JonathanEdwards

Thanks to everyone who voted. I know that the board is slow as all those who have been though the wringer of the admissions process are likely focusing on the next academic year. I totally understand, having gone through the ‘move everything and re-start life’ summer myself a few years back myself. By way of encouraging more people to participate, I’d like to explain more what I was hoping to accomplish with this very unscientific poll. We have a number of application results threads that quickly expanded to an unreadable point as people updated their results (particularly confusing when people got offers from multiple universities). When people start the process for the next admission cycle, it would be nice if they could see a snapshot of what the results really look like. Getting into the competitive PhD program you want involves long odds and an agonizing process, so let’s encourage the ones who come after. We also have an ongoing discussion regarding priorities in the application process. What matters most: ranking of your alma mater, GPA, language skills, research proposal fit to faculty? Lots of people shared their opinions over this last cycle, but now that the cycle’s complete, are there any hard facts? If you received feedback that highlighted a part of your successful application, please share it with next year’s hopeful doctoral students. Anyway, best of luck to everyone in your new challenges!

I know that the board is slow as all those who have been though the wringer of the admissions process are likely focusing on the next academic year. I totally understand, having gone through the ‘move everything and re-start life’ summer myself a few years back myself. By way of encouraging people to participate, I’d like to explain more what I was hoping to accomplish with this very unscientific poll. We have a number of application results threads that quickly expanded to an unreadable point as people updated their results (particularly confusing when people got offers from multiple universities). When people start the process for the next admission cycle, it would be nice if they could see a snapshot of what the results really look like. Getting into the competitive PhD program you want involves long odds and an agonizing process, so let’s encourage the ones who come after. So far the few initial results we got paint a fairly positive picture. We also have an ongoing discussion regarding priorities in the application process. What matters most: ranking of your alma mater, GPA, language skills, research proposal fit to faculty? Lots of people shared their opinions over this last cycle, but now that the cycle’s complete, are there any hard facts? If you received feedback that highlighted a part of your successful application, please share it with next year’s hopeful doctoral students. Anyway, best of luck to everyone in your new challenges!

There are a couple of threads relating to application success. I was wondering if PhD Classics applicants for 2011-12 would mind answering a poll for the benefit of next year’s applicants? Also, if you got feedback, what particularly made the difference to your getting in?

There are a couple of threads relating to application success. I was wondering if PhD Religion/Theology/etc. applicants for 2011-12 would mind answering a poll for the benefit of next year’s applicants? Also, if you got feedback, what particularly made the difference to your getting in?

E.W., I don't mind at all - I took my Th.M. from Gordon-Conwell. Here’s what I wrote about my experience on another thread. On the relational side, I found Gordon-Conwell a model for respectful behavior among Christians from very different backgrounds. Coming from a previous seminary which had a very boisterous approach to anyone of a remotely different tradition, it was a breath of fresh air. I lived on campus and saw that gracious demeanor exhibited by faculty, staff and fellow students. That same affirming attitude was extended to students, Christian and non-Christian alike, who took classes while registered at one of the other BTI schools, which brings me to the academic side of things. Gordon-Conwell is part of the Boston Theological Institute, eight schools which allow their students to cross-register for courses at each other. That is a level of recognition which is rare for an evangelical seminary - GCTS is the only one I’m aware of which enjoys this broader relationship. The other schools (Harvard Divinity School, Boston University, Boston College, Episcopal Divinity School, Holy Cross, St. Johns, Andover-Newton), have a good relationship with GCTS because of demonstrated student ability and mutual faculty respect. One proof of this on the student side is in GCTS’ record of placing M.A., M.Div., and Th.M. grads into the best Ph.D. programs in the world. The year I graduated, everyone that I was aware of that wanted to go on for a Ph.D. was able to do so, and at universities like Oxford, Toronto, Cambridge, Harvard, Edinburgh, London, UNC, Queens, etc. On the faculty side, many of the GCTS professors were trained at the same places as their peers at the other BTI schools. In fairness, this was in response to a fellow there who repeated some very negative generalizations he had heard secondhand about Gordon-Conwell, Harvard, Asbury, and Princeton. While I didn't think that portion of his post was terribly helpful, you should probably read the for yourself if you're considering any of these schools. Best wishes, Westcott

jdm, I just noticed on another thread that you said you had a background in Classical Greek, so definitely pay me no mind on this topic. Ha! I'll let the previous post remain in case someone else with similar questions finds it useful.

jdm, My Greek training included NT grammar/syntax/exegesis, Homer, and Plato. That may look like it’s randomly all over the board, but it was beneficial. One thing I found about NT studies is that it sometimes focuses too much on the vocabulary/syntax of the first century (which has admittedly been wonderfully enriched by modern papyrological finds). However, that doesn’t mean that authors didn’t have large blocks of text pounded into their heads from the classics of the wider culture. It’s almost impossible to overestimate the influence of the Iliad and Odyssey, which had been used as a foundation in the educational system of the Greco-Roman world for centuries. Writers with some classical education (Luke, Paul) may have been influenced by the way a word or phrase was used in Homer, just as they may have been influenced by its particular usage in the Septuagint. Bears consideration, which is why in my translation of Patristic Greek, I wind up checking the LSJM (Classical), Bauer (NT), and Lampe (Patristic) lexicons. Whew! Anyway, perhaps this summer consider doing some reading in the pre-Koine period. If you’re interested, in addition to the online parsed editions of Homer like Perseus or TLG, there are nice editions of Homer with copious grammatical & historical notes by both Oxford & MacMillan. They should be quite inexpensive used. If you already have this sort of background, then pay my ramblings no mind. Best of luck!

Hi JDM, I’d be happy to help more, but I’m a Patristics guy, not Bib Studies. Perhaps this will be useful, though... I’m sure you’ve prepared with grammar/exegesis for the primary language for your research, so I won’t belabor that side of things. One of the areas I needed improvement in and now see in students is a lack of internalization of the languages, even among people who have taken numerous grammar courses. Being able to think and compose in a language is a benefit that’s hard to derive from most grammar texts. If you think this might apply to you, check out Randall Buth’s inductive DVD’s/workbook - there’s a sample on his website at BiblicalUlpan. I’ll warn you that he uses a non-traditional pronunciation scheme for Greek, but that’s something you can work around if you don’t agree with his rationale for it. Unfortunately, this is only an option for Greek and Hebrew, not Latin. Beyond that, I’d encourage you to read as much over the summer in the primary sources as possible so you don’t lose ground. You won’t need to worry about secondary literature, you’ll be fed a steady diet of secondary literature over the next few years! Best wishes on your applications, Westcott

Hi DDSDevil, That’s a good question. After giving it some thought, I think such programs are usually not going to be as competitive. That’s not so much an indictment of them, as it is recognition of the historic hiring pattern at American evangelical seminaries, which predominantly hire PhD’s from top-ranked residential programs or from programs within their own narrow niche. Doing a limited-residency program with a British, Scottish, South African, or Australian research university directly (more on that caveat in a moment), may provide access to the best scholar to supervise your research, although not the immersive experience of being there during the academic year and the access to resources that comes with it. Still, if the scholar who is the best choice to supervise your research and help you produce a terrific thesis does happen to be at one of these universities, then it’s worth your consideration. For people not familiar with the UK scene, many of the limited residency opportunities are indirect, via independent schools like London School of Theology that have ‘validation’ arrangements with royally-chartered universities that are able to issue the degrees. While the better of these non-chartered schools are reputable in their own right, graduates will have to explain to a hiring panel the validation arrangement as well as the lack of residency. Unfortunately for prospective students, the concept of validation itself is currently under fire in the UK, due to one entrepreneurial University’s scandalous validation of some bogus foreign schools.

Ironically, I just noticed that one of the unaccredited online outfits that offers the PhD (Newburgh Seminary) advertises in the banner ads at the top of on this website. I realize that anyone frequenting The Grad Cafe is likely to only apply to competitive programs, but you may come across people considering one of these 'schools.' Since some of them claim home-grown accreditation from unrecognized bodies, a good site to direct potential victims to is the US Department of Education accreditation database: http://ope.ed.gov/ac...ion/Search.aspx.

Hi Jon, The programs you’re looking at are all generally fine ones. I'm particularly fond of Boston College. However, for any of these you’ll likely need to prove yourself in a master’s program to be competitive. I’d encourage you to focus on quality master’s applications instead although that doesn’t mean you can’t take the long shot and apply to your favorite PhD program as well. Read the Princeton Guide to the GRE and take it as soon as you’re ready. That way you may have time to take it again if you feel you need improvement. European universities don’t require the GRE, but all or most American universities will, and if you do well, it’s another form of validation even if it’s not required. When you do submit, de-emphasize or perhaps don’t even mention the Bible institute, as they tend to have a very poor academic reputation. However, you can emphasize the skills you learned there, such as ‘I have a reading knowledge of Hebrew and Greek.’ Likewise, emphasize the teaching experience as a university teaching assistant and at the high school. I wouldn’t mention the Sunday school teaching, to be honest. Last but certainly not least, share with us or give some thought to what specifically you’re interested in studying. That not only helps those of us here give more focused advice, but will direct your search for well-suited programs as you track down the experts in your desired subfield that you want to study under. Best of luck on the journey! Westcott

Nashotah is an excellent choice for anyone interested in liturgucal studies. If I could return to my M.Div. and do it at a different school, I'd go to the House.

No, just the realization that my school's 'accredited but mediocre' academic reputation would not allow me to prove I was capable of meeting the PhD challenge, no matter how well I did. Where are you thinking of doing the Th.M./S.T.M. and in what discipline? W.

Hi ddsdevil, I traveled a similar road and ultimately succeeded. I had chosen an M.Div. based on a scholar who turned out to be an (unadvertised) research professor who rarely taught classes, while the rest of the faculty wasn’t at his level. I chose more carefully for the Th.M. and once I went from Westcott (M.Div., Blah School of Theology) to Westcott (Th.M., Dynamic Divinity School) I got into my first choice university for the Ph.D. Hope that’s somewhat encouraging, Westcott

I haven’t gotten a faculty position, much less graduated yet, but I have come to understand (says ye wise old ‘mature student’) that it’s best to think about the end game as soon as possible. Consider that you will exit a doctoral program having become a noted expert in something. When you go to interviews seeking a faculty position, your expertise will be what you have to offer, not what your grades were. While the courses you’ve taken in your area will flesh that out somewhat, the biggest differentiator between yourself and someone else from a university of comparable quality will be your dissertation. Therefore, pick a dissertation topic that will be interesting, and make sure you have the best supervision and resources to hit that dissertation out of the park. I know many brilliant individuals who landed on an obscure topic simply because it hadn’t been done and was ‘available.’ Imagine trying to convince a hiring panel that you can fill seats because you’ve made yourself an expert on some arcane aspect of Athenian clothing. All the humanities are suffering, and every department would like to bring in students from a broad range of backgrounds. Become an expert in something that will assist in that. Hint: if there are only a handful of people on this planet who care about your diss. topic, it won’t be of much help in that regard. It also might not interest you enough to persevere to the finish line. I also know of many individuals who selected a topic just slightly different from someone else’s because they and their doctoral supervisor see the dissertation as a ‘research project’ box to be checked, not something to really advance knowledge and understanding. Imagine how you’ll sell a hiring panel on your ability to continue producing quality research when your dissertation appears to have been cloned off of your supervisors with one different variable that technically qualifies it as independent. You’ll be expected to publish or perish, and such a dissertation telegraphs that you won’t be an asset to your department. Hope this proves helpful!

Let’s take a break and talk about anything but the admissions process. So what was the best or most challenging book you’ve read in the last academic year? I’ll start: For me, the book which most challenged my preconceptions was T. D. Barnes’ Constantine and Eusebius. As a bonus, it had the older smyth-sewn binding and would actually lay open when I set it on the desk. Your thoughts?

While I suppose this could turn out to be an either/or situation, it’s also possible that there’s a major unrecognized ‘both/and’ opportunity here. There’s nothing that says you can’t take the offer and study a theological movement in U.S. History, or a major American theologian like Edwards, Hodge, and do it with full funding (and presumably medical insurance) from the history department. Check with your advisor and explain your research interests, and perhaps they’ll let you take some of your coursework in theology, or have joint/interdisciplinary supervision. If you’re not satisfied with the options presented you in your first year, you can reapply to schools of theology next year as a better candidate (although you’ll need to carefully work out your explanation as to why you’re leaving a funded program in another discipline.) P.S. Great moniker, by the way.

The usual rule pushed by accrediting bodies is that graduate credits from a conferred degree cannot be used towards another graduate degree. However, since the M.A.R./M.T.S. relates to the M.Div. much like the A.A. does the B.A. (in that at many schools it is designed as a component of the larger degree), that ‘no re-use of credits’ rule usually isn’t applied to M.Div. students. While there is no universal policy, I know that many schools will simply subtract the transferable M.A. credits from the total required for the M.Div. and allow you to drive on. The only reason I include the term ‘transferable’ is that some schools have unique courses that don’t easily line up with courses from another school, giving the admissions/transfer people fits. The most likely limiting factor will probably be the maximum transfer policy. Check the catalog at the school you’re thinking of pursuing your M.Div. at and see how many graduate credits must be completed at the M.Div. institution (sometimes 30, but usually 45 or 60 credits of the typical 90-credit M.Div.) None of the above would apply if you were to try and transfer credits from your Yale M.A.R. into, say, an M.A. in Near Eastern Archaeology. Even if you could line up the classes to satisfy requirements, you’d probably run up against the ‘no re-use of credits at the grad level’ rule. While admissions can bend any rule in theory (get it in writing from the registrar if they do!) the above loophole typically only applies to the M.Div. Best wishes on your program(s)!

I'll second that, and add that the area has some excellent coffeeshops - I can't say enough good about Lincoln Street Coffee in Newton.

The above advice from others about how to use your year off in terms of developing yourself is wise. Your qualifications don’t look to be a stumbling block, so I think the the most helpful thing I could recommend to you for next year is to look at things differently and try to understand the needs of the admissions committee. The problem is that we approach these applications like they’re generalized resume statements, or applications to an undergraduate program, but the game has changed. Let me try to explain what I’m getting at by putting it in terms of how an admissions committee might see things. Among their graduate applicants, all but a few outliers will be able to legitimately say nice things about themselves, the things that admissions committees hear all the time: ‘I have high test scores, a good academic record, a history of social involvement, and a desire to advance noble causes with my education.’ Here’s how that sounds to someone on a committee trying to sort through tons of applications and match students to research supervisors: Yet another intelligent but unfocused applicant. After some time ‘in the system,’ (current Ph.D. candidate) here is what I think they want to hear beyond the standard stuff above: ‘I wish to take these wonderful qualifications and pursue research into the subfield of XXX. Specifically, I am seeking to answer research question XXX. After reviewing the field for a truly expert supervisor for that research, I hope to study under the guidance of Professor XXX.’ Such a blurb may sound inconsequential to you personally next to your large donation of time volunteering, but here’s what that would communicate to me if I were on your committee: This applicant has done their homework regarding the field, has established themselves as a good fit for one of the faculty, and will very likely not drop out after completing coursework and flailing about for a research topic. The admissions committee’s job is not just to select promising students, but to match them with faculty possessing similar research interests. In addition, they’re looking for indicators that you will not fail to complete, becoming a bad statistic and a waste of funding and other less tangible resources. That phase where one transitions from coursework or exams to research is the most frequent time for exhausted students to crash and burn. I think this factor (proposing specific research under a specific faculty expert), which goes largely unrecognized, is part of why it seems a mystery that some people who look less qualified in terms of test scores and grades get accepted. Lacking this kind of statement is also not disqualifying, but I recommend it, as well as contacting the professor in question prior to the admissions deadline. I hope this helps!

I have taken coursework through distance learning, and found it not equal to residential coursework. There are exceptions, but most online schools are either openly for-profit, or are the budget-balancing arm of a non-profit university. In other words, most online programs are run in the same fashion, with predatory admissions and minimal academic standards. Even assuming a school is trying to do their best at educating people online (which I think is pretty rare) what does one miss academically by doing it online? No face to face discussion seminars, where one has to internalize the material, articulate one’s thoughts on it, and think quickly to respond to those who disagree. No face to face language classes, where one has an actual speaker who can correct pronunciation and answer questions. No being immersed in a dynamic academic community, where one learns from one’s peers and professors in informal discussions. Unfortunately, most people doing the online university thing do not have a degree from a solid residential university for a point of comparison, and get very upset when questions are raised about the quality of such an education. In my experience, it’s not an area where much reasoned discourse takes place. The sad thing is that most online schools that hold some kind of recognised accreditation prey upon US students with access to Federal student loans, and encourage them to max their loans for a degree that may be legal, but is absolutely non-competitive. The key to that non-competitiveness isn’t really even the (lame) mode through which the learning is done, but that the programs are not offered by the high-quality schools (and for good reason). Most of the US schools offering online doctorates in religion are either non-accredited, or have accreditation but not much academic respect. There are a number of decent British, Australian, and South African universities that offer their research degrees through a modified format, where one doesn’t live near campus, but usually has to come there every year in the summer. Still, they’re not following the current online model anyway, just allowing you to do your thesis research in other libraries. I am thankful that the US Association of Theological Schools mandates that only a portion (1/3, I think) of one’s degree at an ATS-accredited school can be comprised of non-residential coursework.

Sounds like a good MA program. I’m thinking they’ll have lots of crossover Patristics courses available.

Some of the variance in responses may be due to different fields, and some to what point of the journey one is on at application. Particularly, those coming straight out of undergrad into one of the MA/PhD type programs will likely have a different perspective than mine. I already held a master’s degree with thesis when I applied to doctoral programs, a point at which one really ought to have an idea what they’re going to research. For what it's worth, a significant part of the reason I got into my first choice PhD program was that I contacted my prospective supervisor with a detailed research proposal that interested them.

I like to approach this from a different angle. I think that technically, ranking is not what you want (especially since most ranking is done on the basis of comparing undergraduate programs). Seeking a highly ranked school will cause you to include some highly ranked schools that aren’t the best for you. Without pointing the finger at anyone’s uni, everyone in doctoral programs can probably think of at least one very highly-ranked school that is not a significant player in their specialized field. Ideally, I think one should aim for schools that have first, the scholar(s) who can provide the best supervision for your particular research; second, best departmental reputation; and third, the resources to support your research (primarily libraries/labs, but also funding), and resume (teaching experience, broadening study at partnering university in another country, etc.) Seeking the best school in this way will usually produce a list of highly ranked schools, but the list will be shorter and more focused. Why the emphasis on the supervisor? If you want to break into university teaching, your Ph.D. thesis had better hit like a hammer. It won’t if you don’t find the best possible supervision for your research. I also understand hiring panels frequently view this area as a future indicator of your dedication to ongoing research. They want to see that you are interested in making a genuine contribution to your chosen field, and giving higher priority to other items like convenience, cost, name cachet, etc. suggests that you’ll likely have the same attitude towards your research if hired as faculty. The reality of course, is that I wound up with a list of highly-ranked schools, but I can defend my choice to a hiring committee in a way that is not only hindsight (I want what I got), but advances me as a candidate (I got what I needed to be the best researcher and teacher for you). Anyway, Strangefox, I hope this is helpful to you!

GCTS' main campus is in South Hamilton, on the train line. I used to commute to both Chestnut Hill and Cambridge, and it was a good opportunity to re-read the seminar texts. The Boston campus is indeed much smaller.