Is a PhD really worth pursuing? How many PhD students can really get ‘productive’ or real time use output from their PhD research?
I actually get this question a lot. It comes from students, people I mentor, and even (I wasn't expecting this, but makes sense) people interviewing for jobs.Academic research isn't always directly applicable, or even translatable to a commercial product. It isn't supposed to be. Academic research is discovery of new stuff. It's a process that sparks ideas, new thoughts, illuminates old ones, brings to light truths, and at the very least incites discourse. I end up reading at least two academic papers a day that pertain to my current work, and at least one random one that interests me (thank you Google Scholar for providing a filter to feed me interesting stuff).Industry looks for products, things that make money, with well defined timelines that are attainable within sight of the next earnings report. Companies participate in some "blue-sky" research, often it is based on previous academic research. At the very least this research does not stand alone, it stands on the shoulders of all those who came before them.Productive is a loaded word, without a metric of productivity, I'm not going to touch it. The work that you produce might not be in a product within the next year. What it does do is show that you can do research. It shows what you're interested in. The thesis demonstrates that you can take an idea and chip away at it till there is something tangible, one fantastic spark of information that you can share with the world, and perhaps it will ignite further study in the area. The advice I give people when they say they are thinking about quitting their PhD: Picture yourself in your last 10 minutes of life, do you regret not finishing a doctorate? If you can say no, honestly, then quit. A PhD is something you have to be driven to finish, something has to compel you to discover. If not, then you will eventually think of quitting, and you will.
What is the difference between theoretical linguistics and applied linguistics?
As the name implies: theoretical linguistics is about setting up nice and elegant theories about language… that are not based on representative samples of said language, but rather on an idealized view of language. A perfect example of theoretical linguistics, maybe the only one there is, is Generative Grammar. I mean, those guys in the Minimal Program can say things like “oh yeah, there are cases and agreement phenomena in every natural language, even in languages where there is no inflectional paradigm whatsoever, eg. Sign Language”. When asked for evidence, they might resort to “oh, it’s a theory-internal justification”… (rolling my eyes as I write this). I’m not willing to get all generative linguists on the warpath, here, I’m only underlining the fact that in theoretical linguistics, the emphasis is on the theory, not the data. As Chomsky himself said in an interview, GG is really about “grammar philosophy” (I would have said “grammar metaphysics”): how should grammar be if it were a consistent logical theory?Applied linguistics is about solving real-life problems: how to set up more efficient foreign language teaching programmes? How to translate in a cost-efficient way while preserving quality? How to build dictionaries that actually say something useful about a given language to different users? How to assess the readibility of a textbook, administrative form, website, user manual, etc.? How to help machines understand what we say or write?
Anthropology = cultural approach - Sociology = pscyhological approach?
Anthropology does take a historical approach, but sociology definately does not take a psychological approach. Sociology is never about the individual, which is all that psychology does. Both anthropology and sociology do focus on culture heavily.
Distinguish between power and authority as political concepts?
This helps establish the distinction:In government, the term authority is often used interchangeably with power. However, their meanings differ: while power is defined as "the ability to influence somebody to do something that he/she would not have done", authority refers to a claim of legitimacy, the justification and right to exercise that power. For example, while a mob has the power to punish a criminal, for example by lynching, people who believe in the rule of law consider that only a court of law has the authority to punish a criminal legally as the law says.One is simply power, the other is more towards legitimacy (ie the ethical or respected use of power).* The above examples help as well.Source: Authority
What are the contributions of Bronisław Malinowski to the department of anthropology?
Bronisław Malinowski is arguably the most influential anthropologist of the 20th century, mostly for social anthropology. Bronislaw Malinowski is considered the father of ethnographic methodology by most field working anthropologist because of his ideas on participant observation. He is one of the pioneer to lead participant observation method whereby, the observant lives with the people he studies, gets to understand them and participates in their activities.He followed a methodological method rather than theoretical. It was by exhorting anthropologists to give up their comfortable position on the veranda of the missionary compound or government station and to go and live and work with the people they studied that he effected his real innovation.His magnum opus, Argonauts of the Western Pacific, published in 1922, in which he describes the Kula ring (a complex inter island exchange of arm shell bracelets and necklaces), is one of the first modern ethnographies.Unlike earlier monographs, which were dry catalogs of facts, Malinowski’s ethnographies painted a romantic picture of native life, had an institutional focus, and provided a vivid narrative where the ethnographer is seen to interact with real people. He demonstrated that even so-called superstitions had a logic and function within the context of that society, helping it cope successfully with environmental and social challenges.Malinowski also tackled some of the most important and controversial topics of his day: economics, religion, family, sex, psychology, colonialism, and war. He insisted that a proper understanding of culture required viewing these various aspects in context.Malinowski was instrumental in transforming social anthropology from an ethnocentric discipline concerned with historical origins and based on the writings of travelers, missionaries, and colonial administrators to one concerned with understanding the interconnections between various institutions and based on fieldwork, where the goal was to “grasp the native’s point of view”.
Why is it important to study the sociology of education?
I think that there are so many reasons why sociology as an area of study is important. I will give 4 reasons as to why you should consider studying sociology.Sociology helps you in gaining understanding of the the seemingly complex but simple nature of mankind. It also helps to understand how societies organize themselves in different circumstances. For instance, you would want to understand why Italy is dominated by Catholics while many Arab nations are Islamic states.A student or graduate of sociology has a lot of areas to apply the knowledge and skills acquired. It teaches students to understand people from different backgrounds. This improves your teamwork abilities. Lets assume that you did sociology of religion and you work in an company whose workers come from different religions, you will not take offense if they practice their religious beliefs even if they go against yours. Sociology will also help to understand different cultures. In return, you will easily practice cultural relativism with a lot of ease.Sociology is easy to integrate into other areas of studies. For instance, a student of sociology can easily do political sociology, cultural anthropology, Economics and so on.Lastly, sociology helps a graduate to fit into many sectors of the economy. If you study it together with education, you will enjoy teaching as it will be easy to understand students from different socio-economic, political, and religious backgrounds. If you are a policeman, you would understand why crime is higher in a certain social class as opposed to another.
What is the difference between qualitative measurement and quantitative measurement?
well, the major difference between quantitative research and qualitative research (in social sciences) is the nature of research problems they try to answer and the kind of data they gather and analyse during the research process. While quantitative research tries to gather data by measuring variables in numbers/digits/quantitative data, qualitative research measure variables based on qualitative data -like interview excerpts, focus group discussion transcripts or even observation notes. So quantitative research in social sciences usually depend on data collection methods like survey, quantitative content analyses in which the researcher collects data in numerical format. Qualitative research usually uses methods like intensive interviews, focus group discussions, etc in which the data is in text, discourse or similar formats.while quantitative research is considered good for finding out trends (poll trends, market research), qualitative research is more helpful in understanding more abstract social phenomenon like social perceptions of certain social systems or similar things.basically, quantitative research belongs to the positivist tradition of social science research which believes in applying natural science research methods to study social phenomenon. qualitative research actually belongs to a rival stream of thought, like post-positivism or interpretative paradigm which think that not all social phenomenon can be reduced to numerical expressions to understand them.