mlk

lucy mckenzie laura owens francis alys mika rottenberg

thanks for the info sorry to hear you weren't accepted who knows what motivates any of these decisions

How did you hear back from Rutgers, Coffeeblack? Did you apply for painting? thanks

just columbia

yes. if you had the MFA suffix removed from your slideroom application title then you had been taken out of the running. I guess it was a way for the school to organize their applicants by who was getting interviews and who had gotten rejected. If you go back to the past forums you will see that this is the case.

if you go back to the last two years freak out forums you will see that it is the case not just random neurotic freaking out

the rumor is if you still have MFA you haven't been rejected granted they could be going discipline by discipline so the painters could be the only ones who have been subject to such a purge at this moment but for your sake I hope that is not that case.

womp womp

ack my columbia slideroom just changed from 2014 painting MFA to 2014 painting hopefully this is good. I am guessing it is not. can other people check and let me know what their slideroom says? thanks

has anyone heard from Rutgers? Additionally, has anyone's Columbia slideroom status changed from 2014 Painting (or whatever) MFA to 2014 Painting. Or any other changes in the title? Per last years post this symbolizes that a decision has been made about your application.

Just received an email from nyu inviting me to interview - the interview dates are march 3 4 10 and 11. I think the email was for all disciplines.

You know, I would actually disagree with that, if the cost of a post bac is in itself not too much of a financial burden. People who did the post bac at SAIC, who were rejected everywhere the year before, got into Yale, SAIC with full scholarships, SVA and a host of other schools. It is a good way to get up to date recommendations from professors and to refine your work. People who did reasonably well in the post bac were also then accepted into the SAIC MFA program, so it could be a good stepping stone into MassArt if that's where you truly want to go (based on SAIC, not my knowledge of MassArt). I am dubious about the capacity of visits with other artists to really help you amp up your art to a level where it is competitive enough for the programs you are applying to. Free residencies are very difficult to get into. Paid residencies are no less expensive in terms of $ per day than the post bac would be. Probably they are more. In my (take it or leave it) opinion, it is less of an issue of whether or not you are talented enough, but whether your practice is refined, developed, and sophisticated enough for the programs to which you are applying. I think paid faculty members with an obligation to make you better will help you more than just fraternizing with other artists. Frankly, there are better schools to go to than SCAD and MassArt (in my opinion) - better schools that have more professional cache as well - and If you are getting rejected by your fall back schools then maybe rather than just taking some time to work more, you need to take some time to subject yourself to some intense critique and then aim higher. Spending another year making another body of work independently is probably not enough. And showing your work will not make you a better artist. Better to show when you are ready. But if the debt is crippling then don't do it. Although I disagree with Czarina about the value of post bac, her advice is on the target if you opt not to do it. That being said, it could help you get scholarships for when you do apply the second year, and the school administration surely has an encyclopedic knowledge of external scholarships you can apply for as well. There are many pros and cons. I just think it is a bit rash to judge post bacs for being a bit expensive when you have longer term goals in mind. And mass arts post bac is comparatively quite cheap. You might also want to check out the SVA summer photo residency.

joan mitchell you have to be nominated for

While we are waiting - here's something to think about: http://www.bostonmagazine.com/arts-entertainment/blog/2014/02/04/wellesley-art-exhibit-students-creeped/

check your pm's

I don't remember, sorry. But I know they interview a lot of people as the departments are all pretty big (compared to other art schools)... If I remember correctly they had about a 12% acceptance rate for painting the year I applied.

possibly- just checking as, per previous forums, they change the name when they make some sort of application decision I'll put it out of my mind

PS: Did anyone's Columbia Slideroom status change from 2014 Painting to 2014 Painting MFA? I feel like that wasn't there before... Or maybe it was... I can't remember.

when I had my interview there (quite a bit ago, things may have changed) they divided everyone up by majors. my interview was in a seminar room with two professors (neither of them were high up on the SAIC faculty hierarchy). they projected my slides and we talked about them.

Michelle Grabner, who is currently curating the whitney biennial, has an MFA from Northwestern and an MA in art history from UWMadison... so I'd say if you have the $$$, can handle the debt or can find somewhere with funding and want to do it, you should do it. People spend 3 times as long in school getting their PhD's so an extra 2 years to round out your practice is not too crazy. People do far more reckless things in their lives then spend a little extra time in school. And some people need the structure of school to help them progress while others may be able to do it independently.

oh also another one who got interviewed and then rejected from yale to go to SAIC just finished the core program at houston... and two saic MFA grads are in the whitney biennial this year... it's a good school!

ya- in fact, after my first round of rejections I was like "fuck this I'm making work for myself" which eventually evolved into the portfolio I have now... and I also took 2 years off and then applied again... and I am very grateful for the life experiences I have had in the meantime and absolutely believe they made me a way better artist (and I think this regardless of whether I get into any of the schools to which I applied) also I should note that from my group of applicant friends at SAIC, the 3 people that got into yale are all doing -okay-, but one who got rejected and went to SAIC is now showing at Lehman maupin, one who didn't even get an interview and went to northwestern is showing at emmanuelle perrotin at paris, and one who went to hunter is now a saatchi artist... another one who went to northwestern is tearing it up in chicago and showing at the MCA there... the only reason I didn't apply to any of those schools is because I relocated to NYC (for a bf)...

Last time I applied to and was rejected from Yale Columbia Hunter CalArts UCLA Bard and I did not receive any offers for interviews either In retrospect I feel like I was not a suitable candidate for CalArts and Bard, was not good enough for Yale, Columbia and UCLA.... and I think I should have gotten into Hunter (but whatever) I did get accepted to SAIC, but I was in the BFA painting program there at the time and I truly believe that I was accepted because the teachers knew and liked me personally and not because of the quality of my work (i.e. I would have been rejected othewise). So I discount that.

heyyyy - I got an interview for painting at yale which is exciting for those who got rejected, this was my second time applying and I got rejected everywhere the first time I applied so... it's pretty random what happens I guess.

I HOPE SO I am getting very antsy