ryree2

Actually, I was trying to support and agree with what you said. But, you're right, I don't have children. You'd know better than I.

Why must there always be an undercurrent of pretentiousness and contempt in some of these posts? People come here for advice and camaraderie. Is it really necessary to make a jab at someone just because they express an opinion with which you disagree? I've worked in museums for more than 18 years, and the first thing you learn is the value of diplomacy and tact. Good luck successfully navigating that environment until you master those skills. As for the OP: I have a BA in art history and have worked in three major art museums since graduation. I decided to apply for a terminal master's, even if that meant paying for it myself. I'm fortunate to have the means to do so, and I want it that bad. I've been reluctant to apply until now, because based on my experience working in academia (I also work frequently with scholars outside of museums), I wasn't sure that art history programs would be interested in someone like me. Even though I have a wealth of experience and have worked with some of the greatest scholars in the field, I'm not interested in becoming a professor. I'm just passionate about the study of art history, and I want to expand on that knowledge, as I think it would benefit my long-term career goals in an art museum. Many of my colleagues, curators and professors alike, encouraged me to apply in any case. My GRE scores were good, my recs were outstanding, my writing samples were great, my experience should have been a bonus. However, I was rejected from three of the four programs to which I applied (I'm waiting to hear from the fourth). I suspect that art history programs, even terminal master's programs, aren't interested in someone who has no plans to pursue a PhD (short-sighted in my opinion, as not all of us working in the field want to be professors or curators). I'm sure there are more than a few regulars on these boards who'd be happy to correct me if I'm wrong. I don't want to discourage you from pursuing your dream. (I've long wanted to pursue a master's in art history myself.) However, I think it's a good thing to be realistic about your options/expectations. I knew what I was getting into when I applied, but I was hopeful that at least one program would find me attractive based on my experience, etc. I was accepted into many an arts administration program, but I'd rather spend my time and money studying art history. I suggest that you look into other programs like museums studies, etc. That might lead you in an unexpected direction. As for children, I personally don't have any; however, you wouldn't be the first person with kids to go back to grad school. Don't let that stop you from going for it. Getting accepted into a program is the hard part. After that, who cares what the faculty thinks about your personal life. I hated the GREs, too. I did fabulously on the Verbal and Writing sections, and OK on the Math (surprise). In my opinion, standardized tests are meaningless as a gauge for academic potential; however, they are necessary for most programs. If you do decide to apply to art history programs, they'll most likely be looking at your Verbal and Writing scores. I'd study extra hard for those sections and make sure you meet the requirements of the program to which you are applying. A lot of them specifically state minimums. BTW, I'm finding it difficult to understand the correlation, as stated above, between GRE performance and scholarly study. Really? Seems like a stretch to me, especially if the rest of your application (i.e., writing samples) demonstrates an ability to research, write, think critically. I don't see how GRE scores can convey something like that.

Thanks. I am considering SAIC. As to location: I am open to leaving Chicago. I'd like a good program with great faculty, etc. I don't want to limit my search to the Midwest. Am open to pretty much anything at this point since I have plenty of time to apply for 2013.

After working in museums as an editor for the past 15 years, I've decided to apply to graduate schools in the hopes of pursuing a master's in art history. BTW, my BA is also in art history. I've no interest in pursuing a PhD, and I plan to return to my work in museum publishing once my master's studies are completed. As most of the top programs seem geared toward PhD candidates, and few of them offer terminal master's, I was wondering which programs you might recommend for a candidate like me. Any advice is greatly appreciated.