farflung

I agree completely with this advice. They can't rescind your offer of admission, nothing bad can *really* happen by being honest and asking for more scholarship or work (TA, RA) opportunities. Negotiate!

I'm not in Bio Anth / HEB, so take this with a grain of salt. It is my sense that institutional prestige matters if you want an academic job, quite a lot. Presuming you would be adequately supported by faculty at Harvard, which it sounds like you would be, I can't imagine a scenario where getting a PhD from ASU ((under a highly esteemed advisor)) would benefit you more than having a terminal degree from Harvard ((also under highly esteemed advisor)). Harvard anthropology is one of the top departments in the country, and from what I have seen, their PhD students have excellent job prospects after graduation. Also, larger programs are not always better. Harvard may have a smaller program, but it is the most well-resourced university in the country, by far -- the means tonnnssss of grant opportunities, chances to work with top visiting scholars from around the world, high grad stipends in comparison to public institutions, etc.

To me the primary thing that distinguishes anthropology from the other disciplines you mentioned is its methods. Do you want to spend years conducting research in a single place, learning the language and doing intensive participant-observation? Do you want to write an ethnography, that places you as the author within the text and narrates large political trends through the eyes of ordinary people? Then Anthropology is for you!

Any other GRFP-ers thinking of applying to the NSF GRIP for this coming May deadline? After the optimistic tone of the webinar, I really expected more opportunities to open up, especially in the social sciences. The webpage looks THE SAME... months later. They've added almost nothing.

I would recommend contacting current graduate students directly -- they are usually listed on the Department website, with research interests. You might start specifically with Med Anthro folks. Tell them your research interests and ask if they know anyone else you could talk to about Brown's program (faculty, fellow grad students, etc).

It sounds like you have some important life experience under your belt, and I definitely understand the point about not wanting to continue in a crappy job. Info on your background is helpful. You are extremely young! No, 26 is not too late for starting a PhD, it's right about average in my experience. So if you think the Peace Corps would strengthen your fieldwork chops, it could be a good option! Definitely shows the kind of self-sufficiency, ability to adapt to local realities, language skills, etc. that you will need for a PhD program. My caution about MA programs remain, however, particularly since you have undergraduate debt, it seems you are prepped for the PhD without the MA first, and many MA programs are not fully funded. Don't be too hard on yourself. Often professors that really love your application are simply going on sabbatical, or can't take on a grad student at the moment for another reason. You are aiming for some of the top schools in Anthropology, and there simply aren't very many slots. But, once you get into one of those top schools, you'll probably be guaranteed funding and have a huge leg up on the job market! Application season is not a referendum on the kind of anthropologist anyone thinks you will be. For those that are truly qualified to be applying to top schools, it's a game of numbers and chance. No one will ever know you struck out on your first application season. I think I've been fairly successful as a grad student, fieldworker, and budding anthropologist -- and I was only admitted to 1 program, out of 12 I applied to over 2 years! People will only ever know of the one institution that will be printed on my diploma.

Hello! This is quite common. I didn't get anywhere I applied the first year (6ish schools), then was accepted to a Top 10 school the second year I applied, and am close to getting the PhD now. I know it seems like the end of the universe not getting in anywhere your first application season, but it's just not. Have you considered... getting a job and extending your lease? Plenty of us just sit back and try to make a living while making another go in the next application cycle. You don't have to be working in something amazing & related to anthropology to get into a grad program... my cohort mates were making coffee, working at call centers, etc. when they were accepted to PhD programs. In my honest opinion, an MA at a less prestigious school will cost you time, money, and may not even help you get into the PhD program of your dreams. Peace Corps may improve your application if you can show that it's directly helped prepare you for fieldwork in anthropology, but keep in mind that is an ENORMOUS commitment, and will set you back another 2-3 years toward the PhD. At this point if you begin the rigorous application for PC you wouldn't actually start your volunteer service until 2017. As an aside -- I would say it's probably not a great idea to skip the Peace Corps for a guy -- you can make it work long distance, and if he can't handle distance, he can't handle you being an anthropologist! (just some unsolicited relationship advice from within the academic world). California public schools have no money, so consider that as you re-work your list of potential schools for next year. You can apply to schools multiple times. Keep working on your statements. Maybe retake the GRE. Get work experience. It's mostly luck among truly-qualified applicants, so if you know you have the qualifications to get a PhD, and still want it, I say try again. Are you being realistic about which professors / programs might want to advise your project? Apply to departments that really 'fit.' Big-shot professors get a lot of applicants, aim to work with asst professors / associate professors trying to make a name for themselves. You should contact them in advance of applying.

It takes awhile, sometimes weeks. In many cases, grad schools won't send out word until all funding decisions, admission decisions, etc. are in from all departments-- which takes awhile. You're in, so congrats and don't worry about it!

Among anthropologists who are familiar with or conduct research in Latin America, Universidade de Brasilia is known to have a very strong anthropology program. And, Brazilian anthropology is well respected in general around the world. My main advice would be to get as much field research experience as possible, preferably in your area of interest (migration / urban anthro). If you have the option to write a senior thesis, do it! It's great that you are getting experience presenting at conferences. If possible, you could try to present at a conference in the U.S. or U.K. -- maybe do a poster presentation? I did poster presentations at conferences as an undergraduate, and it was much less intimidating forum to share my research. You could look at the Latin American Studies Association (LASA) meetings, which are in Lima Peru in 2017, or the American Anthropological Association meetings (AAA). You could also consider reaching out to anthropologists who are doing work that interests you at potential graduate programs. Do any of your current professors have connections in the UK/US that they could set you up with? (I imagine many of your professors have also studied in the US/UK so might have some leads on potential professors or programs to contact).

You will definitely want to read Clare Wendland's book, A Heart for the Work: Journeys through an African Medical School (a classic in your line of inquiry) and Summerson Carr's Scripting Addiction. Indiana and U Penn both tend to be strong on the anthropology of education front, although I agree with the comments above that your work is probably best located and framed within medical anthropology. Start with med anthros, see what kind of interests they express in your research plans, then try to find a program where faculty are also interested in the anthropology of education, anthropology of expertise, etc.

Yes! Very important. I would interpret an unfunded offer in the same way -- the program is not prepared to advise me properly, because I am clearly low on their priority list. In fact, I would go further and say that PhD programs that can't find funding for their graduate students should not take on those graduate students under any circumstances-- it's deeply unethical to ask anyone to rely on savings and debt to get a PhD in the non-clinical social sciences or humanities in 2016.

Good question. I would follow the "no new debt" rule religiously. Perhaps you can swing the degree without debt because of savings, or because of a parent or spouse's income. If that is the case, you just need to really consider your future priorities. What did you envision using those savings for when you put that money away? Was it to purchase a house, or have an emergency fund, or to retire one day? Was it just to live a middle-class lifestyle? If so, consider that you will STILL want those things even if you're in / complete a PhD program, especially the deep dark depths of years 4-8, and it may really hurt your future self that you've taken those funds away. Another relevant question -- how willing and able are you to work tirelessly to earn outside grant funding? How successful have you been in grant proposals in the past? This will be a full-time job if you accept an unfunded admission offer - you'll need to apply for literally every grant and fellowship, big and small, and conform your research plans to where that money is (yes... people change their research to get $. no shame). Remember that you can always apply again next application cycle. You could apply ONLY to fully-funded programs, which is what I did. Grad students are happier in fully-funded programs, because we all make a living wage and aren't competing for scraps. We like each other more. We are more productive, and we are more likely to land tenure-track academic jobs because we weren't teaching 80 million students and/or starving during grad school.

Socially mature means the ability to be a peer and colleague to serious adult academics, and to teach undergraduate courses with ease and authority. Anthropology PhD programs take 6-10 years to complete, and many of us don't start for many years after undergrad. Many of your fellow graduate students will be married, have children, will be caring for aging parents, and trying to think through long-term priorities alongside their academic goals and productivity. "Socially mature" seems like a polite way of saying "not a child" -- not one of our undergraduate students, but rather a peer/colleague/professional.

I posted this reply on a similar thread, but it is important enough to me to spread the gospel around. Do NOT go to an unfunded PhD program. Everyone I've talked to agrees it is not wise to take on debt to go get a PhD in anthropology, which typically takes 6-9 years to degree, and will not guarantee you an academic job. (also by the way most currently-available academic jobs are non-tenure-track, low-paying instructorships. so it may be impossible to pay off student debt even if you land an adjunct position after graduation). See Karen Kelsky's timeless, helpful writings on the circumstances under which getting a PhD is an OK idea (you'll notice many of these circumstances are related to money, which is important. It may not be important to your 22 year old self, but it will be to your 30 year old newly-doctorate self). Hope this helps!

Have you considered taking a year off and applying to PhD programs next year? I am in the late stages of a top-tier PhD program in Anthro, and that's what I did when I didn't get in anywhere my first year applying. Plenty of people go this route in fact-- perfect your application portfolio over the next year and try again next round. Get a job, hang tight. If you are sure that you want a PhD, it seems an MA program will merely divert you for 2 years (you'll have to repeat most of the coursework in any PhD program) and possibly put you into debt, since MA programs are less likely to be funded.

I agree with Neist -- it is completely appropriate to keep pushing the funding issue with your prospective grad programs. Talk to faculty, talk to grad students, keep asking for funding, don't be shy. You need funding. Is this a PhD or MA program that you're looking at? I know MA programs often have spottier RA/TAships available, but proceed with extreme caution if a PhD program isn't sure it has the money for you. As a late-stage doctoral student, my only real advice is to not take on a single dollar of debt to go get a PhD in anthropology. It will not pay off in the end. See Karen Kelsky's timeless, helpful writings on the circumstances under which getting a PhD is an OK idea (you'll notice many of these circumstances are related to money, which is important. It may not be important to your 22 year old self, but it will be to your 30 year old newly-doctorate self). Hope this helps!

You should not be doing that. If you decide Anthropology is the way to go, you should be looking at ALL social, cultural, and socio-cultural Anthropology programs in the US -- American doctoral programs make few if any distinctions between these categories. Historically, "social anthropology" developed within/alongside the British and European schools of anthropology, with a strong focus on charting kinship patterns, exchange/economy, and politics. "Cultural anthropology," in contrast, historically developed within/alongside the American school, with a strong focus on documenting the languages and customs North American indigenous peoples. It could be the case that the British are still clinging to "social anthropology" as its own discrete thing. BUT American "cultural anthropology" is not. Cultural Anthro has come to envelop everything that "social anthropology" historically meant, and there is no meaningful distinction between the two (besides learning the history) in my graduate training. I am in a cultural anthropologist who works on issues related to public policy, science, education, etc. -- stuff that interests social anthropologists, sociologists, political scientists, and many others. Here's the story: you can study whatever you want in an American Socio/Cultural Anthropology PhD program, you just have to be committed to long-term ethnographic fieldwork, learning your field languages well, and engaging with anthropological and social theory. To be honest, if you want to do ethnographic work, I think you may be unhappy in a Sociology program. Sociology in the American academy is still HGHLY quantitatively focused, with the exception of a few standout programs. I have several friends doing qualitative or ethnographic Sociology, and their work is consistently sneered at from quantitative folks within their discipline who do not find it "rigorous." On the topic of political activism, the sociological literature often takes the form of typologies -- trying to ID which kind of activism happens in which circumstances. From an anthropological perspective, this literature is boring and does not reflect the nuanced and intricate way that people engage in activism in their everyday lives. Qualitative sociologists on my campus end up taking TONS of Anthro classes. In contrast, anthropologists have a huge umbrella (tend to welcome many topics), and ethnography is the norm -- you'll even be trained in it. Institutional ethnography does of course fit in Anth and Soc, but as someone working on very similar topics to you, I'm glad I went into Anthro. In terms of professors working on similar topics, you'll have to do some research! You need to think broadly about your topic. Look for programs with regional (i.e. anthro of the united states) and theoretical resonances with your project -- not simply topical (i.e. higher education). I'll private message you a few program ideas.

Oops, I meant the May deadline! I'm getting mixed up. Yes, you're exactly right that there is no March deadline this year. My impression from the webinar was that you can definitely use the GRIP to help with rent and living expenses. That's basically what the $5000 is for--cost of living. Is that your impression as well?

No, I have not received reviews either. This is the first application cycle that the Program Director -- the person who e-mailed you about your proposal status -- cannot release reviews early (before the 'official' NSF letter comes to your institution). And now they ONLY let PIs access the reviews! So frustrating. For the Jan 2015 deadline, I was able to access my panel reviews only 2 weeks after the panel met, which was long before the official rejection letter came. The NSF review and ranking system is different than what you described. It goes in two phases. PHASE I: First, your proposal is reviewed by 3 anonymous readers. They rank the proposal on the Excellent-Very Good- Good-Fair-Poor scale. You want to get mostly Goods/VeryGoods/Excellents, because your score during this round determines whether your proposal will be reviewed and discussed by the panel (the panel consists of several scholars across anthropological subfields who meet in person at the NSF to read proposals). You want your proposal to be talked about, that means you got pretty far! PHASE II: Second, your proposal is discussed at the NSF panel meeting. They discuss the merits of your proposal, and often debate about it. During the panel meeting, proposals are sorted into "competitive" and "not competitive" categories. Anyone who is in the "Competitive" category has been recommended for a grant. That is not us. "Competitive" proposals are sent up the chain to be funded in order of priority (high, medium, or low priority). They literally fund the #1 project first, #2 project second, etc down the list (so that's where the high/medium/low priority thing you mentioned comes in). We are both in the "Not Competitive" category since we were not recommended for funding. There are two "Not Competitive" categories -- "Needs Moderate Revisions" and "Needs Substantial Revisions" (not sure if the wording is exactly right, but you get the idea). Most people end up in the "Needs Substantial Revisions" category, which means you'll have to change quite a bit in the protocol to have a chance next cycle. It's not impossible though! I know someone who got funded the second time around after completing those "substantial revisions" that the reviewers recommended. Some people also end up in the "Needs Moderate Revisions" category. Those proposals were on the cusp of being funded, and were almost always discussed in detail at the panel meetings. Usually it's just 2-3 sections that really need some re-tooling in the protocol to get funded. If your protocol only "needs moderate revisions," I would absolutely revise and resubmit.

Did you receive reviews yet? Often the panel statement will indicate how strong the panel thought the proposal was overall, and therefore what kind of chances you may have for future submissions. Sometimes the panel is quite conflicted about whether to award a grant yet or not -- some will clearly think it's ready, and others will not. If you're in that kind of situation, I would definitely try to respond to their comments and resubmit.

Yes, it would definitely be inappropriate (and appear irresponsible) to send additional materials in after the deadline. In addition, it would NOT be advisable to send in a research proposal of any kind as a writing sample. Samples are meant to be already-completed work, to show off your analytic writing skills.

Oh good, someone to commiserate with about GRIP! I attended the first webinar last week. During the webinar, I asked a few times in different ways about the host agencies, website issues, and general lack of clarity around what internships are actually available (especially for qualitative social scientists... hey NSF, we do exist and you do actually fund us!). Here's a summary: Website issues will be fixed soon. Keep checking agency websites. Definitely contact a host researcher you're interested in working with, especially if the website info is vague or not there (sounds like you've done this!). Host agencies are still finalizing the opportunities they want to offer, but they REALLY want NSF interns and so researchers are knocking down the door trying to make those opportunities available. More new & different internship opportunities-- including partnerships with new agencies -- will be available after the new year, in time for the March deadline. The program will only be growing in the future. No idea how many of the above reassurances by NSF are actually true. They seem supremely disorganized this application cycle, which is unfortunate because it seems like a wonderful opportunity for those of us GRFPers pursuing a non-academic career path. I wanted to apply for the December deadline (with a summer 2015 start date) but will not be able to, because there are simply not enough info on opportunities relevant to my skills and interests. Fortunately the March deadline (with a fall 2016 start date) is workable for me, so I'll go for that instead.

Who is the theorist? Foucault? Personally, I would leave it as is. No one expects you to write a new paper or rewrite an old paper for your writing sample -- it really is meant to be a sample of work you've already completed. I would only proceed with option #1 (adding in a few paragraphs to make it seem more relevant) VERY cautiously. I have seen my undergrads attempt that before, and adding in additional arguments or lines of analysis after the fact overwhelmingly tends to disrupt the coherency and flow of the paper. If the piece you are submitting is theoretically relevant to Anth, represents your most coherent prose, and displays your ability to make analytical arguments, you are fine!

I received a "your proposal was declined" e-mail from the NSF DDIG Program Director today, 11/16. My panel date was 10/19, for future reference. Reviews will be made available to the PI within the next few weeks.

Well at least someone has heard something, that gives me hope. It seems like the notification process is fairly unpredictable, and may have something to do with how your proposal is ranked in terms of funding priority. Last cycle my Fastlane showed "declined" weeks before I received any official e-mail. For others it was the exact opposite!