3

I'm a computer science undergraduate student at a Canadian university, going into my second year this September. I am interested in going to graduate school in the future.

I don't know specific topic of computer science that I want to study in graduate school yet, but so far I have been looking into human computer interaction. I've been trying to speak to faculty in my department about research opportunities but none of their areas are in human computer interaction, rather their research is in computer science education. (I'm not exaggerating when I say that all of the computer science faculty is on education because the university I go to is new and the department isn't huge, but nonetheless it's a chance to know your professors more).

Anyway, I was thinking, if I do have a lot of research in computer science education and I apply for a graduate program that isn't computer science education (eg human computer interaction) how sufficient is my experience?

Improve this question
4
  • You may be able to bridge the gap by researching HCI aspects of some computer science education tools.
    – Patricia Shanahan
    Jul 7, 2016 at 2:53
  • 2
    As a mentor I like most people who can do stuff independently, somewhat irrespective of the topic of interest. So if you can prove you can achieve with limited supervision, then even if you are applying for something off topic with your prior experience, you're still a potentially appealing candidate.
    – Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai
    Jul 7, 2016 at 11:24
  • 1
    @GiuseppeBiondi-Zoccai: I would upvote what you wrote if it were an answer.
    – Willie Wong
    Jul 7, 2016 at 16:04
  • @WillieWong Will boost it ASAP
    – Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai
    Jul 8, 2016 at 8:36

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
4

Of course the best scenario would be that you can prove you are capable of independent or supervised research activity in the field of interest of those organizing the master.

However, in my perspective field competence is not the only important element, as methodological competence and evidence of successful research endeavors is also crucial.

Personally, as a mentor of dozen of trainees at different levels in medicine, cardiology, and biostatistics, I like most those people who can do stuff independently or with limited supervision, somewhat irrespective of the topic of interest.

So, if you can prove you can achieve in research (or any other similarly challenging field) with limited supervision, then even if you are applying for something off topic with your prior experience, you're still a potentially appealing candidate.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .