Sparky

Well, of course I'm dying to. Notre Dame, for medieval studies. (I am sorry for yesterday's obfuscation--I had very legitimate concerns about a person I know in meatspace, who, I found out yesterday, has given up reading TGC for Lent). Major congratulations to Febronia on Yale and Postbib on Iliff, and the weird congrats/good-luck to the SMU and Toronto waitlistees! (I am sure I am missing someone; congrats to you as well!) Satori, my condolences. This is a really gross year, admissions-wise. Are there any funded M* programs whose deadlines haven't passed yet? Or maybe a yearlong intensive language program that could help your application for next time? Good luck to everyone waiting on Drew! That is a terrific program; I hope it works out.

And I'm in for straight-up medieval studies. My Holy Grail as well! LOL, we probably met at the interview marathon. So I presume I will be seeing you in South Bend in the summer or fall?

The best rejection letter, which I will admit I have only heard about by reputation (but from multiple sources, so I'm inclined to believe them), was apparently Duke Religion from a few years ago. Instead of the traditional "Thank you for applying..." the letter started off something along the lines of, "As you know, the Department of Religion at Duke is one of the top programs in the country..."

I had an interview marathon last week, Wed-Sat, although Saturday stuff was very informal (nothing scheduled on campus; saw no faculty). The head of the program told us the admissions committee would meet Sunday afternoon and they would let us know the results today. Good news for me, happily. So I guess that would be 2-3 days, depending on how you count Saturday.

Wow. I just got a really stunning acceptance from my top choice/dream/didn't think I had a shot/listed the application fee in my budget as "set money on fire and watch it turn pretty colors" program. I am floored, honored, and soooooo beyond excited. (It is not a religion/theology/dept, so please none of you panic--none of the regular posters on the Religion board would have applied to this program, I 99.5% guarantee you--but I don't want to say where so as not to be the bearer of bad tidings for people on some of the other boards here).

Lily, one other thing that an MA will give you time/space to do is work on languages. I don't know what your language training is like right now, but a good chunk of the secondary scholarship on the ancient Near East is in German and (to a lesser extent, maybe) French, so having 2 years to add those to your CV or improve them if you've got 'em is always good. And that's not to mention primary research languages! (Yikes, what have you got there, Akkadian? Sumerian? Get as many as possible.) Language is a big reason MAs are common for people applying to PhD programs in medieval history and lit, and one of the reasons it's pretty much an unspoken rule that religion/theology PhD programs require an M* degree even if they say they accept applicants directly out of undergrad. (I know those aren't your fields, but a similar principle is at work, I think).

I am currently an MA student, but my first year in the program I took all the same intro classes as the first-year Ph.D students. Of them, the ones who seemed most knowledgable/best prepared had M* degrees from Duke Div or Asbury.

I don't think next year is going to be any better, especially if those of us who get no offers/only unfunded offers (my current situation--and the school knows I can't accept an offer that doesn't include health insurance, so this is basically a polite rejection) apply again in the fall. I got an e-mail a few days ago from my POI at my tied-for-top choice program, a religion dept so no worries on any of your part, that my application was in the 'admit' pile but she just found out she has to 'adopt' the current grad students of an unexpectedly-retiring professor. So, a toast to fall 2011 admissions, right?! /is not bitter, not at all Good luck, UCLA people!

/sigh E-mail from POI at tied-for-top choice: My application was in the 'admit' pile, but she has to adopt the current students of an unexpectedly-retiring professor. If recent trajectories continue, it looks like I may be coming back for round 2 next fall, which is anguishing. (SLU is a fantastic program, but it is an atrocious match for me, personally, especially if the incoming class is mostly patristics-focused). On a happier note, GOOD LUCK and Godspeed to Febronia, phd_aspirant, and anyone else interviewing at Notre Dame theology this week!

Even if you don't get funding initially, the department is really, really good at getting money for people once they've started. Pretty much everyone has aid by the second year, if not the second semester.

It's about a 50/50 Cath/Prot mix right now, with the numbers balancing out slightly different depending on time period (e.g. modern American has a lot of Protestant students working on Holiness/Pentecostalism topics right now). I think patristics is an even split, at least with the last few entering cohorts.

SLU has notified the people who have been accepted w/offers of funding. The e-mail has not yet gone out to people being offered admission but waitlisted for funding. The department is really, really good at getting money for anyone who does not get it initially once they are in the program.

I commiserate...lack of MA funding is the reason I am not at Marquette right now. :/ But congratulations anyway! Are you planning to focus more on historical theo or Scripture (or are you an "I like it ALL" person)? And yay to mike and johndiligent as well! Consider it a GradCafe collective in-your-face to the carnage of Duke.

You have one in your icon...perhaps future hiring committees will take that into account?

In the humanities, you are generally supposed to do the following in your SOP (among other things): 1. State a general direction of research 2. Show you know what is going on in current scholarship about that general direction of research 3. Say why you want to attend that particular program If I'm reading your post correctly, what you're talking about is the second one--you mentioned particular scholars/researchers whose work particularly inspires you and has guided your research, right? If so--not a problem; in fact, advisable. Although it's probably better if you did the third as well.

Or maybe Whitehouse? I'm not 100% on board with his version of ritual theory, for various reasons, but a modified version of it could provide a really cool way to look at the early Church. I'm interdisciplinary as well, but crossing over into history and literature instead of sociology. And maybe a tinge of philosophy from time to time, but I think we all do that to some extent. I'm applying to a veritable buffet of department titles.

Three words: air guitar contest.

We're medievalists. We're ALL five hundred years too late. Is Arthurian lit your focus?

Nah, b/c while purgatory sucks by all accounts (except maybe Catherine of Genoa's*), you necessarily get into heaven at *some* point. * Middle Ages = RELEVANT! For ONCE! Eat it, modern era!

Although couldn't that mean they are planning to do the "accept only the number of people for whom we have spots, then wait to see who fills them" bit? (This is somewhat common in theology, but I don't know about history). (Disclaimer: totally idle speculation on my part; I have no stake in Yale results and have NO special knowledge of any kind).

Most useful: Statistics. Which should be blatantly, bloodily, disastrously obvious to everyone who has been through the results search a zillion times to calculate exactly what day the odds are greatest you will hear from a particular program, depending on date or day of the week (adjusting for year) and based on whether the program sends out acceptances and rejections on the same day, or if it accepts in waves, or-- Oh, wait. You said, most useful to society...

Premodern = late antiquity + medieval; sometimes just medieval. When applied to non-Western societies, often refers to level of technological development, not necessarily time period. Another way to put it: "not ancient and not modern" "Early modern" is just a way to say "We can't talk about the Renaissance if it happened at different times in different countries in different subjects." And 'Renaissance' is very Eurocentric...especially for a time when shit was going down in other parts of the world, if you'll pardon my language. Calling that whole era the Renaissance effectively erases everything that was going on in the Americas, Africa, Asia/Oceania, and with non-elite Europeans. </soapbox> ~ Meanwhile, I am majorly jealous of all you English lit medievalists who can apply to Indiana's Eng department. If I were even *remotely* qualified to study Eng lit...alas. ETA: speelchek

Heh. I am an MA student applying for Ph.Ds, including continuing in the same program. And naturally, two of my LOR writers are on the admissions committee at my school this year. So I feel your pain. In addition, it's pretty obvious from my list that Current School is not my top choice (I am applying to 2 programs that are snowball's chance in hell for even the ideal applicant...so, yeah). I don't have any results yet, but I don't plan on telling anyone at my school--anyone--any news until I have the admissions decision from Current School as well. P.S. A random note, career-wise: if you are looking at a career in academia, colleges are sometimes leery of job candidates whose undergrad and Ph.Ds are from the same university. Something about preferring a 'diversity of experiences' or some such.

Worse: you're paying $12 to hear one-third of the results of the test. If you take the computerized version, you get your verbal and quant scores right away. I bet pretty soon they'll offer the option to see your verbal and quant scores on the day of the test for an extra $12...each.

1. Yes, you have to send the transcript. 2. Applications have a space where you can explain anything problematic or unusual in your record--gap years, medical withdrawals, a semester of D's due to a non-school-related catastrophe, etc. It's a good idea to keep it *out* of your SOP--generally, you don't want negative stuff in there, unless you're trying to pull off an 'overcoming obstacles' story. 3. If you go into "medical reasons," try to play it up in such a way that you are assuring them that it will never again be a problem (even if it might very well be a problem...yeah, I had fun with that one). Short and sweet is critical.