foureyes

I'm sorry, man. It's a really idiosyncratic process, I guess. Let us know how the meeting with HDS goes.

Revolage - I'm sorry hear about your illness and your rejection from University of Chicago.:cry: Congrats, though, on your acceptances! It's always nice to be able to temper the rejections with the thought that there's somewhere else for you. It's Chicago's loss, anyway. Again, congrats, and I hope you feel like yourself again soon!

Understood. But still, the programs you've applied to (Oxford, Harvard, etc.) weren't M.A.'s - they were MTS/MSt. etc. What I'm saying is that applying to Ph.D. programs and the programs that you've applied to were not mutually exclusive (in places like Harvard, these degrees are in different schools.) You lose nothing if you apply to Ph.D. programs and don't get in (except, maybe, application fees and some time). There would be a lot to gain if you did happen to get in. I think the trick would be to illustrate why, in your personal statement, you're interested in pursuing philology when you've (thus far) gotten an M.A. in a different concentration. What they need to see is that 1) there's a logical reason you're pursuing it (given your background, you became interested in it because when you were doing an M.A. in this subfield, you found that ::blank:::, leading you to become intersted in your current subfield) and 2) that you show evidence that you are academically able to do it (and the fact that you've acquired other languages proves quite a bit.) It seems like your fear was that your interest would seem too random (that admissions committees would be thinking essentially, why is (s)he doing this now...? (S)he has no background in it!). I think you can prove why in a good personal statement. Also, next year, you could always check into applying for fully funded M.A./Ph.D. programs if you feel strongly about getting a second M.A. -- I would ask the Religious Studies departments that you're interested in if they think this is a viable option. I would just hate to see someone go more in debt if they didn't have to! Don't know if this helps, but I don't have a background in Religious Studies. I applied to Rel. Studies programs with a background in medieval literature - and now I've decided to do modern western thought (i.e., philosophy of religion.) I illustrated in my own personal statement why my studies in medieval literature have led me to this point -- and many the top institutions that I've applied to (UVA, Chicago, UCSB, and Harvard) bought it. I think it's possible, and you have nothing to lose -- I guess that's my point. ETA: if language is a huge barrier - couldn't you learn Greek on your own or enroll locally in a course this year and see how that improves your chances next year? You don't need a masters to acquire a language. Heck, if you're near a good institution (assuming you might be since you're conversing currently with scholars in your field), you could even take more coursework that wasn't through a degree program in your area of interest. It would be costly - but not nearly as costly as getting another M.A.

Maybe I'm being really naive (it wouldn't be the first time), but I'm wondering why you didn't go ahead and apply for Ph.D. programs anyway. I don't even *have* an MA, and I got into most of the Ph.D. programs I applied to. I know this has been a recent topic of conversation, but I would never pay for another MA, especially after having already paid for one! If your ultimate goal is the Ph.D., isn't that what you should be applying for? You can pick up those extra things that you're referring to along the way (especially since you'll have more coursework to complete at the Ph.D. level.) Even if you took longer to take more language work, at least you'd be funded It's expected that you don't have all your coursework done at the Ph.D. level - that's why they require you to take more. Sorry, I'm not trying to give unwanted advice! I guess if it were me, though, I would not set my sights on getting into an MTS/M.Div/M.St. program -- while they can be a stepping stone to getting into another program, they aren't essential and (according to my advisor's perspective, who has an MTS himself), it *can be* a waste of time if your ultimate goal is the Ph.D. (especially if you already have an MA in a related field).

Foureyes. If you husband is looking at Harvard like you and he might be interested scholars at BC, then you should know that they are both part of the Boston Theological Institute (BTI) along with BU, Weston Jesuit School of Theology and some others in the area. The BTI is an association of schools in Boston that can cross register and share libraries so you can take classes amongst all of those faculties - a nice benefit. For others who are interested in such opportunities, I believe there are similar arangements amongst the schools in DC and Chicago. Though I am not as familiar with those.

Thanks Leagus - found it now! I'm sorry to hear about your HDS news, though. :cry: Maybe next year?

Wow...I'm sure you're right Svartsven, but that seems so....strange. Why would they accept some/waitlist some /decline some...then wait a month and accept/decline more? Is this usually how it works? Seems kind of screwed up. For all those who haven't heard back yet, though, perhaps no news = good news?

Wgrad and rafnow - I think that you should call UVA. I heard from them a month ago. tiredofrejection - I looked up BC just a second ago -- very interesting. I, personally, am not interested in studying Gustafson and the Niebuhrs - but my husband most certainly is. I think we're happy about where we'll most likely end up - but I'm glad you mentioned the school. About the Harvard MTS Program - I can't find out how to see my status! WTF? If anyone has advice regarding how to access your admissions status, please let me know.

Hear, hear! However, I'm curious, Stud. Theol., why it's CGU or nothing..."'academically speaking"? Maybe you've explained this in other posts - but are you aiming to be an academic or something else? And also, is this your first year applying to places, or have you gone through all this stuff before? (If you have, I can see why you'd be frustrated, not wanting to go through it again.) I don't think I'd go to a program unless they funded me, because the job market afterward is so uncertain. I can't imagine carrying tens of thousands of dollars in debt, and only getting paid $30,000 or so a year to work 60+ hours a week at a job that had few benefits, little stability, and can carry a lot of emotional and familial strain. I think, if one really wants to be in academia, the wait is worth it in order to get funding. However, it's your decision -- do what you feel comfortable with.

Congratulations to everyone who heard from UofChicago today. Philmajor -- I hope someone turns down UofChicago's Ph.D. program and you get in. Thanks for all the perspectives. This board is so informative; it feels really relieving to find a place where everyone's in pretty much the same boat! thatindividual - about the partial funding thing -- it IS a tease! I'm no wunderkind, so I got squat, as well. tiredofrejection - totally hear what you're saying. You're right - there aren't anymore Gustafsons or Niebuhrs. Of course, we are their legacy, if you want to look at it that way. I guess one could go to UVa and work with Childress (Gustafson's student)? Or maybe Schweiker at Chicago (also Gustafson's student) or maybe Miller at IU Bloomington (another of Gustafson's *and* Childress's students.) Not the same though - not by a long shot.

Philmajor - I understand what you are saying. I was only reporting my own experience, however incomplete this is. Please forgive me if it is inaccurate. WIth regard to my husband's meeting with the faculty member who said he did not meet with his students regularly -- that's exactly what he said. He does not meet with his Ph.D. students regularly, but gets together with them in a group. I'm sure with other faculty advisors, it's much different. (If I'm a student there -- I'll be knocking on my advisor's door every week.) As far as faculty advisors go -- the Dean of Admissions did tell me that the advisors were more or less matched, but our choice could "not be guaranteed." If I could venture a guess, I think that she said this because some students might come in thinking they want to work with Nussbaum or Marion -- who are understandably busy. She probably didn't want to give us any misconceptions about who we would / could work with. It probably isn't a problem if you're working with someone less busy or (dare I say) famous. Also, I understand what you are saying about knowing their own students better in the Ph.D. admissions process. Still, then, I wonder why they don't just choose fewer masters students and fund them from the start (a combined M.A./Ph.D. program). Regarding Ph.D. placement --- Before my meeting with the Chicago's Dean of Admissions, I had come from UVa. Now, UVa did not say that they placed their students into top 10 universities, prestigious positions, etc. But they DID show me a spreadsheet that showed exactly where all their students were and what jobs they received (or if they received one), stretching back for the past several years. Chicago could not furnish anything of the sort. I'm not sure what this means, but having the UVa's stat sheet in hand, I was disappointed with Chicago's inability to do this. Finally, I did not want to withdraw my application. I would be okay attending this institution and could look past this if I were funded there. There are a lot of fantastic scholars there that I'd love to learn from, understanding that a lot of my work would be independent. My problem is not with the faculty as much as the procedural aspects of the program. Also, when I applied, I had no idea where or if I was getting in anywhere else -- making Chicago a viable option. I don't think it's "too bad" I didn't withdraw my application -- that is entirely my decision.

deus_absconditus - There were actually a couple of things that bothered me about UofChicago. My husband and I visited together (he is also in Religious Studies.) He met with one of the professors with whom he'd be working -- during this meeting the professor said that he only met with his graduate students once a month in a group where they all "shared" what they were doing. He rarely met with students one-on-one. Of course, this is only one professor, but I didn't really feel comfortable with this set up. I also talked to the Dean of Admissions, and during our meeting, she mentioned a couple of things that turned me off. First, at the Masters level, one does not "choose" their faculty advisor. She said that they try to match you up with someone they think matches your interests -- you can express who you'd like to work with, but it's not a guaranteed match, she said. This was troubling to me. The second thing that bothered me during our meeting was that, when I asked for their Ph.D. job placement record, she didn't have any hard numbers. She said they were in the process of trying to collect such things, and that she thinks the majority of the candidates do well, but she didn't have a list to show me. The Religious Studies Department that I'm currently in has expressed some concern with the quality of Chicago's recent Ph.D. graduates. One professor at my institution told me that, when looking at new Ph.D.'s to hire for positions, they have been less than impressed with the quality Chicago's Ph.D. grads (at least in my subfield). It seems that, because the place is such a massive Ph.D. factory, there may be very little attention to the crafting of the dissertation. Of course, this will largely depend on the student's advisor. But still, I was really uncomfortable with all of this. Finally, the Dean told me that their own M.A. students have the greatest probability of getting into their Ph.D. Program. However, funding for the masters is rarely provided (though sometimes it is -- which is why I was disappointed today when I was given the "standard 50% reduction for tuition.") This was frustrating to me. I have to pay $60,000 for a masters from their institution in order to get into their Ph.D. program? I think not. I've been accepted to other schools that are funding me fully for the MA/Ph.D. from the start. It all just seems like a scam for a less than stellar education (at least in my subfield, like I've said.) I'm worried about places like Chicago and Harvard, which basically "funnel" their students from their own Masters / M.Div. programs and get their money from these students to fund their Ph.D.'s. Sigh....it seems sometimes like choosing the "best" Religious Studies program is really like choosing the least bad program.

I heard from University of Chicago today - I only applied to the MA Program, however. I was admitted, but the only funding I received was a 50% tuition reduction. There's no way I can take out $60,000 more in order to go there to get an M.A. No Thank You. Honestly, as much hype as there is about Chicago, I hate the school. There are so many students and the Div. School feels so cold. Sigh. :cry:

This was me. I currently go to well-established Religious Studies program at a public university, so what I've heard about Harvard has come from professors here in the Rel. Studies program. From what they say, Harvard is currently undergoing a transitional period - i.e., there's a lot of faculty turnover, and they're trying to make their program better by attracting new faculty, etc. Of course, the good part about this is that Harvard may get a lot of fresh, new scholars. The bad part is, obviously, it could be a tumultuous and unstable place for a while. I know that this applies to my field in particular (philosophy of religion / ethics / culture) -- I don't know if this is the case with any other subfield. My husband, for example, has also applied to Rel. Studies programs, but didn't even bother applying to Harvard because there's no one there for him right now (he's in ethics.). He doesn't want to go to a place where he always has to work independently (i.e., he wouldn't have an advisor that knew his subfield very well.) That said, if Harvard has accepted you, they must think you're an excellent fit, meaning that they probably have the resources to accommodate whatever you're interested in (including faculty members.) I didn't mean to scare you here! I say just go to the place you feel most comfortable at - and I mean, not only with regard to the type of scholarship that is produced - but also the emotional support that the institution can offer. It's such a hard decision! Good luck!

Hi all! I'm new, having just found this forum. I've also applied to Religious Studies programs for the Fall of 2008. If anyone is interested, I just called UCSB, and they're getting their information out today and tomorrow. Like most others, I haven't heard a word from Chicago. (Then again, I'm not in the Chicago area, so who knows how long it will take before I hear via postal service.) Hope this helps!