Archaeo_Anon

buddy buddy

solar system

tropical fruit

victory garden

For fun, slightly trashy, non-committal reading, I've really been enjoying this series by Andy McDermott. They go really fast, and read pretty much like your typical action/adventure movie. Pretty brainless, somewhat formulaic, but still enough of an original premise to keep it interesting.

I think this is an excellent idea. If you don't have any luck in your first round of apps, mmace, this is definitely something to consider.

I suspect it may also have to do with the fact that it's much easier to brush people off when you don't have to do it face to face (hence it's sometimes difficult to get a hold of faculty via email) or to legitimately forget even if you fully intend to reply (I do this a lot myself), whereas when the person is right in front of you it's both socially and practically easier to have a chat than to rebuff them, especially if you're not doing anything desperately urgent at that exact moment.

park ranger

Also, if I may just throw out some recommendations for really basic introductory texts to help orient yourself in terms of what archaeology is all about, Archaeological Theory: An Introduction by Matthew Johnson is a fantastic, easily comprehensible* overview of the development of archaeological theory in the 20th-21st centuries and the major schools of thought. Colin Renfrew's Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice is also a popular introductory text for the more practical side of things. It does touch on theory somewhat, but not in the same way that Johnson does. *Comprehensibility is more of a virtue than you can probably yet appreciate, if you've never read anything by Lewis Binford. DON'T WORRY. YOU WILL.

That's not necessarily true. While most masters programs would certainly appreciate field school/field research in your background, for many of them having field experience on your CV is just one of many possible indicators that you have thought about and really committed yourself to your field of interest. Back in my grad app days, I was admitted to several masters programs without any actual excavation experience under my belt. I know a fair number of other people pursuing graduate studies in archaeology for whom the situation was similar. Relevant coursework in combination with other research experience (i.e. to prove you have narrowed down your research interests to something specific that they can work with) should also be adequate. For many programs, proven dedication to your research topic and area of interest is preferable to willy-nilly attending a field school anywhere. Archaeological practice can vary pretty drastically from one site to the next, never mind one continent to the next, and participating in any field school that's convenient may not give you the requisite skills for your research area. Most adcoms will most likely be sympathetic to the fact that not everyone has the resources to dig in their area of interest before participating in graduate research. You will need to pick up field experience along the way, of course, but this is often possible to do during the course of your masters work. I'm not sure I could recommend trying to apply to a PhD program without field experience, but I have seen it done successfully, so you never know. People also often forget that there is a huge theoretical component as well as just digging and number crunching, as well as a lot of linguistic and textual familiarity that has to be cultivated if you work in an area where there are extant texts, and/or a serious sociocultural anthropological component if you work in the New World, since so much of the work there has to be done through ethnographic/ethnohistorical reference. Professional academic archaeologists really have to be jacks of all trades, both able to hack it in sub-par conditions in the dirt for three months out of the year, and then turn around and be competent, insightful scientists and scholars the other nine months of the year. It's definitely a grueling lifestyle for anyone. Mmace, I admire that you are taking this so seriously, and are putting together a realistic plan for how to get from point A to point B. That sort of attitude is really what's required here. A few tips: I do recommend you try taking a few basic archaeology classes first before you try applying for a masters program if for no other reason so that you can start to get a feel for the field and make sure it really is what you expect it to be before committing so much time/money/stress to a graduate program. You may also want to start narrowing your focus to specific geographic areas and specific research questions. Once you're in a program you will have some latitude to switch your focus elsewhere (people often do, as they get more exposure to what's what in the field), so don't worry about being committed to that one topic forever. Adcoms just want something solid to assess your fit with the program in terms of compatibility of interests (i.e. to see if you can be useful to any of their faculty), so going in with a vague "I'm interested in these cultures" or "I find x culture intriguing" probably won't fly. You may also find it beneficial to work on your Chinese/Japanese reading skills since the ability to read monographs and site reports from other, local archaeologists is one of the major reasons why archaeologists have to learn so many languages. Otherwise, good luck with the graduate process, and keep us updated! I would like to hear how you do in the future.

model minority

Several people in my cohort have visible tattoos (and a variety of facial piercings), as do a few others in my department. On a day-to-day basis they get no comment whatsoever from any faculty, staff, or students. It's generally a good idea to cover them at conferences and in the field if it's reasonably simple to do so, but if you're worried about just being out and about on campus or meeting with your advisor...don't be. That said, I don't think it's fair to say it's a "huge deal" across the board for conferences and the like. It's going to depend a lot on who's in the in-group in your specialty. If most of the people are more conservative, by all means, play it conservative if you want to make a good impression on them. If most of the people are completely blase about that kind of thing, they'll appreciate your effort to cover up, but it may come across as a little silly depending on the context. My particular area of specialization is quite new, so the people who participate in it tend to be younger and less concerned with visible tattoos and the like. I would certainly consider removing the jewelry in my piercings (I don't have any tattoos) for presenting at a big conference to a wider audience, but to gatherings of people just within my specialization it's pretty much a non-issue.

foreign language

ball bearing

Spoiler: I win in the end. (*cough* not about admissions, obviously, since I'm already matriculated; just allowing myself some uncautious optimism about my future career prospects)

rum runner

dentist chair

I feel incredibly lucky to be here. Not just in this specific program (which is great, and all the people are lovely), but also able to be a student again. The lifestyle is tough, but it suits me much better than an 8-5 office job which is what I was in for several years before being admitted. I feel healthier and in a much better place mentally just because I get to do and think about lots of interesting things, and have more control over my time throughout the day, even though the lack of sleep is...grueling. I love the subject matter and feeling like I've learned something significant. I find it really enjoyable to be intellectually challenged after so many years out of school and in jobs that gave me minimal mental stimulation. I have yet to come across a class, an assignment, even a single reading that didn't seem worth the time and effort. I won't lie, it can be extremely difficult, but I feel like I'm spending my time in a much more worthwhile way, and am getting paid to do it! It's much more satisfying than my previous desk job, which would never have helped me get where I want to be in life.

I've definitely fallen into a pattern where I'll start out each term feeling positively moronic, unable to fully grasp even the most basic course material, and incompetent since I can never seem to find the time to study enough to bring my comprehension level up to where I feel like it should be (not that this is even necessarily an achievable goal on a week-to-week basis), but then by the end of the term I'll suddenly realize that I've gradually accrued enough knowledge that looking back over the course materials from early on I can understand it all fairly easily. It's frustrating and stressful every start of term, but it's a relief to know that eventually it will pass. I actually find it somewhat encouraging that I'm completely intellectually intimidated by everyone else in my program at all times. It means that I've really made it into a high-quality program with the brightest and the best (though admittedly it's tough to deal with sometimes after having been one of the strongest students in my peer group all through my undergrad, and never having needed to be intellectually intimidated before), and it means that I can really get a glimpse of the kind of scholar I'll become if I can stick it out. It helps that all of the students in my program are amazingly open about how tough things are, and how well or badly they coped with the same transition when they first arrived. Knowing that they were all once in my shoes (or in the case of my cohort, currently in my shoes) and that even though they clearly have more knowledge than I do they don't consider themselves any smarter than anyone else in the program definitely helps me keep it all in perspective when I'm having a particularly rotten day. None of us would be in the programs we're in if we didn't deserve to be there. The rest of it is just work, work, work.

television reporter

I wouldn't count on it. Departments often receive partial applications from people who change their mind about applying partway through the process. Following up on every incomplete application would take many, many man hours for the poor departmental staff, and they probably simply cannot afford to do so on top of all their other duties. It's your application, you're the one with the vested interest in making sure all the materials are in, it's your responsibility to check up on this. If there's no automatic notification system to let you know that your application materials have all been received, call the staff person whose name is listed with the application information on the department website. If there's no name listed, call the department's front desk and ask who you should contact about it. Departmental staff don't want to see anybody fail over such a little thing; they will gladly help you if you take the initiative to ask.

I wish I could be encouraging, but I have to agree with warpspeed--you may be a very intelligent student with great a GRE score and decent GPA, but there are very few grad slots in the field of archaeology, and even fewer PhD slots. They are intensely competitive, and archaeology is one of those fields where you just cannot swing it without a fair amount of relevant background experience. There are many highly qualified applicants every year who have plenty of relevant coursework and digging experience who end up having to enroll in a terminal Masters program (sometimes one after another) because they aren't able to get into any PhD programs. Half of my cohort entered with Masters degrees already*, and of the remaining half, most had strong archaeological or Classical undergraduate degrees and were admitted after multiple years of fieldwork and research under specific faculty members in this department, and the rest of us have solid coursework backgrounds, archaeological undergraduate degrees, field exposure, and unusual research interests that allowed us to circumvent some of the usual preferences for extensive experience. That said, things are not hopeless for you. It will require a lot of work, and you probably should not expect to be admitted to a PhD program for another application cycle or two (or three), but if you can build up enough of a background to support your commitment to the field on paper, and to demonstrate development of your chosen research direction, you've got a fair shot at success. Take relevant classes wherever you can. If they have classes at your local community college, take those. If a nearby four-year college will allow you to enroll in courses without jumping through all the hoops of being a degree-seeking student, take classes there too. Archaeology 101, classes specifically about your region of interest, LANGUAGES is a big one. Start taking languages relevant to archaeological study in your region of interest. If that were anything in Mesoamerica or South America, Spanish for sure. In the Mediterranean, French and German plus whichever ancient languages are relevant (Latin, Greek, Akkadian, Middle Egyptian, etc). Since you're hoping to focus on East Asian archaeology, figure out which country you'd want to be working in, and start learning their language. Read a lot of academic articles and start defining what specific questions you might want to investigate in the course of your graduate research. Strongly consider applying to terminal Masters programs so you can pick up a lot of the archaeological research and coursework experience you're missing. Fieldwork is good and important, and I recommend you try to get into a field school in your region of interest** (and while you're there use the time to network with presiding faculty and their current graduate minions), but field experience alone is not enough to get you into a PhD program. Archaeology is a wonderful field, but it requires a huge amount of dedication and an even huger amount of work. You're going to have to demonstrate to the adcoms that you're willing to put yourself through all that. Being successful in the field of archaeology requires a not insignificant amount of academic masochism. Many people--even those admitted to the top programs--drop out after they complete their Masters degrees, and never make it to PhD. If you want it enough, you will put in the work and you will succeed. Eventually. If you're not willing to do so, you'll probably be much happier in a different field. I don't mean to be a Negative Nancy about this, I'm just trying to give as realistic a picture as possible. As warpspeed says, many (most, even) people do not understand what archaeology actually entails. I hope you find my advice helpful. *I should note that one member of my cohort actually completed their undergraduate degree in economics (not too far from business administration). They were able to turn this to their advantage by focusing their research on economic exchange networks of the Mediterranean. Prior to being admitted, however, they spent a year of full-time coursework acquiring the relevant languages followed by a terminal Masters degree in Classical Archaeology. It can be done! ** Shovelbums is a good place to look for names and locations of different field schools and information on applying; the departmental websites of programs you're interested in may have information about field schools that they host, though not all schools bother with or can afford to run a field school in addition to any active digs their faculty may participate in. UCLA usually runs a number of field schools, though it looks like from their website they may not be doing that this year (budget problems no doubt. Poor California!).

embedded reporter

pie pan

Draft Dodger