blukorea
-
Posts
18 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by blukorea
-
-
I second on the Vanderbilt MA, and there are also Washington University in St. Louis and University of Arizona. These terminal MA programs are quite competitive, both from what I hear and what I went through myself!
When I was a post-bacc some of my classmates got funded offers from Kansas and Minnesota, so consider these programs as well.
The main advantage of having an MA instead of post-bacc is that, in my opinion, you get to familiarize yourself with the scholarship by immersing yourself in a highly focused academic environment. Looking back as a third year grad student, I really had no clue what I wrote in my personal statement. Focusing on a specialized field for a couple years, you will get a sense of what sorts of ideas sell and are in trend, in addition to exploring your interests more in depth. Such will make a tangible impact on your PhD admissions; and you are right to aim high: I'd only want to go to a top program in an uncertain economy like this.
If you already have a clear idea of what you want to write your PhD dissertation on, then I'd assume that you have no reason to go through an MA program, unless you have financial constraints.
-
From my experience, post-bac programs don't really 'reject' applicants so I'd say that your stats are an overkill. You might even want to apply to some funded MA programs, which will give you the same (or better) credentials at no cost, and see what happens.
-
I improved my scores the second time around by 60 pts total (40 pts in Verbal and 20 pts in Math). I was pretty certain that even more drastic improvements were possible. If you are confident about it, take it again by all means.
-
Some great suggestions by kemet and ogulia...
If you are interested in the historical aspect of things, you should absolutely consider the programs hosted in History departments rather than Classics. There are three ways to pursue ancient history in the US: in Classics departments, in History departments, and in specialized ancient history programs. It all depends on the program, but this is what I find to be the general trend: the Classics track will focus more on languages, History track on the historical methodology, and the specialized ones on material culture and ancillary disciplines (epigraphy, papyrology, etc).
I myself am pursuing a degree on ancient history in a History department, and I can testify that there is a considerable amount of interaction with pre-modernists, modernists, Americanists, etc. I find myself engaging more with theory and social science approaches than on language and material culture, in large part by virtue of my affiliation.
For example, at Berkeley you can pursue ancient history through AHMA or through the History department. The History departments with reputable ancient history programs that come to my mind are Yale, Berkeley, Columbia, UVA, WashU, and UNC, in no particular order.
Hope this helps!
-
Oh I actually missed your statement of interest. If you are interested in Late Antiquity and religion, definitely consider Medieval Studies and Religious Studies programs. And consider also applying to Cornell: they have several good historians of Late Antiquity.
-
5/4 semesters of ancient languages do not sound enough to compete in top Classics programs. It is expected that Classics applicants have at least 6/6; they often have more. You may find more success applying to History programs.
Many specialized Ancient History programs, such as Berkeley's AHMA and Chicago's PAMW, have a strong focus on material culture and you will not find much success with zero experience in excavation.
Some programs that may suit your circumstances: Berkeley, UVA, UCLA, Duke, UC Santa Barbara, all History departments.
With economy being in such a wretched condition, I would say forget grad school unless you get a funded admission from a reputable program. A PhD in humanities nowadays is really not worth the time and effort.
-
The Penn Post-bac program will not transform you into a top applicant. It is strictly an intensive language program, for the students who need some more semesters of Greek and Latin. Students who advance to top PhD programs already enter the Post-bac with stellar qualifications; there are students, on the other hand, who drop out and fail to get any funded admissions.
From the University's perspective, the program transfers excess resources in the department (since only few students major in Classics as undergraduates) and makes a profitable use of them. It is, to be direct, a profit-driven program (although many will find it cheaper than than some other schools that offer it). Because of this, I would presume, the program often finds itself admitting more students than those whom they reject.
That said, the post-bac director at Penn is fantastic and it is fun to live at Philly for a year, so I hope you will all enjoy the experience!
-
I don't have an insider's perspective from CUNY, so I hope you don't mind my comment: it is probably a bad idea to commit yourself to a program with no funding guarantees in this economy. I can't help but to suspect that CUNY, too, is hurting in terms of finances and its administrators (perhaps the DGS in question included) are wanting to recruit as many students as possible who will pay their tuition through the program. Please be super wary!
In any case, it is a horrible idea to go in debt to do a humanities PhD, because the degree will by no means guarantee you a job when you get out and, even if you do land on a position, the salary won't be much (recall the infamous Chronicles article). I would personally try to get a temporary job and try again this fall, dramatically improving your SOP and writing sample. If you are willing to go to Camden or New Haven, there are certainly more schools which you can apply for?
-
I generally agree with what everyone said so far. When I was applying, my UG mentors also advised me to look for admissions from PhD programs alone. I later on regretted not having applied to terminal master's programs in which they offer some TAships. My impression as a second year grad student so far has been that students with MA degrees normally do better in PhD admissions and also when they actually arrive.
This does not mean I should go complaining to my advisers, because I am sure that their recommendation originated from good will and they highly regarded my potential. It simply means that their assessment was a bit out of tune with the extent of competition and strength of other applicants, of which they may not have a complete grasp especially if they are not recent PhDs or if the department does not have a PhD program.
Alternatively, you can try to take year off working or something and try again next year. Students customarily fare better in their second time. Good luck!
-
So, I've been kind of listening in on your conversations the last month or so...figured I should contribute a little myself. First off, I can tell you from my experience that you can come back from a poor undergraduate gpa (2.6). After heavy semester loads at a regional university (MA), I have gotten offers at two good universities (UCSB and Virginia). Now I have to decide between no funding (UVA) and a decent shot at funding (No. 3 on wait list at UCSB). I would love to get any information from those of you who might have some insight on UCSB funding (whether you have an offer, might decline, or are on the wait list yourself). Also, just to confirm what has been said repeatedly here, I was told by future advisors that my fit with their interests was ultimately what got me in.
Here is my application info for those who are applying again next year:
2.6 ungergrad
4.0 graduate gpa
6 semesters Latin
3 semesters Ancient Greek
1 semester French
Moderate travel in area of interest
1290 GRE (620 Verbal-89th , 670 Math-65th, 5.0 AW)
Specialty: Greek and Roman
Accepted:UVA, UCSB
Rejected: UCLA, Duke, Maryland, Washington
I don't know anything about the funding situations at UVA and UCSB, but what I can tell you is that the Greek historians at both schools are absolutely fantastic people. You have for yourself very attractive options for that reason. Professor Lendon does cutting-edge research and has a wonderful personality. Prof Lee is also a promising scholar with a bright career ahead of him. You couldn't go wrong either way, so best of luck with your funding situation!
-
Regardless of the state of the economy, under no circumstances should you be willing to go into any amount of debt to get a Ph.D. in history. The job market for History has been horrendous even when the economy has been relatively strong. Even if you are able to find a decent job, how are you going to pay off debt with your meager salary from a job in academia? Going after your dream is fine (I'm doing the same thing), but realize that accepting any debt to continue your education in the humanities would be a colossal mistake.
Not that I disagree with futurePhD, I have gotten conflicting advices from my undergraduate mentors. They said that if it comes down to a really good program with $15k per year versus an average program with $20k per year, the former is the way to go, although $15k is probably not enough for a decent person's living. I think a manageable amount of debt is acceptable, and sometimes even unavoidable, if the program is top-notch and a great fit. True that going into any debt is undesirable, but that should not completely stop you from going to where you wish.
-
Hello,
Perhaps this subject has already been addressed. I am curious, how have people's graduate school priorities/choices changed in light of the global economy? Personally, it's making me reconsider the amount of debt I'm willing to accept to continue my education. Also, I imagine that the competition will be fiercer than ever this time around, with all the people hoping to "wait out" the job market by seeking an advanced degree. (This is probably more prevalent in disciplines other than history.) Undoubtedly, the money available for graduate students will be less. Right? And if the economy continues it's slide, what about the state of the academic job market? What are your thoughts as aspiring historians? Discouraged? Undaunted?
Personally, I'd like to say undaunted, but I must admit that when I tell friends who have been struggling for months in the job market, or have been laid off, that I want to study medieval history, I can't help but feel a bit frivolous. I imagine I'll pursue the same course regardless, because it's my personal American dream, but I guess I wonder how other potential graduate students are handling the same pressures? Thoughts?
I am only a second year grad student, but here are my two cents: the History PhD market has certainly suffered and will continue to suffer. My sympathies go out to all those who are currently in the job market, just because things are so much tougher and will not improve anytime soon. I know a number of accomplished senior-level grad students who are not getting offers.
That said, this is today's economy in general, so wherever you go, whatever you do, the situation will not vary by a great deal. I know a good law school student who is about to graduate but still does not have a job despite scattering a hundred resumes.
Nowadays most private schools offer packaged funding, which means that you will remain unaffected by the economy for 4-5 years when you are working towards your degree. However, the number of applicants will have skyrocketed and the number of offers will have shrunk, so you must have exceptional credentials in order to get some of these offers.
If I am confident about my commitment to the historian's profession and about my capacity to excel, then there really is neither a good reason nor a good alternative to simply pressing on.
-
*Sorry I deleted this post for the sake of confidentiality*
-
Yes, looks like you have a good language background, though ideally classics departments look for minimum 3 yrs in each. On the second thought you may have a decent shot at Chapel Hill. It is a relatively unknown program for ancient history but they seem to have a solid classics department and good ancient history faculty (esp. Talbert, if you are interested in ancient cartography and travel). I don't know what your specific interests are, but UVA history and UCSB history would fall in that category of relatively under-publicized ancient history programs.
-
Hey, I'm kind of doing what you are doing, ancient history PhD in a history department. Classics departments will require strong training in Greek and Latin, regardless of your subfield. I would assume that you have pretty good background since you doubled in classics. All of the programs you listed above are insanely competitive to say the least, excepting Penn State. Unless you would be quite content to go to Penn State for your graduate studies (I don't mean that you don't stand a chance, I am simply saying that even the strongest applicants will face many rejections from the schools you listed), I would add some more viable schools to your list. Re your GRE score, I know a number of professors at the so-called top programs who would raise their eyebrows at a verbal score lower than 700. That said, it is a trendy thing nowadays to tell people that GRE scores don't matter that much. Good luck, and I hope this helps.
-
Hey, given your specs and background, I also think that you are in a good shape in getting into some of the programs you are applying for. I would just make sure that you don't take anything for granted and develop really strong personal statement and writing sample. Otherwise, even candidates with the highest qualifications could face rejection. Good luck!
-
Here is my dilemma- at the top programs I would receive instant name recognition and- admittedly
Fresh GRE scores. What do you think?
in History
Posted
I also think that's a decent score. One often needs a 700+ to impress top programs. I got in to a very good program with 650 verbal, but I did have a 800 quant.