brown_eyed_girl

You have very good scores, and I highly doubt they will be the deciding factor in your admissions. 

I totally second brown eyed girl. CUNY has some top notch scholars in 20th century. I also would look into departmental methodologies. Some departments are quite intense with their practice of social art history while others are quite indebted to psychoanalysis. Sorry to bring up a cliche, though many of these rankings promote comparing apples to oranges. Each scholar and each department have different things to offer. I would urge you to pick a position that puts you in a decent funding position and a helpful advisor.

I'm assuming that you're in the U.S. and by "two year transfer degree" you mean an associate's degree at a junior college.
Which provokes the question: is there some reason that you don't want to do a four-year degree at a brick-and-mortar school, or something that is preventing you from doing that? Because that would probably be the best option.
The answer your question really depends on what programs you're talking about and where they're from. There's a difference between getting an online bachelor's at Capella or Walden and getting one at Penn State's World Campus or University of Arizona online. Generally speaking a bachelor's will offer you more opportunities, because many jobs do require a bachelor's degree, but some employers may not consider you if your bachelor's degree is from a for-profit or unaccredited online university.

Your final situation would be roughly about what mine is now, i.e. about $40k after your MA. I'm OK with it because I have a wife who has a real job, and my loans stay in remission (subsidized) while I'm in my PhD, so we can tackle them one at a time. 
I don't think having $40k in debt will give you problems that are substantially different from having $30k in debt.

It's obviously not the moment to try new techniques for focusing and rigor. So I would suggest getting enough sleep, drinking lots of water, taking some nuts with you to the exam, and refueling at the breaks so that your mind is at its sharpest. Then if you have enough time at the end of each section, double-check your answers. But at least pick some answers for all questions so that you don't end up double-checking perpetually on a question, and if you don't have time, at least you have a probably correct answer for each q rather than no answer.
One thing that I keep mentioning as advice: when clicking "next" do not click twice. Wait for it to load. I was kicked out of a section like this, because the very last "next" is in the same location as "submit", so by clicking again because I thought the system did not get my first click, I ended up submitting. (it was OK though, I got all the answers correct on that one, but imagine the stress for the next section!).

First off, you might get more replies in the Art History forum than here (Museum Studies degrees are often discussed there, even if you're not interested in the art side of it).
I agree 100% with verycunning - curation and education are totally different paths. I come from the art museum side of things, but there as well curator jobs usually require PhDs in their field; there are still assisant curator jobs at some large museums and full curator jobs at smaller museums for those with research-based MAs. Museum education people have a wide range of MAs, and it's also possible to get entry-level education jobs with just a BA (I know several people in higher-up ed positions who worked their way up with only the BA). 
In general, I would think very carefully before pursuing a Museum Studies MA. At least at the large art museums I worked at, these degrees were not well-respected, as they are often considered more like vocational degrees. There were certainly people with Museum Studies degrees working there, but they were all in Administration jobs. I think you'd do better to find an MA program in the field you're interested in (Anthro, Ed, etc) and then focus on museums in your thesis project or continue building your experience in museums in your free time. There is a ton of great work on museums in Anthropology, for instance, as I'm sure you know. 
Another thing to consider is cost -- I'm not aware of any funded museum studies degrees, so unless you have the cash on hand you could be looking at a lot of debt. This is especially risky when you're preparing for generally low-paying work at nonprofit museums. Research-based MAs are much more likley to be funded or partially funded, and I think your job prospects would be better as well. 

First off, you might get more replies in the Art History forum than here (Museum Studies degrees are often discussed there, even if you're not interested in the art side of it).
I agree 100% with verycunning - curation and education are totally different paths. I come from the art museum side of things, but there as well curator jobs usually require PhDs in their field; there are still assisant curator jobs at some large museums and full curator jobs at smaller museums for those with research-based MAs. Museum education people have a wide range of MAs, and it's also possible to get entry-level education jobs with just a BA (I know several people in higher-up ed positions who worked their way up with only the BA). 
In general, I would think very carefully before pursuing a Museum Studies MA. At least at the large art museums I worked at, these degrees were not well-respected, as they are often considered more like vocational degrees. There were certainly people with Museum Studies degrees working there, but they were all in Administration jobs. I think you'd do better to find an MA program in the field you're interested in (Anthro, Ed, etc) and then focus on museums in your thesis project or continue building your experience in museums in your free time. There is a ton of great work on museums in Anthropology, for instance, as I'm sure you know. 
Another thing to consider is cost -- I'm not aware of any funded museum studies degrees, so unless you have the cash on hand you could be looking at a lot of debt. This is especially risky when you're preparing for generally low-paying work at nonprofit museums. Research-based MAs are much more likley to be funded or partially funded, and I think your job prospects would be better as well. 

Museum curation and museum education are going to require very different grad programs, imo. Most curators I know at top (history and science, at least) museums have PhDs in the field they work in. Most museum educators I know have M.A.s, but in a variety of degrees (museum studies, public history, archives, history, education, art history, American Studies, and Women's Studies, off the top of my head). So that is something to think about.
If you're interested in using social media, you may want to look into programs strong in digital humanities, as that can help bring together social media, archives, library, and other fields related to museums. I've got a friend who's used the Carolina Digital Humanities Initiative, so that's the only one I know of specifically, but it's definitely a growing field of interest.

Even though you have the space, I still think brown_eyed_girl has it right. Your own description of your character isn't something that I can trust. On the other a very short and to the point "I had failures before, but I've grown and now I have a 4.0 GPA" is a much stronger statement. I can conclude for myself that you've worked on yourself and are very passionate. Even though you may have 1000 words, you certainly aren't required to use them. Adcom members are busy people. Only say what you need to.
As a young man, I was placed on academic probation at several community colleges (_______, _______, _______) due to failing grades resulting from poor attendance.  At the time I was immature, unorganized and uncommitted to maintaining the academic standards demanded by these institutions. However, since that time I have redefined my character, refusing to let past failures defeat me. Both my transgressions and triumphs have served as an impetus for my recent success and when I returned to college three years ago, I did so with a fire in my belly—determined to unveil my potential as a student.  This passion is reflected in the work I’ve done at ___________ College and __________ College, where over the past eight semesters and I have since maintained a 4.0 GPA. I am grateful for all of my experiences, both good and bad, which have bestowed in me the fortitude necessary to succeed as an academic.

The sexist comments you guys have mentioned sound really upsetting. Have you considered going to school officials? Especially if this I someone in your cohort who you will have to be around a decent amount, I don't think it's reasonable to put up with that. Plus, the thought of someone in a PhD program openly saying women should serve men rather than be in higher education is even more upsetting given that they could be teaching young women soon. If he is saying things like this unchecked, perhaps he needs a good reminder of university policy on gender discrimination. It may not solve his obvious issues, but perhaps he'd at least see how truly inappropriate his comments are and realize that there is no place for that. 

1) I totally second what the above commenters have suggested in terms of seeing a therapist. Medication might not even be necessary - just talking to a professional can be very powerful, esp. if you are now alone. If no therapist is available right away, consider attending time- and stress-management workshops. You'll learn strategies and see that others are struggling with the same issues or even worse. A thing that may seem silly but is very important: do you eat well? do you have enough sleep? working less hours but sleeping adequately increases efficiency. you need to stay healthy (beyond not-being-sick) or it will affect your mood.
2) I can certainly relate to what you feel about theory. I'm currently in one course which is all about theory, and there are lots of people from outside of my home department so most of what they're discussing is... well... rather uninteresting to me, to say the least. Most of them are super-knowledgeable and enjoy this stuff, but there are others like me who'd rather talk about actual history, as you put it (esp. folks in my sub-field). I feel very dissatisfied with a lot of theory we read because it tends to be vague, pretentious and often tendentious. (I do enjoy historiography though). I think it helps to analyze, why you don't like theory/historiography. Is there something dissatisfying about it? Do you feel like the way it is presented is inadequate? How would you do it? I personally want to find a way to shift the theoretical discourse in my field, shift the way people write about theory. I find some of the features of major theoretical works downright unacceptable. I'm not gonna go on a rant here. Maybe I should make a post about this and see what people think. In any event... to change the way theory is done one needs to first get to master it. So that's my motivation. Try establishing what could be your motivation for understanding theory. Otherwise, for now, try approaching this as a necessary part of what you have to know, just like languages. Don't sweat over it too much, approach that mechanically. I'm sure many people do just that. I personally feel like I should start making tables and flashcards of sorts for the theory component if I want to stay on top of the game. It's like studying for another exam in the undergrad: just need to get through it for now.
3) This is a time of year when it's very hard to stay on top of your game. It's totally normal to feel burned out. I would suggest letting go of some of the unnecessary commitments which you've taken up. Are you on any committees? extracurriculars? do they bring you joy or only make you more tired? replace that time with more efficient relaxation time. it's all about finding a balance.

I want to second rising_star's suggestions. Please take some time for self-care! I find it's really important to do this to get through all parts of grad school. 
I also want to say that what you are feeling is actually "normal" in the sense that it's a common experience for many new graduate students to feel, especially in the first semester/year. I don't mean it's "normal" as in "this crappy way you're feeling is your life now and you just have to get used to it". Definitely not that at all. I am just saying that these struggles are common and it does not mean that you're not meant for grad school or that you're not meant for academia! In Canada, we do 2 separate grad programs for Masters and PhD and with both grad programs, the start was a little tough, very similar to what you're describing. What helped me a lot was hearing that established academics and professors who I respect tell me that they had similar struggles too!
Little things that people I know (and I have done) to fight "burn out" and self-care:
1. See a therapist. I hope your school has a lot of options that are free or covered by insurance. 1 in 5 students will see a therapist during their time in school. They are a resource that are meant to help us and seeing one doesn't mean you're broken! Also, if making an appointment is too scary, see if your school's health center has drop in therapy times. My school offers them one or two nights per week in the evenings.
2. Schedule and prioritize time to call/Skype home. We often wait until we have "free time" to do things like this, but I think we should just schedule it. Make it one of our day's priorities, same level as homework or grading. Taking time to take care of yourself is part of grad student work. 
3. Do things you enjoy! Join a sports club or take classes at the school gym, if that's what you enjoy. If you have a hobby, join the club for that at your school. Or, find something offered in the city and do this outside of school / off campus (usually school/on campus things may be cheaper though). Again, make sure you schedule this as a priority.
4. Monitor your work hours and optimize them. At one point, I found myself "working" 12 hours a day and feeling very burnt out but then I realised that I was not really effectively working at all. I would spend a lot of time doing other stuff during my work hours, which meant my productivity decreased, so then I worked longer hours, then I got more burnt out and needed more breaks, which meant my productivity decreased etc. It's a cycle. Now, I work fewer hours but try to get more done in that time. I limit myself to about 40 hours per week of work (not including lunch breaks and breaks for things like typing this post!)
5. Travel home! I have not been able to just take an impromptu trip home because it's more expensive and further away than a lot of my friends. But for those who are just a 2-3 hour flight away (or less), I know that many of my friends go home about one weekend every 1-2 months in their first year. Others who live further away will take longer, but less frequent trips. Thanksgiving and Christmas is coming up, so if those are big events for your family (or friends back home), perhaps that would be a great time to "recharge". For me, Canadian Thanksgiving happens a month earlier and my family doesn't celebrate Christmas, but I was able to get the same happiness from my new US friends.
6. If traveling is too expensive, then take time to do touristy things in your new home! Pretend that you're here as a tourist for a long weekend. Take an extra Friday or Monday off and see the sights. Or do one of the other things that you enjoy instead (reading, hiking, etc.) i.e. a "staycation". 
7. Know that it gets better! Speaking to the passion/inspiration part of things, I find that the minutiae of academic life very boring. I get what you mean by not enjoying historiography. There are aspects of my field that are absolutely important but I find completely boring and have no passion for. That's normal. It's okay! As you say, you know it's important, so it's not like you are dismissing it, it's just not your cup of tea, and that's fine. You don't have to be in love with everything you do and every part of your field. Sometimes I feel putting that pressure on yourself makes you feel even more burnt out.
8. One of the best ways to get me interested in my passion is talking about it with other people. Usually, the week or two after a conference is highly motivating and energetic for me. After several months of just working on something, looking at the fine details, it's really nice to step back and take a look at your work from the big picture point of view, which is what happens when we discuss our work at a conference. It may be hard to go to one during your first year, but if you know that these types of actions benefit you, you may be able to "simulate" it on campus. Maybe you want to take one half-day each month to write up a big picture summary of your work. Or, spend some time reading the big picture review articles. Or, start a discussion group with other students/postdocs and talk about big picture things in your field. In a lot of my peer groups, we try to avoid talking about work when we are socializing, but once a week, we purposely get together to talk about science over lunch!
Anyways, I hope some of these ideas are helpful in one way or another. I just want to say that what you are feeling is shared by a lot of other current and new graduate students too!

Just a small note, the highest degree awarded at the Art Institute of Chicago (SAIC) is an MA (oh, how I wish that weren't true).

I agree with all that TakeruK said, and I want to clarify that I don't mean not to include your personality - just also stay focused on what they are asking for and try to imbue your personality while staying on message. Personally, I structured my SOP rather uncreatively, but I think it's an effective organization for clarity and concision:
Intro: My opening paragraph outlined the subfield I was applying for, described my research interests, and proposed a potential dissertation topic, while making it clear that this was just an example of the type of project I was interested in to allow room for flexibility. This is where I stated excitement for my research and discussed its potential impact. 
Body: I outlined my qualifications and experience chronologically. I mentioned relevant coursework, language prep, grants/scholarships, honors programs, research experience during undergrad (senior thesis); then I discussed my work after graduation; I named professors who were particularly influential and who I worked with closely; I explained how each of these unique experiences shaped my approach to things. This is also where you can put a positive spin on anything that might look odd on your CV. My argument here was "I'm prepared to succeed in a doctoral program." 
Close: I discussed why each school was a great fit for me and my research (I.e. Access to amazing university resources, methodological fit, location close to outside research material, etc), who I hoped to work with in the dept specifically, and why X was the best school for my needs. 
This is admittedly not the most exciting format, but it did get me into a top program in my field, and I think is quite flexible for various fields. Good luck! 
 
 

I can't speak to all fields so feel free to correct me if I'm off base here, but in the humanities this would not be an appropriate SOP because it's all about you and how much you like the field (as well as random personal info like your excitement about your wedding) that is basically irrelevant to whether or not you'll succeed in the program. It's assumed that everyone applying is excited about the field and has personal reasons for that, so you don't really need to go into them or the moment you realized grad school was right for you, etc. What you've written is not bad, but it's a personal, narrative essay intro that would be appropriate for a college admittance essay rather than a grad school research statement. In other words, your writing abilities are good, you're just misdirecting them.
Further, I've read a whole paragraph without getting any idea of what specifically you're interested in researching or why you are qualified. You have a short amount of space to convince an adcom that you are worth investing in, so make it count by keeping your SOP focused on need-to-know info. Keep it straightforward and professional. What do you hope to contribute to the field? Why are you qualified? Why is this school and this POI the right fit for you, and what do you bring to the table that others don't? Admissions committees are busy, so front-load the most relevant information and make it easy for them to see why you are a great applicant. 
And don't forget to have some of your former professors look over the SOP before you finalize your draft - they are the best resource since they know your field and can tell you what they look for when they review candidates. 
Good luck! 

I am in a different scientific field and I also do not think this is a good way to start a SOP. There is nothing wrong with the content of this paragraph---that is, you should not feel like you have to hide your personality, how much you like the field, or how excited you were about your wedding. However, as brown_eyed_girl points out, you want the main point of your SOP to be the "purpose" of you applying to this graduate program and you are not providing what the reader is looking for in this first paragraph!
In addition, the last part of the paragraph (being with "thus, following a six-year....") sounds very out of place. First you are writing a story about a personal moment then it abruptly jumps into standard "SOP-speak".
My suggestion would be to start with the point up front. Don't tell a story in the first paragraph. Instead, say exactly what you want to do. Answer the questions that brown_eyed_girl wrote in their second paragraph. What kind of research do you want to do? How do you want to do it? What are some big questions/themes that interest you? What are some methodologies that you want to try?
Then, you can tell them a bit more about yourself and your past experiences. As others have written on these forums recently, there are two common ways to do this. The first is fairly common in the sciences and you would present your experiences in a chronological order. This has the advantage of making the story clear in the reader's head, especially if you did other things besides high school --> undergrad --> applying to grad school. Also, I chose this method because I wanted to show how my interest and skills developed, as one experience led to the next. The downside is that this style can be a little boring and it risks you just repeating your CV in long form, which means you wasted the SOP space to tell something useful. Sometimes when people write chronologically, they just list basic details instead of telling the reader the story of their "purpose".
The other common way is to group your experiences into various themes and/or other statements you want to make. For example, someone in my field might want to discuss all of their experiences and interests in one particular methodology in one paragraph and then another complementary methodology in another paragraph. This method is great if you have several strong common themes to write about and if you have experiences that you want to highlight different aspects of. This might also be good for someone like you, who is applying outside of their original field of study. It would allow you to pick out the things in these other fields that are really suited for computer science and highlight them. The potential disadvantage is that if you are not careful, you can confuse the reader with what event happened when. For example, when discussing experience X in topic paragraph Y, it might not be clear if X is an experience during undergrad research, during your industry years, or something else. A reader with your CV can probably figure it out, but since you have some industry experience, it might be helpful to include a few words when describing your experiences that help the reader know approximately when in your life they happened.
Finally, if you really want to tell the story of your wedding website, I think it's perfectly fine to do so. I would remove some of the extra-flowery language because it sounds a little like you are trying to place much more importance on it than it would sound to a third party. I think this experience is also relevant because as you say, your degree was in EE and this demonstrates your own personal interest and some work on computer science. It's also okay to reveal a little bit of personality and yourself in the SOP. After all, you are a person and you want the committee to also "meet you". Sometimes, people take it too far and spend way too many words doing this though, and as StyleD said, it makes more sense to do this while also answering the SOP prompts.
I just don't want you or another reader to think that the takeaway is "Don't write about personal experiences in a SOP", because that's not true (in my opinion). We are defined by our personal experiences and when they are relevant to the "purpose" then we should certainly write about them. In my SOP, I wrote about my own marriage too as the reason why I did a MSc in Canada but now want to go to the US for a PhD (because if I had applied for a US PhD right away, my partner would not have yet been married to me and thus they would not have been able to move to the US with me, so we stayed in Canada until we got married). Although this is another topic, you can also save these stories for an interview, if your program does that. (For me, another reason to apply to California schools was because we preferred the west coast and California is closer to our hometown than Eastern Canada, but that wasn't relevant enough to include in SOPs, but I did say it in interviews).
That said, these are just generic tips and people have certainly been successful not following them at all. One person I know submitted a SOP with a bunch of photos of their undergrad experience to a hard sciences program and they got admitted. It's certainly riskier to take a non-standard approach though, so it's your call :)

There's Susan Babaie at the Courtauld Institute of Art. Avinoam Shalem and Zainab Bahrani at Columbia University could also be possible advisors. Anneka Lenssen at the University of California, Berkeley, is a recent hire and an excellent advisor for this area, incidentally she graduated from MIT.
Hope this helps.

My knowledge backs up raisinbrancusi, I understand that Williams is offering better packages in recent cohorts to stay competitive with PhD programs. Michael Ann Holly is filling in until they find a permanent replacement for Darby English. And always remember as you are looking at programs, academic superstardom and good teaching/mentoring do not necessarily correspond.... 
Another thing to note about Williams regardless of who runs their research program is grad students' access to Clark fellows and the scholars they bring in for colloquia and symposia. These scholars can become contacts at their institution's PhD programs or even POIs. In terms of meeting/working with top professors and sampling trends in the discipline, there's no terminal MA that comes close, and few PhD programs. It's part of why they look at their program as competing with PhDs not any of the other terminal MAs out there.

Apply to the PhD program. Usually, if you don't get in but they see potential, they will admit you to the MA program as a consolation prize, and you can make your decision then--though I would not recommend an unfunded MA unless you or your parents have the money to fund it yourselves (for all the reasons you can read about in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Slate, the Professor is In, etc...).

Gravity is in my field, and you definitely do not cite it Generally, in the physical sciences, we do not cite things that are more than say, 100 years old. In my opinion, we (people in my field) cite for two reasons: 1) to give credit where credit is due, and 2) to allow the reader to find more information on the topic when necessary (especially if we use other people's ideas without a full explanation). Reason 1 isn't as important for people who worked more than 100 years ago, but reason 2 is often important!
 
For example, the oldest citation I've ever made was from the 1800s from a guy named Hill for his idea of the "Hill sphere" (i.e. a region very close to a planet where the planet's gravitational influence is stronger than the star's gravitational influence). I cited this for Reason 2, because although experts in my field know what a Hill sphere is, the typical reader of my paper might not. However, if I talk about Gravity in general, or Maxwell's laws for electromagnetism, we do not cite. Basically, if it's something you learn in your freshman physics class, it would count as "common knowledge" in my field.
 
My advice specific to the OP is to read what other people in your field do when discussing this specific piece of information (or similar information). When you write your papers, you do a literature review anyways so you are generally reading a lot of very similar papers. Follow the norms in your field!

One suggestion I have is to edit out the epigraph and to make your first sentence something like this:
I agree wholeheartedly with Jaron Lanier, the pioneer of virtual reality, when he writes, "I've always felt that the human-centered approach to computer science [finish quotation]." One of my first experiences . . .
Maybe exchange "wholeheartedly" with something more your style, but my personal opinion is that a streamlined SOP without an epigraph would look better.

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! 

Yay, glad it's working out for you! 

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.