brown_eyed_girl

I agree that you want to go to the best law school you can get into rather than look for a specialized one at this stage; people specialize in all kinds of things, and a good law school will help show you different avenues you can use the degree for through elective courses and intern opportunities, while providing the broad general foundation that will allow you to pass the bar exam and offering networking possibilities. Most law schools should have IP courses, but you can look around for ones that may have stronger faculty than others, and think about cities where you could do your summer internships at places that do specialize in art law/intellectual property, etc. Everything I know about law school comes second hand through lawyer friends, though, so you may want to post this question on a board that deals specifically with law.

School 1 sounds like a no-brainer to me. I'd go where the money is - and in this case, that's also a school with a stronger reputation, more rigorous coursework, and proximity to a museum where you could gain experience in your field. As others have said, I don't think coursework in your subject will be the biggest factor in your PhD applications. Coming from a strong program, showing ability in art history coursework in a range of fields, building language skills, and having museum experience in your field, on the other hand, would all be big advantages. I don't know your field, though, so if you feel like School 2 has a significantly stronger reputation in Near Eastern/Egyptian and/or a stronger PhD placement record, that would be something to consider.

I'll be moving to NYC to attend Columbia in the fall, but my boyfriend is coming with me so I don't think we'll qualify for CU housing. Ideally we would like a 1-bedroom under $2400, and preferably in Morningside Heights or nearby in the Upper West Side. (A 20-min commute or less would be ideal - I don't mind the idea of a subway ride but I'd rather not have to walk long distances in winter.) Any recommendations? Does this seem doable, or should I be looking in other areas?

Yes, it sounds like they did give you an answer - you are not getting university funding, but it's possible to get outside funding and maybe university work opportunities down the line. Not all PhDs are funded, unfortunately, and I don't think how early they admit you correlates to funding. In fact, it's probably easier to make a quick admission decision when they're not offering you a hefty multiyear fellowship, so the early reply isn't surprising.

What kind of museum work do you want to do? I'd start looking at the LinkedIn's of the people at the museum you work in now and/or places you would like to work, as well as job listings at those places, to see what degrees lead to the jobs you are interested in. In the museum where I work, people with Museum Studies degrees do mostly admin work, whereas curatorial assistants and even some junior curators have Art History MAs. Other museum professionals have degrees in things like nonprofit management or communications. The Art History MA could also lead to jobs in auction houses and galleries, whereas the MA in Museum Studies could lead to work in museums that aren't art related. Just things to weigh in terms of figuring out what kind of degree would be best for your needs.

Thanks, quer7890 and gundohinus. Sometimes unspoken rules need to be clearly explicated. I emailed the department admin and let them know that IF I'm still under consideration they can take me out of the running. You both make good points; in my case I really just presumed rejection if I hadn't heard by now, so I wasn't intentionally holding out for some reason. I certainly agree that once you make a decision you shouldn't string anyone along and you should promptly step aside to give the waitlists a shot. I admired a friend who told the interviewer at one program that they had gotten into their top choice and would not attend if admitted. PS I didn't mean to be insulting by saying it was my "safety" or imply that I wouldn't have considered it, had I been admitted or waitlisted in a timely manner. The POI was an excellent fit for my esoteric interests, which is why I applied in the first place. I really do hope I'll get to work with them in the future.

I don't appreciate my ethics being called into question. I am aware (and compliant) of the rule to notify other programs to which you've been accepted as soon as you accept an offer, but if a school hasn't gotten back to me by now (or been in any contact since I submitted my app - no interview, no contact with POI, etc.) I assume I have not been accepted anyway. Correct me if I am mistaken and I'm happy to resolve the issue with a quick email... but let's not put this in grave moral terms. And I'm not sure why these responses are to me rather than Happy Little Pill or Kantekst?

I agree that the general reputation of CSULB may be a bit higher, but not sure about your specific program. My impression is also that it's more of a "college town" with a community built around the school, whereas CSULA is kind of in the middle of a not-amazing area of LA. Though if you're going to be a commuter student anyway, and you prefer LA to Long Beach, I'd also take that into account. Though LB is close to LA, it's a pain to get back and forth so I'd choose an area you don't mind living for a few years. Have you visited both schools and checked out the neighborhoods? Does either school have a professor you love? If funding and rankings are fairly equal, I'd choose the area you'd be happier living in. Good luck!

I'm actually still waiting to hear back from one PhD program (if the boards are correct I'm not alone), though it was my "safety" and I already accepted an offer from my top choice so it's not an anxious wait.

I'll be starting a direct-entry PhD program in the fall at age 25; since it wouldn't let me answer one question without the other, that's my answer for both questions.

I never limit the amount I eat, but I do stick to minimally processed plant-based meals, and 95% of my meals are homemade so I know exactly what goes into them. My diet is based around whole grains, vegetables, and legumes; within that, there are endless variations if you have a pantry well-stocked with various staples and seasonings and learn to make some good sauces/dressings, etc. I don't buy much snack food; instead, I eat things like fruit, trail mix, or hummus with pita and veggies between meals. I never get bored or feel deprived because I get full on foods that are nutritious and hearty, and I've cooked for myself enough to know how to make things I like, without an undue investment of time. I also aim for making large enough batches that I have leftovers throughout the week, and proportion them out into meal-size containers so that it's easy to grab my day's lunch as I'm headed out the door, which means I'm less tempted to eat out (plus I save money that way). It requires a little extra forethought and an investment of time in experimenting to figure out what you like, but it's really a very simple method and works well for me.

A major in art history is not required for graduate work in Art History, particularly at the MA level. Some programs do have a minimum number of courses you should have taken (NYU requires 4, for example) but your minor should have covered that - you can always verify with the programs you are interested in. What is important is that you did well in the Art History classes you took and can get recommendations from AH professors. Aside from that, I think being good at analysis and knowing how to write a good research paper is a skill that translates well into other humanities disciplines. What do you hope to do with the MA? Figuring that out will both help you narrow down the kinds of programs you want to apply to, and be your ticket to "convincing an adcomm" -- I think that having a clear focus of why you want to pursue the degree and what you plan to do with it is what will make you a compelling candidate. Can you demonstrate sustained interest and involvement with the field, and does it seem like you have an idea of how you will translate your skills into the real world? If I were an adcomm, these are the questions I'd be asking. Also, to allay your fears, most people applying to MA programs (and many applying to PhD programs) won't have any published work yet. Many who apply to MAs don't have specializations, either. In fact, when I was applying to grad schools this round, I considered applying to some terminal MAs in addition to PhDs, and multiple advisers, including a professor I contacted at an MA program, told me that since my interests were already very specific I should apply directly to PhDs. Most MAs are meant for more general studies in Art History, while allowing you to hone in on your particular field as you go along. For going into an MA, I think it would be helpful to have a general idea of the region, time period, or conceptual issues you're interested in... but you don't need to know all three. I'd focus on composing a strong writing sample (you could either rework a course paper or write a new one), doing well on the verbal section of the GRE, and gathering some good letters. Experience in the field is also helpful - and if you don't have any art world experience, I'd at least start with volunteering at a museum or historical society, etc. Good luck!

Someone else actually started a thread on this - so yes, it seems that results haven't been released yet:

A lot of people don't find work work in their field right out of undergrad, so I don't think you should despair yet. Since you're not getting many interviews, I would also consider finding an internship or volunteer position in your field to augment your resume and give you some relevant experience as you continue applying. You should apply broadly to jobs in related fields - for example, since you're not qualified for coordinator jobs yet, consider applying for general admin and receptionist jobs in hospitals, nursing homes, etc. Starting somewhere will help you get your foot in the door. As to schools, in the US I believe a number of universities offer postbac nursing and/or med school preparation programs of varying lengths that may be worth looking into instead of doing a full second bachelors, if you decide to go that route. Before you apply anywhere, though, I would suggest finding some courses in your field that you could take to raise your overall GPA. A lot of schools require at least a 3.0 overall for admission consideration. You may also find some useful info in the sub-3.0 GPA acceptance thread: Good luck!

I would apply directly to PhDs and see what happens. You could also apply to several MAs to diversify in case you want to go that route, but I would think carefully about doing a second MA, for the simple reason that the second degree may not help you get into the PhD programs you are aiming for, and you have already been successful in the kinds of positions that most hope to get with only a terminal masters in Art History. If you want to go for the experience and knowledge that would be one thing, but since you say that you would have to take out loans for an MA and that your ultimate goal is the PhD, I don't think it would be worth the risk for a slightly better shot at PhDs.

It appears that they haven't released most of this year's decisions yet (only a few rejections to the PhD a month ago.) Looks like last year they notified MA students in early April. http://www.thegradcafe.com/survey/index.php?q=boston+university+art+history

I've had conversations with guys about this, and it seems like men are usually more visual than women are. I am MUCH more attracted to personality/personal traits (intelligence/ambition/emotional stability/openness/thoughtfulness/sense of humor/compatible life goals/chemistry) than looks. It's hard to separate the two because, unless we're just looking at pictures and not interacting with someone, a person's demeanor and character come into play. I would not be able to enjoy dating a highly attractive but dumb person. A smart and caring but mediocre-looking person could be extremely attractive to me. It's very holistic for me. I agree that being attracted to someone is very important, and relationships where I've tried to overlook a low attraction level have not gone well; that said, my degree of attraction does not correlate to whether I think someone is objectively good-looking.

I'm so sorry to hear this. It sounds like this may end up being a really positive new beginning for you, though. Dating someone who struggles with depression is very difficult, and you don't need the stress of worrying about someone else's mental health while also adapting to a new city and trying to adjust to a new program. I also think that having some distance between you will give you necessary space to heal and move on. Also, big congrats on getting into two excellent schools and starting a new chapter of your life! Sending hugs.

For what it's worth, I've met people with MAs from both Columbia and IFA who got into top PhD programs. I've also met people from both MA programs who had difficulty getting into PhD programs. I think you can be successful at either if you put in the work and focus on making connections, but also be aware of the debt to projected income ratio and do your research on loan repayment options and what that will look like for your financial situation. @Joan, I got into a top PhD program with only a BA & museum experience behind me. When I went to the open house for my program, about half the admitted students only had BAs. My understanding is that you'll be judged by a different rubric depending on what your highest degree is, but you'll either need to be "exemplary" coming out of undergrad or coming out of your MA. Of course I'm sure the preference varies by school - I've met some professors who prefer (even to the extent of having an unofficial policy) taking students with only BAs, and some with the opposite preference.

Rodin12, how highly ranked are the programs you are applying for? Though I don't think GRE scores are the end all be all, I do think they are often used to screen people out, especially when choosing from many well-qualified people. After all, for getting into top programs, I'd say having a 4.00 (or close to it) is more like a prerequisite than a guarantee. Though I'm sure it's possible to get into a top program with a dismal GRE, I wouldn't bank on being the exception to the rule. I found this chart helpful when considering target GRE scores to keep my applications competitive. As you'll see, even in programs ranked 11-50, average verbal scores are in the 160s: http://magoosh.com/gre/2013/gre-scores-for-arts-and-humanities-programs/ (Incidentally, I also recommend the Magoosh free GRE vocab app.)

If they told you that you didn't meet requirements, I would ask what specifically they were referring to. If it is GRE and the programs have a cut off that you didn't meet, I don't think it's insurmountable to retake them and improve - go take a look at the GRE forum and you'll find many people who improved drastically with consistent studying. I actually think it's encouraging if the reason you didn't get in had more to do with not meeting basic criteria than something more nebulous (and hard to fix) like your writing style not being received well or your research being too theoretical. Some programs also require demonstrated language ability, and so you could get screened out if you don't meet that requirement. If you can figure out what the issue is, I don't see why you wouldn't be successful reapplying.

My impression is that NYU is a very reputable MA program that can prepare you well for PhDs (assuming that's your end goal) if you focus on writing a great thesis, network while there, find an attentive adviser, etc. It does have a strong reputation in the museum world. The price tag, however, is kind of ludicrous. Graduating with $100k in loans is no small thing, especially given the average salary of a museum-worker.

@TakeruK I'm not sure what Aroma Black's specific situation is, but in a lot of fields if you hope to go into teaching, it may be hard to find an academic job for a while and/or you may spend several years in poorly paid adjunct/postdoc fellow roles that don't include benefits. I certainly hope I'll be making more than my stipend after graduation, but it wouldn't be a bad idea to prepare for the worst.

That sounds like a prudent approach. What kind of account are you using, if I may ask?

I would recommend Culver City and the Pico/Robertson area instead of the Valley - it's about the same distance, but much nicer and more restaurants/bars/galleries/interesting things to do. When I was at UCLA I lived in Silverlake and commuted (about 40 mins) which was worth it to me because I much prefer the East Side of LA, already had friends there, and I didn't have to be on campus all the time. It was around $600 or $700 for an annual parking pass (make sure you apply on time if you want to have the option of parking on campus - it fills up quickly and if you don't have a pass it is very hard to park nearby). If you want to be able to walk to campus, there is also plenty of housing in Westwood itself, and it should be easy to find roommates since there are so many students. For apartment hunting, check out West Side Rentals - it's subscription based, but I had much more luck on there than Craigslist.