Hegel's Bagels

I can second this. I'm not a student at Princeton, but a friend in the department told me that both Heuer and Zchomelidse were denied tenure. This is not so much a result of a particularly dysfunctional department, but of a particularly dysfunctional relationship with the administration. In both cases the department recommended them for tenure, but they were denied by the Dean (President? or whoever makes that decision). It's a bleak time to be in the humanities...

Tufts has a great placement record in PhD programs. Message me if you want to talk more.

I think it is actually pretty normal to receive a phone call from your POI or DGS. (Acceptance, not rejection) At least, that has been the case for my colleagues, myself, and many people who have been on these boards in the past. IHM: I was at the dentist's office when I received the phone call from my top choice school. I recognized the area code, knew immediately what it meant, and actually ran out of the little office with the stupid bib on, blood in my mouth, etc. to answer it. Pretty epic.

Pay attention to the number of women and POC in the faculty. How many are tenured? Tenure track? Assistant vs. Associate vs. Full? Females might be well represented in the grad student body of the department, but this is not necessarily true for the faculty. I have found that there are oftentimes a higher proportion of male professors and specifically a higher proportion of male senior faculty. This might give you a good temperature check of the departmental environment. I also highly recommend asking a female professor in your current department about what they have heard. I specifically did not attend one top-ranking program because my potential advisor was well known in the art historical community as a misogynistic ass. Also, fair warning: while grad departments are often perceived of as bastions of progressive, liberal thought - they are still highly elitist and selective. You are still going to hear a lot of sexist, homophobic, racist, classist, etc. remarks in your time as a grad student, oftentimes by some of your colleagues. It's incredibly frustrating and a real sorry reminder about how far we have to go as a society. Definitely look for allies in other departments, grad student groups, etc.

I recommend babysitting or tutoring. Often higher wages and no taxes taken out...plus the schedule is flexible and you might able to even get some work done while you're sitting.

I'm glad to hear that they have restructured their financial packaging. They have such a great program; it was absurd that they didn't have a great financing plan to go with it. Thanks for the info guys.

I strongly advise against planning to transfer schools before you've even started. Transferring from one program to another should only occur because of SERIOUS grievances that you possibly couldn't anticipate now (and if you could then decision made! go to the other school...) MA programs are what you make of it. In your case where you don't have a clear winner (Rutgers vs. Temple right?) there is no bad decision to be made. But in order to get the most out of what the MA program has to offer then you have to stick around to benefit from it...e.g., LoRS from professors that have known you for more than one semester. Have you talked to your undergrad adviser? If you're still stuck at the end of May you should definitely be asking for their help in making a decision.

This is information a few years old and so could benefit some fact checking from members here who have recently dealt with the IFA PhD program. But, in any case, IFA's Art History PhD program is notorious for not having guaranteed funding (and MA is absolutely no funding). The way I understood it - first year or so (maybe two years?) PhD students will receive stipend + tuition waiver. After that, funding is competitive. That means you are competing with your cohort for $ to pay rent, etc. Eek. Like I said, this might have changed in the past few years but I have not heard otherwise. It would be well worth your time to email or call the department and ask for more specific information about their funding. Also, IFA's funding is very unusual and not like other PhD programs. The reason the funding situation is weird is because IFA takes a really large class of students while others usually only take as many as they can afford (around 4-7 students per year). Funding varies from program to program but if you are accepted to one that does not offer tuition waiver + stipend for at least the first 4-5 years then think hard before attending. Most other schools (at least the ones I've been accepted to in the past and the ones colleagues have gone off to) offer this. And if you're really lucky you just might get healthcare thrown in too!

Speculum, Sixteenth Century Journal, I Tatti Studies, Renaissance Quarterly - representing the other side of the temporal divide Also Imago Mundi for those interested in critical cartography

Instead of applying for a poster session, I would apply to smaller regional conferences in your field or a graduate/undergraduate art history conference. A lot of deadlines will be this summer. I think you will have a better chance at having an abstract accepted and it will look a lot better on your CV. I think a poster session would be a waste of time. Unlike the sciences, scholarly presentations are the litmus test for your worth and having one under your belt will show potential departments that you will able to handle seminar presentations during coursework. Also I have been to CAA multiple times and I have never seen an undergrad or a graduate student who was not ABD present. This is not gospel truth but it is my understanding that CAA is for scholars who are further along in their research/career. Maybe this is only true for my field?

ProspectStu, for someone so quick to cruelly judge others for not participating in the discussion put forth, you have not actually contributed anything substantial yourself. I actually disagree with some people here that this is nothing but semantics and I was intrigued when the topic initially popped up. However, I felt that the question was too vague to really engage with it. I think the term is problematic in many ways, for example, the types of objects it privileges, the types of (entrenched canonical) histories constructed around the term, its openness to the attachment of even vaguer terms like "visuality." Where were you hoping to go with this discussion Prospectstu? Instead of continuing to be a jerk on this forum, you might have saved a bit of face by explaining your thoughts on the matter. Also, an apology wouldn't hurt either.

As an early modernist my sense is that Rutgers has a better reputation. The best thing to do is contact the department and ask about later PhD placement for their MA students. I think this kind of information will be crucial in helping you make a decision.

Go with the terminal MA program. It is a common complaint of MA programs with PhD students that the MA students do not get the attention or funding the PhD students do. Oftentimes the MA students are viewed as cash cows...the IFA is a notorious example. Also, since you are working on contemporary Mediterranean art it seems like an adviser who does Byzantine would not be particularly useful? You mentioned a professor at the terminal program who does Ottoman architecture...Ottoman Empire goes well into the modern...what period are they specifically interested in? It'll be important that you have a professor at the program that can help mentor your thesis, which will instrumental in getting into a PhD program.

Oof! Yea if your POI is leaving from Tufts then Courtauld is obviously the better option! I didn't get that from your OP. Best of luck at Courtauld...

Da Vinci Code!! *throws head back and laughs* In all seriousness: The Return of Martin Guerre, The Agony and the Ecstasy, Pollock, Fur, Basquiat, Frida, PBS's Art21 series...

I think at this point you cannot make a wrong choice...so congratulations! You're in a good place so far... That being said: it looks like you are choosing between apples and oranges and that is always difficult. I did not attend the Courtauld but I do know one or two PhD students who did their work there. They all loved it but both have expressed frustration with the one-year MA system. There is a lot to be said for a two-year program. You will forge stronger connections with your professors (....so better LoRs) and you will have the opportunity to develop a broader knowledge of art history at the graduate level. Having this knowledge base will be particularly useful when you eventually do a PhD and have to take your exams or teach survey. I think that that is my one reservation with the Courtauld; you end up with a highly-specialized knowledge of one field and that is not always a good thing this early on in the game. Moreover, perhaps it is the mentorship of a couple of professors who are not a 100% fit that will help you a generate a truly original thesis topic. I'm casting a vote for Tufts but that is only my opinion and admittedly their US-style program is what I'm more familiar and comfortable with.

I don't know about their MAs but a friend of mine already received an acceptance to their PhD. Their admitted students' day was last week. (Or this week? Can't remember)

Rinascimento: I understand the desire for anonymity on the forum but your stated research interests as such are very broad. You would be hard pressed to find a scholar on the Italian Renaissance who does not deal with patronage in some way or another in their work. What specific aspect of patronage are you interested in? This is something you'll need to make explicit in your SOP. In regards to particular programs I would start with looking up scholars whose work you admire. There was also a recent forum post on Ital Ren programs; you might find some useful suggestions there.

Off the top of my head: Brown, NYU, Hopkins, American, Tufts...

Yea that's actually a description of Tufts' funding situation.

Williams and Tufts are generally regarded as the top terminal MA programs in the U.S. Williams might rank slightly higher in terms of prestige but not by much. Based on my experience, I would say the two programs are split evenly between students focusing on museum careers and academics ones. I think Tufts funds their students more (in terms of tuition remission) but Williams does offer a select few (read top top top candidates) tuition remission and stipend. I don't know how often or how many. In terms of fields of interest I would say they both have diverse faculty covering a wide range of fields. Either would be great options.

THIS a million times. And also why are there are so many female art history students and such a higher proportion of male faculty at top ranking institutions.

??? Then you know...there are the students with 4.0s that are also really creative, interesting, and not from privileged backgrounds. Overall though I have to agree with ProspectStu's assessment that it's the applicant's ability to demonstrate a critical engagement with the field and potential to conduct interesting, innovative research. It really boils down to SOP and writing sample. A statement of purpose about how much you love art and a writing sample about Artemisia Gentileschi is not going to cut it (no matter how well it was written). Fit is also extremely important.

Fullofpink addressed #1 well and #2 is really something you should discuss with your current adviser. Unless anyone else here has some good advice on that. For #3: You should absolutely not apply for any external fellowships until you have discussed all the nitty gritty financial details with the department you decide on. Most external fellowships WILL...I REPEAT WILL...cancel your department funding for the year. For many schools, this funding cannot be deferred. It varies from school to school, but in general, expect to apply for external fellowships once your department funding runs out (usually fourth or fifth year). Your department probably does not want you applying anyway for these fellowships until you're at least ABD. I would definitely advise cornering a couple of the current grad students in your prospective programs to find out the dirt on your department's financing of students. They are not always completely up front in their funding letters. It took me about three to four months into my first semester at my PhD program to totally understand the funding situation.

*brings out tar and feathers*