields) have been plummeting in both wests for as long as I can remember. So what's considered 'AP' nowadays would most likely be considered 'CP' or 'BM' thirty years ago or so.
Just sayin'.
-
AP is still the highest level you can take because AP classes are college classes.
So whether or not AP is less 'AP' than it used to be, that's still going to be your "top" students.
-
Uhm. Well, it is still the top high school in the state... So it's not a representative sample of my age group as a whole. It's a representative sample of the *best and brightest* of my age group.
No. It is not.
Actually let's just ask: how many people in your class can you objectively state as using TV as their primary source of information? And what kind of TV?
If you can get representative sample out of anecdotal evidence in one class you have broken statistics.
@Turambar: Academically, we're still on top of any public high school in NC. It's just not as much fun to be a student as it was 32095709683083 years ago when you went here. :P
-
AP is still the highest level you can take because AP classes are college classes.
So whether or not AP is less 'AP' than it used to be, that's still going to be your "top" students.
AP classes aren't college classes, believe me. They're some odd tangential development.
-
They are equivalent to intro level college classes and the credits will transfer at most schools. Of course, that isn't saying much.
On this topic, check out this news (http://www.tumeroks.com/starcraft-course-opened-for-college-earn-credits/). This class actually sounds like a lot more fun. :D
-
Evidently, schools can smoosh their students through the toughest classes that they offer, they can offer them in a way that allows most of them to pass, yet people still don't learn too much.
-
On this topic, check out this news (http://www.tumeroks.com/starcraft-course-opened-for-college-earn-credits/). This class actually sounds like a lot more fun. :D
What about a Assassins Creed course, where the students analyze the best approach to the target? :D
In the article above is a link to a article about a course where the students analyze prOn movies. :p
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the original topic:
Besides, if you’re trying to get a good look at culture and how it works, it’s important to look at the media people are actually consuming and not just the stuff that seems worthy to the academics.
This. Marshall McLuhan would commend you. This isn't a class for people fascinated by soap operas; it's a class for people fascinated by people fascinated by soap operas.
Shouldn't this be a part of social/ psychology/ media classes, rather then a class on it's own?
-
Shouldn't this be a part of social/ psychology/ media classes, rather then a class on it's own?
Not necessarily. In-depth study of a single, specific topic is the goal of most academic research, and at high levels a lot of classes are highly specialized.
-
i personally refuse to throw any more money an higher education unt+
He's saying a lot of things here. I don't have my glasses.
ctrl+
-
But my classes are almost all AP. -.-
Then say bye bye to the future of the us
Not sure what AP means but its probably the equivalent of Advanced courses in Ontario High Schools. Actually I think they have a new name which is "University Stream" or in other words the kids who are likely to go to University as opposed to College. Which to explain to the Americans...Universities are academic institutions while Colleges are technical and applied schools.
Anyways ...regardless of what level it is in High School ...its still High School. Its a regurgitation session...there isn't any actual thinking going on. Wait till University...then your peers will start to think for themselves. They will be dragged kicking and screaming but some of them will even make it by the end and be able to critically look at the world around them.
-
But my classes are almost all AP. -.-
Then say bye bye to the future of the us
Not sure what AP means but its probably the equivalent of Advanced courses in Ontario High Schools. Actually I think they have a new name which is "University Stream" or in other words the kids who are likely to go to University as opposed to College. Which to explain to the Americans...Universities are academic institutions while Colleges are technical and applied schools.
Anyways ...regardless of what level it is in High School ...its still High School. Its a regurgitation session...there isn't any actual thinking going on. Wait till University...then your peers will start to think for themselves. They will be dragged kicking and screaming but some of them will even make it by the end and be able to critically look at the world around them.
AP means its a class that is beyond what would normally taught in high school. So much so that people get college credit for it. They're not exactly college classes, but they're certainly a lot harder than normal classes.
Most of them where I go to school are sequential; you have to take all of the preceding courses to be able to take it. And since there are usually 3 or 4 preceding courses, most of the time you have to skip a class or take it in middle school.
-
The main difference between AP and regular high school classes is that at the end of the year AP students have an opportunity to take a standardized exam based on the curriculum of the equivalent introductory course in college. Universities may or may not give credit for a passing score on the exam, and they can choose for themselves what qualifies as a passing score.
The classes themselves, in my experience, were structured more like ordinary high school classes than like college classes, and they’re generally taught by high school teachers. The content may be similar to the equivalent college course, but I didn’t find the experience to be at all comparable.
-
The classes themselves, in my experience, were structured more like ordinary high school classes than like college classes, and they’re generally taught by high school teachers. The content may be similar to the equivalent college course, but I didn’t find the experience to be at all comparable.
There wasn't much of a difference in my case, even compared to the regular, non-AP classes. From what I have seen, the intro level classes at most colleges are largely still run in a high school-ish way in terms of what is expected of students, how grades are determined, the nature and interval of assignments, etc. I only saw differences with this in upper level and graduate classes. (and even those vary a lot with the school and professor, with some being far better than others)
-
The classes themselves, in my experience, were structured more like ordinary high school classes than like college classes, and they’re generally taught by high school teachers. The content may be similar to the equivalent college course, but I didn’t find the experience to be at all comparable.
There wasn't much of a difference in my case, even compared to the regular, non-AP classes. From what I have seen, the intro level classes at most colleges are largely still run in a high school-ish way in terms of what is expected of students, how grades are determined, the nature and interval of assignments, etc. I only saw differences with this in upper level and graduate classes. (and even those vary a lot with the school and professor, with some being far better than others)
It definitely depends on the caliber of the college you're at. (Which is not a shot at you, CP!)
-
CP goes to Princeton University :nervous:
-
CP goes to Princeton University :nervous:
That's why it definitely wasn't intended as a shot at him; Princeton is a great school. But Princeton (like most big research universities) isn't necessarily renowned solely for the caliber of its undergraduate education.
I go to a school of a similar caliber but different style, and the classes here are very different from high school. But, again, it all depends on your professor and what kind of high school you went to. And I'm not saying U of C is superior to Princeton, that's absurd; at this level there's not really any difference.
It all depends largely on what you make of the experience. School rankings are silly.
-
Well, I'm a grad student here. I was at Maryland as an undergrad, a reasonably good but not top tier school. However, I see many of the same kinds of things here that I experienced (from the other side now, as a TA :p).
One example of the sort of thing I'm referring to is the discussions/recitations tied into a lot of classes. Almost every school has these things at the intro levels. The ones I had were a nuisance, messing up your course schedule and rarely covering anything new or worthwhile. It's common to have to take weekly quizzes or something there that forces you to attend. (in fact, forced attendance in general is another annoyance often seen in low level classes)
There is actually a more pronounced difference in the upper level undergrad courses here and a huge difference in the graduate courses, but that is unique to the math department and doesn't apply to any others here.
-
Ah. Math department. That's all you needed to say. :P
Joking. Joking. In all seriousness, my freshman and sophomore years were quite different than my last years in high-school. For one thing, the classes didn't meet everyday, and the homework jacked up through the roof. In high-school, we were practically spoon-fed. At the university level, all of sudden you had to teach yourself a lot of the material you'd need to pass the course. Sometimes that was an indictment of the professor, but more often than not it was because the material was just covered too quickly (had to be, or you'd never manage to finish all the course objectives) and you had to go back over everything with a fine tooth comb to figure out why you kept getting wrong answers on your homework.
Grad school was another paradigm shift, but that varies even more from one school to the next. UIUC was... a pressure cooker. The faculty were under so much pressure to publish and win more grant money that they barely qualified as human anymore. Students were only useful for the research legwork they could do. Those students who were on fellowships were treated decently because they brought their money with them. Students who were funded by the university as research or teaching assistants were little better than slaves. I know that sounds like it has to be an outrageous exaggeration, ridiculous. I assure you it isn't. Things got so bad that the graduate students came this close to unionizing. I know one professor whose modus operandi was to grudgingly allow some starving grad student to work for him for 6 months, without pay, with the promise that if his work was good enough, he'd sign him on as a formal (paid) research assistant. Usually, he'd drop that student and move onto the next one at the end of 6 months. He was not unique, he was just the most blatant.
After two years in that hellhole, my wife and I escaped back to TAMU. I'd had enough and went into industry. She continued on with her Ph.D. It was night and day. That department welcomed us both back with open arms (even though I was no longer going to be a student) and gave her every possible tool to grow into a better engineer.
So, yeah, not all universities are made equal. Some universities take pride in their students. Some pretty obviously could not care less as long as the research dollars keep rolling in.
-
In high-school, we were practically spoon-fed. At the university level, all of sudden you had to teach yourself a lot of the material you'd need to pass the course.
I wish it was like that. :p I am a self-learner and they often didn't give you the freedom to do that in most low level courses I did. Although the basic courses I was referring to were in other departments at Maryland, not math.
This is what I like about the Princeton graduate math courses. They are not really courses in the usual sense. They don't cover the qualifying exam topics at all, which you are expected to learn on your own. The professors just talk about their current research instead, and there are no assignments and no grades, with the idea being that you should focus on your thesis work. And the system works great.
The physics, EE and other departments are more traditional. I have sat in on a few of their grad courses but never did them for credit.
The TA load here is fairly light, especially in the applied math sub-track I am in. I would prefer an RA position but the work was quite easy last semester, grading biweekly homeworks for one class with 10 students. I will need to do more this semester, but it should still be reasonable.
As you said, there is a lot of variation in graduate programs on the overall student culture, and it pays to do your research into this when choosing between schools. A lot of students don't think of this when applying and end up worse off for it. (not referring to you, but some other people I know)
-
... TAMU ...
!!!
That's where I am. You still here?
-
Sadly, no. We moved to Corpus Christi about 2.5 years and one child ago. After she graduated, there was that whole, "OH CRAP, NOW I HAVE TO GET A JOB!!!!" thing to contend with. She got a job offer down here, I wheedled a transfer (and a rather nice raise) out of my company, and we've been down here since then.
I do miss College Station, though. It combines the best parts of living in a big city and a small town. Oh yeah, and there's a bastion of intellectual elitism right in the middle of it, though they do their best to disguise it with Aggies. :p
-
Aye, that's for sure. :D