Shelley Burian
-
Posts
75 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Shelley Burian
-
-
What I found the most helpful,particularly with the anecdote stuff was to have an art history professor I was close to read it. If you can get feedback from your professors, they are absolutely the best people to look at your SOP because they have experience on the admissions side of things in the field. They can help you judge whether a particular segment will be well received or not. Its always a risk to accept someone's advice, because not everyone agrees, but I found that regarding the SOP most professors have a good general idea of what schools look for in candidates.
-
Have you investigated transferring into an MD/PhD program at your current institution? Sounds like you want to leave academic research but thought I would bring it up. Many MD/PhDs do research and see patients so you could do both, and could study for both programs at the same time. Regarding telling your adviser, I would simply lay out your reasons for leaving and since it is obviously not due to a bad experience with them or with the school I don't think that they would blame you. Not sure about the administrative part though.
-
Some of what you're experiencing sounds like mild depression (not clinic but just a response to a situation where nothing feels right, you're out of place everywhere and being hit with new experiences at a rate faster than you can handle). I am going through the same in this first semester (not for the same reasons but I recognize the feeling you seem to be describing) and two things I have found that are really helping are to get out of the bubble of my department and find events and groups on campus which help revive me a bit. I joined a French conversational group and am getting involved with the Race and Difference institute at my school and I am already feeling the difference. Other grad students or even senior undergrads that you meet at other functions might be more open to hanging out. The other thing is to go outside the university all together, if you can. Churches, charity organizations, dance groups (my activity of choice) will give you the chance of socializing with a different group of people outside of your academic circuit which I have always found helpful. I would try to stick it out for at least a semester if not a full year to see if you are having adjustment pains or if it is that grad school is just not right for you at this time.
-
I would consider how much it would add to your application before spending the time. Does the school have a definition for what they include under the heading of diversity? If you find that you really don't have much to say then you might want to it leave be.
-
I don't have a tremendous amount of experience but have some familiarity with this situation so here's my two cents. I think it really depends on the field and the type of job that you want. I have known several people (including archaeologists) who have gone to UK programs and been very successful here, at least in finding mid-level museum work. If you want to apply to Ph.D.'s later you will not have much difficulty either. However,most everyone I know has gone to either UCL or Cambridge so I'm less familiar with the schools you list. I would ask some of your undergraduate professors what they think, and try to learn more about accepted standards in any non-academic careers you may be considering. I've never heard anyone say they regretted earning a humanities MA in the UK.
-
Depending on how many art history course you took, it may not matter as most departments don't require a major, just a specific number of courses. You might want to take a few refresher courses, depending on how long ago you went to school, but what I would really advise you to do is volunteer or intern in several different departments in art museums, as many as you can, to try and narrow down your interest area. Unless you want to curate, you do not need a Ph.D. in art history, and most of the fields of interest you have named fall more under museum studies or conservation MA's than strictly art history. Things like textile restoration and exhibit design require drastically different types of programs, so I would investigate some before making a commitment to a training path. Best of luck!
-
I agree with the previous poster that Québec is not really the best option. I am the reverse in that I learned my French there and have trouble understanding Europeans. Middlebury has scholarships and financial aid, which French immersion programs in Canada don`t offer to non-citizens.
-
There are a lot of different opinions on pre-admission visits and I think it`s another one of those aspects of grad admission that varies a tremendous amount between various situations. I chose to make pre-admission visits to two middle-range (in terms of distance from me) schools and I do think that it made a difference in my case. I would definitely consider going if you will be able to watch your potential adviser lecture or lead a seminar as this something most visit weekends don`t include and it helps to get a sense of the person`s working style. Going to the campus also gives you a chance to talk with other graduate students, the DGS and get a general sense of the place. I feel it also shows the school that you have a level of commitment to the program; both of the programs I visited accepted me. I was told by my undergrad adviser that in her experience, when visits go well, they do tend to help when decision time comes around as the person has a better idea of who you are. All that being said, I also opted for a phone rather than fly across the country to California. I would consider visits to your top two choices if the financial investment is not too steep. I would definitely opt for a phone call for programs that are farther down on your preference list.
-
I think its probably more to see which other programs/schools they are being ranged with according to students. No one expects you to apply only to their school. I was honest on all my applications and it didn't seem to hurt me any. This question will also come up in interviews if a program does them, as you'll see from other posts
-
One of the most difficult things about graduate school applications is that there is no perfect formula, particularly at the PhD level, as it often comes down to individual professors. You look like you have a fairly strong background,however,I am a bit confused about your research interests, as you have named two fields (you can look at gender in any sub-field) which are very different and rarely combined (unless you are interested in the later reception of ancient American art). One of the key things that helps you be successful in PhD applications is showing a strong inclination and well formulated research questions within a particular field. It is very unlikely that you are going to be able to combine 19th century European art and pre-colonial Amerian in research unless you are interested in cross cultural influences/ appropriation in European art. From my own experience, if this is your research interest then you are better off looking for advisers on the European side or people who study colonial art, as pre-colonial people are less likely to be interested. Another thing would be to look at programs which require a minor concentration, which allows you to gain tolerable knowledge in a field different from your principle area of interest, or one in which you could have co-advisers for your dissertation. You also REALLY need to contact potential advisers to make sure you don't apply needlessly to programs where there is not support for this topic. Note also that combining modern Europe/ pre-colonial American means learning more languages as you'll probably have to have French, German, Spanish, and an indigenous language.
-
I second 2013app with not selling yourself short on Ph.D. programs especially as it sounds you are fairly focused and have excellent qualifications. As a graduate of McGill, their modern/contemporary program is excellent,and I don't think that either Amelia or Christine are going anywhere anytime soon. However,I would be cautious about Canadian schools because unlike most U.S. schools their graduate funding comes from federal and provincial governments,for which students have to apply separately for. I am fairly certain that most of this money is only for citizens and permanent residents. Some schools have extra money, but full funding is going to be unlikely. As for getting into U.S. schools, it really isn't a problem,especially when you are working with faculty as well known as those at McGill.
-
In the humanities, where this happens a lot because of liberal arts programs, it's important to trace how you arrived at your current research interests, because that shows people how much you've thought about your direction. Some examples I have heard of in my field (art history) is someone saw something in a museum which really inspired them or went to a conference and heard a presentation and then went and did more research or reading into the subject. This makes it personal while still being academic. Don't make it sound like you just woke up one morning and picked a topic because you liked the look of it.
-
I am an art history student, but I sympathize with you (I have to know two and only really have a passion for one of them) and have done some work in philosophy, so I'll share my opinion. This seems to be one of the most fluid and ill-defined areas of grad school requirements. I would say that the importance of language is fairly high, at least regarding reading comprehension, because they want you to have these languages so you read scholarly publications in other languages and primary sources. I do research in French almost every day. For art history, the standard is that you need to know at least two, and perhaps more depending on what you study. They expect you to have what they term a "reading knowledge" and very very few will actually require that you pass a test for anything other than reading comprehension. I suspect that the most important for you will be French and German (these are the most common pair in art history and its mainly because of the philosophy). However, the format of the language test is different at every single school, and at mine I have been told that the level they expect you to have even varies from professor to professor! However, some schools will allow a student who has taken a certain number of classes in a particular language with a B grade to skip the test. I would try to ask some of your philosophy professors, and particularly grad students in your department what they would recommend. If its only the spoken part you really have trouble with, don't worry, you will be in good company among many academics, because very few in my experience can speak ALL of their languages as well as they read them.
I would tentatively recommend, if it is the speaking and listening you have trouble with, to eschew regular classes all together and do self-study combined with a private tutor who can help guide you. Many grad students elect to teach themselves at least one of their languages, because that way they can focus on the written part exclusively if they need to. You will be expected to read fairly advanced texts and have a thorough knowledge of grammar, so sometimes it isn't in your best interests to enroll in general classes as most focus on speaking in daily living situations and only introduce you to those texts after three years of study, during which you will spend a lot of time on things you don't really need to master. You can also always pick up the conversational later, if you decide you want it.
I will go out on a limb (which other philo folks PLEASE contradict if its incorrect) and say that while languages are important and you HAVE to have at least one squarely under your belt, most schools and professors, if they are genuinely interested in you, are not going to worry about you having all of them done when you start. In art history, my experience is that they are looked upon as a teachable skill, which isn't nearly as important as your statement of purpose and the innovation and quality you show in your written work.
-
I moved early because although I was really excited about my school/program I was less than thrilled about where I was going to have to live so I wanted to get my life outside of school set up so I wouldn't be making two adjustments at once. I am doing some informal museum work for my adviser, which I am really liking as I am getting into a good working relationship with her before the harder coursework and am also able to slowly ease back into more structured academic work. Hurray for starting early!
-
Good luck!
-
Well, most Canadians like to look to England for Masters programs, so I here's what I know. Courtauld seems to really get people places and there are scholarships for Americans (which I'm assuming that you are, sorry if I'm wrong) so that's definitely a good place to look. A lot of my friends ended up at University College London, so although I don't know their medieval strength it seemed a pretty popular choice. Have you considered Cambridge? I have another friend who went there although she was in Early Modern. I really don't know anything about York or Edinburgh (except that the latter has a very good all round reputation). I would leave France out of it, as I have never heard of anyone going to grad school there who wasn't a francophone or could study completely in French. Maybe some other people have better information on that though. Germany has several English schools like the Heidelburg and the Max Planck Institute but I believe that these are mostly for science/ social sciences but you could check (and please excuse my German spelling!) My graduate program has an exchange program with the University of Leiden and I have been told that it is excellent as well, but I know my school places priority on sending Ancient art folks there so I'm not sure about their Medieval (I can't think that we would have the program if the school wasn't really good in general though).
For me, the main considerations on studying abroad are the "usefullness" of the degree in getting you where you want to be and money. I did not really want to continue my education in the United States at first but for Pre-Columbian it is hands down the best place to be for that sub-discipline so here I am. I think that as a Medieval specialist Europe is probably a pretty smart move IF you can afford it and are willing to go through the extra hoops of being an international student. If you are aiming primarily at working in the US and are looking at careers that do not necessarily need a Ph.D. then it's also a good idea to check the acceptance of European degrees in those fields. However since your interest is Medieval I'm assuming you're curatorial/professorship bound so you will have NO problem with a European degree in those careers. Application processes for European schools tend to be different and may have due dates at different times so I would really start looking now and get familiar with the process at each of your schools.
-
People come to their passions through all kinds of paths, and you certainly don't need to plan out your whole future in a field right at the beginning, as your interests will change the more you dig into all the facets of art history. I didn't decide whether I was going to be an archaeologist or an art historian until I was actually starting to apply to grad school for the first time. It's never too early to start thinking about careers, but as an entering second year I would focus more on simply exploring the field and seeing what kinds of art/theory interest you, as this will actually help you determine what careers or work environments you might enjoy. Volunteering at a local museum or cultural center would be an excellent way of beginning to make contacts with people who can help you explore careers and perhaps find a more in-depth internship later.
-
I read a bit and really enjoyed it as well, especially the frank and personable writing style. What would be really great though is for a Humanities Ph.D. to write a companion book, as I am ALWAYS having to explain to other people who are only acquainted with science programs how different our programs are. Our first years ARE spent taking classes (and learning all of our necessary languages) and since papers are rarely collaborative, we're gradually coached to the point where we can present our own by ourselves, usually not before the third year. Having to go through all of that in the first year of a program sounds terrifying to me!
-
From my experience, museum studies degrees/certificates tend to have less value in art museums, especially for a potential curator. Getting solid experience working in whatever type of museum department you are interested in, either through internships or temporary positions, is usually the best way to show employers that you have the qualifications necessary for a permanent position. Some schools offer a certificate in museum studies or a concentration as a supplement to an art history masters, which doesn't cost extra. I would really investigate how much gaining an extra qualification like this will help you in your career ambitions before you commit time and money to it.
- fullofpink and Pythia
-
2
-
I did my undergrad there and loved it, but I wouldn't say that their grad program or department is the strongest out there. First off, since McGill is a Canadian school, getting admitted for an MA/Phd is pretty rare (I'm not even sure that they allow those with bachelors to apply for the PhD). In Canada its still pretty much the rule that you do an MA and PhD separately, although I can't speak for all schools. The department's focus is very heavily modern/contemporary and Canadian art, and their graduate course selection reflects that. I'm assuming that you are interested in working with Cecily Hilsdale, since she is the only faculty member in your field. Her interest is heavily Byzantine, rather than Medieval so take a look at her research and publications. You could always compensate for the lack of courses in your field through the Classics department, or even History. For an MA, I would say that it would be great (I personally love Dr. Hilsdale), but don't really think that they have the strength in your area for a PhD. I would also REALLY check into the funding if you are not a Canadian citizen because most of their funding comes through SSHR, a federal funding program. I'm not sure about strict rankings, but in terms of general reputation the University of Toronto is more highly regarded for art history.
-
What is your career direction in art? That is what will determine what further graduate education you would need. Unless you plan on becoming a curator in an art museum or a professor of art history a Ph.D. is probably going to make you over-qualified for other kinds of jobs. As I commented in another thread, a sucessful Ph.D. application requires a fair amount of focus, even with a specific sub-discipline, so you should use your grad classwork and research projects to explore your areas of interest and narrow them down. This also makes it easier once it comes time to select professors/departments for further study. From reading others comments, figuring out your specific sub-discipline before you write your Master's thesis also seems like a good plan, because then you have a really good writing sample which gives an in-depth sample of your work. You shouldn't have to take the GRE again, unless more than 5 years pass between the time you took them and the time you are applying.
-
Again, thank you for your input.
At some point, I may choose to pursue another degree in a more academic subject; however, I don't know if I feel a strong enough passion for a particular era of history, etc., to spend the money on graduate-level education at this point. If I can get some grounding and a foot in the door at a museum and discover that passion, there's a good chance I will go back at some point (and, if I'm lucky, might get my employer to pay for it). Right now, however, my interests are tending away from the curatorial, as I'm enjoying the interpersonal aspect of museum work rather than the hard research/collections stuff. I'm choosing my programs (be they actual museum studies programs or academic degrees with museum studies concentrations/certificates) primarily based on graduate placement rates in museums. Obviously, it's not foolproof, but it's the best I can do.
Things may very well vary from discipline to discipline--after reading over a ton of history museum summer internship positions over the last couple months, the descriptions have consistently requested someone pursuing graduate education in history, museum studies, or a related field--never strictly one or the other. I just finished sending in my slew of internship applications yesterday, so I guess we'll see how it turns out. At this point, though, I don't know if I feel ready to devote myself to strictly one small period of history, as a graduate degree would require--there are several areas that interest me.
History museums are a completely different ball game than art and they have a very different attitude towards degrees. Very few curators in history museums, except the very large ones have Ph.D.s and the majority of the jobs are in smaller institutions. Museum studies degrees are also much more valuable in history museums. You are absolutely right that it is experience that counts. I was a curator in a small historical society in Connecticut for almost a year and you know what my specialty is? Pre-Columbian South America. But they had absolutely no one who had a clue how to manage a collection and that was what they needed. This is an unusual case, I'm sure, but my experience has been that if you have the bureaucratic, collections management and basic research skills, you stand a much better shot of getting at least some temporary positions to start with, and that gets your foot in the door. The executive director I worked with had a degree in Public History, which I think is more general, so that might be something you could investigate.
-
From my point of view, the most important question you need to answer is what kind of position do you want to hold in a museum and then, what kind of museum do you want to work for? The kind of training that you need for a particular position can be DRASTICALLY different from that needed for others, and as I learned from hopping back and forth between history and art museums, the type of institution really matters too. For working in a history museum, a Masters in Public History or a Museum Studies degree are good ways to go for most types of position unless you really want to specialize in something like education or exhibit design. However, for art museums, I would suggest a Masters in Art History at a school which offers a concentration in Museum Studies or even a supplementary certificate program. If curation is your ultimate goal, the trend in art is that a Ph.D. is virtually required now, but almost no one in history musuems expects that level of degree. I would follow runaway's excellent advice and do as much volunteer work/internships as possible before comitting to further school. The number of unemployed museum MAs has not been overstated so it's very important that you have clear goals going into your studies and as much work experience relevant to the position you evetually want as possible. You might actually have very good luck getting a job or at least a temporary position in small museums looking to set up databases for the first time. Many people who run historical societies have NO computer skills and your CompSci background, if you want to go that direction, might be your ticket in the door.
-
Not a silly question at all, was wondering if that was a common accronym when I used it. An ISP is an independent study project, sort of like the grad level directed reading. You normally work with one professor and produce a single large paper or other kind of project through one semester (I curated an exhibit). Not all programs have this option, but its a good chance to show schools that you can work independently and handle the planning of a larger, longer project than a regular term paper. Since you are an honors student, I assume that you will be doing some kind of large project as part of your program so I would say its not totally necessary to pursue doing one if it would be difficult at your school. Narrowing down specific time periods and regions is a good start, and very necessary for help you narrow down your school choices, but most professors/programs will want to know what kinds of questions and objects you would look at in your research. Are you interested in paintings, sculptures, decorative arts? Would you be drawn to investigate gender relations within art or the philosophies behind the production of a certain kind of image? As an example, my time period is the Inka empire, but the questions that I will work on have to do with the way textiles acted to form, as well as illustrate, personal identity within the Inka culture, and then the ways this carried over to the colonial period. I also have larger interests in applying the phenomenological theory of Merleau-Ponty to the experience of textile arts. You can certainly change your specific research topic during grad study, as I'm sure I will, but having at least a few suggestions ready shows that you are focused and have given though to your future research. Are you looking at Masters programs or Ph.D.s?
Terrifying personal situation: rumors in the department
in Officially Grads
Posted
Personally, I tend to took with more distrust on someone who is spreading gossip about another person before I judge the person who is the subject of it. Saying bad things about the people that you work with to others is unprofessional behavior and I would hope that if the information passes beyond the people whom you told that you would be sought out for clarification if someone had any doubts.