brown_eyed_girl

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 see these questions pop up from time to time, but can't help but wonder if they're of any use.
 
All it seems to do is make anyone outside the 23-28 age range feel out of place. Isn't there enough worry already about being able to connect with new peers?
 
One of the things I love about grad school is that it's so transient. For some amount of time, you get to be surrounded by peers who are from different backgrounds, different knowledge bases, different sets of experiences, and so forth. With that, you get a number of students who don't fit the "standard" age range, but it also means that it just doesn't matter any more.
 
What does matter is that you can learn new information quickly, keep up with a hard-working lifestyle, and build relationships with new and interesting people. I don't see how age affects any of that, nor why anyone outside the "standard" age range should feel like they have something to prove.

Also, even if you're admitted to a school, sometimes your one POI leaves and then you're left holding the bag. That's incredibly awkward once you start investing time into your doctoral research. 

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!

Oops -- I had meant to respond to that part of your question too, sorry.
 
I don't know the facts for certain but my opinion/thought would be to agree with GeoDUDE! and say that they do compete with each other. I don't think they share applications between UC schools because 1) schools (UC or not) don't share applications with each other since it's not ethical (although people may talk to each other, it's not like they are all plugged into the same system) and 2) many programs are structured differently between UC schools. For example, when I applied to UC schools, I applied to different departments at different schools because some departments/programs don't exist. In addition, I believe the UC schools I applied to didn't even use the same application system/software!
 
From experience with schools with multiple campuses, every system seems to prefer to have each campus operate as an independent university. I think part of the strength of the UC system is that each campus can have its own identity and ability to adjust things to meet their own needs while sharing some advantages of being part of a very large system (e.g. pooling resources for telescopes). However, the kind of communication for graduate admission decisions you are worried about would undermine the purpose of having independent campuses, in my opinion!

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. 

^^ Amen. It's exceedingly difficult to write that stellar dissertation if you are working extra jobs to make ends meet, if you cannot afford to travel to pursue or present your research, if your advisor has not published enough him/herself to give you sound advice about how to frame your work for a wider audience, and if you are not surrounded by a cohort of excellent, challenging young scholars to push you in creative ways. People can and do, of course, turn out great work in smaller/less famous environments, and sometimes (too often) people in the top-tier programs wind up feeling crippled by the pressure and dropping out. It's all really a matter of fit, and individual preferences. But in general there certainly is a strong correlation between institutional resources and quality/success of dissertations. 

I have registered just to make sure that prospective MA students won't be misinformed by biased and highly subjective posts.
 
As of Fall 2013, admission to Columbia MA MODA program was at 27%; 30% for the regular MA program. (http://www.columbia.edu/cu/arthistory/graduate/)
 
According to CAA guide, 390 students applied to NYU IFA last year (including PhD, MA, and Conservation) and 109 were admitted. Although admission process is different for each of their programs, the overall acceptance rate is, inevitably, at 27%.

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. 

Great advice, just do consider the resources you will need to write that brilliant dissertation. You need a great advisor/mentor, rigorous training, a supportive departmental culture with exciting faculty, encouragement to present your work at conferences where you can get feedback from others, and you need money. If your package offers funding through teaching and/or your department doesn't have a great track record with fellowships in your field (CASVA, Fulbright, etc...) it will be that much more difficult to maintain the momentum necessary for concentrated work on your dissertation. Discussion of late has emphasized job placement (as it should ultimately), but you should also consider outside fellowship placement in your calculus of whether a department is a "top ten" according to your needs. Many of the criteria listed above can be found at Ivies, but can also be found elsewhere. I was actually surprised when I looked at my own program just now, there are quite a few of us from schools we've been batting around as in the "10-20" and most are indeed among the younger faculty. I still contend that the path of an art historian now is horribly difficult with much less hope for any kind of successful outcome that just a decade ago, but if you must go be as forearmed as possible. 

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. 

@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. 

I like "Rutgers? I barely know her!" 

I like "Rutgers? I barely know her!" 

I was matched with another student of my prospective adviser at my program's open house, and he was quite candid with me -- but only when out of earshot from others in the program and professors. I'm also not sure he would have been so open over email. He didn't have anything actually negative to share about the program, but he was honest about the difficulties he had faced in adjusting to the city, having some different research interests from his adviser, etc. I was really grateful that he was straightforward with me about the issues he'd faced, and I also felt pretty confident after talking to him that the problems he had faced were specific to him and not the same ones I would have. I appreciated that he didn't sugarcoat, and it didn't scare me off at all. (Overall he was very encouraging and said he thought the program was right for him, just that it hadn't been a totally smooth transition, etc.) So, there are certainly those out there who are willing to be really honest about the challenges they are facing, but perhaps only in a more private scenario. I don't think anyone has incentives to recruit, but no one wants to be caught bad-mouthing their adviser or program and making enemies in the department. Departmental politics can be tricky. 

Sounds good, though I would be hesitant to work with someone named Dr. X.

Re: clothes. I think this varies a lot by department. I majored in Art History at a top-25 university (top 15 AH dept) and my TAs were all very fashion-forward women. TAs in other departments at my school wore jeans, but Art History TAs tended to be very well-dressed (an artsy version of business casual). 
 
I've also seen studies that professionally dressed TAs are rated more highly by students and have better learning outcomes, so I wouldn't discount the importance of personal presentation. Getting ready to enroll in a AH PhD program this fall, what to wear as a TA has been on my mind... Luckily I took a year off to work so I'm not totally at a loss for professional clothes. I'm actually looking forward to being able to dress more casually day to day - but as a petite 24-year-old woman, I also want to make sure I don't get mistaken for an undergrad and make good impressions when networking.  

I'll be 25 when I start my program so I'm not exactly in your shoes, but I am very petite and look young, and I've found that (in various professional scenarios) putting a little extra effort into dressing in a way that's polished and pulled-together makes a big difference in how you're perceived. And finding a flattering hair style and doing regular upkeep on it (for either gender) and wearing a little understated makeup (if you're female). Nice shoes and a nice jacket are very helpful in getting taken seriously/not looking 15, for either gender, even on a day when you're just wearing jeans.   

I'll be 25 when I start my program so I'm not exactly in your shoes, but I am very petite and look young, and I've found that (in various professional scenarios) putting a little extra effort into dressing in a way that's polished and pulled-together makes a big difference in how you're perceived. And finding a flattering hair style and doing regular upkeep on it (for either gender) and wearing a little understated makeup (if you're female). Nice shoes and a nice jacket are very helpful in getting taken seriously/not looking 15, for either gender, even on a day when you're just wearing jeans.   

Hmm.. let's be blunt, here. If your GRE scores were higher, you probably wouldn't be entering an MA program in art history (or, very likely, entering this field at all). Sad, but borne out by the stats. Definitely not a field for the best and brightest.