eternallyephemeral

I can't say anything about art history specifically, but it's not a guarantee that if you get into one school, you will get into the other one. Even if one is ranked higher, the other school could have a completely different pool of applicants, they could be looking for different things, and you might seem to fit better at one school than the other (in the eyes of the admissions committee). Can you contact any current students? Do they put their emails or names on the website? That could probably help you make a decision, as there may not be a lot of people on this site that have gone to one of those schools for Art History.

Very strange - maybe strategy does things differently. Have you seen any results on this site from Michigan strategy? I started seeing a few interviews and acceptances before I got my rejection. Yes, it was two weeks ago. But each area could be on their own timeline, I'm not sure. I haven't heard anything at all about UCLA's business school, so I presumed that I was rejected. But things could change. Best of luck!

I just got into Western's I/O Masters! Anyone else hear back?

I completely understand. My bf is applying this year as well, and he's very discouraged after directly getting rejections or assuming that he was rejected as interviews have already happened. You're right that you can do all those things and still not make it. And you will get frustrated that you did everything right, and yet you still aren't getting anywhere. And that's a terrible feeling. Unfortunately, not everyone that deserves it gets in and that's a terrible fact to face. There's so much competition and sometimes what works for someone in a less competitive field (like mine) won't work for you in a more competitive field (if that's the case). Have you applied to different schools each round? Are there a mix of masters and PhD programs available to you? Have you thought about working in the field for a while? Remember, even if the typical progression involves following a certain path, you don't have to do that. It might not be the best for you. Perhaps it's time to talk to you people you know about another approach?

Hey! I'm not perfect by any means, but here's what I did: Worked super hard from the beginning of my first year because I know that you can't change your marks a ton at the end (I know this isn't only during the application process, but it does matter). Studied like crazy for the GRE, constantly practicing and learning new words, practicing with every book I could get online and in the library, and generally did bunches of full practice tests. Started doing research extremely early as well, right after my first year. You can't change that now, but it shows you're serious if you don't just do research in your last year or last semester. Which brings me to my next point... Go to as many conferences as possible and get on papers if you can based on your research or research you are working on with others. I understand people can't always do this, but the more time you spend doing the research then the more you can take on, and the more you can show people that you're serious about research. Getting into undergraduate journals, being part of the editing process, joining relevant extracurriculars all really help to convince the admissions people that you know about writing papers and that you're interested in the area. Regarding the application specifically, I would research the people who fit with your interests and what you've done before. Then research their papers and send a mostly tailored email to each one individually including your CV and, if you want, your stats like GPA and CV. It helps them evaluate you a bit before the application. If they will hurt, maybe don't include them. Try your best to meet with people through Skype or phone before applying. Then start the statement as early as possible, reading examples and tips online while revising it and getting other people to look it over. It's a balance to write something that is different but not cheesy. I hope that that helps!

Makes sense! I don't expect that I got in since I saw some people got interviews or waitlisted for NYU in the past few days.

I just heard back from Michigan Ross biz school and I didn't get into the M&O program. They included their evaluation criteria and said they had 500 applicants, and only accepted 5% across all their categories for the business PhD. I'm not mad

I completely agree with @rising_star. On top of that, you want to find out what you would be doing in each of those areas day-to-day. My first area of interest was actually neuroscience, and I had a volunteer lab position for a month where I helped out with a psychopharmacology lab that worked with mouse models of autism and anxiety. That stuff was really interesting, but I found the constant repetition of biological methods not very interesting. From then on I moved to cognitive psychology and perception (which is basically the stuff you're talking about, like vision, attention, working memory, etc) and I did research there. I found this more interesting because I could actually create the experiments, program them, and work on something without having to kill any animals (this was important to me). More recently, I found myself interested in the kind of applied psychology that people do in IO Psych progams and Organizational Behaviour departments in business schools. So I've been speaking to people, asking them what a typical day is like in their field, how they do their research, and how they come up with their questions. This has helped me determine if I want to be in that field or not. So basically, reading is extremely important and you will need to do that. But nothing is better for figuring out what you like than to actually do it - by taking a lab course, volunteering in a research lab, taking on a project with a professor, or other opportunities of that nature.

1. It's sort of like that (a 130 is the lowest score) but its not always so clear-cut. What I mean is, the number of questions you got incorrect is not just subtracted from 170 and then they call it a day. The level of difficulty of the questions matters because the test is adaptive to your performance on the first section. The second section can get easier or more difficult based on how well you do in the first part. 2. There are lots and lots of books that you can take out of the library with example AWA responses, and they break things down to help you. I did this when I studied for the GRE and I got a 5.5 on my first try. Also reading books like the APA Handbook, the Elements of Style, and the Sense of Style (this last one written by Harvard professor Steven Pinker) can help you with your writing. Good luck! The GRE was quite stressful in my opinion but I'm glad I put lots of effort in the first time and then never had to do it again.

Cool thanks for letting us know! I thought I heard they don't interview, but maybe I was wrong/that was another school.

Thanks so much for your insight - it does seem that they may be doing this. I don't get the impression that they want me to do a terminal masters, they very much emphasized the path to the PhD. I asked about the funding structure, so hopefully they will clarify that. If it was one year, I would be more interested but the website (which is extremely confusing) said the masters is two years with an internship. So overall there's a lot of miscommunication. However I see your point.

I just applied to UCLA and Rotman without a masters or work experience. They recommended that I emphasize my research experience and fit with the faculty. I think you would have a chance but you should email professors you are interested in before applying. They are usually very helpful.

I applied to OB/org studies/management programs and IO psych. I've only heard back from one biz program, Schulich at York University. I also applied to Rotman at the University ofToronto, NYU Stern, UCLA, UC Berkeley, and Michigan Ross. Haven't heard anything yet.

Hey everyone! I applied to management/OB/Organizational studies at these places: Rotman (university of Toronto) Schulich (York university, Canada) NYU Stern Michigan Ross UCLA Anderson UC Berkeley Haas I've only heard from Schulich so far, I did some interviews as I made the shortlist.

Thanks so much! Yeah I agree with that, I've heard of people doing that at NYU, but with a super expensive, non-funded MA program (it's like $40k a year). I hope that's not exactly what they're doing in this case. I emailed them back to ask for some clarification (whether it's funded, whether it's terminal, and whether you can speed through some parts of the PhD if you stay on) and then I'll have to make a decision I guess.

I'll be sure to update the results section and message you! Being just out of undergrad makes me nervous as well :S

I'm not currently attending waterloo but I did apply to them for Fall 2016. I just got an email from one of the profs today, asking me if I want to change my application from PhD to MASc. I thought the MASc was terminal and not funded, but they said in the email that people 'typically do an masters first and their acceptance to the PhD is based on their masters performance'. Is this common? I keep seeing all over their website that they encourage people out of undergrad to apply right to the PhD, and then I get this email. I'm quite confused. They did ask me to answer as quickly as possible, and they said they had a meeting to evaluate applicants to the program.

I received an email two weeks ago from a PI at Western I spoke to and mentioned in my SOP; she told me I was on the shortlist for the Masters and was invited to the open house on Feb 12th. I still haven't heard anything from the administration, but she told me the general timeline for the day so I know when to get there. I also just got an email today from a PI at Waterloo asking me if I want to switch my application from the PhD to the MASc (I'm coming out of undergrad). I'm a bit confused, because all over the website they say you should apply directly to the PhD program. I've also heard this from other schools. Does anyone know if this is a new approach, if they think I'm not good for the PhD program and they want me to apply to the masters, or are they suggesting I apply for the (what I believe to be terminal) MASc program? This is the email: " However, we noticed that you applied to PhD—I think you noted it was your preferred choice. More typically, students complete a master’s degree and then apply to the PhD program. Matriculation to the PhD program is typical for interested individuals, but is, of course, dependent upon good performance in the master’s program. Thus, I was wondering if it would be ok with you if we changed your status MASc?" I'm a bit concerned because I thought the MASc was terminal and therefore not funded, and I'm interested in a funded program. I also was leaning towards waterloo as the PhD is direct entry and it would be much quicker. This definitely changes things, but I should wait for the admission to make that decision anyways.