Jump to content

lily_

Members
  • Posts

    137
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Everything posted by lily_

  1. I went and visited Columbia when I was shopping around for graduate programs this year. I crossed it off my list, mostly because of that type of attitude! It's a good school, but there are a lot of problems and politics in many of the departments (at least in liberal arts). I think of this as something to avoid and would rather not spend the $90 or whatever it is to apply. I'm still waiting to officially hear from NYU even though I'm sure at this point it's a done deal.
  2. Ok, you got me, again. I'm not going to respond to you any longer. You are pretty rude most of the time. I've been polite, and I don't want to get in a flame war, I don't think this is the place for it. Feel free to comment about how this makes me a baby, or ill-equipped for graduate study. It's an online forum, no admissions committee is going to read this, and there is such thing as a typo. We don't all suffer from excessive Type A personalities, and thank goodness, I'd hate to see what your blood pressure is like.
  3. What was the "Live-Online" course like?
  4. Thank you so much! I will definitely be using them!
  5. I've read the article on the changes on the GRE, however they have claimed that they will make changes before and not much has happened, so depending on what happens I will make my decision then. Obviously, studying the vocabulary and quantitative exercises even for the current version would not be a bad idea regardless. You will still need to know both for the updated version. I also understand that the scoring range will be different, and that may mean different strategies for studying. So, if I don't end up taking it by year's end I'll simply re-evaluate in 2011 when and if they make the changes. However, I think it's best to be prepared either way, and looking for feedback on what was successful for others won't hurt even if they do change the exam. PS. I edited this because I hit "enter" prematurely, not because I misused any GRE vocab words.
  6. I think the best and most professional way to approach your situation is to ask this professor who said they were fighting for you what was it about your application that was lacking. What could you have done differently to have come out on top in that fight? I think the only way that you could go for a year is if the school has a non-matriculated option, which could be very expensive at some places and is not a guarantee in (although it has worked for many people, I would ask around before going through with this). I think that it's worth asking the places that rejected you what was it that got you rejected and how to improve in the future. A few things could happen. 1. You find out that you're simply not eligible for that program and cross that institution off the list for next year. 2. They could tell you honestly what aspect of your application got you rejected and then you would know where to improve for next year. 3. You could find out that your rejection had nothing to do with your application, and that they couldn't accept you because of budget cuts, sabbaticals, or a myriad of reasons and reapply next year. 4. They could say nothing, which might be the most likely option, but it never hurts to ask.
  7. 1. Apply to MA program that is affordable, reputable, and in my city and if I get in, work my butt off to get a high GPA, one or more publications/presentations at conferences, and find new profs to write positive LORs. 2. LEARN TO READ FRENCH. For Old World arch there is no way around this in many departments. I should learn an ancient language to make me more attractive at straight archaeology programs, but I would much rather study arch within an anthro department rather than risking getting a Classics-heavy education (especially since I don't want to study Classics). 3. Possibly retake the GRE. I'm up in the air on this one. I have about a 1200 with a 6.0 AW. Most of the departments I've talked to say they have no hard-and-fast rules about the GRE, and some people I know who have gotten into departments I applied to this year had GREs lower than mine. I think with the proper training I could potentially get it over a 1300, but I'm concerned with my low undergrad GPA that I would fall into the "smart but lazy" category that gets your application put directly into the trash. To be fair, I was a lazy undergrad, but four years later I'm a much more driven, motivated, hard-working person, and hopefully getting the MA will illustrate that. 4. Research more programs. I only applied to 2 programs this year, and I think next time around I will shop around more. I did visit 6 universities and found that I am much more suited to anthropology departments rather than departments of archaeology. I looked mainly on the eastern seaboard, but I think I am going to pursue universities further afield and apply to a better range of schools next time, including at least one safety. I didn't do that this year and I may have had better luck instead of only applying to my top two choices. 5. Continue to attend conferences and work on my networking skills. I know this is a long shot, but I really feel like face-to-face meetings with potential faculty members and advisers is important, and if you get in this is something you will have to do, especially if you go onto professorship. Best to get your name out there as soon as possible. 6. Continue to work on the excavation I've worked on for the past 2 years. This goes without saying, fieldwork is important (and it's fun!).
  8. I think it really depends. Some anthro departments are small, and a rejection could simply mean that the professor you would have fit with best wasn't accepting students. Other times, they may have liked parts of your application, but you were lacking in some area that could be alleviated through further coursework or fieldwork. I know of a girl who applied to one department three times, and the third time was a charm. Especially with something like anthropology where you have a limited number of people to work with and it tends to be competitive, I think that applying for a second time in some circumstances is fine. Obviously, if you are planning on doing that, following up with the schools that rejected you is a must. One school that rejected me told me that I would have a better chance of getting into their PhD program if I pursued an MA first, so obviously, not going to reapply unless I earn one. And sometimes people get rejected for reasons that have nothing to do with their applications. It could have been a bad year for funding, you could have applied to work with someone who was headed off on sabbatical, or one sub-field was going to have preference over another (I've heard many of my colleagues complain about this at various institutions). You could have a stellar application, and get rejected for things that have absolutely nothing to do with you, and whose to say those circumstances that got you rejected this year would be the same next year.
  9. I think that getting a third master's degree might be a little much, especially if it requires you to relocate. I'm pursuing an MA to boost my chances of getting in a PhD program, but the university I'll (hopefully) be attending is where I live and one of the most affordable in the US and has a decent reputation in my field. I think that most likely you have a good chance of getting in as it is. I've heard professors say that the longer you've been out of school, the less important that UGPA means. And it's probably difficult for most adcoms to process your old GPA because there has been a lot of grade inflation over the past few decades in some schools. I'd definitely pursue option B before looking into a third master's. Publications are important, at least in my field, and can set you apart. Some journals allow you to publish at the MA level as well if your article is approved by their reviewers. So, your professor may even have options for you to publish something independently, even as first author, which would be most preferable. I guess the thing that makes me hesitate in saying go for the third MA is that you don't want to end up in a situation where some committees might think you're over-qualified for a PhD and continuing to take coursework would be ad nauseum and a waste of your time and theirs. However, I don't know much about marketing as a field, so I could be wrong, but I have heard that happening to people in the humanities. However, another master's couldn't hurt, and at least it would give adcoms some more recent indication of what you're capable of. Best of luck!
  10. Ok, so this is a bit premature, but after this application season I feel that I should definitely look into raising my GRE score to something more competitive. Granted, it may be a year to a year and a half before I tackle it again, but it's always good to be prepared. So I'm asking the forum what is your preferred method? Which method brought you the most success? Are those classes worth the $1,000 to raise your score? Has anyone ever taken them and actually raised their score (and I mean REALLY raised their score...over 100 points on each portion)? I know there is a lot of debate over the validity, importance, and ethics of the GRE, but I'm not really interested in that discussion for this post. Simply, what's the best study method, what's proven to work, and what's a rip-off. Thanks!
  11. That's a tough situation. I know that all of my LORs were great, however, one of them (the most prestigious individual no less) made me a bit...paranoid. Fortunately, I have worked my ASS off for this women for over 2 years. When I asked her to write me a recommendation, she said, "you are a natural born leader, a natural born archaeologist (my field), exceptionally intelligent and would be an asset to any graduate program. Of course I would write a letter for you." However, for some reason the situation still makes me paranoid seeing as the e-mail exchange explaining and reminding about the LOR when the time came was a bit...cold. But again, she's a big name in the field and in my situation I felt like a letter was better than no letter. Likely, she was busy with her own thing, other students, etc. I would try to talk to this woman you're thinking about writing the LOR for a discussion about your career goals and whatnot. Another one of my letter writers asked me specifically what I wanted them to focus on in their letter. Maybe you could approach her and say something like, "I'm really proud of this aspect of my MA/application...what do you think? Is it worth mentioning?" and go from there. Unfortunately academia means a future dealing with difficult people. best of luck!
  12. It's such a bummer isn't it? Well, there's always next year. I got denied from one and am waiting to hear from my top choice, but word on the street is that they made offers Monday and rejections come next week. What a sadistic cycle, it'd be nicer if they rejected people first and then admitted them! My fiance got denied to every school he applied to the first year around. The second year he applied, he got offers from three (two with full funding!)
  13. This is what I've heard. According to a professor at my undergraduate university, if you are applying to a normal school (ie - NOT top tier and likely not tier 2) any GRE score over 1000 is good enough to prove that you're not an idiot. He said that more competitive schools you need over a 1200 total. And of course for the highest schools, a 1300 or above is ideal. However, this past fall I spoke to 6 different departments (of anthropology) for PhD (Johns Hopkins, Brown, NYU, Stony Brook, BU, and Columbia). All of them said that they aren't concerned with GREs, so long as they aren't abominably low. Columbia and Stony Brook said that if they are between two potential candidates, and everything else is equal, that's when they turn to the GRE. My fiance got into NYU's PhD program with an 1100 GRE, to give you an idea. Everything else on his record was excellent, and he even got his BA from an essentially no-name school. I'm not sure if psychology would be different, but at least for a lot of liberal arts school, I would shoot for a good score, but not get too bummed so long as it's over 1200. If you're really concerned, taking it again might help, but I would suggest taking a class on how to take it before you do. I would not dwell on it too much in your SOP. I really feel like the GRE only measures you ability to take the GRE, and so long as the score is not totally dismal (I knew a guy in undergrad who got a 760 on it! that's dismal!) the other aspects of your application will stand out. Focus on the many positive things that make you an attractive candidate. Some programs will have cut-offs, and there's nothing you can do about it you already sent the application in. Best of luck!
  14. Some applications have the option to waive your right to view LORs or they give you the option to view them after they are submitted. Which is better? My guess is if you waive the right to view the letters, adcoms assume a more honestly written letter? Or do they really care? Just some thoughts, would love to hear some feedback.
  15. I thanked them via e-mail once their letters were submitted, and then I sent them thank-you cards, and I am planning on visiting the ones within a stone's throw in a few weeks. When I did campus visits I sent every person I met with a small thank-you note as well. I do the same thing with job interviews. I guess it's old-fashioned, but I think it helps in the long run and is generally a nice thing to do.
  16. It looks like you're well versed in using the edit key as well. I guess that's what it's there for! I wasn't trying to "get back at you." The only thing I have said that could be construed as an insult is that you appear to be redundant.
  17. I was aware of that, thanks. It wasn't that I thought I was ineligible to apply. I looked into the department when I was shopping around for grad programs. There was no one to study under for what I want to specialize in. Why waste the application fee if you're not a good fit for the department? You're not my parent, nor my adviser, no need to give me a lecture about things I appreciate your advice, have a nice evening and good luck.
  18. The point was to see if it was possible, if others had accomplished the same thing under similar conditions. I never said I had not made up my mind or not, it's been made up since I left college and have been working towards improving my record and adding to my CV to become an attractive candidate. Evidently, what I have accomplished thus far is not enough, so what's next? Try for the MA. It may help, it may not, but I think, especially after reading this forum and talking to undergraduate professors and colleagues that it's worth a shot. You're right, life is not fair, believe me I completely understand that concept. However, I believe that nothing worth doing is supposed to be easy or fair. I never said I didn't like your advice. I read your articles and everything you said. I disagreed. You did start out talking about how many people think that getting an MA increases their earning potential, at least that's the point I got from the NY Times article you shared. That's not why I'm in this field. I can ask a question, get a reply I disagree with, and decide to do things my way. Which is exactly what I am going to do. If I fail and end up thousands of dollars in debt working at McDonald's in three years, I'll post a new topic that says, "and seadub was right" and warn everyone else from getting a terminal master's. In the meantime, I'll keep working on my SOP for this master's program.
  19. Oh and Seadub, I just calculated my junior and senior year as an undergrad - my GPA for those combined years was a 3.25. Guess I'd have a chance at Berkeley anyway Thanks for pointing that out!
  20. I'll repeat myself again. This round of applications (in which Berkeley was not on my list) I actually visited 6 universities, met with faculty members and the people I thought would most likely be my advisers, simply because I felt that was necessary to make an educated opinion on where to apply. I narrowed that down to 2 universities based on these meetings. I found I was not eligible for one program, and three others did not seem like the best fit for me based on how the programs were set up and what people specialized in and focused on. I would obviously do this again when I reapply for the PhD in the future. I said Berkeley as an example because one individual from the college I am applying to for my master's, earned their PhD from there after earning their MA from this program. I know that's not a guarantee. My heart is not set on working there, and I believe that they do not have anyone currently in the department I would be interested in working with. There are schools, top tier, and tier 2, that do no have hard and fast rules about undergraduate GPA. Infact, the 6 schools that I visited this fall, did not. Furthermore, archaeology, unlike many fields, in order for you to be eligible for permanent employment rather than contract, temporary jobs, requires you to have a master's. It also opens up the possibility of teaching at most community colleges. So, although you may disagree, I feel that I am making the right choice. Again, the title of this post was will a master's degree help me gain admission to a PhD program, not will it guarantee me the career of my dreams or oodles of money somewhere down the road. I appreciate all of your advice, but I feel at this point it's getting a bit redundant. I know it's a gamble, you have made your point. Thanks.
  21. Yes, languages are huge! I have an intermediate reading ability in German, and plan on minimally studying French while doing the master's. What I really need is Akkadian, which is difficult to find. Also, I don't know how it is for medieval history or lit, but archaeology is a bit of a mixed bag. There are departments that take a more classical approach which heavily focuses on languages, while others are taking a more anthropological approach - I'm more interested in the anthropological approach, but the languages are still important anyway. Plus it would really be awesome to be able to read the Epic of Gilgamesh in one of the original languages it was written in!
  22. I decided on grad school a long time ago. The thread was asking, specifically, if getting a master's degree would be helpful to my pursuit of a PhD. You argued that it was not, and I should probably quit (not in those words, but it's safe to say that was the gist of your posts). Frankly, I feel that his posts were helpful, and gave me hope (even if said hope is, according to you, foolish). I'm glad you got into a program and have it all together. I'm confident, someday I will too, even if this round of applications is discouraging.
  23. In some departments, you're absolutely right, it won't matter. However, as I'm sure you know, not all departments are the same. I titled this thread will a master's degree help, not will a master's degree be a guarantee. You have argued eloquently, even with sources, that it's not a guarantee. I understand it's a gamble, but I'm still willing to take my chances while I'm still young.
  24. You're absolutely right about doing your homework. I actually started out with a list this round of applications of 6 potential schools and departments I wanted to apply to. I visited all of them, met the people I would want to work with, and talked to current graduate students, and narrowed the list down to 2 based on which were the best fit for me and my interests (for example, I found it useless to apply to a program that required me to learn ancient Greek when I want to study Bronze Age Mesopotamia). I thought meeting with people and showing up in person would help a little. There's still a chance I might get into this other PhD program, but I'm not holding my breath. Congrats on your acceptance. That other program is ridiculous if they won't take your MA, especially with publications into account. I always thought (at least in liberal arts, probably other fields too) that academia had the mantra "publish or perish" and it would be better to accept a student who had publications already under their belt, instead of a novice, but I'm not on an admissions committee!
  25. Agreed, I feel that her reasoning is pretty much the same as mine. They say that GPA is the best indicator of graduate success, but if you can prove that you can be a successful graduate student it should (in theory) eliminate or assuage the part of your profile that says otherwise. At least I hope so!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use