Jump to content

Archaeo_Anon

Members
  • Posts

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Archaeo_Anon

  1. Clearly I can't speak for all archaeology programs, since I'm only in the one that I'm in, and I only have direct knowledge of those experienced firsthand by my peers, but as far as I can tell, archaeology doesn't work exactly the same way as many other fields in which it's recommended that you cast as wide a net as possible and hope that any of a number of faculty will take you under their wing. Even the top tier programs only have a limited number of faculty working in a particular region or on a particular topic, and if you want admission as a PhD student, you are going to have to work specifically with a certain faculty member on that topic in that region. You don't get assigned to a lab which may be doing multiple things, you are essentially apprenticed to a faculty member or their pet project. Is there latitude for interests which may bridge the specializations of multiple faculty? Certainly, but you do have to be careful with it, and it is still absolutely essential that you target your POIs with specific information and interests that you can back up with specifically related experiences. Casting as wide a net as possible will not make one as attractive a candidate as being as specific as possible and as strong as possible in that one particular specialty. It may seem like putting all your eggs in one basket to have that kind of focus, and extremely nerve-wracking to be so reliant on a single professor to make or break your admissions chances, but that's the way it works. No two ways about it. If someone is admitted to my program (which is a top tier program) this year who wants to work in a certain part of the Americas, everyone knows exactly who their advisor is, because that's the only person who works there. If someone is admitted who wants to work in East Asia, again, the pickings for advisors are slim. Classical archaeo? Everyone knows. Archaeology is a small world. It's circumstances like these that make it such a competitive field for prospective students. I'd like to help, but I'm not sure how much more specific you want me to be short of linking everyone to their magical dream activity's website, which I cannot do since it is going to be so case-specific every time. On top of the common sense advice given to applicants in all fields, you need some combination of the things in the list I posted above. Which things are most relevant and achievable for you in your own circumstances are something only you can determine. Unfortunately if the one thing your application really needs to bolster it, for example, is more specific coursework (in languages, say), and you have too many other things going on in your life to realistically make time for that, you simply may not be able to reach that "top candidate" status. You may not always need to be the best of the best and the top of the top for admission depending on your focus and which programs you apply to, but it is something you would have to come to terms with. (Fortunately, in most cases shortcomings of one experiential type can be made up for with others; take a hard look at your application, figure out where it could be stronger, and figure out what specific tasks or activities from the list can fill that gap.) I really, really don't want to be a downer about it, but it's important to keep an honest eye on exactly how hard it is to make it in archaeology. Many extremely intelligent, hardworking people get stuck doing several Masters degrees in a row before they get in to a PhD program or give up. Several of my friends from undergrad are in this exact situation. I feel for them, but I can't wave a wand and give them that perfect combination of attributes that they would need to get into the program they want. They're the only ones who can make it happen, and even then they'll need all the luck they can get. I still have trouble comprehending how I managed to get in myself given how totally arbitrary some of the process seems, and a few grads who have been in the program much longer than me have told me that even after many years into the process they still have yet to figure out how they managed it. You do what you can, and the rest is out of your hands. If you have more specific questions, e.g. making nice with LoR writers, or where to look for info on field schools, I will certainly try to provide what advice I can.
  2. I think this one will depend more on the atmosphere at your individual school. At some schools extreme casual dressing (like, roll out of bed and go) is the norm, or at least common enough to not attract comment. At others, dressing at least somewhat nicely or professionally is expected, and dressing casually will raise a few eyebrows. In either case, try to look at least moderately professional when it counts (conferences, presentations, if you're teaching, meetings with your advisor/potential advisor, etc), and err on the side of overdressing if you're really unsure. That said, even if your school is pretty casual, try not to go too overboard. I previously worked at a university where not even the staff had any particular dress code, and the one grad student who was extra greasy, never changed clothes, and occasionally walked around the department without shoes definitely attracted comment and derision behind the scenes.
  3. Ah, cool. I thought that might be the case, but your info didn't specify.
  4. Out of curiosity, AG, are you on the sociocultural or archaeology side of anthro?
  5. Fit with individual faculty probably matters more than fit with the overall program the vast majority of the time (you have to inspire someone to pull for you in those adcom meetings, and possibly offer up funding on your behalf; to do this you really have to sell yourself to the individual faculty member). Research your POIs at each program--read whatever they've published most recently, and check out their CVs and faculty profiles on the department website. Whatever they're doing or researching now may not directly reflect what they were working on earlier in their careers, so it would behoove you to make sure you still fit with what they're actually working on. Tailor your application to fit that individual faculty member. Esoteric but recently acquired interests by the faculty may be your best bet (and don't "fake" being interested in these just to better your chances--see point C, they'll see right through you--but be on the lookout for faculty who have suddenly become interested in the same thing you are, and apply to work with them), because they may want a grad student to work on that new interest with them, but haven't gotten one yet. In some cases it helps to directly contact your POI via email or--even better--in person. Not all of them are super welcoming to random emails from potential applicants, but most faculty are more than happy to chatter away about whatever they're working on, and tend to think well of people who show interest, provide a listening ear, and may be able to follow up with some insightful comments or thoughtful questions. This will also help you determine if your POI is even taking students this year, because if not, spend your energy elsewhere where you've actually got a chance. Only extremely well-funded rockstar faculty (and it's not always the people you think, so ask around...ask the current grads if the dept website offers up a few to field applicant questions) are able to take on a new grad or two every year. If you are in touch with your POI beforehand, definitely follow up and let them know when you've submitted your application. Be specific about your research interests. You don't have to have a precise written-out-in-words question that you intend to propose for your dissertation topic at the time you apply, but have a particular general topic and region in mind (e.g. state expansion in x, trade networks between a and b, issues of identity in n culture under colonial rule, etc), be sure to delineate rough time periods where applicable. Just saying you've been interested in archaeology/the Maya/whatever since you were a kid is not enough to qualify as a research interest. Pretty much every archaeologist and wannabe archaeologist has been into this stuff since they were kids too. This approach won't make you stand out at all. Be able to back up your stated interest with something concrete: coursework, a relevant undergrad or masters degree, some kind of research project (undergrad/masters thesis, research paper, poster presented at a conference, etc), some kind of extracurricular work or volunteer experience relevant to the topic (volunteering at a museum with an exhibit to do with your interest, be a shovel bum on a dig relevant to your interest, etc), and/or potentially field school in the region relevant to your interest. Don't settle for just any random archaeological experience regardless of its relevance to what you want to study. Target, target, target, target. Get your interests in mind as early as possible and get going. You absolutely do not have to have all or even most of these concrete experiences to qualify as a top candidate, but having multiple of them under your belt will show them that you're serious and that you have the chops to take action in pursuing your interest even without being affiliated with their (clearly best ever) program. I'll also second the common knowledge that GPA and GRE scores mainly help as a basic qualifier to get you into the candidate pool, and that generally the particular scores don't matter, but I will also throw out there that if you happen to have extremely good scores on both accounts, you may get an extra admit boost because the department may consider you a good bet as a nominee for various campus-wide or other fellowships, which are parceled out based mainly on scores. Fellowships and scholarships awarded to their students help departments look prestigious, and take the funding burden off of them, which makes them even more eager to have you. Basically, if you can't get the tippy tippy top scores for either GRE or GPA but you still have good, solid scores that meet or exceed their minimum, don't sweat it. But if your scores are already high enough that it's doable for you to work a little bit harder and study a little bit longer to reach that tippy tippy top, do it. In summary: Ask not what the department can do for you, ask what you can do for the department. Then prove that you've got the follow-through.
  6. Incidentally, I found this website on About.com to be particularly helpful when I was first looking into applying to Archaeology graduate programs. It's fairly comprehensive, though with a few blind spots since it seems to focus more on programs worldwide than just in the U.S., but it's updated regularly, and although it doesn't let you sort programs by whether they offer terminal Masters degrees, it does let you sort them by other characteristics that may help you narrow things down (e.g. location, specialty, etc), and then lists the degree types offered in the actual list of programs. Just fyi the links to the actual list are above the list of external links under "GGSA by Name", "GGSA by Program Focus", etc. It's not the clearest layout ever.
  7. I find it very worrisome that your advisor is against your thesis topic. Are you friendly enough with your other mentor to ask them to speak to your advisor on your behalf? It sounds like your advisor isn't very willing to work with you or compromise, and I'd be afraid that even if you finished your thesis on the topic you want to look into, they may flat out not accept it because they didn't want you to write on that topic in the first place, regardless of quality. This would leave you SOL in terms of getting your degree, and with another year gone by. My program had a student a few years ago not have his thesis accepted because he refused to make the changes requested by his committee, and when he raised a stink about it (and to be fair, he made some serious breaches in the process), he was kicked out without his Masters. Try to get other faculty to advocate for you. If that doesn't work, I'm not really sure what to say. If it were me, I would certainly consider compromising on my end in order to get out as quickly as possible, but that's just me. What you decide is up to you. Sounds like a no-win situation!
  8. That really sucks. Sounds like a bad time all around to be in that program. I might ordinarily say this is the kind of situation you should try to transfer out of, but I'm assuming it's a 2-year Masters program which means you're half done, and a year is about how long it would take for you to go through the whole application process again to find another program anyway. If you've been trying everything you can to make friends in the graduate population and it hasn't been working after a year, I'm not sure what to tell you other than to focus on getting done and getting out. A friend of mine is in the process of finishing her second (and final) year in a Masters program on the East Coast that she hates, in a place where she's miserable living, and where her only good friend is her S.O.; she's just been admitted to a PhD program at UC Davis, and needless to say, she's ecstatic. The vast majority of grad programs are not like the one you're stuck in; my own program is extremely friendly and non-competitive, and everybody makes a serious effort to include everyone else in most social goings-on. After watching my friend struggle through her Masters, I feel extremely lucky that the vibe is so awesome where I am. Just remember that things may suck now, but they will get better. As long as you can keep plugging along, it's only a matter of time before you're out of there and on to bigger and better things. I wouldn't worry about the desk/office situation, though. That sounds pretty par for the course. Even in my program everyone (even the ABDs and TA/GSRs) has only a desk in a shared office.
  9. Am I misunderstanding your description of your program? There is only one professor? That seems weirdly small! Is it an interdepartmental program with additional faculty (and students) who just aren't directly affiliated with your specific program even though they participate, or is it really just the one guy? Would there be any options for you to try to make social inroads with students and faculty in related departments (like Classics or Sociocultural Anth, Near Eastern Studies, etc)? Try checking out their departmental calendars for any lectures or other events that they may be hosting that will let you meet and interact with other grads with similar interests. What about people in your classes? Surely your classes must include students other than just the few in your program. Any chance of starting up a regular study group that would give you an excuse to grab a cup of coffee together and maybe shoot the breeze a little before/after? Once you're more acquainted you can find excuses to get together on a purely social basis. Unfortunately in this kind of situation you're going to have to be pretty proactive about seeking out compatible people and finding ways of cobbling them into a social group. I know firsthand how painful it can be to be stuck in such an anti-social situation, so I wish you lots of luck!
  10. Generally speaking, yes, though with a few caveats--it will help you to have Masters work in archaeology if you were working in (/towards) the topic you want to focus on in your eventual PhD work. If you are planning to work in the New World (which would be a pretty big jump from classics, but hey, you never know), archaeological practice has much closer ties with sociocultural anth, so there may not be much disparity between how much sociocultural Masters work will help you and how much strictly archaeological Masters work will help. If you want to use the Masters (either archaeo or anth) to just explore different areas you don't have much exposure to and don't narrow your focus and strengthen your background in that one area, having that Masters may not necessarily give you a significant boost over another applicant who only has a Bachelors but has spent more time and coursework on their proposed PhD specialty. If most of your coursework to date is in classical archaeo and you're still interested in continuing in that vein, many classicists have trouble with fulfilling the language requirements. One option that many take is to enroll in a post-bac program focusing just on the languages they need, or, if they're more interested specifically in the archaeological side of things rather than philology or history, apply directly through archaeology departments* for their graduate studies rather than through classics departments, since the language requirements tend to be less (though it may still be a good idea to squeeze in that post-bac study if you can). *(or anth if archaeo isn't its own department at that particular school; interdepartmental archaeo programs like UCLA's Cotsen and Brown's Joukowsky are particularly good for this since they pretty reliably include classical archaeology in their programs instead of letting it stay segregated in classics.)
  11. Good luck, Neshmi! I understand that most of the UCs make their decisions around the end of January-beginning of February, so hopefully you will get some good news soon!
  12. Fair enough. Though the fact remains that the general assumption is that it's required, which is probably why I read this as your meaning. I can't speak to any "general rules" since I'm neither on every adcom nor able to keep statistics on such things, but I'm not sure it's really correct to say that getting into Masters programs without field experience is rare enough to call it a fluke. Is field experience preferable? Sure. Is it a good idea if you can manage it? Absolutely. I've just found it to be the case that the qualities that field experience expresses about an applicant can be achieved in other ways, and that trying to acquire any field experience at all without regard to its applicability to your region or subject of focus may not necessarily help applicants as much as they may think. If an applicant has to choose between volunteering at a local dig that has nothing to do with their area of focus other than just being a dig, and working on a research project which will get them in contact with texts and site reports directly related to their area of focus but which provides no field experience...the latter will probably give them more of an edge. Ymmv, obviously, since the relative difficulty of digging in certain regions without being attached to an academic research team and the quality of research experience available to non-graduate students is going to vary pretty widely from focal area to focal area. The point being, applicants-to-be should weigh their options and proceed thoughtfully rather than just jumping into anything archaeological at all because it's just "what's done". No one applicant characteristic or experience on the ol' CV is the be-all and end-all, and many things can contribute to a winning application; so applicants who just can't swing field school, for example, shouldn't lose heart, and applicants who have been to ten field schools but done very little to further their experience with their desired research focus shouldn't feel smug. It's not a case of finding the right school/person to "plead your case to", but rather figuring out how to make yourself a stronger candidate from a holistic perspective.
×
×
  • 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