Café com Leite

I haven't seen a lot of talk about masters programs so far (MDiv, MTS, MAR, etc), so I thought we should start up a thread. Where are you applying, what for and what other news do you have about the process? Go at it...

My interest is in N.T., specifically Paul. I like both the historical side (New Perspective stuff) as well as the theological side, but that's a very general overview of my interests. I have taken 5 semesters of Greek and have intermediate french reading and very basic German reading (I took a course on it, but wouldn't say I can "read" it with ease). Hope this helps. Not to expand the topic too much, but what other schools would be good for doing an MTS/MAR related to Pauline studies. On my list so far I have Duke, Emory, Yale and maybe Vandy. Thanks again!

Thanks for the feedback and thanks FnkyFreshman for the insights from the "front lines" at Baylor and Truett. I finally emailed Baylor because I couldn't find info on applying for the MAR (only a page listing the course description) and they replied and said that they are currently not offering a MA through the religion department and referred me to Truett if I was interested in a M** in Religion/Theo. So I guess that solves that question. I do plan to apply to several of the "top" schools for MTS/MAR programs, but I would like to have at least one option that is close to family, are there any other "noteworthy" masters programs in Texas for PhD prep? Thanks for your help again!

Hello all! I'm looking to start a masters program next year with the goal of going on to do a PhD afterwards. I've been looking at Baylor because I have family in Texas, so it would be nice to be close to them (but not a necessity) but I'm a little confused about the relationship between Baylor and Truett and which would be better prep for a PhD. I saw that the Dept. of Religion at Baylor offers an M.A. in Religion, but their site has almost no info (most of it is about their PhD) and Truett offers a MTS for "further academic study". Does anybody have any feedback about either of these programs and which would be better? Thanks in advance.

For what it is worth, I took the GRE for the first time in Jan and here's a couple of my "revelations" after completing it: 1. Focus on Vocab: Everything says to focus on vocab, so that's no surprise, but honestly, when/if I take it again, I will probably ditch a lot of other studying and books, and just practice vocab words. I think covering a list of 3,000 vocab words will pay off better than reading several guides. 2. Don't over-study: This may just be my opinion, but aside from vocab, I would not spend more than 4-6 weeks studying in advance. Most of it is easy to understand strategies (basic standardized test stuff) and unless you are trying to ace the quant. section, there's no need to spend more than a month or so reviewing basic math concepts. A friend suggested doing a 3 month study plan that would take up less time per day, but by the end (or middle) of it I was burned out before I even got to the test day. 3. Don't be fooled by easy tests. I took Kaplan tests several times and aced them, even the first test without studying (that was my first sign something was up...). Fortunately, I abandoned Kaplan early on and used the Manhattan guides, which worked great. I was shocked on test day how dissimilar the actual test was (esp. quant) as compared to Kaplan's practice tests. 4. My personal recommendation for materials would be to use only one guide series (Manhattan would be my suggestion). I think covering one guide series really well is better than jumping from guide to guide. I was happy with my score using the Manhattan materials, but I'm probably going to try again just to see if I can increase it, and I'm planning to use Magoosh's online study guide. I've used the free side of the site to answer several questions I had, and since it has a guarantee, I figure there's no harm in trying! Hope this helps!

YAD, I have no wisdom of my own to share, as I'm in the same boat you are and am currently trying to write my SOP as well. I related to your example about the "ambiguous" guidelines, I feel that about half of what I read says, "Tell a great narrative because everybody that applies is going to have good grades, etc, so its your story that matters," and then the other half says, "Adcoms are tired of hearing about how you loved talking religion when you were 3, emphasize your academics!" (see: http://chronicle.com/article/Leave-Dr-Seuss-Out-of-It/126098/). The conclusion I've come to is to highlight your academic goals and focus first, and then fit it into the larger story of your life, but avoid cliches. Now there's a mission for you. Hopefully some of those who have already made the journey can share some better insights!

I'm going to be applying to several MTS programs in the fall. My potential list right now is Duke, Yale (MARc), Emory and Vandy. I'm super nervous about it all, so I'm sure you'll hear more from me as the time gets closer!

JDM and JoshJ, thanks for the replies and info, it definitely helps to know that I'm not automatically disqualified for not having revolutionized the theological world in my undergrad studies! What about the distinction between it being recent work vs. something prepared for a class? Any thoughts?

I have a few questions about religious writing samples when applying at the masters level. I know this is a hectic/scary time for many, so sorry if this comes at a bad time, but I thought it would help to get everybody's opinion while the application season was still fresh on their minds. At least maybe it will serve as a diversion for some who are anxiously awaiting good news! Quick Background: I have been out of school for about 4 years. I did a undergrad degree in Bible and then a masters in Family Studies in order to better equip myself for ministry in areas I felt were lacking from my undergrad studies. I'll be applying for (most likely) various MTS programs next application season to start in the fall of 2014 with the goal of doing a PhD following. I've read and received a lot of advice about the writing sample, and to be honest, I must say it is overwhelming and at time very contradictory! So I thought I would post a few of my doubts here and see if you all could provide me some great insight (BTW, this is my first post, I've been "lurking" for months reading posts, but haven't commented yet!). Here's a couple questions: Writing Style/Clarity vs. Original Content The initial advice I received about a WS at the master level is that most schools are not looking for ground breaking research, but they are simply wanting to see that you can communicate in a clear and intelligible way. But recently I've heard/read from some that say schools are solely focused on original research and/or original ideas (even in their master's applications). If you're work doesn't add something to the field, then you shouldn't submit it. This seems a little onerous to me for an undergrad paper, but of course, I could be wrong. I know both are obviously important, and original content would always be a plus, but is it necessary at this stage? I was planning to submit an exegesis I did as my WS, is that too weak? Recent Writings vs. For Assignment As I mentioned, I've been out of school for a few years, so all of my writing samples are a few years old. I've heard from a few people that schools are looking specifically for assignments that you completed for an undergrad class and not something you've cooked up especially for applications. But, some schools I've seen have a requirement that the writing sample be from the past two years. So in my case, should I use a paper I did in my undergrad a few years ago or should I spend some time and work up something new before applying? Thanks for taking the time to read this, and if you have other advice about writing samples, I am all ears! Thanks, and keep calm during your wait!