needingspring

I'm not really sure what direct experience with the program Incitatus is basing his "impressions" on, but I'd be wary of basing your view of a program from random (positive or negative) posts online. I'd rely more on your own impressions while visiting.

Hmm, okay, so as someone who graduated from this program in 2008, I feel the need to jump in here and speak to this program's strengths. I disagree pretty strongly with the last post, which I know was second hand information (no, you don't have to get another master's in order to apply to a PhD, and, no, this program gets a lot of respect precisely because it's not your typical master's program). First of all, because this program is only a year, it will be the most intense academic year of your life and make you feel (and actually be) immensely prepared to do PhD work. Thus, it can both serve as a great way to test the demands of graduate work and figure out if this is really what you want to do, and what it means to actually do it. I think what someone quoted from their email about its "theoretical and conceptual" advantages is incredibly true: it's a program (and university) that is incredibly reflective not just about the content of what you are studying, but the form in which you are studying it. You will constantly be "experimenting" in your writing and ways of thinking about how text and theory interact with and collide into one another, and this attention to the theoretical and methodological ways of approaching your particular area of study will challenge you in all kinds of good, scary (ok, sometimes painful) ways. I believe the structure of the program is a strength as well, especially if your interests and ways of seeing this work tend at all towards interdisciplinarity. The "experimental" quality of this program isn't an accident, it's an actual philosophy: it enacts the idea that field-specifc work (and yes, you can do that too) cannot just exist in a bubble, but the work of, say, an English Literature student benefits from his or her interaction with other disciplines (and colleagues within other disciplines) like philosophy, art history, film and media studies, anthropology, etc. In other words, the program doesn't see disciplinarity as a static, hermetically sealed entity, but thinks about the ways cross-disciplinary work, etc. pushes the boundaries of respective disciplines. It encourages its students to push their own boundaires and pursue innovative work. That said, it is a really challenging, different program, and it's not for everyone. I think it really helps if you know a little about what you are trying to get out of it and act accordingly. As for it's size, the incoming class would be larger then your average MA in English Lit program because it's drawing students from accross the Division of the Humanities. Yet, it has this helpful, anchoring structure that makes it feel a lot smaller: a preceptor and small precept group who you will work with most heavily in fall quarter, and in some capacity throughout your MAPH year. The faculty members and thesis advisers are, in my experience, incredibly open and receptive to MAPH students. You will not feel like you are treated differently b/c you are a master's student. So, this program can be an amazing place to academically grow and expand. For me it was all the difference in getting into PhD programs this year, including, for example, an ivy (whatever that label is worth) doctoral program that had rejected me before my MAPH year. My advice would be to attend their visiting days, and ask as many questions as possible. The visit will be worth it and help you see either what makes it a unique and great opportunity, or something that doesn't make sense for you to pursue right now. I hope some of this helps!

Wow, this thread is a bit insane on all sides. Original Poster: You probably would have been met with more sympathy in the "decisions, decisions" section of this forum where there are already a bunch of threads (not so surprisingly) on the topic of making decisions. I think what people reacted to so strongly was that it seemed like your decision was already, obviously made, but for some lingering malaise over the general concept of decision-making. I think you need to give a thoughtful, careful assesment of your situation to figure out if it is actually something between the schools that is tripping you up, or if it is a more general fear of decision-making. I would just like to reiterate, that if you know where you want to go, and have for 2 months, then definitely just get on with life, and commit. Not having it all hang over your head will make you feel better, and the people on the waitlists feel better, so it's a win/win situation. However, as someone who is confronting a tough decision between two schools that equally make sense for almost opposite reasons, I feel the need to defend (hopefully without being too defensive) the people who haven't decided which school they are attending yet. On another thread it was proposed that these people were either too "flighty" or "dithering" to make a tough decision, or they hadn't researched their schools properly. Here it's been proposed that they are essentially careless, spoiled, cry-babies. I guess all I want to say is it might be a bit more complicated then that: in some cases the decision process (much like other parts of this application process) are more difficult then originally anticipated. I'm pretty sure that not everyone confused by the decision process is just like Paris Hilton, or some of the other names that have been said about the original poster on this thread. I would also hope that the people who are still deciding are doing it as actively, thoughtfully, and quickly as they possibly can, with some kind of basic awareness and sense of perspective on the whole matter.

I'm not exactly sure why a fair amount of people on this thread are assuming that the only reason someone wouldn't sit down and make the "tough decision" is because 1) they are too prone to "dithering," and cannot really make a "tough" decision, or that 2) they haven't properly researched their programs before applying, basically don't know what they're doing, and have just thrown money at various applications for the fun of it, etc. Hmm. My feeling is it's a lot more complicated for some people then that. In my case, once I got into school X, I knew there was only one school (let's call it school Y) that could make turn down school X's acceptance (or at least seriously consider it). And a couple weeks later, much to my surprise, I got into school Y. Acceptances to school X and Y are simultaneously the best outcome for this application process, and, in a way, the worst--there were no other combinations of schools that would have made this decision such a "tough" call. Sure, I'm grateful to have this decision, but, since the schools are so close to each other in ranking and placement, their pros and cons balance each other out in an almost absurd way, and both visits were really strong, I'm still left to work through this and figure it out. Since the visits didn't tip things in one direction or another, I am now contacting a network of neutral advisors (people not located in the actual institutions who can give me an outside, non-biased perspective). The truth is either one could work--but would work differently--and not only do I feel a pressure to decide, but a pressure to make a "right" decision (even if I know both could be the "right" decision, etc.). So, I think there are also a good amount of us out here with a decision that is indeed "tough," and requires a bit more out of their decision-making skill set. Taking your time to make a "tough decision" is in many cases, a very proactive process. It requires both an honest attempt to work through the problem, and an attempt to move through it as fast as possible. I don't think it makes sense to assume that people who have not decided where they are attending yet are just foolish, lazy, or "dithering."

I was able to dismiss one acceptance pretty early because it was only parshall funding at a school that I wasn't very excited about in the first place. Once I received acceptances from two schools that I would equally love to attend (and I had visited them both), I decided to remove myself from all other waitlists just to simplify the situation (and because I honestly knew I wouldn't have picked the waitlist-schools above either of the acceptances). Now, I have absolutely no idea how to choose between the two schools that I have left, especially since the visits to each were equally strong. But at least I have a month to figure it out! I guess if you have a place that you absolutely, honestly know that you will *not* attend, then why not let them know early, in order to free up a place for the waitlist. If you have a more confusing decision between three+ places, wait until you have visited all of them before you make your first cut. So I guess just simplfy, simplfy until you pare things down to the point of maximum confusion (or optimal clarity?)

I'm a bit shy to the online forum world, but I didn't want this post to have zero replies, so I figured I'd give it a try. I'm still in the phase of double-checking the acceptance email to make sure that 1) yes, it still exists and 2) yes, it was indeed addressed to the right person. I'd say I'm an example of someone who wouldn't have gotten into a PhD program without working really hard in a master's program first--that made all the difference. Since there were only two posts (I think) on the result page, perhaps they are still in the process of contacting people? The prospective student day isn't until mid-March, so I wouldn't rule anything out until then. I wish all of you the best. I know that on the many days that I have been despairing about the insanity of this whole process, I have taken great comfort in the way the people on this site are continually supportive and generous with one another. It's pretty refreshing to see.