RepatMan

I also wanted to update on my original post in case it helps future prospective students, especially international!
While the DGS and faculty were supportive and accommodating, I ultimately felt that the structural restrictions made their offer unsuitable for me. I talked to current students with a range of perceptions -- it was a major stress point for some. I'd heard of international students who found ways to sidestep the 6-year timeline, but there aren't any guidelines on how these things work so it would have confusing to navigate. One question I didn't explicitly ask the program (and also because I ended up getting another offer) was the % of students who finished in 6 years -- I would recommend getting a clear answer about that. It felt like the program was trying to assuage my concerns by sidestepping the issue and telling me how much they wanted me and how I would be one of their top students with the ability to finish earlier than others, but I did not meet anyone who would have finished in 6 years and the program didn't mention any statistics.
I found out that the only way to pause the 6-year clock would be to take an official leave of absence, which would suspend status at the school and render the F-1 student visa invalid. You would have to leave the country and reapply for a new student visa. The clock doesn't stop for fieldwork, even if you get external funding.
I was also concerned about post-graduation career opportunities. I want to stay on in the US after my PhD and I don't intend to return to my country of citizenship. Leaving a program early might mean that you are disadvantaged in the job market (not enough time to look for jobs, etc) and from personal experience job hunting in the US after college I know how difficult it is trying to get a job that will take you on OPT and sponsor an H1B visa, especially in a non-quantitative social science field or if you're looking for non-academic or non-corporate jobs! This is something that most Americans or programs might be oblivious about, so it's important to know beforehand. Most non-profits, community organizations, startups, small or medium sized companies, etc don't hire international students. I preferred to join a program where I could potentially stay on for an extra year if I needed the time to find a job, and not get kicked out of the country immediately after graduation. It seems like these days it takes 1-2 years of applying to jobs and fellowships in the penultimate years of a program to even land something.
For my situation, all's well that hopefully ends well: I unexpectedly received a late offer from another program at a private university with better funding, so I accepted that instead.

Unsure if this helps, but I've had a lot of professors reference this article in relation to programs and job placements, which they translated to tiers. I think the PI and what you hope to do with your degree (along with financial support) are important factors.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0202528

Congrats! I would say to first contact whoever your potential adviser is (outside of the MAPSS program) if you have a good relationship and start by asking them. If that doesn't work, then I would say you should write the program director, and CC whoever the program administrator is right now. Good luck!

@pmcol and @bonesandbakes, Penn doesn't require formal interviews, but usually does them when they need someone to be interested in something like a secondary adviser role (like someone that would be interested in advising the studying if the primary faculty member left) or when they're bringing people in off their informal wait-list. Not getting an interview doesn't mean much at this point, but I believe the department had the goal to make initial offers in the first week of February.

It's generally considered unethical for PIs to review application materials. I wouldn't ask, but you could probably ask if they would allow you to discuss how you hope to lay it out or what you will discuss within it.
Chatting with folks over skype or whatever is pretty crucial. Odds are that there will be a great deal of qualified applicants and normally faculty go to bat for those that they have confidence they'll like working with. So it would be ok to ask a PI or other faculty to chat to discuss your fit in the program, both academically and personally.

I created an account just to give my review of MAPSS, because I wanted to present a different and more positive perspective of the program. I just graduated as part of the 2017/18 cohort, and I am extremely thankful for the opportunities that the program has given me, and I can see that the program will be suitable for certain types of students. MAPSS is great for people who are serious about academia, and for those who aren't sure, the program is still great for you to decide whether academia is right for you. As many of MAPSS alumni will tell you, MAPSS will show you the worst of academia, and if you go through the program still having an interest in academia, then you know that academia is right for you ?
For background purposes, I entered the program straight from undergrad after failing to get into any PhD programs I applied for. I managed to complete the program in nine months, wrote a thesis which I was proud of and that I got an A+ for (my advisor encouraged me to publish it), and so far have heard back from two of top choices in this Fall 2019 PhD application cycle.
The Lows of the Program
- The program is extremely compressed, and it consists of three quarters plus a summer. This means that you have a month to do fieldwork of any kind during winter break, and you pretty much need to have an achievable project in mind when you enter the program. Writing thesis and doing coursework at the same time is not easy, but there are ways around it, including using coursework for research and as fodder for your thesis. I asked my professors for some of my classes if I could use the final papers to flesh out sections of my final thesis, so in the end I did not have to write out a completely separate thesis and received very helpful, timely feedback from the professors at the same time.
- People here have mentioned that some faculty members do not look kindly on MAPSS students. That is true, and you need to learn to avoid them by speaking to other graduate and PhD students in the department to figure out who you can best work with. Even after finding an advisor, you will have to manage the advisor's schedule in relation to yours, i.e. they will not spoon-feed you and treat you like an independent, adult graduate student. You will have to take the initiative to set up meetings with advisors, tell advisors specifically what you need, when you need it by, and remind them of the deadlines of your program.
- Some of the MAPSS courses are terrible and substandard. I actually liked Perspectives and found it useful, but the few data/methodology courses that I took were mostly garbage (why did I sign up for more than one I seriously have no idea), and you can avoid them by just signing up for courses by actual professors beyond the MAPSS department itself. 
- As OP mentioned, the grading system of Perspectives is weird, because they gave out many Bs in general to "scare" students into performing and working harder during the midterms, and then usually recalibrate after the finals. Don't be too frightened about Perspectives in general.
The Highs of the Program
- I actually really liked the people in my preceptor group. I found them very perspective, friendly, and hardworking. So I beg to differ from the general view that MAPSS students are inferior; far from it. MAPSS is an extremely large program comprising diverse people of different majors and expertise, so I don't think it is very fair to say "MAPSS students are X" when really there are so many people of different backgrounds in there. 
- If you know what you are doing and have an idea of what you plan to get out of a one year's master's program, MAPSS is great for you, and you can even save more money and time by completing your thesis and graduating earlier than 90% of the cohort in June, which is what I did. A master's degree in 9 months from an accredited institution, is simply just crazy.
- MAPSS also writes a glowing letter from the department which can take the place of a letter recommender when applying for PhD programs, which is immensely helpful because you then only really need to look for two more letters for your applications.
- MAPSS has its own fantastic career services office that give loads of personalized advice and workshops right from the start of the program, and you can still contact them for their help in job search after graduating. 
- Being given many opportunities to participate in academic conferences and engage with people within the department. The amount of exposure you get in MAPSS is actually pretty good, but you need to be able to source those opportunities out and also talk to people within the department. The PhD students are always your best resource, and I made a few great friends in the department who were able to help me revise my master's thesis and also help me edit my PhD application proposals. IMHO, they are better resources than the professors themselves, and I would not have done so well without all the relationships that I have forged in UChicago. For perspective, I only met my advisor in person twice outside of class for my thesis and had two email exchanges with him before I submitted my thesis, and most of the help I got was from the PhD students and other students in the MAPSS program.
- You get to take life-changing, mind-blowing classes taught by established professors in their fields. 'Nuff said.
***You should only apply to/accept an offer to MAPSS if you have:
i. Enough funds or funding. Financing a master's education, even for a year and partially funded, is very expensive. You will also need to have enough funds to last you through a gap year after MAPSS if you are set on academia (see point three below).
ii. You are interested in academia or pursuing academia. MAPSS is not designed to be a professional or a terminal degree, so it will be a waste of your time if you are simply planning to enter industry right after graduation. 
iii. You can afford the gap year after MAPSS. MAPSS is only one year, but you cannot apply for a PhD program (I mean you can, but the department will not support you when you are applying just months into MAPSS) during MAPSS, which means that you can only apply for the following cycle of PhD programs. This means that you WILL have a gap year after MAPSS, and you need to plan that into your schedule, such as taking up part-time or full time work to tide you through. 
Hope this helps!

Just so folks know, Penn anthro is making their decision as we speak. They'll be finalized and sent to the Dean today. The Dean is expected to approve those decisions by mid-week next week.
I have really no info about how the wait-list is generated or whether they let wait-listed people know at the same time, but if you haven't heard from your primary contact at Penn by the end of next week, touch base with them. They'll likely have some insight for you one way or the other.

Just so folks know, Penn anthro is making their decision as we speak. They'll be finalized and sent to the Dean today. The Dean is expected to approve those decisions by mid-week next week.
I have really no info about how the wait-list is generated or whether they let wait-listed people know at the same time, but if you haven't heard from your primary contact at Penn by the end of next week, touch base with them. They'll likely have some insight for you one way or the other.

I still think it's a mistake and it will be revoked or something...but I was accepted to UNC! I...I can't believe it. I thought there was no way. Went there for undergrad and will be thrilled to be back on campus. Go Heels!

@pmcol and @bonesandbakes, Penn doesn't require formal interviews, but usually does them when they need someone to be interested in something like a secondary adviser role (like someone that would be interested in advising the studying if the primary faculty member left) or when they're bringing people in off their informal wait-list. Not getting an interview doesn't mean much at this point, but I believe the department had the goal to make initial offers in the first week of February.

@pmcol and @bonesandbakes, Penn doesn't require formal interviews, but usually does them when they need someone to be interested in something like a secondary adviser role (like someone that would be interested in advising the studying if the primary faculty member left) or when they're bringing people in off their informal wait-list. Not getting an interview doesn't mean much at this point, but I believe the department had the goal to make initial offers in the first week of February.

@pmcol and @bonesandbakes, Penn doesn't require formal interviews, but usually does them when they need someone to be interested in something like a secondary adviser role (like someone that would be interested in advising the studying if the primary faculty member left) or when they're bringing people in off their informal wait-list. Not getting an interview doesn't mean much at this point, but I believe the department had the goal to make initial offers in the first week of February.

Posting, more for a bump than having a strong testimonial. I stayed pretty engaged consistently, having gotten a BA in 2011, an MA in 2014, and then into another program in 2015 with another MA coming in 2016, then started PhD that fall. However, I know there are multiple folks in my program that were out for several years, one or two without having ever gotten an MA but still got into the program in their early 30s. So it seems very possible, and perhaps might even really benefit you when you apply. Programs want to know you really want to be there, you have the maturity/drive to finish, and have the ability to identify and pursue and interesting project. It sounds to me like all those things will apply to you, and when you contact faculty at the programs you're interested in, you should ask them if they can get you in touch with older students in their program to talk about their experience. As a side note, tt's often a good sign faculty are interested in your if they're game to send you along to chat with their students.

Posting, more for a bump than having a strong testimonial. I stayed pretty engaged consistently, having gotten a BA in 2011, an MA in 2014, and then into another program in 2015 with another MA coming in 2016, then started PhD that fall. However, I know there are multiple folks in my program that were out for several years, one or two without having ever gotten an MA but still got into the program in their early 30s. So it seems very possible, and perhaps might even really benefit you when you apply. Programs want to know you really want to be there, you have the maturity/drive to finish, and have the ability to identify and pursue and interesting project. It sounds to me like all those things will apply to you, and when you contact faculty at the programs you're interested in, you should ask them if they can get you in touch with older students in their program to talk about their experience. As a side note, tt's often a good sign faculty are interested in your if they're game to send you along to chat with their students.

Penn's education department has a really strong applied anthropology slant to it, I would suggest you check that out. Talk to Kathy Hall, a fantastic anthropologist and chair of their department could probably direct you to other potential advisers/programs.

I think everyone on the waitlist is "high" because they don't keep a long one... maybe just 3-5 people. The good news is that they've made many offers to waitlisters in recent years. The bad news is, the department is putting a new emphasis on retaining folks with the initial offers--especially by hosting a substantial admit weekend event (weekend after next).

It's tough to answer your second question, I'm not sure who accepts or rejects offers more specifically. It's very contingent upon certain types of fits. For Bio, we have a very small program (really just 2.5 professors) so if people's projects don't fit, they don't (or shouldn't) come. Linguistics is the same--if you're not a Agha-nian anthropologist, this is not the Linguistic program for you. Cultural and Arch are a bit more broad in terms of coverage, so I'm not sure why people don't accept offers from those.

Either way, good luck!

Folks were notified about Penn informal acceptances a little over a week ago. If you haven't heard, it's possible you're on the wait list but it's more than likely bad news. The professors were supposed to reach out individually to potential advisees/students of their subfield. Students in the program got informed a couple weeks ago who they're admitting.

Penn is changing their formula up a bit as they're having paid on-site visits for those given offers next week. However, if you are on a waitlist, don't give up hope! I was actually explicitly not on a waitlist and they still circled back around to me on April 15, Decision Day....

Penn is making final decisions on Wednesday. However, acceptances are sent up to the dean and people might not officially be notified for another couple weeks...

That being said, they want to invite accepted students to campus at the end of March, so it should probably be a quick turnaround, even if people are unofficially notified.

Hello everyone,
As a form of procrastination I kept track of the anthro program results this year in an excel file. Here are some interesting things I found:
- # of anthro submitted decisions = 490
- # of acceptances = 196 (40%)
- # of rejections = 294 (60%)
- # of programs represented = 109
- Top 10 most applied to programs (# of decisions in parentheses): 1. Michigan (24), 2. Brown (19), 2. Harvard (19), 4. UC Berkeley (18), 5. Toronto (17), 6. NYU (16), 6. Stanford (16), 8. Oxford (14), 9. Princeton (13), 9. UCLA (13)
- Top 10 most selective programs (% admitted, at least 5 submitted decisions): 1. Chicago (0%), 2. Brown (5%), 3. Stanford (6%), 4. Cornell (9%), 5. UC Santa Barbara (11%),  6. NYU (12%), 7. Princeton (15%), 8. Emory (17%), 8. SUNY Stony Brook (17%), 8. Notre Dame (17%)
- Top 10 most selective programs (% admitted, at least 10 submitted decisions): 1. Chicago (0%), 2. Brown (5%), 3. Stanford (6%), 4. Cornell (9%), 5. NYU (12%), 6. Princeton (15%), 7. Michigan (20%), 8. Harvard (21%), 9. Columbia (25%), 10. UC Berkeley (27%)
- February is when the action happens. The vast majority of decisions are made in this month, with many fewer in January and March: 

-I attached the excel file if anyone else wants to play around with the numbers
-As a word of caution, I have no background in statistics and have no idea how the Grad Cafe data relate to the true amount of applications each school received. This is meant to just be a rough idea as to how the application season went and should not be taken seriously. I hope it might help people who apply next year have an idea as to which schools are popular and when schools release their results.
grad school national results.xlsx

I have a little museum professional experience (in education and NAGPRA, separately), and a little more experience as a grad student. My understanding is that an MA will get you most anywhere you'd want to go in most museums (even Dept. Director or Museum Director). However, for really large, elite institutions, you'll need a PhD to even become a curator, let alone anything higher. So it depends on what you're shooting for--if you want to become a curator at NMAI, you'll likely need a PhD. If you want to become a repatriation coordinator or curator at a regional/local museum, the MA will be great.

I have a little museum professional experience (in education and NAGPRA, separately), and a little more experience as a grad student. My understanding is that an MA will get you most anywhere you'd want to go in most museums (even Dept. Director or Museum Director). However, for really large, elite institutions, you'll need a PhD to even become a curator, let alone anything higher. So it depends on what you're shooting for--if you want to become a curator at NMAI, you'll likely need a PhD. If you want to become a repatriation coordinator or curator at a regional/local museum, the MA will be great.

For anyone considering MAPSS, I graduated from the program last spring and have some thoughts:

I had received a well-funded PhD offer from a mediocre program during the same cycle. I had interviewed for UChicago but didn't get the offer, despite my POI's full support in their admission meetings. When he called me to tell me they weren't going to take me, he said he could ensure I got into MAPSS, if I was interested. I told him, since I already had a good offer on hand, and I'd promised my wife not to take on any more loans after my first MA, I needed a full scholarship.

He actually submitted some sort of recommendation on his end to try to get me more funding. I'm not sure how that works, but the moral of the story is, if you have a POI in Anth or any other social science program at UChicago that really wants you there, ask them if they can help. Otherwise, I would say leveraging other offers and a hard line of funding you need to accept is only going to help in the "official" petition others have mentioned.

In general, MAPSS was a fantastic program for the quality of education you receive (nearly all PhD level courses are available to you) and for the support you get from MAPSS in applying for PhDs afterwards. It's filthy expensive, and I wouldn't have done it without a great scholarship, but for me it was the difference between a PhD at a mediocre program and being at a tier one PhD program. I believe that's the case for a lot of candidates (though its by no means a guarantee you'll get a good/better offer).

If anyone has any other questions, feel free to PM me.

For anyone considering MAPSS, I graduated from the program last spring and have some thoughts:

I had received a well-funded PhD offer from a mediocre program during the same cycle. I had interviewed for UChicago but didn't get the offer, despite my POI's full support in their admission meetings. When he called me to tell me they weren't going to take me, he said he could ensure I got into MAPSS, if I was interested. I told him, since I already had a good offer on hand, and I'd promised my wife not to take on any more loans after my first MA, I needed a full scholarship.

He actually submitted some sort of recommendation on his end to try to get me more funding. I'm not sure how that works, but the moral of the story is, if you have a POI in Anth or any other social science program at UChicago that really wants you there, ask them if they can help. Otherwise, I would say leveraging other offers and a hard line of funding you need to accept is only going to help in the "official" petition others have mentioned.

In general, MAPSS was a fantastic program for the quality of education you receive (nearly all PhD level courses are available to you) and for the support you get from MAPSS in applying for PhDs afterwards. It's filthy expensive, and I wouldn't have done it without a great scholarship, but for me it was the difference between a PhD at a mediocre program and being at a tier one PhD program. I believe that's the case for a lot of candidates (though its by no means a guarantee you'll get a good/better offer).

If anyone has any other questions, feel free to PM me.

I haven't really read through the advice offered here, so I'm sorry if my comment is redundant, but here's what I've got:

Coming from someone that got a 3.3 GPA at a mid-tier private school (University of Evansville) that's now at an Ivy League PhD program, it really depends on who is advocating your application in the faculty meetings. Sometimes your application will be solid enough on its own to warrant a lot of advocation by several members of faculty, and sometimes (like my case) you really need to be recruiting faculty to your side before you even apply. If they like you and have faith in you as an academic, that's what ultimately matters. Moreover, you may need multiple faculty members that are excited to work with you--your primary potential adviser may not be tenured, they may not be in a good position to take students, etc., in which case you need other people on your team.

My advice is to apply wherever you really want to be, but don't assume your resume will get you in there. You need to find ways to connect with the faculty in as meaningful of ways as possible.