Zachary Z

Hi all, I hope you're all enjoying spring! Thank you to anyone who reads this long entry and can provide me with some expertise, especially if you have obtained your PhD. Right now, I am having a really difficult time choosing between some schools for my masters in social anthropology. A little bit about my background: I completed my BA in History and Political Science with a minor in Economics in 2023 at a somewhat recognizable, local public school in my hometown of Pittsburgh, US after I had to transfer from Toronto during because of the pandemic. I originally planned on going to law school before having a change of heart. Now, my goal is to obtain my PhD in social anthropology and become a researcher/professor, specifically looking at the historical anthropology of religion and gender/sex. I'm not looking for opinions of the validity of 1 year UK masters programs. I already examined this and determined it would be better for me to obtain one than apply to PhDs without an Anthro masters or stay in the US for a terminal masters, but I digress. Currently I am trying to determine the importance of experience conducting original field research in my niche during a MSc before applying to US PhDs. Increasing my odds at a top US PhD (I would love to stay in the UK too, but there are just so many more US schools) would be my priority when choosing where to attend. I'm trying to decide between LSE, UCL, St Andrew's and Edinburgh. I really want to go to LSE. It seems almost perfect. I love the location (I'm gay and really tired of living in a small city. It's actually so horrific), course structure, modules offered, small cohorts, and recognition that LSE's Anthro department has, especially in the niche of religion and gender. I think the faculty would be a great fit and write the some of the best letters of my options. However, I cannot do original field research, and my dissertation would need to be library based. I'm not sure if this program is for people without fieldwork experience who want to pursue PhDs. Some sources claim that this will hurt my chances at top US PhDs, and others claim it has no bearing. I've reached out to professors at Pitt with no help given. What do you think? It's my top choice if doing a library -based dissertation has no real bearing on my chances of getting a PhD. So, if fieldwork experience isn't very important, I would choose LSE. If it is, I guess I'd reluctantly choose between the two least prestigious schools I got into, UCL and Edinburgh. I have other gripes with St., Andrew's not adequately preparing me with enough relevant substantive courses as well as its isolating location. Can anyone speak to the importance of fieldwork in my field before applying to PhDs in the US? Thank you for taking the time to read all of this. I really hope some of you could provide your kind and genuine thoughts given what you know and your experiences.

Hi all, I hope you're all enjoying spring! Thank you to anyone who reads this long entry and can provide me with some expertise, especially if you have obtained your PhD. Right now, I am having a really difficult time choosing between some schools for my masters in social anthropology. A little bit about my background: I completed my BA in History and Political Science with a minor in Economics in 2023 at a somewhat recognizable, local public school in my hometown of Pittsburgh, US after I had to transfer from Toronto during because of the pandemic. I originally planned on going to law school before having a change of heart. Now, my goal is to obtain my PhD in social anthropology and become a researcher/professor, specifically looking at the historical anthropology of religion and gender/sex. I'm not looking for opinions of the validity of 1 year UK masters programs. I already examined this and determined it would be better for me to obtain one than apply to PhDs without an Anthro masters or stay in the US for my masters, but I digress. Currently I am trying to determine the importance of experience conducting original field research in my niche. Increasing my odds at a top US PhD (I would love to stay in the UK too, but there are just so many more US schools) would be my priority when choosing where to attend. LSE: I love the location (I'm gay and really tired of living in a small city), course structure, modules offered, small cohorts, and recognition that LSE's Anthro department has, especially in the niche of religion and gender. I think the faculty would be a great fit and write the some of the best letters of my options. However, I cannot do original field research, and my dissertation would need to be library based. I'm not sure if this program is for people without fieldwork experience who want to pursue PhDs. Some sources claim that this will hurt my chances at top US PhDs, and others claim it has no bearing. I've reached out to professors at Pitt with no help given. What do you think? It's my top choice if this has no real bearing on my chances of getting a PhD. St. Andrew's: I'm also attracted to St. Andrew's for its small cohorts (I think they would also write great letters) and the recognition they have in anthropology, especially in historical anthropology and religious anthropology. Although, I'm more interested in the religions of West and South Asia than in Christianity, which is the emphasis at St. Andrew's. In addition, I was offered a place in their MRes program. This would give me the most field research experience. However, given that I have no background in Anthropology, I feel like the fact that they only offer one substantive module covering topics in anthropology that aren't even tangentially related to my interests, means I should rule this option out. I just don't see myself writing a good writing sample. I also just don't think I could ever live in the isolation of St. Andrew's. UCL: Love the location. I really do love UCL's course structure and the modules offer. Its nearly identical to LSE's. Plus, if it matters, I can do field research here, unfunded. My gripes with UCL are that it's such a huge school, so I'm concerned about the quality of my relationships with professors and of my letters of recommendation. I also feel like the faculty is less recognized in Anthro in general and in my niche. Its more so for biological or material culture and its high global ranking comes from its massive size. It feels like LSE is better in every way except for the fact that I can't do field research there, however I don't know how heavily to weigh that. Right now, it feels like my major decision is between LSE and UCL. Edinburgh: Location would be a compromise, its rather small. the course structure could be the best. It offers all the same courses on religion, gender, sexuality etc. There's also an additional writing course and an additional methods course. I honestly don't know if getting feedback on one paper and doing one extra methods course would be worth living in Edinburgh compared to London, though. There is large number of researchers in South Asia here, the largest in the UK I believe. However, less expertise in religion and gender/sex compared to LSE and less recognized for Anthro in general compared to UCL. I feel that the department and some names are less recognizable/ carry less weight than those at the three other schools. I know it's mostly about what I produce, but I've read that who writes your letters is actually very important. Additionally, Edinburgh feels like a large school with the same obvious drawbacks that I mentioned with UCL. Edinburgh is smaller than UCL though. Although not much smaller. I don't really think this would compensate for the location or lack of recognition that Edinburgh receives compared to UCL. So, if fieldwork experience isn't very important, I would choose LSE. If it is, I guess I'd reluctantly choose between the two least prestigious schools I got into, UCL and Edinburgh. I'm leaning towards UCL mostly because of location and its recognition. Can anyone speak to the importance of fieldwork? Or LSE vs UCL,. UCL vs Edinburgh, LSE even vs Edinburgh? Thank you for taking the time to read all of this. I really hope some of you could provide your kind and genuine thoughts given what you know and your experiences.

Hi all, I hope you're all enjoying spring! Thank you to anyone who reads this long entry and can provide me with some expertise, especially if you have obtained your PhD. Right now, I am having a really difficult time choosing between some schools for my masters. A little bit about my background: I completed my BA in History and Political Science with a minor in Economics in 2023 at a somewhat recognizable, local public school in my hometown of Pittsburgh, US after I had to transfer from Toronto during because of the pandemic. I originally planned on going to law school before having a change of heart. Now, my goal is to obtain my PhD in social anthropology and become a researcher/professor, specifically looking at the historical anthropology of religion and gender/sex. I'm not looking for opinions of the validity of 1 year UK masters programs. I already examined this and determined it would be better for me to obtain one than apply to PhDs without an Anthro masters or stay in the US for my masters, but I digress. Currently I am trying to determine the importance of experience conducting original field research in my niche. Increasing my odds at a top US PhD (I would love to stay in the UK too, but there are just so many more US schools) would be my priority when choosing where to attend. LSE: I love the location (I'm gay and really tired of living in a small city), course structure, modules offered, small cohorts, and recognition that LSE's Anthro department has, especially in the niche of religion and gender. I think the faculty would be a great fit and write the some of the best letters of my options. However, I cannot do original field research, and my dissertation would need to be library based. I'm not sure if this program is for people without fieldwork experience who want to pursue PhDs. Some sources claim that this will hurt my chances at top US PhDs, and others claim it has no bearing. I've reached out to professors at Pitt with no help given. What do you think? It's my top choice if this has no real bearing on my chances of getting a PhD. St. Andrew's: I'm also attracted to St. Andrew's for its small cohorts (I think they would also write great letters) and the recognition they have in anthropology, especially in historical anthropology and religious anthropology. Although, I'm more interested in the religions of West and South Asia than in Christianity, which is the emphasis at St. Andrew's. In addition, I was offered a place in their MRes program. This would give me the most field research experience. However, given that I have no background in Anthropology, I feel like the fact that they only offer one substantive module covering topics in anthropology that aren't even tangentially related to my interests, means I should rule this option out. I just don't see myself writing a good writing sample. I also just don't think I could ever live in the isolation of St. Andrew's. UCL: Love the location. I really do love UCL's course structure and the modules offer. Its nearly identical to LSE's. Plus, if it matters, I can do field research here, unfunded. My gripes with UCL are that it's such a huge school, so I'm concerned about the quality of my relationships with professors and of my letters of recommendation. I also feel like the faculty is less recognized in Anthro in general and in my niche. Its more so for biological or material culture and its high global ranking comes from its massive size. It feels like LSE is better in every way except for the fact that I can't do field research there, however I don't know how heavily to weigh that. Right now, it feels like my major decision is between LSE and UCL. Edinburgh: Location would be a compromise, its rather small. the course structure could be the best. It offers all the same courses on religion, gender, sexuality etc. There's also an additional writing course and an additional methods course. I honestly don't know if getting feedback on one paper and doing one extra methods course would be worth living in Edinburgh compared to London, though. There is large number of researchers in South Asia here, the largest in the UK I believe. However, less expertise in religion and gender/sex compared to LSE and less recognized for Anthro in general compared to UCL. I feel that the department and some names are less recognizable/ carry less weight than those at the three other schools. I know it's mostly about what I produce, but I've read that who writes your letters is actually very important. Additionally, Edinburgh feels like a large school with the same obvious drawbacks that I mentioned with UCL. Edinburgh is smaller than UCL though. Although not much smaller. I don't really think this would compensate for the location or lack of recognition that Edinburgh receives compared to UCL. So, if fieldwork experience isn't very important, I would choose LSE. If it is, I guess I'd reluctantly choose between the two least prestigious schools I got into, UCL and Edinburgh. I'm leaning towards UCL mostly because of location and its recognition. Can anyone speak to the importance of fieldwork? Or LSE vs UCL,. UCL vs Edinburgh, LSE even vs Edinburgh? Thank you for taking the time to read all of this. I really hope some of you could provide your kind and genuine thoughts given what you know and your experiences.