poorstudent

There are three PhD in Art Practice program in North America: University of California San Diego (started in 2002), York University since 2008 and University of Western Ontario since around 2007 (the latter two in Canada). There are plenty of PhD in Arts program in Europe. 
I am currently only months away from finishing my MFA program at a university where there is a PhD in Art Practice program as well. From my direct interaction with the PhD in Art Practice students, many of them friends, I know for sure, it is not a good direction for artists. Some really regret they started the program but after two years of intense investment of time (while not making art at all) it is hard to drop out. 
Here are the realities: you will not make art in your first two years or even longer. You will have no time at all. You will study for your minor and major comprehensive exams then you will work on writing your prospectus for your thesis. The amount of reading and your writings demanded by your course work is exhausting.  When they tell you that part of your program is two mid term show in your minimum 4 year studies, you will practically scramble to carve out some time to produce work to be ready for your show in the last minute as your academic studies are so demanding. Also, the academic learning addresses a narrow field both in the US and in Europe (except England and Ireland). Your mandatory readings will be from cultural theory meaning Lacoon, Bartes, Foucault, Derrida, etc. If it is not your cup of tea and you have a broader interest, then you will be disappointed because you will not have time to read or do anything else. 
A big disadvantage of being a student in PhD that for granting agencies and public galleries you are just that, simply a student, and you are not eligible to apply for many grants or public exhibitions because students are excluded from those opportunities (in case you are a miracle student who can carve out a tiny bit of time to make a tiny bit of art). This will hinder your art practice tremendously. If you want to teach studio at a university when you finish after 4-5 and sometimes six years of study (years when you hardly made any art), it will be a disadvantage of not having a consistent practice of continuous art making and public exhibitions. 
When I came to this program as an MFA student, I was thinking to continue in PhD (and I have every chance to continue as I am top student). I don’t consider it anymore. I am still interested in doing a PhD but in a solid, established field such as university art education, theatre and performance studies, media studies etc. and doing it low residency while I am teaching and making art. Doing a PhD which is not directly in art practice will not render me to be a mere art student and I will be eligible to apply for grants and professional exhibition opportunities just as any other artist. It will be still demanding and will require a lot of energy to make art and complete a PhD in low residency but my PhD will have also a much better prestige than an Art practice PhD.
I hope this information will help you.
 

There are three PhD in Art Practice program in North America: University of California San Diego (started in 2002), York University since 2008 and University of Western Ontario since around 2007 (the latter two in Canada). There are plenty of PhD in Arts program in Europe. 
I am currently only months away from finishing my MFA program at a university where there is a PhD in Art Practice program as well. From my direct interaction with the PhD in Art Practice students, many of them friends, I know for sure, it is not a good direction for artists. Some really regret they started the program but after two years of intense investment of time (while not making art at all) it is hard to drop out. 
Here are the realities: you will not make art in your first two years or even longer. You will have no time at all. You will study for your minor and major comprehensive exams then you will work on writing your prospectus for your thesis. The amount of reading and your writings demanded by your course work is exhausting.  When they tell you that part of your program is two mid term show in your minimum 4 year studies, you will practically scramble to carve out some time to produce work to be ready for your show in the last minute as your academic studies are so demanding. Also, the academic learning addresses a narrow field both in the US and in Europe (except England and Ireland). Your mandatory readings will be from cultural theory meaning Lacoon, Bartes, Foucault, Derrida, etc. If it is not your cup of tea and you have a broader interest, then you will be disappointed because you will not have time to read or do anything else. 
A big disadvantage of being a student in PhD that for granting agencies and public galleries you are just that, simply a student, and you are not eligible to apply for many grants or public exhibitions because students are excluded from those opportunities (in case you are a miracle student who can carve out a tiny bit of time to make a tiny bit of art). This will hinder your art practice tremendously. If you want to teach studio at a university when you finish after 4-5 and sometimes six years of study (years when you hardly made any art), it will be a disadvantage of not having a consistent practice of continuous art making and public exhibitions. 
When I came to this program as an MFA student, I was thinking to continue in PhD (and I have every chance to continue as I am top student). I don’t consider it anymore. I am still interested in doing a PhD but in a solid, established field such as university art education, theatre and performance studies, media studies etc. and doing it low residency while I am teaching and making art. Doing a PhD which is not directly in art practice will not render me to be a mere art student and I will be eligible to apply for grants and professional exhibition opportunities just as any other artist. It will be still demanding and will require a lot of energy to make art and complete a PhD in low residency but my PhD will have also a much better prestige than an Art practice PhD.
I hope this information will help you.
 

There are three PhD in Art Practice program in North America: University of California San Diego (started in 2002), York University since 2008 and University of Western Ontario since around 2007 (the latter two in Canada). There are plenty of PhD in Arts program in Europe. 
I am currently only months away from finishing my MFA program at a university where there is a PhD in Art Practice program as well. From my direct interaction with the PhD in Art Practice students, many of them friends, I know for sure, it is not a good direction for artists. Some really regret they started the program but after two years of intense investment of time (while not making art at all) it is hard to drop out. 
Here are the realities: you will not make art in your first two years or even longer. You will have no time at all. You will study for your minor and major comprehensive exams then you will work on writing your prospectus for your thesis. The amount of reading and your writings demanded by your course work is exhausting.  When they tell you that part of your program is two mid term show in your minimum 4 year studies, you will practically scramble to carve out some time to produce work to be ready for your show in the last minute as your academic studies are so demanding. Also, the academic learning addresses a narrow field both in the US and in Europe (except England and Ireland). Your mandatory readings will be from cultural theory meaning Lacoon, Bartes, Foucault, Derrida, etc. If it is not your cup of tea and you have a broader interest, then you will be disappointed because you will not have time to read or do anything else. 
A big disadvantage of being a student in PhD that for granting agencies and public galleries you are just that, simply a student, and you are not eligible to apply for many grants or public exhibitions because students are excluded from those opportunities (in case you are a miracle student who can carve out a tiny bit of time to make a tiny bit of art). This will hinder your art practice tremendously. If you want to teach studio at a university when you finish after 4-5 and sometimes six years of study (years when you hardly made any art), it will be a disadvantage of not having a consistent practice of continuous art making and public exhibitions. 
When I came to this program as an MFA student, I was thinking to continue in PhD (and I have every chance to continue as I am top student). I don’t consider it anymore. I am still interested in doing a PhD but in a solid, established field such as university art education, theatre and performance studies, media studies etc. and doing it low residency while I am teaching and making art. Doing a PhD which is not directly in art practice will not render me to be a mere art student and I will be eligible to apply for grants and professional exhibition opportunities just as any other artist. It will be still demanding and will require a lot of energy to make art and complete a PhD in low residency but my PhD will have also a much better prestige than an Art practice PhD.
I hope this information will help you.
 

There are three PhD in Art Practice program in North America: University of California San Diego (started in 2002), York University since 2008 and University of Western Ontario since around 2007 (the latter two in Canada). There are plenty of PhD in Arts program in Europe. 
I am currently only months away from finishing my MFA program at a university where there is a PhD in Art Practice program as well. From my direct interaction with the PhD in Art Practice students, many of them friends, I know for sure, it is not a good direction for artists. Some really regret they started the program but after two years of intense investment of time (while not making art at all) it is hard to drop out. 
Here are the realities: you will not make art in your first two years or even longer. You will have no time at all. You will study for your minor and major comprehensive exams then you will work on writing your prospectus for your thesis. The amount of reading and your writings demanded by your course work is exhausting.  When they tell you that part of your program is two mid term show in your minimum 4 year studies, you will practically scramble to carve out some time to produce work to be ready for your show in the last minute as your academic studies are so demanding. Also, the academic learning addresses a narrow field both in the US and in Europe (except England and Ireland). Your mandatory readings will be from cultural theory meaning Lacoon, Bartes, Foucault, Derrida, etc. If it is not your cup of tea and you have a broader interest, then you will be disappointed because you will not have time to read or do anything else. 
A big disadvantage of being a student in PhD that for granting agencies and public galleries you are just that, simply a student, and you are not eligible to apply for many grants or public exhibitions because students are excluded from those opportunities (in case you are a miracle student who can carve out a tiny bit of time to make a tiny bit of art). This will hinder your art practice tremendously. If you want to teach studio at a university when you finish after 4-5 and sometimes six years of study (years when you hardly made any art), it will be a disadvantage of not having a consistent practice of continuous art making and public exhibitions. 
When I came to this program as an MFA student, I was thinking to continue in PhD (and I have every chance to continue as I am top student). I don’t consider it anymore. I am still interested in doing a PhD but in a solid, established field such as university art education, theatre and performance studies, media studies etc. and doing it low residency while I am teaching and making art. Doing a PhD which is not directly in art practice will not render me to be a mere art student and I will be eligible to apply for grants and professional exhibition opportunities just as any other artist. It will be still demanding and will require a lot of energy to make art and complete a PhD in low residency but my PhD will have also a much better prestige than an Art practice PhD.
I hope this information will help you.
 

There are three PhD in Art Practice program in North America: University of California San Diego (started in 2002), York University since 2008 and University of Western Ontario since around 2007 (the latter two in Canada). There are plenty of PhD in Arts program in Europe. 
I am currently only months away from finishing my MFA program at a university where there is a PhD in Art Practice program as well. From my direct interaction with the PhD in Art Practice students, many of them friends, I know for sure, it is not a good direction for artists. Some really regret they started the program but after two years of intense investment of time (while not making art at all) it is hard to drop out. 
Here are the realities: you will not make art in your first two years or even longer. You will have no time at all. You will study for your minor and major comprehensive exams then you will work on writing your prospectus for your thesis. The amount of reading and your writings demanded by your course work is exhausting.  When they tell you that part of your program is two mid term show in your minimum 4 year studies, you will practically scramble to carve out some time to produce work to be ready for your show in the last minute as your academic studies are so demanding. Also, the academic learning addresses a narrow field both in the US and in Europe (except England and Ireland). Your mandatory readings will be from cultural theory meaning Lacoon, Bartes, Foucault, Derrida, etc. If it is not your cup of tea and you have a broader interest, then you will be disappointed because you will not have time to read or do anything else. 
A big disadvantage of being a student in PhD that for granting agencies and public galleries you are just that, simply a student, and you are not eligible to apply for many grants or public exhibitions because students are excluded from those opportunities (in case you are a miracle student who can carve out a tiny bit of time to make a tiny bit of art). This will hinder your art practice tremendously. If you want to teach studio at a university when you finish after 4-5 and sometimes six years of study (years when you hardly made any art), it will be a disadvantage of not having a consistent practice of continuous art making and public exhibitions. 
When I came to this program as an MFA student, I was thinking to continue in PhD (and I have every chance to continue as I am top student). I don’t consider it anymore. I am still interested in doing a PhD but in a solid, established field such as university art education, theatre and performance studies, media studies etc. and doing it low residency while I am teaching and making art. Doing a PhD which is not directly in art practice will not render me to be a mere art student and I will be eligible to apply for grants and professional exhibition opportunities just as any other artist. It will be still demanding and will require a lot of energy to make art and complete a PhD in low residency but my PhD will have also a much better prestige than an Art practice PhD.
I hope this information will help you.
 

My understanding is that merit based scholarships or graduate merit awards come together with the admission notification letter. I got a major graduate merit award and it was highlighted bold in the admission letter with a congratulatory note of an almost full paragraph.
I do not know about need based financing. It would make sense that need based financing is decided later once the candidates send back their confirmation of accepting the offer and all forms and documents about their financial status.

My understanding is that merit based scholarships or graduate merit awards come together with the admission notification letter. I got a major graduate merit award and it was highlighted bold in the admission letter with a congratulatory note of an almost full paragraph.
I do not know about need based financing. It would make sense that need based financing is decided later once the candidates send back their confirmation of accepting the offer and all forms and documents about their financial status.