Working with Theory

Upon my last meeting with my supervisor, I was advised to try to get a few more ideas down. In particular - ideas regarding theory.

For my project, it looks like Anthony Giddens' theory of structuration is going to fit the bill. This is funny - I did my very first presentation in my very first course (COMS 601) on this guy.

And to be honest, I've been delighted to have not thought of him or his ideas since then! But here I am, faced with a stack of books by old Giddens himself.

My supervisor said, "Listen, you've got to read the theory. Think about and identify the main concepts. How does this theorist think? Reflect on how the main concepts might be usable in your area of interest." So, here goes.

Giddens is a real middle of the road type guy - which I like. He sees weaknesses in previous social theories. All those guys and gals (who am I kidding though - it was mainly guys, wasn't it?) who believed that the social world was dominated and determied by social structures? Nah. Those theorists put too much emphasis on social structures. And all those guys (and gals?) who believed that individual social actors (i.e. you an me) were responsible for the social world? Not really. They put too much emphasis on agency.

It is a bit of both people, argues Giddens.

According to Anthony, social structures exist but so do not-so-stupid social actors. Social agents, he says, call the shots: "In and through their activities agents reproduce the conditions that make...activities possible" (Giddens, 1984, pp. 2)

Some of his other thoughts that tweaked my interest:

Social Actors are Competent

Giddens says:

"...actors will usually be able to explain most of what they do if asked. Questions often posed about intentions and reasons by philosophers are normally only put by lay actors either when some piece of conduct is specifically puzzling or when there is a 'lapse' or fracture in competency" (Giddens, 1984, pp. 6)

And also on motivation:

"Motivation refers to potential for action rather than to the mode in which action is chronically carried out by the agent. Motives tend to have direct purchase on action only in relatively unusual circumstances, situations which in some way break the routine. For the most part motives supply overall plans or programs...within which a range of conduct is enacted. Much of our day-to-day conduct is not directly motivated" (Giddens, 1984, pp. 6)

Example. Today I took the bottles back to the bottle depot. After a bit of waiting it was my turn. Up I went and dumped out my orange garbage bag into the bin. The guy started to count the bottles. All normal. Then the lady behind me says, "Here, I'll help." She started to take off the bottle caps of some of my bottles in the bin in front of me.

Here were my thoughts, which occurred in a span of about 10 seconds.

"What? Do I have to take off the caps? There is no information about that. Why don't they put up information? They should put up information. I could have taken off the caps. There is no educational or instructional information for patrons here! Or why don't they encourage the workers here to talk to the patrons and tell them? No one ever talks here. This is a poorly run program. They should revamp it so that they encourage the workers to interact. Are patrons scared to talk to the workers here because there are posters all over talking about how the workers are disabled? Oh, that is probably it...this lady must work with disabled people. Yah, she knows. She must know about this stuff. She knows more than me. I could have taken off the caps if I knew. But why doesn't she just let this poor guy do his job here? Does they guy want me to help? Does the guy not want me to help? Whatever. Take off the caps if you want."

So, back to Giddens. This is one of those circumstances where that lady's motivations came to the forefront. And did it throw me for a loop.

Rather than rely on the mutual knowledge of the social situation, she had a different motivation. She could have clearly articulated it, I'm sure. But we don't usually do that. Usually, our actions aren't terribly driven by motivation - like Giddens says. But when they are driven by motivation, there is a blip in the social situation, just like what happened to me at the bottle depot.

So, I am not researching the bottle depot (but there is probably a research project or two there!) I want to look at new Canadian immigrants and how well they fare in the transition into Canadian post-secondary schooling. I'm using academic advising as my site of examination, as it plays a part in the transition process.

Could Giddens' ideas above play out in a new Canadian immigrant student/advisor interaction? Sure.

Imagine the student and advisor in an advising session, first semester, first year. Are there instances when there are blips in that mutual knowledge, when motivations are exposed? If so, what could that tell us about the reproduction of the social activity of advising? And what does that mean in terms of the possibility of social transformation of this activity?

Reference:

Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity.

General to Specific in 2 seconds

It has been quite some time since I have written.

I finished up the COMS 711 that occupied my time this Winter 2009 semester. Just to reiterate - best thing I've done yet. If anything at all, that type of course gets you used to being "out there alone" rather than safe within the comfort of a highly structured 15-person course.

Now I'm into the thick of things. I have selected a supervisor - or should I say that she has agreed to take me on? Anyway, we've met a few times and here is what I have learned.

During COMS 711, I had the opportunity to really take a wide angled look at my area of interest - student attrition/student transition into the undergraduate post-secondary experience.

Working with my supervisor in this fashion has proven to be an error. I met with her last week and was quite proud to show her all of the "progress" that I thought that I had made. For nearly 3 weeks, I had been looking with my wide lens at literature around Nursing programs (as I will be focusing on this type of academic program and the advising that occurs around it), the philosophy of Nursing programs, what they attempt to teach, etc. Very broad.

My supervisor, however, wanted the meat and the potatoes. What, specifically, is your thesis question? Who are you going to talk to to get this info, and why do you think that they are good people to talk to? What type of research method are you going to adopt, and why is this appropriate? When are you going to complete your ethics documentation?

I had been moving in an important - but opposite - direction as my supervisor, and I left her office feeling a bit of a failure. She wanted answers, and I was busy trying to familiarize myself with the literature so that I could gradually get to the answers.

I've found that you just have to jump in - even if you don't know what you are doing. If you are an MCSer like me, you surely won't know what you are doing at this point. But just jump. Try to be specific - think of a question. Think of the people you want to ask about the question. Think about how you want to ask them. Come down from the stratosphere and get to the nitty gritty.

This feels totally unnatural. But - not meaning to slag the program - the thesis is, like many of the courses, a big damn rush. You just don't have time to sit and and ponder and if you're like me, get comfortable with everything and anything ever written on the subject before getting into the details of your project.

Prepare to be pushed to move into action early. It isn't easy, but it will be easier for you if you expect it. Expect also to be extremely uncertain as you are pushed - but just keep trying to answer those specific questions like you know what you are doing.

Write early, write often

I am struggling through my first paper for my directed field study course.

I am one of these "do-all-your-research-first-and-then-write-the-paper-after" types. I am quickly learning that this is not the best way for me to go.

I spent about 4 weeks reading, reading, reading. I thought all I'd have to do is sit down, undertake the arduous task of organizing the information, and then write it all down. An edit or two, and done!

I forget EVERY TIME that writing is such a bloody process. I'm finding that I am writing stuff and then having to put (CITATION NEEDED) all over the place. Damn, damn, dammit!

I am this way because I am so afraid to write anything if I haven't read it somewhere else. My fear of being wrong is getting very annoying.

Be cocky. Write as you research.

Start the writing process when you start you first wee bit of research. Fill in the gaps as you go. When you're not sure, write what you'd like to say and back it up with research (or change it) afterward.

It is a hell of a lot easier searching for a specific piece (say a definition, or historical information) than sifting through piles of general material looking for a gem.

It is true that you have to start with a real general look at the literature when you begin just to get an idea of what is out there. But don't spend too long getting the big picture.

I have spent too much time looking at the big picture. It is like I am floating in space looking way down at my tiny desk and tiny paper. I'm so high up that I can't see my tiny pen on the desk. Space is a cold, lonely place. No air, no pens.

Do some general stuff, then write. Try to write the story - what did you learn from all the stuff? What if you were telling someone a story about it? How would it go? What would the key points be? What do the really important characters say? Can you group the characters?

How does the story relate to what you want to do? Is the story that you want to tell missing? Has it been told the wrong way by others?

As you write the story, construct it the way you want it to be. Be liberal in your placement of (CITATION NEEDED) brackets. Fill 'em up later. Correct them later.

Just get the story down. Once it is down, you are in the homestretch.

Beginning to Write

Why is it so difficult to start to write?

I recently read a book called "Writing the Successful Thesis and Dissertation" by Irene L. Clark. Good read. Who doesn't want their thesis to be successful?

There are a couple of good tips in this book about being more aware of how you write.

How do you usually write papers?
Do you plan ahead? If so, how much?
Is your revision process ongoing, at the end, or non-existent?
What do you find difficult about writing?

The book suggests you start your papers with the aspect of writing you like best. I found this to be useful to think about. Also, I really hadn't been terribly cognizant of my writing process until my very last courses within the MCS program.

My favorite part of writing is the 'handing-it-in' phase, however...can't really start with that!

First Meltdown: Monday - 4 AM

It's started.

The "I-can't-do-this-how-am-I-going-to-do-this-I'm-so-bloody-tired-oh-my-god-it's-4-AM-and-I-have-to-be-up-in-two-hours." You know what I'm talking about.

Oh yes, it's started. I've had my first stress meltdown. And so much earlier than I thought. Well, better now than in bloody September, I guess.

For my thesis, I want to look at post-secondary education and how students transition from not being in post-secondary school to being in post-secondary school. Don't ask me to be more specific now - that's my all for the moment.

I have been reading material for about 3 weeks now. Reading, reading, reading...stuff on college and university and students and drop-out and why they drop out and why they don't drop out and then....ahhh....facebook (to keep me sane and up on my ex-boyfriends).

And I've realized...MY GOD THERE IS SO MUCH STUFF OUT THERE.

At least 3 billion people have done graduate work. No - what is the world's population? 6.8 billion? OK, more people have done bloody graduate work. And it is starting to feel many of them studied students and post-secondary stuff. Cripes.

But I am learning one of the most important lessons in doing your MCS - how to fish.

I am a fisherman, says my advisor. Catch some, let some of the others go. You can't catch all the fish in the sea.

Good advice - she is right. It is impossible to read it all. After 5 years and 7 courses, you'd think that I would have learned this already, right?

No. Even after all those papers and courses, I still approach each paper like a total virgin. I think that I will have the time to read so much and get such a deep and well-informed understanding of the issue I'm looking at and all the many issues around it. And how they all connect - yes - I'll include that in the paper, too.

Seven times I have been shocked at how I've had to buckle down, cut the crap, and focus on one tiny, miniscule, microscopic area and the specific papers that deal with that area and nothing else. Nothing else! Well-rounded well-informed learning? Ha. Just get the damn paper done!

Well, I hate to say it but the literature review is not terribly different. Sure, you get a bit more time to review a bit more stuff (and are expected to review a bit more stuff) but ultimately it is a cut-the-crap-and-get-'er-done deal, too.

So when it's your turn to do your lit review, remember - fish.

Thus far I have caught three guppies and many, many, old boots.

The early bird gets the worm...

I received some great advice early in the MCS program from a particular prof. She suggested that for my eighth (and final) course to set up a directed studies course rather than registering for a 'regular' course (as offered by the Faculty).

This is good advice because the first part of COMS 790 (your 'thesis'...or, sorry, 'project' year - whatever!) is quite tricky. You've got to pull off a literature review in a relatively short and scary period of time.

"So why do this to yourself?" advised this prof. Rather, set up a directed studies during your final semester of coursework so that you can get a jump on this literature review and have a more reasonable amount of time to do it.

One could argue that this is unnecessary because after all, you do have the entire summer before your COMS 790 begins in September to work on your lit review.

I've been in this program for what feels like a million years and I assure you that each April I am committed to keepin' on keepin' on with my school work through the summer...yes - I'll go to the library every Thursday just like I did during the semester - sure - I'll read scholarly articles while I'm vacationing in B.C. Well, I assure you, it ain't long before the only reading I can handle in the balmy month of July is the Archie comic on the magazine rack at Safeway. And not the double digest, either.

It goes like this: figure out what you want to look at as a topic, approach a prof who has some experience in this area (I am doing this one-on-one with a prof, but I have heard of groups of students setting up directed studies), and ask if he/she is open to the idea.

If all is a 'go,' there is a form you and the prof must fill out indicating what types of assignments you'll be doing (how many papers, how much each is worth, due dates, etc.)

Then you are off....and although you may feel a bit lost, at least you know that you are stumbling somewhat in the relative direction of your thesis.

This is what I'm doing right now - a directed studies. And stumbling. But they say it is 'normal.' Hmmm.

Why blog, why?

Of all the courses I've taken in University of Calgary's Master of Communication Studies (MCS) program I have to say that very few explicitly outlined (or explicitly encouraged me to practice) skills that I would need to confidently approach my thesis year.

Ok, ok - I know what you are thinking. And let me stop you and set you straight.

This is not an MCS bash fest. I am not a disgruntled student setting up camp in the blogosphere to smash and crash the program. I am nice, small, and happy. I don't plan to make sneaky, crass remarks about certain professors and admininstrators on this blog...what jack ass so and so is and did you hear about such and such? If I did, what would be left to discuss at great lenght at the Grad Lounge?

My point in all of this is to give future 'MCS-ers' a leg up on this thesis stuff.

I found particlarly helpful those handful of courses that explicitly taught me and had me practice 'thesis-y' skills. Like learning to read academic work better and more efficiently. Or learning about what a thesis actually looks like and is composed of.

So I wanted to pitch in to this type of teaching and give future students a slice of what the thesis year is like from someone going through it.

I hope it will be helpful. I hope it will ease the minds of future MCS-er and maybe offer a few tips and tricks. I also hope one day to be widely known for my incredible intelligence, wit, and wisdom. Sigh. Let's just begin with the blog.