brown_eyed_girl

I agree that your GRE scores are probably fine and you should focus on other parts of your app. You have enough going for you otherwise that it's unlikely your GRE scores will be the deciding factor of your app - in fact, from what I hear the GRE won't get you in or keep you out unless it's so abysmal that it raises serious questions about your abilities or doesn't meet university or department cut-offs. Top programs will be a bit more selective about it (I don't know enough about your field to know how the places you're applying rank). As long as there's not a cutoff at the places you're applying or you meet/exceed those cutoffs, I don't see it being a big issue. I also think adcoms understand that standardized tests aren't everyone's forte, and won't place huge emphasis on it when the rest of your stats and your interests align well.

I think you'll have a hard time finding an advisor if you do contemporary Middle Eastern. Not impossible, but there aren't many professors who focus on that specifically and most of the ones who do are junior scholars at smaller programs. Of course, it's possible that you could apply to work with a modernist and focus on the Middle East in your own work, but I'd aim for a program where you at least have close access to someone who is familiar with the region, and access to interdisciplinary courses. It's an area that is very rich and in need of research, though, and it doesn't have the issue of over-saturation that post war American Art does. (Others may be able to better address the challenges of applying as a American modernist, but I'm sure you know that it's a very popular area and therefore competitive.) I'd encourage you to start researching faculty you'd be interested in working with and making contacts with them to get a read on whether they think the issues you're interested in would be viable to pursue in a PhD, whether they're taking new students, and whether you're a good fit with them. This goes for any direction you're interested in - and hopefully chatting with some professors will help you figure out if there's a direction you feel more strongly about or are better equipped for. As for general advice about applying, I'm not sure where to start other than to say that building research experience and relevant language skills are good overall ways to go in terms of improving your profile. Anything else you're wondering about specifically?

I agree with TakeruK. If it's common knowledge to the point that you and most people would know it, you probably don't need to cite, but sometimes you would to provide info to the reader. When in doubt, it never hurts to add a footnote that says, "for more on this concept, see the following." I also find it useful to cite for stuff like this when sources differ - for example, when dates are given variously in different sources, you can always state that in your footnotes.

You dont say much about your other stats and whether they balance you out, but if for example you have a letter of rec from a math professor or you had a very high GPA that shows you did well in math and English classes, I think you could just mention somewhere in your app that you have standardized test anxiety and hope that other parts of the app make up for the low scores. You can also contact programs/check their websites to see whether they have admissions cutoffs - some places do, while others have "suggested scores" but no minimum, and other places will tell you it's not weighed heavily. Obviously you don't want to apply if your app will be thrown out for not meeting a stated minimum score, but you may find that a lot of places consider it the least important part of your app. I'd also say, if you DO choose to take the test again, it sounds like practicing test-taking strategies and anxiety management would be the most helpful for improving your score. Mediation is great for anxiety/stress, for example.

The troubling plaigarism issue aside... Are you an international student? This reads as if written by someone who doesn't have a firm grasp of English. The first sentence is very oddly constructed, for example, much of the vocab seems to come from a thesaurus (e.g. Americans do not use the verb "accomplish" with "degree"), and the whole thing is stiff and formulaic. Perhaps this is an attempt to sound academic, but a more natural voice would allow more personality to come through and be more engaging for the reader. You should sound excited about your research! There are also a lot of redundant sentences ("These are themes and issues I would focus along doing both my coursework and my research" is both obvious/unnecessary and misuses "along"), so the whole thing would benefit from a style/grammar/sentence structure review. I'd also say that it's better to talk about your research interests generally than to summarize your MA thesis, which they will presumably read as your writing sample. Further, do you have any relevant research experience or other accomplishments you can discuss? Did you do research abroad during your MA? Did you present at conferences? Did you do relevant internships, TAing, volunteering, or professional work? In other words, what makes you more qualified to pursue a PhD than any other person with an MA and grasp of a second language? You want to convince the adcoms that you are worth investing in. This should be more sophisticated than saying that you enjoy the field and have completed a degree - you want to illustrate that you are exceptional and that you will bring unusual dedication and skills to the table.

It's not unheard of to switch fields like this, but you may need to take some college-level courses to demonstrate that you can do well in such a different field (and for your own benefit - how do you know you'll like formal study of art and be committed to a grad program if you haven't studied it in school before?). I'm in the humanities, but I assume most fine arts programs will also want to see a portfolio of work and will expect you to be able to discuss art theory and explain your approach in a formal artist statement - you can certainly produce a portfolio on your own outside a class setting and familiarize yourself with predominant scholarship, but you'll be doing some catchup work. You could also look into whether there are some short-term conservatory programs you could do that would allow you to hone some skills and produce a portfolio before applying to degree programs. Most drama programs will probably require an audition, so that's a whole other kind of thing to prepare for. I'd also say that if you're considering programs as diverse as fashion design, drama, and graphic design it would definitely be to your benefit to take some time to take classes and do research into each of those paths to figure out what appeals to you before you start actually looking into schools.m

This forum is intended to offer advice specifically about Art History graduate programs. If you are currently a student, try your school's writing center. It looks like you would benefit from some edits for style, sentence structure, and vocabulary. I'd also consider putting more important/relevant information at the start of the paragraph - unless you have a lot to say about the figure on the right wearing a red dress, you may not want to lead with that or use two sentences to tell us what color the dresses are. You may also want to consider issues like use of light/dark, negative space, facial expressions, treatment of drapery, stylistic tendencies, quality of brushwork, etc. If you don't have a writing center or tutor available to you, looking at visual analyses in published sources may give you a better sense of where you should aim. Edit: I just saw that you've already asked here about how to improve your writing abilities, and that you stated that you are new to the field and English is not your first language. You are off to a good start, and I encourage you again to use your school's resources to work on your English composition skills. Right now, your writing is fine in terms of grammar and spelling, but you have room to improve in complex sentence structure, academic vocab, and overall flow. This takes practice, time, and effort to achieve, but it's certainly doable. Some general writing composition classes would be great, too, if they are offered at your school. Good luck!

I agree with artman. Assuming you are serious about getting the PhD but were thinking of applying to the MAs because you thought your odds were better, I'd go ahead and apply to the PhDs, since if you are turned away but have a good application you will generally also be considered for their MA programs. That way at least you wouldn't be left wondering whether you could get into the PhD. Also for what it's worth I started working on apps in Oct last year and still got into my dream program. As long as you have your letters and writing sample ready and have done the GRE, the rest shouldn't take a crazy amount of time. You can do it!

Yay, glad it's working out for you!

Definitely agree about contacting people at programs like Williams where there is not a phd program or where the MA program is funded. I didn't end up applying to Williams (wanted to go into a phd but also considered some MAs), but the faculty member I contacted there was the most helpful and encouraging of any of the faculty I emailed with anywhere. She even suggested other places I should apply that were better fits for my research interests! I'd treat applying to funded MAs the same way as applying to PhDs. For unfunded, I would not bother reaching out to faculty unless you have a specific question that the admin office can't answer.

Your scores sound very good given that you're in the right ranges for accepted students in each program. I doubt if improving a few points in a retake is a good use of your time. Amazing GRE scores won't get you in to a program, but bad scores might raise some eyebrows or keep you out - in your case your scores are more than fine so I don't think they will hold you back. I'd focus on the rest of the application components.

Agree with qwer7890 and Joan that most good programs will allow you to incorporate critical theory, and many encourage interdisciplinary study. You can always compare PhD guidelines from various departments or ask the grad student coordinator about policies regarding registering for classes outside the department if you're unsure. At my program it's encouraged to take classes outside the Art History department as long as they're in some way relevant to your specialization (i.e. aesthetics classes in the Philosophy dept, History or Lit dept classes in your region/period subfield, etc.)

As fuzzlogician says, there's a lot of variance by field and school. I would look at the websites of each school you're thinking of applying to and see if they give a guideline. For example, some of the places I applied said something along the lines of "We encourage you to contact professors in the Fall before applying" while others said nothing. If they don't say anything, you could also always call the administrative office of the department and ask what the policy is. My mentors/letter writers recommended reaching out to potential advisers, but the responses I got back from POIs were very varied. In several cases they didn't have much to say, or stated that it was unnecessary to contact professors before applying. In a couple cases they were encouraging (one was so encouraging that she advised me to apply directly to PhD programs rather than the terminal MA program where she taught). Whether their replies were friendly or not seemed to have zero correlation on where I was accepted, so don't be intimidated if the person you most want to work with sends you a curt "I make it a policy not to talk with students before I receive applications" kind of email. The most useful cases were those in which I learned that POIs were not accepting students in the year I was applying for. For that reason alone, I think it's always good to at least send out a brief email explaining that you admire their work, are interested in applying, and are wondering whether they are currently accepting new students. You definitely want to know that before you put the effort and money into applying! As for guidelines on what to write, I found this suggested template very helpful: http://theprofessorisin.com/2011/07/25/how-to-write-an-email-to-a-potential-ph-d-advisor/

TakeruK, that makes sense! The context you're describing does sound confusing - it's less the word itself than the fact that it sounds like the author used it incorrectly trying to "sound smart" even though another word would have been clearer. This reminds me of the advice I've gotten from several friends and colleagues who've completed their PhDs, all versions of: "Do you. Don't think you need to write a certain way or speak a certain way. Don't use words you don't know. Don't be intimidated because someone else is using words you don't know - they might not even be using them correctly." The issue you bring up of writing for a readers who aren't native English speakers is really interesting. As someone in the humanities, I've never heard anyone make that argument, but it's good food for thought. As I prepare for an upcoming foreign language translation exam, I would certainly appreciate if others in my field did this. Personally I hate reading jargon-filled articles, and I do try to make my writing as pithy as possible. I was also taught to write with the assumption that the reader would not have prior knowledge of my topic - something that doesn't usually happen in academic writing, but is very helpful for readers who aren't experts in your field/subfield. Interdisciplinary study is important to me, so I would love if more academics wrote in a manner that was accessible to those in other disciplines.

I agree with Juillet - I'm a URM and I only mentioned my ethnicity (and other reasons I might be considered "diverse") for programs that requested diversity statements. I definitely wouldn't mention it in a statement of purpose, since I'm not sure how you'd fit that in while staying on topic.

Haha, I completely agree that academic writing doesn't need to be verbose and convoluted, but I had to laugh at this example. "It only exacerbated the situation" is a phrase I would/do use in everyday speech. Just goes to show one person's pretentious is another person's clear and concise.

Decide now. Doing otherwise means you'll be getting the resources at the Canadian school that someone else, who actually intends to complete the program, could be using. If you want to go to the UK school, let the Canadian school know that you have to withdraw immediately.

Whether you will get in depends on many factors that no one here can really predict, but I wouldn't let not having French/German deter you if you feel ready to apply. For what it's worth, I'm in a highly ranked PhD program and about half of my cohort came in with only undergrad degrees. Our language preparedness varies. Some people I talked to before I applied told me I would need more language skills to get into grad school (even MAs!), but I applied and got in anyway. Of course that means I've made more work for myself while in school, but that's what summer intensives are for. So by all means mention in your statement of purpose that you are currently doing private study in French, and don't let it stop you from applying.

Hmm. Well, if your boss is giving you condescending talks, you've made a lot of mistakes, and your coworkers have a poor impression of you, what makes you think you would get a good letter of recommendation from the boss anyway? I don't say this to be mean - I just wonder whether that's a good reason to stay if the situation is as bad as you are describing. Before you make any decisions, I think you should probably have an honest talk with your boss and, in as professional a manner as possible, explain that you're struggling and ask him what you could do to improve the situation. Surely the boss is aware that it's not going well. Perhaps he will say that the lab doesn't seem to be a good fit for you, in which case you have a graceful out to leave. Perhaps he will give you valuable constructive criticism, which you can use to improve yourself. If you haven't already broached the topic of grad school with him, you may also want to use the opportunity to bring up your career plans and seek his guidance on grad school. Just be prepared for the possibility that he might not be the best person to write you a glowing LOR under these circumstances, and if I were you I'd think about alternatives no matter what.

Are you more interested in being a Curator or a Collection Management professional? What makes you drawn to a PhD versus an MA? To me, Curator versus Collection Manager are drastically different jobs/skill sets and have very different training requirements. Museum curation often requires a PhD, though there are still Assistant Curator positions out there for those with MAs in large museums, and you might find full curator jobs requiring only an MA at some smaller institutions. Of course, outside the museum circuit you don't need a specific degree to do gallery/independent curating, though the MA/PhD could be helpful. On the other hand, in my experience collection managers have MAs or even just BAs. Tho I'm sure they exist, I've never met anyone in Collection Management with a PhD. Though you say you've hit the ceiling at your particular institution, are you sure that has to do with your level of education? Could you find opportunities to advance in CM at another museum? I know this doesn't exactly answer your question, but I just wanted to pose these thoughts because based on your description of your career goals, I'm not sure that you need/should get a PhD. Of course, if you want a PhD for other reasons that is totally understandable, but I'd be wary of getting a PhD for career advancement unless you're fairly sure that you need it for your career, which doesn't sound like the case based on the info you provided. And given that you don't sound like you have a particular Art Historical focus, an MA sounds like a better match of degree for you at the moment. If you ARE set on the PhD being the right degree for you (e.g. you're sure you want to be a museum curator/teach at the university level/can't imagine yourself doing anything but research and teach for the next 7-10 years of your life) then I'm sure that there is large degree of variance between the levels of competition at different schools. It's a hard thing to quantify, though, so you may just have to visit some different programs and get a sense of what the vibe at each place is. And, of course, you will need to hone your research focus before applying/to begin to narrow down the kinds of places you would want to apply. Good luck!

I don't think it's necessary to limit yourself this much - these scholars may be the best matches for your interests, but most professors are open to working with students who are interested in time periods/subfields other than those in which they specialize. For example, you may end up working with someone who has a different subfield from your own, but similar theoretical concerns. Or the person who is on paper the best match for your interests may have a difficult personality or not be taking students this year. I'm just saying I wouldn't write off applying to work with someone who's an expert in Hindu temples if they've been known to mentor dissertations on Deccani painting and that's your thing. And it goes without saying that admissions are competitive (especially top programs like Berkeley/NYU) so it doesn't hurt to diversify a bit.

I assumed someone would have already started a thread about this, but since I don't see one -- can we just talk about the Michael LaCour falsified research debacle for a minute? Is anyone else as riveted and shocked by this case as I am? For anyone who may not have heard, this is the case I am referencing, though more and more details have come out: http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/05/how-a-grad-student-uncovered-a-huge-fraud.html?mid=fb-share-scienceofus In short, a star PhD student at UCLA, whose study was considered groundbreaking and published in Science, turns out to have falsified much of the research in pretty major ways - from making up hundreds of thousands of dollars in grant money that never existed to beefing up his CV with nonexistent awards. This case raises so many questions for me. Why would someone falsify their research to this extent after investing so much time in their PhD? Didn't he know he'd get caught? On the other hand, are there many more like LaCour who haven't been caught, given how many people tried to talk the whistle-blower out of saying anything, even as his proof became undeniable? What is your duty as a researcher to verify the papers you cite and the research of collaborators? Would you turn in a fellow grad-student whose research methods were extremely suspect, in spite of warnings from mentors and colleagues that you couldn't gain from it so it would be safer to say nothing? Thoughts, anyone?

I agree with others that there are great options, like auditing local college courses or enrolling in university extension classes, that might fulfill some of your desires. Maybe even joining an erudite book club or local literature society with some meaty discussion groups. I'd also say that if you don't care about the degree and aren't motivated to fulfill requirements that don't personally excite you (like languages), a structured graduate program - especially a PhD program, if you are considering them as well - are probably not for you. Of course loving your field and being excited by it are a big part of why most of us pursue grad school, but it's a big commitment, whether of money, time, blood/sweat/tears, or all of the above. On the other hand if you've given it a lot of thought and really do want the degree, I definitely wouldn't let languages stand in your way. I know people who've fulfilled requirements by taking summer language intensives, for example.

Another big factor is whether you plan on having a car? That makes a big difference in where you can live in LA. I did not live on/near campus when I was a student there (overpriced and didn't love the area), but I had a car and didn't mind commuting. It's probably still doable to take a bus from someplace like Culver City or the Pico-Robertson area, which is more affordable and quieter than Westwood. That said, I'd also consider how social you plan to be and how much time you plan to spend on campus outside of class time. Since a lot of grad students do live near campus and don't have cars, a lot of the social life may be near the school, so if you are a 40 minute bus ride away you might find yourself isolated in your first year. That's where I could see it being a big advantage to live nearby while you get yourself established and get to know people. I was not very interested in the UCLA social scene, so living farther away didn't bother me, but that's just me. PS I think a West Side Rentals subscription is totally worth it -- much more reliable than Craigslist if you're looking for apartments online.

This.