Sparky

{{gentle hug}} I had a rough first semester of my MA and downright horrible first year of my PhD. Here I am back for more. So the good news is, it does get better, it really does. The beginning sucks, no matter what. (To be clear: the second semester of my PhD was bad not in and of itself but b/c it was basically a 'hangover' from the first semester.) Feeling alone *is* the worst part of it. There is very much a culture of "pretending everything is hunky dory" in academia, even though nearly everyone is falling apart underneath the facade, at least/especially the first year. Is there a grad student support group run through your counseling center? If there is, GO. I cannot recommend it highly enough. (I had a scheduling conflict first semester last year and couldn't go. But I am convinced they are the sole reason I made it through the spring. Well, them, and long protracted phone conversations with, yes, my mother.) At least at my school, it's not group therapy in the traditional sense--which I've done for a different issue and have actually found quite counterproductive--it's basically grad students in all sorts of programs sitting around and venting. Of course it feels AMAZING to get everything off your chest IN PERSON, i.e. not just on the phone , and sometimes other people will have really good advice for you (especially the older more experienced students...I am eternally in their debt). But the absolute biggest value is that it completely beats you over the head with the giant Baseball Bat of You Are Not Alone. 'Cause let me tell you, I was convinced that I was the only person in my department at my university in graduate school who took an incomplete in a class, still couldn't finish the paper, nearly failed out of the program, cried every night, was homesick, loved what she did so much it hurts and would die if she had to give it up but didn't know if she could bear how crappy other stuff was, etc. (And keep in mind I had already been through First Year Blues with my MA! /sigh.) Grad student support group saved me. As far as teaching goes--yeah, the beginning sucks. (The beginning of any job sucks.) But I guarantee you that your students aren't nearly as hard on you as you are on yourself. As for friends--I finished the first entire year with basically no friends. It is three weeks into year two and I am rich in developing friendships, even if we don't have time to hang out beyond an hour for coffee after office hours. (Also, if you need a dose of "you are not alone" right now, search this forum for "depression." You'll find several threads from last fall consisting of multiple people, including me, basically talking about how stressed and sad we are and how much grad school sucks and everyone says it's going to get better and why can't it just get better now. I was a stunning exemplar of maturity last fall, yes, yes I was. )

Marquette is stingy with money. Definitely look into Yale Div and the GTU (Berkeley consortium) as well. The GTU offered me a decent aid package for a master's, and they've got a broad range of programs and courses. Probably a little easier to get into than ND/Harvard/Duke, too. For Duke, if funding is an issue, you'll have a better shot applying to the MDiv (3 years, pastoral focus) instead of the MTS, as they fund more of their MDiv students. It's quite common for religion PhD students to come in with an MDiv as their master's degree (or one of their master's degrees)--that's why you'll see me use the expression "M*". Does Union Seminary have a master's program? What about Drew? (Just thinking about the faculty there; it seems like that would be up your alley). I'm not really sure how to judge your background. I do know that your list is pretty much the most competitive religion master's depts out there. On the other hand, M* applicants in religion tend to have colorful pasts! (At the school where I did my MA, one of the PhD students had an MS in math and had been teaching high school/adjuncting college for ten years! I majored in poli sci and then worked as a short order cook. You can see why this did not last.) I suspect that a lot of it will come down to your SOP and writing sample, maybe LORs. (I really don't have much of a sense of how religion M* programs make admissions decisions. If I were on an admissions committee and received my own application of yesteryear, I would almost certainly reject it, but I got in everywhere I applied, so...)

Is that really the only RCIA class being offered in your diocese this year?

How much Russian is "one semester"? Are we talking Russian 101, or a summer intensive class that took you from zero to hero? (nb is that possible with Russian? I have no clue). Did you learn Czech, Russian, or heck, even German to a degree of reading proficiency when you were abroad? Do you have reading-proficient German or French? With one semester of one language, you will not be competitive for comp lit PhD admissions. It will be a severe disadvantage for modern Euro PhD admissions. That's just getting in, though. How committed are you to doing a PhD? (That's a genuine question--I can't get a read on it from your post.) Why do you want the degree? You said you don't feel intellectually challenged right now; in all honesty, that's an excuse, not a reason, to do a 7+ year degree with crappy job prospects at the end. (I'm don't mean to be offensive--I totally get it if you have actual reasons but are just giving the excuse for privacy or whatever; I'm sorry, I can't tell). Do you want to be an archivist? Museum work? Teach? Okay, do you want to teach history? English? Russian? Musicology? Seriously--if you haven't even picked a field yet, do an MA. It will give you time to figure out whether history (or whatever) is the right fit for you, and it will give you the time to learn at least one language to a research-worthy extent. Yes, with a killer writing sample, SOP and LORs, plus a generous slathering of good fortune, anything is technically possible. But in your case, I honestly think you would benefit a *ton* from an MA. There are a handful of funded programs out there. Look especially at schools that offer an MA but have no PhD program. You will likely get closer attention from the faculty--although my MA is from a school with a much larger PhD program and I have no complaints; it was an amazing experience--and are more likely to wind up with a TAship or RAship (i.e. money).

I'm uneducated on this subject from the standpoint of Literature, but I just feel the need to say is hilarious.

Hm, is Americone Dream really that great, or does this have something to do with a certain deity of truthiness? I hail from the land of frozen custard, which basically means start with vanilla and make your own. I go through ruts, but old classic favorites of mine are vanilla-pineapple, strawberry-chocolate chip...and absolutely NOTHING with banana. That's THE fastest way to spoil a perfectly good concrete. It's not the same by any means, but now that I'm stuck in a land that frozen custard forgot (and on a stipend that is not yuppie fro-yo price friendly), I have developed an unsurpassed love for McDonald's soft serve.

Uh, I'm pretty sure U.S. schools would still view that as a transfer/grass is always greener bid. Also, what do you mean by "pass the qualifying"? You mean when you pass comprehensive exams, or when you finish your dissertation and get the degree? (Do you know how U.S. PhD programs are structured?) Are you seriously proposing that you would stop your coursework in HK, do U.S. coursework, pass comps, then go back to HK while you write your dissertation? Or are you suggesting that you finish off the U.S. degree, get your PhD, then say, "No thanks, I don't want to do anything with it, I'm going to go back and be a student somewhere else." (See TMP's previous post for exactly what U.S. schools think of that.) Besides that, would your current program really allow that? I can't think of a single U.S. school that would let a student ditch out in the middle of the program to do a degree somewhere else but still hold the spot. Do you know how long a history PhD in the U.S. usually takes? Would your credits/all the work you've done in your current program expire? Would you still have a spot in your program? And finally--most importantly--WHY?! Why on Earth would you ever do that? If the HK degree will get you where you want to go, pursue it. If you need a U.S. degree for what you want to do, why would you go back and finish the one in HK? If it won't do what you want it to do for you, put together a compelling case for a U.S. school to look beyond the fact that you're transferring. If you told us why, exactly, you want to do a degree in the U.S., maybe we could be of more help...

To tack onto TMP's point #1: the worry, in this case, would be that if you just randomly left one program to go to another (in other words, without a compelling reason like "my advisor left and there is no one here anymore who studies my geographical area OR my time period of interest"), what would be stopping you from doing the same thing to the new program? The grass is, after all, always greener on the other side...

Okay, I gotta ask, where are all the sci-fi fans? There are enough medievalists and modern lit people here that there must be a *couple* more of you out there, right? Anyone else excited for the new Neal Stephenson and Vernor Vinge books this fall? I am so excited they are both happening this year, when I can pretend I have time to read non-school things, instead of next year when I'll be reading for comps.

It would depend on whether you're a TA or RA, what classes you're TAing, whether you're auditing any classes to make up deficiencies or for the heck of it (I don't know how common this is in math), and your department. Also meetings with professors pop up randomly. Just given the way scheduling generally works in colleges, it's probably more likely you'd be TAing one or more MWF or TR classes, so you might not be able to count on the dream "Wednesday is my Friday!" schedule. Certainly there are days when you likely won't *have* to be on campus. Heck, I'm still in coursework and there are days I manage to avoid it. But it's best not to *plan* on it being a regular thing.

1. Are there any journal articles from non-sub-sub-subfield, superspecialized journals that address the book? How much do those articles contextualize it/how much plot do they provide? That might be one useful guide. But as you say--if it's not 200% necessary, cut it. Be merciless. You don't want loose writing. 2. You know, I'm not sure how I feel about your porn paper being the secondary sample. It would almost feel to me like, "Oh, ze's just trying to be Controversial ™ and cool." But that's *totally* just my personal opinion, and likely an arrogant one at that. Assuming it's a brilliant paper, I would be impressed as hell by an applicant who had the audacity to send that as the only writing sample, I think. Also, for me, would be whether or not the paper addresses what is at stake in calling the novel porn or not. Show that you know what you're doing, that you know the fire you're playing with and aren't doing it to make people mad but b/c it reflects in some important way on P or Q. Or something. Given the English profs I know, I think most of them would likely give you a fair shake. And if they wouldn't--would you honestly be able to be happy in that program? I know it's really easy to focus on "I must get in somewhere! I must!" Ohhh do I remember. But think about whether you'll be happy once you're there. Sometimes beggars need to be choosers. My own SOP was risky. But I knew that any school who rejected me based on it (well, based on the first two lines, in fact) was not a program I wanted to attend...

Indeed, there are many ways to "love Jesus." That's why the OP asked the question bluntly in the post title--ever hear of a hook?--but then clarified in the post itself. While it is true that evangelical Christianity in the U.S. has a pervasive, even dominant sexist and homophobic streak, it is equally true that (1) this is not true of all evangelicals, and (2) evangelicals by no means have a monopoly on misogyny and homophobia within Christianity, the academy, or American culture! (FFS.)

...Saying you're interested in using feminist theory to look at XYZ? Mentioning important feminist art historians as scholars by whose work you've been particularly influenced? "My summers of working with [pro-choice nonprofit] have cultivated an interest in art as propaganda by the two sides in the U.S. abortion debate"? "I plan to explore portrayals of gender, race and dis/ability in calendars sold by charitable organizations"? If your approach is that feminism* is part of your research, include it in your SOP as a part of your research. It's not bad to say "I am a feminist" in the sense that it would be bad to say "I am a Nazi" (sorry for the Godwin's Law violation), it's just that it's unprofessional. The SOP is about you as a scholar. Keep the focus there. * I have gotten the vague, intangible, and hopefully wrong impression that the older feminist scholars I, personally, know do not appreciate the Third/Fourth/whatever Wave terminology "my feminism"--even as they speak of "feminisms" and strive dearly to avoid being labeled a "white liberal feminist." So I'd be wary about using that. While I'm on board with the term, it's also a little less scholarly--after all, your point is that you will be using Established Theory ™ as a lens, not wildly inventing whatever you want. ~ETA for a critical plural. Oops.~

History seems to be the reading-heaviest discipline at my school, that's for sure! My history workload has been roughly comparable to what StrangeLight described upthread. As for buying all the books--heavens, no. If I can tell something is going to be critically important to my research, I'll usually spring for it; also often If I think it will end up on my comps list and I can find a cheap, unmarked (that's key) copy on Abebooks/Amazon Marketplace. Otherwise I use ILL or take advantage of copies on reserve in the library (this was done only rarely at my MA school, but is standard practice here). People here tend to diverge wildly in whether or not they straight-up buy every book. I see a lot of ILL slipcovers, but also a lot of barely-creased paperbacks.

Yup--money being an important reason I *didn't* do a separate program. HOWEVER. I would argue that the opportunity to learn Latin/Greek without other coursework is a gift. Beyond a gift. It's one thing to build up your Latin at the normal pace of the undergrad track while doing regular undergrad work. It is an entirely different universe of pain to go from zero to hero (and hate to break it to you, but after the summer intensive course you will likely have moved from the negatives to zero) over the course of a semester or even year while also trying to do full-time graduate work. Note the "trying to do." It's one thing to need Latin for a subfield where most sources have been translated, where you're mostly just checking up to make sure the published translations are accurate. For that, I can see where a summer course plus working intensively with a tutor might suffice. (That's how I got through the proficiency test at my MA school, in fact, so I'm guessing it does suffice for a lot of people in that situation). You need an entirely different level of knowledge for a Latin-based subfield like Western classical/early medieval.

I think rising_star was talking about articles for independent research/keeping up with your field, not required reading for classes. As for required readings, I haven't had any professors actually give out printed handouts. A couple have put articles on e-reserve. More likely there are books on reserve in the library of which we have to read all or part. In general, people in my classes have established a class e-mail list in which a few of people per week scan most of the readings and e-mail them to everyone else. I've also had a couple of classes where the assigned reading was limited to primary texts, with the understanding that we would all be reading whatever secondary works were necessary to understand and contextualize the context. This includes finding out what those articles are. A lot of the frustration with having to speed read/skim is more like this: graduate school is this amazing time when you discover all this stuff that you REALLY REALLY REALLY want to read, but you just don't have time. Having to speed read is a tragedy. Sure, in many cases you can "get away with it," insofar as most classes (in the humanities, at least) don't have quizzes/tests and you might not be prepping that field for comps--but that's a completely upside down and backwards way to think about it.

(Side note: Did you get my PM?) You would probably be okay applying to standalone MA programs without Latin. For PhD programs, however, no Latin (assuming that will be your primary research language; if you're looking at the Greek East, substitute "Greek" for all occurrences of "Latin") is a deal-killer. I mean this in terms both of admissions and in terms of your ability to handle the work when you are in the program. Self study and the introductory summer course will not be enough for PhD work. Even if you can somehow sneak in under the admissions radar. You will not be able to keep up in class; you will not be able to do the research. Also note that PhD adcoms are rightly suspicious of "rigorous self-study" and will probably ignore it on your application unless you do something like sit for the Latin SAT II test or independently take Toronto's proficiency exam--at least, that's how my current dept suggests for people without formal Latin coursework to prove their ability--because it does not work. Honestly, I wouldn't even mention the self-study bit in your SOP. It's kind of laughable. But you could say something like how you're using the MA to prepare for PhD work, and are looking forward to the program as an opportunity to get your Latin into research shape (or some such). It's pretty common for medievalists, at least, who lack Latin from undergrad to pick it up during a master's degree with a goal in mind of applying for PhDs. One other option to consider is a separate post-bacc classics program. I think Penn probably has the most well-known one. It's basically just a year of Latin and (I think) Greek, but you really really learn your languages. (I should have done this.)

...Depression is such a monster. What have you done since undergrad that is CV-able? Have you worked in Internet media, the tech industry, etc.? Taught ESL? Volunteered to teach computer classes at a local senior center? Most people I know who've overcome a lousy undergrad GPA are those who apply with a very solid chunk of real-world experience in something related to their target field. "Transferring" grad programs is not like transferring undergrad. Most grad schools don't accept much--if any--credit from previous schools. Basically, you'd be starting over. You'd also have to explain to New School, in your application, why you want to "transfer." Furthermore, if it's only a two-year MA, how are you going to build up the necessary relationships with professors you'd need for LORs? Either you'd be applying right away, or else it wouldn't be a transfer, you'd have graduated. (Note: I'm assuming a traditional 2-year full-time schedule here. If you're only a part-time student, YMMV). If your eventual goal is a PhD, make sure you find out the PhD placement rates of the MA programs to which you apply (and don't bank on "transferring"). Everyone has their story of the long-shot from U of Northwest Podunk who got into the PhD at Harvard; we all know this story because it is the exception. I guess my advice is: in this crappy economy, go get a job, work for a few years, then see if grad school still feels right. I'm assuming your LORs (letters of recommendation) will reflect, or have to talk around, your stated undergraduate years' lack of ambition and propensity for excuses. That is not going to be helpful. If you do follow the above advice to take a couple of years, maybe try dipping a toe back in with one or two classes, at either the undergrad or grad level. Do a phenomenal job, get yourself used to school work, and get an LOR out of the deal that says, "Even though ze, as a non-degree seeking student, was required to register as an undergraduate, postmanreader worked harder than any of the graduate students in hir XYZ class." I suspect something like that combined with a few years of relevant experience could make up for the low GPA. Good luck!

Michelle, I'm going to PM you in a sec, but I wanted to suggest a couple of quick things: 1. Instead of looking at this as a huge "I must do everything before I can do anything," why not break it down into more manageable chunks? I totally understand not wanting to talk to the DGS until you've rolled over the incompletes. Is there any way you could get just *one* of those papers finished very soon? Get that done, turned in, and then meet with the DGS about getting back on track with the rest? That way you have visible progress, but it's not some massive looming obstacle. 2. I do better face-to-face than over e-mail--I don't like having to wait for the other person's reaction; I don't like not being able to judge off facial expressions and (especially) body language. With the semester starting, profs will be holding office hours, maybe you could drop in? (Or maybe you're more comfortable over e-mail, in which case, ignore this entire paragraph. ) 3. I know you said you had a yucky experience in therapy; I hope you would consider trying again with either a different therapist or with group therapy. As you observed, just being able to be open and honest about the crap that you're going through with respect to school made you feel a lot better. This is basically the raison d'etre of the grad student support group that my school's counseling center runs; I strongly suspect most unis have a similar group. Please at least check into it? The group here, in all honesty, is probably the sole reason I made it through last spring. 4. You're not me so I'm not sure this will make you feel better, but FWIW, I doubt that your profs are going to think worse of you for handing in late papers. If anything, don't you think they'll be impressed that you were able to put all that sh*t behind you and get the work done? I'm actually taking a class this semester with the prof in whose class I had to take an incomplete last year, and he's basically just thrilled to see me back and in a happier place. (BIG sigh of relief on my part!) So, sample size equals 1 and all, but...yeah.

You need to meet with your DGS. A lot of the answers to your questions and worries will depend on the policies of your particular university and department, and she's the one who would know. I can tell you that at my school, time spent on official leave would not count against you in terms of 'advancing towards candidacy' time limits. On the other hand, we have very strict limitations on how long you have to finish off an incomplete before the I turns to a permanent F. As for handing in a whole bunch of work and reminding the department that you've been delinquent: in all honesty, this is throwing up huge red flags for me that shout EXCUSE rather than 'legitimate reason.' It's precisely the kind of self-defeating non-logic that makes perfect sense from the inside and makes everyone else facepalm mightily. Maybe your situation is different, but isn't this something that you would take care of with individual professors? I took one incomplete the first semester of my PhD, and I'm not sure even the DGS ever had any idea. Meet with each individual professor. Find out what you have to do to finish the work for the course. Have them give you a deadline. Get the work done. If you do this (meet w/the profs, I mean) *before* you meet with the DGS, it would probably make you look more serious about catching up. Have you worked with a therapist or counselor on campus? There's probably someone who specializes in grad student issues and could give you further insight. It honestly seems like you're dealing with a lot of depression/anxiety issues that are perhaps more severe than many but very similar in type. And, of course, e-mail your adviser. If you want to get started on your diss prospectus, you need to do this. On the other hand, if your relationship with your adviser isn't working out so well, is there someone else you might work with? Someone who could kick your ass a little more? It seems like you might need that if you ever want to finish. You can't continue to "slip by." You've been trying that. It hasn't worked. You need to reach out to your department.

(I'm not in art history, but do medieval in a discipline that fetishizes language training) For an MA-only program, I doubt it will hurt at all. A lot of people, in fact, use MA work as a time to acquire the primary research language they lack. (I did! Zero Latin experience before I started my master's). You do have languages for secondary scholarship, which will be a bonus. The little exposure I have to scholarship on Byz art suggests that the French will be more useful than the German, FWIW, but it's awesome that you have both already! I'm not that familiar with the language requirements of art history programs themselves, so I don't know whether you'd likely be required to take Greek once you're there. If, however, you're contemplating a PhD at some point down the road, it would be a great time to get cracking on the dead language, maybe an intensive summer class or something. I took a Byzantine art class last spring! So not my area, but *so* fascinating. (Definitely made me wish I knew Greek!) I'm kind of jealous.

I love class discussion. Always have. Anybody who thinks I am a lead-brained lunkard for spouting the occasional sentence of gibberish that barely passes as coherent English is not a person whose opinion I care about. Anybody who thinks I am a huge dork for asking a lot of questions and having the occasional good idea is also not a person whose opinion I care about.

3.25 is lower than most applicants you'll see post on TGC; it is not disqualifying for a master's program. If you do well at the MA level, you're far enough removed from bachelor's work that it won't matter. If it were a 1.25, I could see room for concern. Unfortunately, you're quite right. But it's not really any better for Europeanists. If you decide to pursue this, understand that only something like 1/6 of people who enter humanities PhD programs end up as tenured professors--a number that will most likely continue to fall. Do it because you love it. There really isn't another reason.

This is true, but remember that the people who will have PhDs from Harvard and Berkeley are facing exactly the same lousy job market and getting exactly that same advice. Do you really want to bet your future on the odds that the top 25 programs will spend five years accepting only slackers who don't publish, present, or seek out teaching fellowships? Where things get interesting, IMHO, is the question of "top-ranked program with well-known advisor" versus "lower (say, 25-50esque, and understand that I'm not referring to any set of rankings but just general impressions of what's successful versus not) ranked program with ZOMGSUPERSTAR advisor."

IIRC, most application forms ask you to give your GPA separately for each school you've attended. You'll be able to show how you've improved since transferring. That might also be something to mention in your SOP. Just from what you said, it seems like you are way ahead, not behind, many applicants regardless of their background! You actually have a well-articulated area of research interest, a story of how you got there, and a record of improvement. I bet your SOP is pretty great.