qwer7890

I should add quickly... when I say "An MA in museum studies won't cut it." I mean, an MA in museum studies won't cut it for curatorial positions at major museums. There are plenty of positions within museums that involve lots of rewarding research and engagement with art objects for which an MA in museum studies is the appropriate degree.

From queennight: "...if you can see yourself moving from town to town as a lowly adjunct (nothing wrong with that, it's just an incredibly difficult life bordering on the poverty line, but I have a lot of respect for individuals who manage to pull through it - that's pure passion) then go ahead and try for the Art History Ph.D..." As an art history PhD candidate... I'm not so sure where this impression that job prospects with a PhD in art history are all that different from job prospects with a Ph.D. in English Lit. If anything... because people with PhDs in art history often siphon off into two viable career tracks that involve rigorous research and in-depth scholarship (curatorial and academic) there are more options. From lyonessrampant: "if what you want to do is curate at a museum, you might want to do museum studies programs instead. Much better employment statistics and you could still do research on art." This isn't the case at all -- for major curatorial jobs, especially outside of contemporary art, a PhD in art history is pretty much a prerequisite these days. And even for curatorial positions in contemporary art, an MA in Art History from a rigorous program like Williams, Bard, or Tufts is necessary. An MA in museum studies won't cut it.

The sentiment you express in this post is an important one... but I would urge you to be cautious in writing publicly about your interactions with current students. Since you're only TAing for one class, and its your first one, it will be very clear to your students and others at the university which class you're talking about. And although you didn't name names, it might be clear to students in the class which students you've quoted from. FERPA laws are rather strict... but more importantly, you risk making public something a student told you in confidence--and the students, particularly the female students who you quote from, might feel publicly shamed. When in doubt, I think it's best to treat interactions with students as *highly* confidential... I know I might feel very upset or that trust had been breeched, if an instructor wrote publicly about a private meeting.

I second condivi's advice -- questions about the program's structure and resources, as well as more pragmatic questions about teaching load, etc... can mostly be answered by the department's website... don't ask the faculty member about these. Even more important than being prepared to ask the faculty member what she/he is up to next... Be very prepared to speak confidently and concisely about your own research interests and investments. The goal is to have a frank and smart discussion about the potential fit... with the hope (if it is indeed the right fit) of getting the faculty member excited about the possibility of taking you on as a student. Asking about the faculty member's current students/recent grads is also a good idea... even better, look here first: http://www.caareviews.org/dissertations (not necessarily a comprehensive list) and the department's website to get an idea of what current students are working on.

just ask the prof directly if she thinks it makes sense for her to write a letter (best case scenario, she writes you a fantastic letter, worst case scenario, she's flattered) -- so much depends on where in the ABD process she is, and what type of appointment she has at your college/university. If, for example, she hasn't yet defended her dissertation for technical reasons... but has a full-time or even tenure-track position teaching several upper-level courses and advising BA thesis projects... then yes, it probably makes sense for her to write a letter. If she's just teaching one course while she's in the middle of work on her dissertation... then no, she probably won't yet have the clout to write an impactful letter.

"I also heard from a friend (in a PhD program without a terminal MA) that classes with mixed PhD/MA students were to be avoided because the MA students bogged down the discussion..." This seems like weird advice to me -- and a huge conclusion to draw after sitting in on one class (and in my experience, both as an MA student and as a PhD student, wholly untrue). Having a range of backgrounds and experiences in the same room more often enriches classroom discussion than bogs it down...

don't sweat the GRE's too much... and don't let a low score stop you from applying to places "like Columbia or Harvard"... they matter very little to admissions committees because (as well all know) they bear so little resemblance to anything you'll actually be doing in graduate school. rather, channel your energy and anxiety into a focused and sophisticated personal statement and an exciting/original writing sample. and learn how to read german.

Seriously... although I want to say that this sort of defensiveness, insecurity and misplaced aggression has been the rare exception, rather than the rule, of my own experience in academia. I've found that most people are generous--motivated to figure out the argument you are actually trying to make, rather than reading your argument with blinders on looking only for fodder for their own arguments. @poliscar: attacking a person's character based on your reading of his/her grammar, whether on an anonymous internet chat forum or in person, is just plain mean. And I suspect that papelpicado's sentences "At first I scoffed at them. Now I scoff at me." were written that way for rhetorical effect. In terms of MAPH, I think there are really good, nuanced arguments to be had about it -- and I do think there is much merit to m-ttl/borden's sincere concerns about who the program includes/excludes. But rather than dismiss the program wholesale, or paint all non-funded MA's with a broad brush (many Tufts/Williams MA students are unfunded too), why not frame your concerns in a way that allows those "defenders" of the program to respond? They're serious concerns, and I think they deserve a serious debate. My own anecdotal experience: as a PhD student at the University of Chicago, I've seen plenty of friends of mine from MAPH over the years benefit tremendously from the program--landing spots in top-PhD programs, or really cool jobs, etc. I've also seen friends who seem to fall through the cracks--not managing to foster the sorts of valuable relationships with faculty mentors that other students are able to foster.

I think only email if you have something concrete and specific to say -- and keep it super short: "dear X, I was so glad to have the opportunity to meet you and hear your paper/session [insert a brief specific]. I want to thank you for your [comment/suggestion] which was helpful in such and such way. I'm looking forward to keeping up with your work [be specific]."

I would hold off on declining offers until you've *formally* accepted an offer elsewhere. Then yes... totally a good idea to contact your POIs elsewhere.... you can say something to the effect of: "I'm writing to let you know that I've accepted an offer for admission at X school. It was a really tough decision because your program is great is XYZ ways. I look forward to keeping up with your scholarship (note specifics if you know s/he has a book or article forthcoming) and I hope our paths cross in the future..." it's a small art history world... even smaller when you're talking people in your subfield... so definitely good to keep all doors open.

without a doubt -- wait until you've heard back from the school before reaching out to current students. unless you're already friends with them, emailing current students while decisions are pending (particularly at this late stage) is really bad form for several reasons, (a) it might come off like you're fishing for information, and indeed, oftentimes departments make known internally who they've accepted weeks before sending out official rejections to everyone else, and (b.) you might very well be wasting someone's time having said that, once you're in the process of making a decision with acceptances in hand, by all means do reach out to current students. but i'd recommend asking more specific and directed questions, rather than asking a student to give you his/her general impressions of the department.

As long as you have a compelling and rigorous personal statement and writing sample, I think you should be a contender... I can't imagine an admissions committee writing off a strong candidate just because he/she has taken a different/longer route through college. But, having said that, it's probably important that you vet your writing sample and personal statement through the advisors you've sought out outside your "not exactly academically rigorous" school... to make sure that you're hitting all the right notes. Good luck!!

i find that the process of finding faculty to support one's work can take generally about 198 years.

monoskop.org/log/ and aaaaaarg.org -- but I have to say, oftentimes even when I am able to get my hands on a PDF, especially if it's important for my thinking, I usually can't resist buying the book too... so at the end of the day, it's not really a money saver...

in regard to this part of your post: "I also worked a lot of smaller jobs, retail and odd things, just to earn money, should I mention these in my CV as well?" no. make your CV work for you, use it to let your museum/gallery/art history work experience shine (since that doesn't really come up elsewhere in the application...) "And I have had fiction and poetry (which I actually like!) published, but only in online magazines, although relatively good ones. Should I mention these as well?" yeah, why not... particularly if its work that you're proud of. programs are looking for creative thinkers.

Anyone who's paying attention to the realities of the academic job market shouldn't be discouraging anyone from a curatorial trajectory... and it's my impression that many graduate programs (top, bottom, middle, whatever...) recognize this and are adjusting accordingly. The Mellon Foundation has been giving generous and ongoing grants to various graduate programs throughout the country for object-focused initiatives, which require close partnership with a museum: (http://www.mellon.org/grant_programs/programs/museums) Which is to say, don't assume that a "top" program won't be interested in your curatorial ambitions... particularly if you write into your application novel ways of thinking the relationship between "scholarship" and "curating"... or how scholars can/should use objects in teaching, writing, researching

since the published rankings are basically useless for art history -- and much ranking is based on "reputation" anyways... I thought it might be useful to do an informal, crowdsourced gradcafe ranking... please do include any commentary/caveats/useful info on specialization, etc... i'll start: yale,uchicago, berkeley, harvard, princeton, IFA, northwestern, stanford, michigan, cuny i'm most tuned in to modern/contemporary, so i'd say my list reflects that bias.

Also, stephd016 - I wouldn't rule out throwing my hat into the ring for Williams for an MA - though they don't have a reputation for theory/contemporary art, they're actually quite strong in these areas... with ties to MASS MoCA, and the option of working closely with Ondine Chavoya and now Darby English -- it could be a very conducive environment.

This isn't accurate, FYI. Chicago has Matthew Jesse Jackson and Christine Mehring (and until very recently, Darby English), who advise students in contemporary fields. Though the department recently lost Darby English to the Clark, they're sure to replace him with someone very strong in the very near future. Additionally, there is productive cross pollination with Cinema Media Studies as well as with the English department (WJT and Lauren Berlant, in particular).