Search the Community

Hi All, I am struggling in deciding between UChicago MAPH and NYU IFA. I know both programs have been said to be "cash cow" programs, but they seem to be the only two options that I have now... I am interested in post-war American art and modern/contemporary art in East Asia, and currently do not plan to apply PhD afterwards. Both programs have faculty that fit my interests. I knew more about IFA, since I was an undergrad in NYU, but I still don't have a very concrete idea about the MAPH program, as I have heard many different sides of stories about it. From the virtual sessions I attended, I feel faculty at IFA are more supportive. But I might get a more intensive research experience and better academic resources on campus at UChicago.. If anyone can share some insights about which program is more reputed in the art field, I would really appreciate it! I would also really appreciate if any current students or alumni from the two programs can share your experience! Thanks!

Hello everyone I'm interested in studying photography (including issues of class, power and the documentary genre). I was accepted to the IFA's MA program, and the UT Austin PhD American Studies program (which would have a strong photography angle). I am wait-listed at U Michigan-Ann Arbor's PhD art history program. I ultimately want to get a PhD, then teach and curate photography. IFA is tremendously respected, and would open a lot of doors (maybe more in curating than academia), but would cost $70,000. UT Austin is of course free. But do you think it 1.) is respected / opens doors and 2.) might allow me to keep a foot in both academic and curating worlds? I would appreciate any insight you might have. Thank you!

Received offers of MA in art history from Columbia, NYU IFA, and Courtauld. Dunno which one to choose. My undergraduate focus was on 18-19th century French Art (Rococo art mainly), and crosscultural/inter-cultural art between France and China (chinoiserie mainly). It is also what I listed as the foundation of my MA research direction. The Courtauld project is to follow Professor Katie Scott on a 18-19th c French art track with one of the two semesters learning with an anthropology professor (Going to Courtauld means I would be limited in researching crosscultural and east asian art and would be solely focused on French art). The Columbia program offers me Professor Frederique Baumgartner as my thesis advisor. At the same times, I have possible access to Professor Harrist's courses on Chinese art. The IFA did not mention any specific professor who potentially can be my advisor, but I am inclined to follow after Professor Hay and Professor Meredith Martin if possible. My concerns: 1. Does any one knows about the academic quality of these three schools? Is there huge differences, in terms of professors, academic resources, research quality, etc? 2. IFA and Columbia offer no fund at all to international students like myself. Thus when taking the tuition fee into consideration, I believe IFA and Columbia cost about two to three times of what courtauld may cost me. However, perhaps I can apply to external fundings for my second year as a grad student cover some of the cost. (welcome for funding suggestions!! really needed!) 3. I am still not sure what I want to do after a MA program. I am inclined to find a job right after (want to be financially independent...), but I am also very interested in a phd track. I know that going after a phd is a huge commitment and if my MA is only one year (like at Courtauld), then my application to the phd programs would not be of much difference from my MA application. Really need help BEFORE APRIL 13TH to make the right decision!!! Thank you in advance who could give insight on my dilemma!