I started this project on a completely different track than where I wound up. My first plan was to capture the process of training for a triathlon while specifically focusing on female triathletes and their experiences. Unfortunately, due to cost and time I wasn’t able to actually train on a regular basis. That then led me to wondering how people have the time for hobbies whether it be training for a triathlon or any other sort of hobbies if they have families and work full-time, attend school and work-full-time, or have any other commitment and work full-time. This then linked to the idea of feeling discontent and dissatisfied with that limit of time, especially when you are not happy with your job — which led me to this video. I have spent quite some time and acquired a gross amount of debt to figure out what I wanted to do with my life and so far have wound up working as support staff at a local law firm I knew I wanted more. Regardless, I have planned to continue with college to earn an MA in Literature and eventually a PhD in Literature with the goal to become a professor so my current position wasn’t the end all be all. I feel this video is a projection of my journey of discovery about what it means to pursue a PhD in Literature – for example, the potential outcomes regarding the state of the field, the job market in its entirety, and how parts of society view a PhD in Humanities.

I chose to project my journey rather than bombard the audience with stats and tips on how to market your degree not only because this is an auto-video, but also because this is a very personal issue to a multitude of people not only struggling with what they want to do, but also those pursuing the PhD and who are aware of the potentially daunting outcomes. I am beyond grateful that I end up completing this project because I learned a lot of valuable information that I believe most PhD learn years into their work. I would actually say my most interesting discoveries are those that happened around the core video – I think reaching out to professors and really understanding what is going on with the humanities was invaluable. However, there was a frustration on my end that I couldn’t capture all the information I acquired (such as what is a PhD, what are happening to the jobs (i.e. decrease in tenured track positions and increase in adjuncts, the ever shrinking funding for humanities programs, who is against humanities programs, etc.), can you market your PhD for a job other than academia (showing how many people see the PhD process as archaic and out of touch, understanding that traditionally a PhD is only training for professions in academia, showing the resources I have since acquired to market myself (i.e. Dr. Colton provided websites and publications for job searches) and understanding I should do some sort of interdisciplinary work), and really the why behind I am still doing this. With that said I would like to share the segment I could not include:

My dream is to have a career that I love and that I am passionate about. I have spent the last six years in six different schools — 1 online, 1 community, 1 in Ireland, and 3 private institutions — In five different majors — Communications, Journalism, Social Science, Business, and English — And I have acquired over $80,000 in student loans to solidify my dream. It was as an English major at Saint Rose when I discovered that my dream is to complete a PhD in Literature with a focus on gender theory and with that become a Professor. If I am asked why, I initially respond that it grew organically and that looking back I gravitated toward gender focused theory in each major I explored. But, at closer examination it is more than that. It might be all the reasons most bright eyed BA’s look toward a hopeful future career in academia, but they are my reasons. It is participating in workshop and collaborative learning, drawing connections between theory and current events, constantly re-examining personal values with each new theory you are introduced to, trying to understand which lens is best suited for a piece of literature, it is the excitement of looking at literature in a way you never knew existed, and it is knowing that you may have the opportunity to not only study, but complete original research on real-time social and cultural changes. And it is also the inexplicable, the feeling that you cannot picture yourself doing anything else. Unfortunately, almost everything I read and almost everyone I talk to would strongly suggest that I take an alternative path.

If I had more time, I most likely would have found a way to incorporate the above passage. I don’t believe I would have been able to create the film I did without being part of the YouTube era; because so many people are taking part in the participatory culture I was able to see and understand that my experience is a shared experience. (For example YouTube user VirgilTheMuse reflecting on his frustrations of being warned against pursuing a PhD.) I also may not have been able to learn and discover all I did – for instance the vast amount of social commentary on the opinions of PhD’s (particularly slanted toward the negative). I was also able to remove myself from the local into the global – humanities are not only suffering in Albany, New York, but I also saw videos as far away as California and the UK. The only other thing I would say about being part of the YouTube culture is how surprisingly concerned I was with the aesthetics. I recall responding the section on videos only being popular if they have “professional” aesthetics and being somewhat perturbed. I initially felt that YouTube is for amateurs so I felt popularity shouldn’t be based on the aesthetic quality, but the more I got into the process the more I realized that the only way you’ll really be heard or appreciated is if your video is smooth (plus the sense of personal accomplishment) – I was almost ready to do a crash course in typography just so my video would look professional!  

 

Final Project: Trying To Make Sense of It All

http://youtu.be/bvX_x8sJOn0

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Morrow, David. Personal interview. 27 April 2011.

The main components I took from Dr. Morrow’s interview for my film included his initial goals when entering an MA and a PhD program and his positive views and advice regarding the experience and what it led to.

2. Colton, Alyssa. Personal interview. 27 April 2011.

The main components I took from Dr. Colton’s interview for my film included how she got involved in the PhD program. However, Dr. Colton also gave me a lot of valuable information on the importance of marketing your degree in the case academia doesn’t work out, how to market your degree, career resources, the importance of publishing in a research institution versus a teaching institution, and commentary on the outlook of the academic job market.

3. Woods, Michele. Personal interview. May 2011.

The main components I took from Michele’s interview included information regarding where she started in her college career versus where she ended up.

4. Pinckney, Matthew. Personal interview. May 2011.

The main components I took from Matthew’s interview included information regarding where he started in his thinking about his future career goals versus where he ended up.

5. Zielinski, Meredith. Personal interview. May 2011.

The main components I took from Meredith’s interview included information regarding her experiences as an English undergraduate, how her undergraduate led to graduate studies, why she did not complete those studies, and a look of where she is now. I found Meredith’s interview particularly interesting because it also led to a discussion of how to mentally prepare yourself for an MA in English and her musings on why people go for a PhD in English (individuals focused on writing and publishing versus individuals focused on teaching).

6. Blanchard, Dianna. Personal interview. May 2011.

The main components I took from Dianna’s interview were her expectations and goals for college versus where she is now. Interesting enough Dianna’s main concern when it came to college was finances and the major was secondary.

7. Kelly, Jennifer. Personal interview. May 2011.

The main components I took from Jennifer’s interview were her goals for her vocation versus where she ended up. Although this segment was not on film a big deciding factor for Jennifer to not continue her education is due to having a child.

8. Glickman, Kyla. Personal interview. May 2011.

The main component I took from Kyla was the humor angle she took from my question about what were her goals and aspirations when she started off. Like Jennifer Kyla’s plans were altered when she had a child.

9. “Sou you Want to Get a PhD in the Humanities.” YouTube. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obTNwPJvOI8&feature=related>

“So you Want to Get a PhD in the Humanities” focused on all of the negative aspects of earning a PhD including job prospects (lack of tenured track positions, the rise in adjuncts, and the pay of adjuncts), potential job locations, how earning the PhD effects personal relationships, the disgruntled feelings of current professors, and a view of the future for PhD’s versus a PhD hopeful. After confirming some of the opinions with other more fact-based articles I used segments of this “interview” in my film to exemplify the overwhelming feeling I got when receiving all the negative information at once.

10. “Don’t Get PhD (10-8-10).” YouTube. 
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayyMtN2kyco>

I used “Don’t Get PhD” by VirgilTheMuse to show my feelings of frustration, disappointment, and anxiety regarding the bounds of negative information that is out there regarding earning a PhD in the humanities, but also to show that I’m not the only one being served this information and feeling disheartened.

11. “The Simpsons – Comments about PhDs and Grad Students.” YouTube.  <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XViCOAu6UC0&feature=related>

I included “The Simpsons - Comments about PhDs and Grad Students” to give an example of the social commentary that is out there regarding PhD’s.

12. The Survey of English PhD’s included responses to the following question: “Knowing everything that you know now, what advice would you give others entering or in the early years of graduate school?”

 The responses were broken down in the following categories:
a) “Know yourself and know what doctoral study entails”
b) “Investigate the program thoroughly”
c) “Understand the job market”
d) “Understand and get funding”
e) “Select your advisor carefully”
f) “Take time off between undergraduate and PhD studies”

This advice survey indirectly informed my film in terms of the learning process I was going through while researching about earning a PhD. Throughout the entire process I found the most helpful and honest information came from individuals who actually participated in or are participating in a PhD. As outlined above the most poignant arguments for me included financing, having a defined goal, being careful about who you work with, and understanding that earning this degree may not lead me to the exact career track I have in mind.

13. “PhD in Literature: Degree Program FAQs.” DegreeDirectory.Org.
              25 Apr. 2011. <http://degreedirectory.org/articles/PhD_in_Literature_Degree_Program_FAQs.html>

This quick FAQ confirmed the information regarding length of time it takes to earn a PhD in the “Sou you Want to Get a PhD in the Humanities” video. The video states that it takes seven to nine years and the FAQ confirmed that by stating it takes four to six years at the full-time level. Therefore, I made the assumption that the video was referring to part-time or half-time lengths. (I also confirmed the time when surveying professors who have completed a PhD — most took an average of six years.)

14. Nerad, Maresi and Joseph Cerny.  ”From Rumors to Facts: Career Outcomes of English PhDs.” Fall 1999. Council of Graduate Schools. 21 Apr. 2011. http://www.grad.washington.edu/envision/PDF/TenYearsLater.pdf>

This study included a type of “where are they now” survey of Ph.D.’s ten years later. The study covered which Ph.D.’s have or had tenured positions, non-tenured track or adjunct faculty, are working in a field outside of academia, recommendations/advice they have for potential Ph.D.’s and current Ph.D. programs, whether or not they would get the Ph.D. again, and the level of satisfaction or dis-satisfaction they have with their current position.  This survey, like the FAQ, supported some of ideas of “So You Want to get a PhD” such as the flexibility you have to be willing to have in order to get a tenured position — go where the jobs are. Also like the PhD survey this survey indirectly informed my video understanding what I am facing if I pursue a PhD; specifically about ideas such as how to market my degree for other careers, defining my goals, understanding the constant downsizing within the field, etc.

15. Cohen, Patricia. “Doctoral Candidates Anticipate Hard Times.” The New York Times. 7 Mar. 2009. 21 Apr. 2011 <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/07/arts/07grad.html>

Patricia Cohen’s article focuses on the dismal outlook for PhD’s coming out of their programs. Cohen features individuals that are faced with applying to jobs that have 300 other applicants also applying, how the universities are replacing tenured professors with adjuncts or are downsizing programs, and how current tenured professors are pushing off retirement which in turn is decreasing the pool of available positions. Cohen also featured individuals giving advice to stay away from the program unless they are independently wealthy or well connected and how the humanities departments are suffering the most out of all of the programs.

Like other sources this again informally informed the tone of my film and solidified the overarching opinion (or more accurately, facts) regarding the declining job market and dismal outlook for PhDs. Also the hopeless feeling of prospective, current, and past PhDs.

16. Cohen, Patricia.”The Long-Haul Degree.” The New York Times. 16 Apr. 2010. 21 Apr. 2011 < http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/education/edlife/18phd-t.html>

This is another article by Patricia Cohen commenting on how the recession has further effected the historically bad job mark for PhD’s. Again, this article is filled with warnings not to pursue a PhD and to avoid the heartbreak due to the ever decreasing job market. However, this article also comments on the archaic nature of the PhD process, the expectations of current PhDs (including covering a wide rang of material, passing general and oral exams, and completing a dissertation). This article also provides stats of PhDs: “About half who enter a humanities doctoral program drop out along the way. The average student receiving a Ph.D. today is 35 years old, $23,000 in debt and facing a historically bad job market.”

I used the last quote as a sort of frame for my film.  I found it interesting how Meredith was part of the program and did not finish and I also questioned Dr. Colton and Dr. Morrow about how many of their cohorts did not complete the program. I also commented on how long it has taken me just to complete my undergraduate degree and the amount of debt I am already facing. Finally, I included sound bites regarding the bad job market with the film “So You Want to Get a PhD” and with the Simpsons at the end.

Preparations for Thursday…

FRAMEWORK FOR THE ENTIRE PRESENTATION:

Question: What do you think of when you think of YouTube? (rhetorical – we would answer this question with the below video.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kfEzHdWKOoQ

We thought we should end it before he turns the computer around at the end scene.

By becoming digitally literate with the platform of YouTube we have discovered there is more to it than some believes and what this video has shown.

OUR PRESENTATION:

1. QUESTION: How does being digitally literate directly affect or empower your life? OR In what ways can YouTube make us digitally literate?
2. DEFINE: We currently understand literacy as how to read, write, listen, and speak eloquently about specific content. Literacy encompasses an understanding and interpretation of visual data, symbols and spoken words. However, digital literacy then takes us to another level; Digital literacy the knowledge people have of digital media’ including their prior knowledge and or their ability to find, create, or participate with digital media. It is also the language of social networking and participatory culture without the language you cannot progress with the world of the digital realm.

Specifically, Burgess and Green believe that being “‘literate’ in the context of YouTube, then, means not only being able to create and consume video content, but also being able to comprehend the way YouTube works as a set of technologies and as a social network” (72). In addition, having a strong background in digital literacy allows us to understand YouTube as a social-experience or as a way of understanding our society. We now have the ability to look at videos critically and understand how this is representative of our particular culture or cultures throughout the world.  

1. EXAMPLE(S): Web 2.0, Letter to Educators video, comments and responses, Vlogging, Rebecca Black (?) – Working on a video montage, to send to you by tomorrow afternoon.
2. IMPLICATIONS:  

A. Participation gap/digital divide, (Explanation: Participation is needed in order to gain an understanding of digital literacy.)

B. Critical of media messages/Defines new media literacy….

OTHER THOUGHTS:

According to Burgess and Green, we understand that “literacies, rather are produced by and practiced in, particular social and historical contexts” (71). Which would only allow the viewer to grasp hold of the content if they had prior knowledge of a certain topic. Burgess and Green continue on to explain that “literacy is not a self-evident thing individuals can possess” (71) which in turn results in products from particular contexts that have occurred. Our understanding of vlogging as a literacy fits this understanding of digital literacy as well -one must have prior understanding of the geographical, cultural, or psychological world around them. Which would allow one to understand the vlogs being created in response to a certain video, thought, idea, or even person.

“Read, Reply, Record: The Three You’s of YouTube” — Ideas for the Digital Literacy Subgroup

DIGITAL LITERACY GROUP:

Subgroup goals: what do you want your audience to know about each of the three aspects of YouTube above?  What do you think they know already and which of those ideas do you want to challenge or add to? What are the most important tenets of each of the elements above, and what ideas do you want the audience to walk away with?

I think we should define digital literacy as the knowledge people have about digital media. I think this would be an effective segway into asking the audience about their level of experience (expert, intermediate or novice) with YouTube and how that experience lends itself to what level of participation with and the type of participation with YouTube they have. (Obviously this would be further discussed in the Participatory Subgroup.) I also believe a discussion of what digital literacy is could also lead into the idea that YouTube could be used as a social-study. As I referred to previously, the degree of digital literacy may directly correlate with the level/type of participation and the basic desire/non-desire  to have the YouTube experience. For example, individuals with more knowledge could use YouTube to their advantage (for example, videos that go viral, singers who’ve “made it” through YouTube, or individuals that have been picked up to become advertisers) and the individuals with less knowledge are restricted to using YouTube to share home videos with friends and family. Another direction that could be taken is how individuals who study YouTube can study how people connect (for example those with more knowledge and aesthetically pleasing videos connect with others that have like abilities and vice versa). (**These ideas are based on the Hartley article.)

Subgroup examples: as you look over the goals you’ve listed above, identify a video or two that you think exemplifies the ideas you want to discuss, or that challenges pre-conceived notions of YouTube’s functions, aesthetics, interactions, etc.

As discussed in class, I think we could use Emily as an example. Because of Emily’s knowledge of YouTube (aesthetics, how to gain subscribers and views) we may find that her community are also other trend-setting, tech savvy individuals. Also, by sticking with using Emily’s page as an example we can still focus on the “local.”

Presentation ideas: on Thursday, we discussed a number of methods of making the presentation interactive.  If this is a format you’d like to pursue, describe how an interactive component might work to sensitize the audience to the subgroup-defined aspects of YouTube.  How might a presentation or activity ask the audience to engage with the elements of YouTube that are most important to us?

I am at a loss for this question because like I said in class I would be the person that would not get up in front of a group I am not familiar with and act out YouTube. I suppose I would do more of a discussion and example segment as we did with the curation projects. I think it was effective that we opened with a question at the end to spark a discussion — we could ask a question for each of the subgroups.

Start of Annotated Bibliography

As I reference in my “Time to Adjust and Plan Again” post, one of my reference points/sources would be the Peters and Seier article. Although, Peters and Seier have three main arguments in their article, I would focus on the idea that a video is a reflection of how an individual perceives themselves or the idea of subjectification from three different perspectives (how we see ourselves, how we project ourselves, and how others respond to the projection). My project is all about self-projection – how I see my life (if I am living a full life or have the time to live what I feel a full life is) and how others live a full life (or how they think they are living a full life). To be more specific, I am attempting to focus on my goal to compete in a triathlon. However, I found with time constraints and money constraints this might be much more a further in the future goal. Because of this happening I deduced that my life is made up of going to work, going to school, and preparing for graduate school – aka unfulfilling. I wonder though if this lifestyle is just a self-constitution (pre-determined boundaries set by myself) because I am afraid of failing at certain goals or if I really don’t have the time. I would like to see how other triathletes or (I may have to expand) other individuals who have full-time occupations and time consuming hobbies do it.

My other reference so far is Whole Living magazine, The Happiness Issue. Because my main focus is how people lead full/whole lives I thought this would be interesting case-study to see how individuals define happiness and living fully. For example, there are articles focusing on organization/cleaning, eating healthy, working on relationships, where to take vacations, what car to buy/clothes to wear, and how to acquire more energy, which in turn will make room for doing “more of what you love.” It seems as if the issue is saying when everything is in order in your life, then you can have time for doing what you love. This idea actually creates another question for me, do individuals compartmentalize each part of their life or do they believe that it is all connected and if one thing is out of place, everything else effected? In other words, can you do what makes you happy if other parts of your life are not in order? I also find it interested that material things will help you get a hold of your life. I think this piece might get me away from my core questions, but I think it is still beneficial to see how others perceive “living fully” to be.

Understanding Roles in YouTube

From what we’ve read so far, I feel the potential roles regarding participatory culture and YouTube are to fully participate, to be passive or to pass all together. It seems you are either a member (like Emily), a viewer (what I perceive most of the class is), or you don’t engage at all in YouTube. I believe your roles as a filmmaker could be similar; you could be an active member (create, respond, and comment), be passive (just create and share with already existent friends, not become part of the community), or not participate almost at all (just create a film for a class or upload once and then walk away from the “full experience”). I think along with the varying degrees of participation you also have varying degrees of cultural, political, and aesthetic involvement or interest.

For example, those who are “digital natives” I would say fall in the category of heavy users who fully participate in the YouTube sub-culture because they are “avid users through living and learning in the digital realm” (Hartley). I believe that these users are concerned with the aesthetics of the film in terms of showing off their own style, having the potential to become “viral” or obtain subscribers, or even to have YouTube pick them up for advertising. In other words, I believe these users would be more concerned with the Peter’s and Seier’s ideas of self-alteration (changing yourself in terms of socially accepted or professionally set aesthetic standards). We saw this through Emily’s personal participation (and her concern of upgrading her camera for her film quality and having a professional package for editing) and the participation of her friends that are also avid YouTube participants.

 As far as the ideas of Hartley’s creative practice (using YouTube as a form of self expression and making a piece of art) or Peters and Seier’s idea of self and world (closing the distance between self and world) or self- referentiality (how an individual sees themselves and how they project that self to others) – I believe each type of user would fall into these categories. Whether or not you’re a “hipster” or “trend-setter” and know the in’s and out’s of YouTube or if you’re a novice who puts out crap videos of their cats and kids doing silly things, YouTube is still a platform of/for creativity, self-expression, connection, and projections.

Time to Adjust and Plan Again

I am supposed to be well into my second week of my training, but I have not been able to exercise for the last few days due to my work and study schedule (I have been having to work past 6:00 in the evening and I am going to be taking the GRE’s this weekend). I don’t want to give up on training, but I’m not sure I’ll still be able to pull off the practice triathlon in three weeks.

That said, after watching the videos by Emily I realized how full some people live their lives and how at this point I am not exactly doing that. I am currently living an existence only of work, school, work, and coming home. Therefore, I am wondering if I could capture that lifestyle/frustration on film while finding out if others face the same frustration or if they live their lives fully. I still want to incorporate my training as my potential outlet and attempt at living a more rounded life.

At this point I think an outsider would just try to focus my film and most likely try to steer me back to the direction of my first idea. However, my fear with my first idea was/is that I may have been setting up unrealistic expectations for myself that would end up in failure. Which, is why I am now trying to refocus my idea while incorporating some of my original plan.

Two YouTube theorists that would inform my video are Hartley (and the idea of creative practice) and Peters and Seier (and their idea of self-refrenhtiality). As Kim’s blog shows us, creative practice is the act of using YouTube as a form of self-expression and making a piece of art. I could study how people use YouTube to aid in their quests to live their lives more fully and how they choose to display it. And our group took self-referentiality to mean how an individual sees themselves and how they represent that self to others. For example I see myself as living a less than full life and that is what I would try to capture on film. I would like to see how others see their lives and how they represent it on their videos.

To go with the idea of my film I would choose to present the idea of self-representation via YouTube. I do not want to focus on what videos are the most popular or what users have the most subscribers or the videos that have been deemed aesthetically pleasing or superior. Rather I would want to focus on the idea of content and self-referentiality. How do people see themselves and how do they portray that self via YouTube. My question: what aspect of a person’s life is so important to them that they took the time not only to make the video, but also to share that part of them with a potentially large audience.