Jump to content

killerbunny

Members
  • Content Count

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About killerbunny

  • Rank
    Caffeinated

Profile Information

  • Application Season
    Already Attending
  • Program
    Art History PhD

Recent Profile Visitors

2,224 profile views
  1. Third-person would be the voice to use. Generally, these biographies are required to fall under a certain number of words, and not that many in my experience, a short paragraph. If there are no guidelines given for this symposium, I would look up the programs for similar events to find examples of ones that you like. Many journals include author biographies that follow the same format. But yes, your research and publishing achievements are the primary topics. Highlights as opposed to an overly thorough rundown of your scholarship are best IMHO.
  2. Hi, @EyLC. I have some feedback based on the snippet that you shared. Would you prefer that I PM you?
  3. Caravaggio's Boy with a Basket of Fruit, The Musicians, Boy Bitten by a Lizard...
  4. Still, there are more productive and, dammit, nicer ways of communicating. Sorry but I see this sort of thing a lot on this site: a good point, such as "do some due diligence before asking a question"—not getting across because snark makes the "guidance" too bitter to swallow. I'd love to see the moderators and more seasoned users of this forum encourage folks to follow a minimum of collegial discourse. An easy rule of thumb, for example, is to ask before posting: would this ever be something I'd feel comfortable saying to the OP in person?
  5. Well, all of us—including those accepted into a program this round as well as those already attending—have a very uncertain future in academia. This might be my cruel optimism talking, but aside from how the job market will look five years from now, if you decide to reapply, you'll have a leg up because you have learned so much from having already applied. You know better than new applicants all the practical challenges of applying, and this year's experience gives you a rare insight into how to put together an even better application. If you are dead set on getting into a program, I bet your
  6. I hear you on all of this and very much share the same motivations. After a series of editorial and publishing jobs, the stipend of a PhD with decent funding isn't too much of a pay cut for me. I wish you the best of luck and look forward to hearing updates on your progress.
  7. You are 100% correct in your concerns about the competitiveness of upcoming application cycles and the viability of a career in academia. What do you want exactly from a PhD in art history? To leave adjuncting for a more secure, sustainable career, a tenure track teaching job is probably the most pie in the sky solution out there. Is there any way to leverage your current education and experience to get a better position (if that's what you're after) that does not involve going to school for 5–7 years? This is not to discourage, but knowing what you want out of going this route is necessary; y
  8. I agree with @Artgirl87—you've got the (extracurricular) goods. Now for the most important part: writing a great sample and devising an enticing/relevant research project/topic that shows where you situate yourself in art historiography and how you plan to advance it. Two-ish years should be just enough time to come up with both. The sooner you decide your interest and begin reading voraciously in that area while keeping an annotated bibliography in advance of writing an eye-catching sample, the better you stand to get a funded spot in a PhD. A piece of advice for much further down the line af
  9. Imposter syndrome is real. Remember your programs want you to succeed and are (literally) invested in your doing well. In a way, the adcomm are able to see better than you that you are no imposter. They waded through all those applications of stellar candidates and said "yes" to you, and they likely have the experience of previous cycles to make solid predictions about who will do well in their program. Between their expertise and self-doubt, go with the former. And ultimately, now especially, grad programs need you more than you need them. One other general tidbit I have is don't let imposter
  10. Speaking from experience, I would say to what degree a lack of area specialists will impede your success depends on your level of independence and your choice of topic. And just because there is a potential advisor whose interests overlap with yours does not ensure support; it depends on the availability of the professor and/or your ability to get their attention. (Hint: be sure you aren't overlooking other humanities departments for someone you could be simpatico with; people are doing all manner of interdisciplinary work, and an instructor in Women's Studies or Sociology might be able to pro
  11. I like this optimism about the quality of online education benefitting from the test periods of late spring and summer, but I am highly skeptical the quality of virtual learning can approximate even a fraction of the benefit of being in a real classroom setting. I loathe doing my current graduate seminar through a staticky interface, and everyone involved, including the prof who is the most committed I've encountered in my master's program, is struggling to maintain the engagement and enthusiasm we had before moving online. In two words, it sucks. I'd also hate to think of missing the opportun
  12. Apologies @ArizonaAdmit. The same happened to a friend who had been accepted back in mid Jan to another AZ dept. I've seen comments to the effect of "well, maybe if they'd accepted their offer..." which fails to consider cases like my friend's: she was still waiting for an official letter detailing the finances and so couldn't accept when they sent word about no funding this year (well, it was more like they'd try to scrape something together for the first year but no promises for now or later on). Luckily, my friend got off a waitlist for another program only days ago; so it worked out in thi
  13. Yes, it's a major bummer. I feel like a killjoy sharing it here but I personally appreciated this insight from a Humanities DGS. The OP of the Reddit post is in philosophy; I'm guessing English might have somewhat better prospects of weathering this storm, but who knows at this point. I have a few friends who are banking on the 2021 cycle and I just told them to make sure to start now on being the most competitive applicants they can be.
  14. I take viable to mean what works for you in your situation and comprehends all of the factors that go into choosing to enter a graduate program or not. You have to decide based on your own situation whether this offer is right for you, and no, you shouldn't disregard critical contributors to the quality of your life just to be in a program. I think in the case of this Reddit post, the professor is saying if you have a funded offer that remains a good fit in terms of both your academic interests and your individual situation, then go for it; don't bet on the next cycle just to get into a higher
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.