European Studies

Chuchoter

Just wondering about doing this next year as I've heard very mixed reports. It looks fantastically interesting and I'd really like to do 2 languages, but a lot of people seem to say its a total waste of time and its so general you're not actually qualified in anything. Are there any real jobs you could get out of it? Do you find yourself frustrated that things don't get done in enough detail?

zam

You could say that about most arts degrees, really... Of course it leads into things, working in the EU, as a translator, etc.

Mark200

I'd imagine that the EU only need so many translators! I have no idea about job opportunities but I know a few people doing it and they seem to really enjoy it.

djcervi

Ah this post reminds me of myself during the LC, finding out through Boards about European Studies.

Well, I ended up starting in European Studies (French and Spanish). Though, I only lasted six weeks . Then, I changed to a pure languages degree (TSM French and Spanish) by internal transfer.

The reason I changed was that it wasn't for me. It is a very intellectual course. I had started off with languages, European History and Sociology. After a few weeks in, I got a bit disillusioned by it. I didn't like Sociology, and the reading work was just not interesting at all. History was alright, but still writing critical essays on History wasn't for me either. If I'm honest with you, I think I got a bit too excited about the two languages and the guaranteed Erasmus. Also I didn't get the best career guidance when I researched the course.

OP, Do you like History? If so, it would be a great course. Also there is a History of Ideas (Historical/Philosophical) course too in first year. As I said, it is a very intellectual course. On top of this, you have your two languages to study for. I absolutely couldn't recommend Spanish enough. It's one of my main subjects, and they are a nice department. Personally, I am not a big fan of the French Department. But, after a few years, I've come to realise that they have their finer points too. It's just not language teaching. Some people may wish to differ, but that's my two cents.

Even though I've said what I've said about ES, I've been told by those who were my classmates, that the first year is the tough year. This is due to the fact you have to do a bit of everything. Then in 2nd, you specialise in History, International Relations, Sociology, etc. Maybe in hindsight, I would have liked it if I had stayed on. But I knew languages were my only interests on the course. In that case, I probably did make the right decision.

If you're just interested in languages, my best advice is to steer clear of ES, as languages are not just the main subjects of the course. In that case, I would look at TSM. Though, pure languages do tend to have a huge emphasis on Literature (Particularly TSM Spanish). If you're interested in just pure languages, maybe an applied languages course (like in DCU), or even business and a language (if you like business).

Anyway, best of luck with yor choices.

Chuchoter

I've never done history except for at JC and it wasn't my favorite or anything even remotely similar to european studies, I actually do all three sciences because I thought I wanted to do some sort of sciencey thing but what I really want is something that will challenge me thinking wise, not just learning endless facts. The course description sounds fascinating and my career guidance seems to think it sets you up for all sorts of great jobs, but I'm not so sure. I'd like to take up Italian too.

NSNO

Chuchoter wrote: »

I've never done history except for at JC and it wasn't my favorite or anything even remotely similar to european studies, I actually do all three sciences because I thought I wanted to do some sort of sciencey thing but what I really want is something that will challenge me thinking wise, not just learning endless facts. The course description sounds fascinating and my career guidance seems to think it sets you up for all sorts of great jobs, but I'm not so sure. I'd like to take up Italian too.

This sounds a bit odd. Surely learning a language simply consists of learning words and grammar off?

Everything in university will challenge you thinking wise (*insert BESS joke here*), that's what universities are for. No matter what degree programme you choose you will not be learning endless facts. Especially not the sciences, which are not about learning facts off in the slightest.

Having said that, do what you'll really enjoy for four years. A little bit of me dies on the inside when I see people wondering about job prospects before choosing their degree. If jobs prospects are why you choose a course then you will not last the four years. You have to enjoy what you're doing. Choose something you love and worry about the job when you're deciding on a Masters in 4 years.

languagenerd

NSNO wrote: »

This sounds a bit odd. Surely learning a language simply consists of learning words and grammar off?

You're not studying a language, are you?

"Learning words and grammar off" might get you through the Leaving Cert fair enough, but not college, and definitely not if you intend to use that language in it's country or in translation.

All languages have different structures, different forms of expression and cultural influences that are specific to it. I could learn off the entire French-English dictionary and still not be able to properly express myself in French. If it were that easy, we'd all be fluent in about 5 languages!



OP, if it's the languages that are really drawing you, do a two-language TSM degree. ES and TSM have the same language classes, but where ES have history, philosophy, statistics (?) etc., TSM have literature, linguistics (which I love), culture and (in French anyway) history of France & French politics.
If it's the history and ideas, go for ES.

Also, I'm not sure if you can go into teaching having done an ES degree (can anyone confirm that?)

NeuroCat

languagenerd wrote: »

You're not studying a language, are you?

"Learning words and grammar off" might get you through the Leaving Cert fair enough, but not college, and definitely not if you intend to use that language in it's country or in translation.

All languages have different structures, different forms of expression and cultural influences that are specific to it. I could learn off the entire French-English dictionary and still not be able to properly express myself in French. If it were that easy, we'd all be fluent in about 5 languages!



OP, if it's the languages that are really drawing you, do a two-language TSM degree. ES and TSM have the same language classes, but where ES have history, philosophy, statistics (?) etc., TSM have literature, linguistics (which I love), culture and (in French anyway) history of France & French politics.
If it's the history and ideas, go for ES.

Also, I'm not sure if you can go into teaching having done an ES degree (can anyone confirm that?)

The level of fluency attained in the core languages would be to the same standard as the TSM course so there is no reason why you wouldn't be able to teach with the degree.

NSNO

languagenerd wrote: »

You're not studying a language, are you?

"Learning words and grammar off" might get you through the Leaving Cert fair enough, but not college, and definitely not if you intend to use that language in it's country or in translation.

All languages have different structures, different forms of expression and cultural influences that are specific to it. I could learn off the entire French-English dictionary and still not be able to properly express myself in French. If it were that easy, we'd all be fluent in about 5 languages!



OP, if it's the languages that are really drawing you, do a two-language TSM degree. ES and TSM have the same language classes, but where ES have history, philosophy, statistics (?) etc., TSM have literature, linguistics (which I love), culture and (in French anyway) history of France & French politics.
If it's the history and ideas, go for ES.

Also, I'm not sure if you can go into teaching having done an ES degree (can anyone confirm that?)

I was pointing out his/her mistake in saying science was just rote learning by applying his/her logic to language. I think the rest of my post quite clearly says that universities are not about rote learning.

Chuchoter

I was considering a general science degree but having done all three sciences I feel the first two years I'd die of boredom as its all a rehash of LC (with a bit extra, according to my Biology teacher)

I'm not really sure what university is like but I'm really afraid of getting myself into a course where all you do is learn things as you do science at LC (ie learn book vomit book onto exam paper get A1 go home). That fear could be totally unfounded though.

I'm actually more interested in finding out what ES is like outside of the languages, because my mum did French and Spanish so I've a reasonable idea of what those are like at third level.

Craguls

Chuchoter wrote: »

I was considering a general science degree but having done all three sciences I feel the first two years I'd die of boredom as its all a rehash of LC (with a bit extra, according to my Biology teacher)

I'm not really sure what university is like but I'm really afraid of getting myself into a course where all you do is learn things as you do science at LC (ie learn book vomit book onto exam paper get A1 go home). That fear could be totally unfounded though.

Not really (Well it depends on the university but from my own experience (JS Immunology) it's not really true). For the first semester there is some hand holding in places to accomodate those who didn't do subject X Y or Z for the LC then it breaks off. You could say some elements of introductory lectures in second year are LC rehashes but tbh it's all very new. Remember when you went into LC chemistry and you found out that everything was dumbed down so much at JC level it was all lies? It's very much reminiscent of that. Also courses are essay based (to a lesser extent chem and physics) so that regurgitating info only gets you so far so you will be challenged after a few weeks anyway. (Maybe 6 weeks of old stuff then you get into a lot of some things that were alluded to at LC level like developmental biology and viruses in microbiology)

As far as European Studies goes I know a fair few of this years JS class. They all love it but it's a very challenging course so much that many of them have considered moving to a TSM at some stage. It does get better with time though so it's really just a case of sticking it out. It's great if you have a broad interest in socio-economics but you have to be really into it to last it seems. Mind you many of them are the driven sort; on soc committees and whatnot so I guess it just attracts a specific type of person.

bscm

Chuchoter wrote: »

I was considering a general science degree but having done all three sciences I feel the first two years I'd die of boredom as its all a rehash of LC (with a bit extra, according to my Biology teacher)

I'm not really sure what university is like but I'm really afraid of getting myself into a course where all you do is learn things as you do science at LC (ie learn book vomit book onto exam paper get A1 go home). That fear could be totally unfounded though.

I'm a JF in Science at the moment and I'm not bored at all. I'm doing Physics, Maths and Geography (didn't do Geography for the LC so it's all new to me). So far, very little of what we have covered I already knew. In Maths I've only touched on elements of half of the first module, and in Physics I would understand the theory of some of the course, but the formulae are more advanced than LC level.

Having said that I wouldn't dismiss Science, it's amazing. I was in your shoes last year, I really wanted to check out ES but the recession made me seriously consider Science. I'm glad I chose it in the end.

Chuchoter

Recession is factoring into my choice to a degree, obviously jobs aren't everything but I don't want to take something I'll never get work in.

So do people drop out of ES because its really hard or too many hours? Do they have to pay fees then?

Just as we're on science, did you guys like science at LC more or less than you like your current course? Because I like physics and maths, but I totally hate biology and chem is a bit meh.

Craguls

Chuchoter wrote: »

Recession is factoring into my choice to a degree, obviously jobs aren't everything but I don't want to take something I'll never get work in.

So do people drop out of ES because its really hard or too many hours? Do they have to pay fees then?

Dropping out appears to be rare from my impression of the course. Transferring into the aspects of the course you enjoy the most as a TSM seems to be the most common. This is possible but it's on a case to case basis (provided you've the points too!). You can avoid fees this way too. But if you do leave though you need to pay fees for the time you spent if you go back.

Chuchoter wrote: »

Just as we're on science, did you guys like science at LC more or less than you like your current course? Because I like physics and maths, but I totally hate biology and chem is a bit meh.

I was a little meh on LC science since I had done a project in a lab so I knew I was being spoonfed a little. That said, I do like my course now though despite the fact it can be difficult but it's definitely challenging and very interesting. At the start for the first few weeks things are a bit slow to start but it does pick up. This does give you some time to get used to college too though which is nice to get a feel for socs and the like.

You should also know that in terms of approach LC science does get it wrong more often then not IMO. Bio becomes closer to LC Chem, Chem to LC Physics and so on. So there is a different feel to the subjects all together at times. Feel free to send us a PM if you'd like to see some of the notes or would like to know anything else about either course/Trinity in general.

languagenerd

NeuroCat wrote: »

The level of fluency attained in the core languages would be to the same standard as the TSM course so there is no reason why you wouldn't be able to teach with the degree.

Yeah, I know, I just remember being told that if you wanted to go into teaching, you should take TSM over ES. Maybe they just meant TSM's more suitable if all you want to do is teach. It was 3 years ago, so my memory's a little hazy!

NSNO wrote: »

I was pointing out his/her mistake in saying science was just rote learning by applying his/her logic to language. I think the rest of my post quite clearly says that universities are not about rote learning.

Sorry, I missed the irony

laoiserick

Hi Guys I'm also thinking about doing European Studies in Trinity. I haven't done History since the JC and I wondering if I'd be at a disadvantage?

Ravelleman

Probably, as a good knowledge of history is always useful if you want to study it in college. I wouldn`t really let it influence your decision though. It`s nothing that some private reading can`t help. European Studies is a good course.

gutenberg

laoiserick wrote: »

Hi Guys I'm also thinking about doing European Studies in Trinity. I haven't done History since the JC and I wondering if I'd be at a disadvantage?

In first year at least, you do early modern history (sixteenth and seventeenth centuries) which no one has done since JC, even those who took LC history, so on that front you'll be fine.

For history of ideas, a basic chronology would be helpful, but as it's mainly late 19th and 20th century you probably have a decent enough grasp just from JC/common knowledge. History of ideas is more intellectual history than anything else, and doesn't require any detailed chronological knowledge imo.

The same applies in second year, the compulsory course is Europe 1700-1870, which a lot of people won't have really done before. Because of the range of options in 2nd year, you don't *have* to take any more history courses if you don't want to, you can take politics/sociology/economics instead. That said, the 2nd year history course (Europe 1870-1990) is fantastic, so I'd highly recommend you take it anyway!

Ravelleman

There is actually a course on 16th/17th century history for the LC, although very, very few schools actually do it.

I took all the history options for European Studies and I must admit that my LC experience did help me. It certainly didn´t make me though.

gutenberg

Ravelleman wrote: »

There is actually a course on 16th/17th century history for the LC, although very, very few schools actually do it.

I took all the history options for European Studies and I must admit that my LC experience did help me. It certainly didn´t make me though.

I think at last count two schools offer the early modern LC course. I did history in college & only encountered one person who had done it!

And yes LC history is helpful, but it's not essential, as you don't *have* to do history beyond first year, apart from history of ideas. ES is largely cultural studies, so you can get away with not having as solid a background in history.

Ravelleman

gutenberg wrote: »

And yes LC history is helpful, but it's not essential, as you don't *have* to do history beyond first year, apart from history of ideas. ES is largely cultural studies, so you can get away with not having as solid a background in history.

Actually, you do. In second year all ES students have to take 'Culture and Politics in Europe, 1700-1815', which is one of the harder history courses, from my experience at least. It's not a 'history of ideas' course.

Also, depending on what country you go to on Erasmus you could well end up in a history faculty even though that's not your thing.