16th January 2011, 08:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 16th January 2011, 08:05 PM by ZSilvia.)
Doug and Moreno - thank you so much for your detail in clarification.
I mean a Research Masters when I said MSc. I've been in the middle of putting together an Edinburgh app this week so my mind was in Scotland while I was writing out my post. The MRes programs don't seem to require any modules too often (of course depending on the program) and thats what I was getting at.
I was basing all of my knowledge of US Master's programs based on friend's experiences doing Masters programs for Brown and UMass Boston, where they were in classes for at least 3 years and were taught field skills alongside their thesis. It had never occurred to me that some people do in fact do MA's in America without fieldwork (seems kind of gaff to me to be honest). I had been advised by professors back where I did my undergrad against doing an MA in the UK altogether, for the very reason you just stated. They claimed it would hurt my chances of going on to a PhD program should I choose to do so in America. I don't know how much I believe this though because of how many British archaeologists I've encountered as students at all levels of study in the states, and at how many British professors I had and encountered. It seems like the flow between our countries is decent. The reason I posed the question of US v UK archaeology in general alongside all of this is because as an undergrad we learned that somehow archaeology as a practice in the UK was radically different from that of the US. After being here in the UK, reading more British arch. lit. than American, and from watching Time Team }
I am beginning to think the only difference is where Americans place archaeology as a discipline. Those who stressed differences might have blown it out of proportion.
Anyway, basically what I am looking for in an MA program is theory alongside fieldwork. I really do love both. Like I said, I've done fieldwork but not at a level where my presence mattered at the site. I don't want to go all the way through academia without the practical skill, which is where my concern about the taught MA came in. At what point are skills typically taught in the UK (I understand it might vary depending on the school)? Also, is it typical for someone who is PHd track to do a taught MA, then a MRes, then PhD? Or am I safe to go from MA to Phd as long as my research objective is clear and plausible, etc. Are you doing a MRes or a PhD?
Jeez so many questions, sorry about that. I'm new here :face-approve:
I mean a Research Masters when I said MSc. I've been in the middle of putting together an Edinburgh app this week so my mind was in Scotland while I was writing out my post. The MRes programs don't seem to require any modules too often (of course depending on the program) and thats what I was getting at.
I was basing all of my knowledge of US Master's programs based on friend's experiences doing Masters programs for Brown and UMass Boston, where they were in classes for at least 3 years and were taught field skills alongside their thesis. It had never occurred to me that some people do in fact do MA's in America without fieldwork (seems kind of gaff to me to be honest). I had been advised by professors back where I did my undergrad against doing an MA in the UK altogether, for the very reason you just stated. They claimed it would hurt my chances of going on to a PhD program should I choose to do so in America. I don't know how much I believe this though because of how many British archaeologists I've encountered as students at all levels of study in the states, and at how many British professors I had and encountered. It seems like the flow between our countries is decent. The reason I posed the question of US v UK archaeology in general alongside all of this is because as an undergrad we learned that somehow archaeology as a practice in the UK was radically different from that of the US. After being here in the UK, reading more British arch. lit. than American, and from watching Time Team }
I am beginning to think the only difference is where Americans place archaeology as a discipline. Those who stressed differences might have blown it out of proportion.Anyway, basically what I am looking for in an MA program is theory alongside fieldwork. I really do love both. Like I said, I've done fieldwork but not at a level where my presence mattered at the site. I don't want to go all the way through academia without the practical skill, which is where my concern about the taught MA came in. At what point are skills typically taught in the UK (I understand it might vary depending on the school)? Also, is it typical for someone who is PHd track to do a taught MA, then a MRes, then PhD? Or am I safe to go from MA to Phd as long as my research objective is clear and plausible, etc. Are you doing a MRes or a PhD?
Jeez so many questions, sorry about that. I'm new here :face-approve: