Archaeology MA

[SD141255]

Hi everyone,

Ok so I know it's not quite classics but I have a question about Archaeology MA programs and I could definitely use some advice. I am currently trying to decide between doing my archaeology MA at UCL in the UK or Tufts University in the US. I am pretty torn between the two schools.

From what I understand UCL has a global reputation and it is in the middle of London within walking distance to the British Museum and it's a great place to study Archaeology. However, I have also been told that the UK masters degree which is only one year...basically won't help me get a PhD school or get a job in the US. On the other hand Tufts is a somewhat selective program in the States ...however it doesnt have the global reputation that UCL does and it will take me two years to get a Master's here instead of the one year at UCL. I'm really torn between the two and can't seem to figure out which school will be the better choice in the long run. If anyone out there has any advice I would really appreciate it!!!

Thanks!

Edited March 31, 2010 by SD141255

[emichele]

Hi everyone,

Ok so I know it's not quite classics but I have a question about Archaeology MA programs and I could definitely use some advice. I am currently trying to decide between doing my archaeology MA at UCL in the UK or Tufts University in the US. I am pretty torn between the two schools.

From what I understand UCL has a global reputation and it is in the middle of London within walking distance to the British Museum and it's a great place to study Archaeology. However, I have also been told that the UK masters degree which is only one year...basically won't help me get a PhD school or get a job in the US. On the other hand Tufts is a somewhat selective program in the States ...however it doesnt have the global reputation that UCL does and it will take me two years to get a Master's here instead of the one year at UCL. I'm really torn between the two and can't seem to figure out which school will be the better choice in the long run. If anyone out there has any advice I would really appreciate it!!!

Thanks!

Well, are you going to be receiving any funding from Tufts? And are you planning on applying for a PhD afterward? I was in the exact same situation a few weeks ago, trying to decide between getting my MA in Classics at UCL or at a university stateside. I would have had funding here, but my boyfriend is English, and so that was a whole separate issue to consider. Luckily for me, I have just recently been accepted into a PhD program here, with funding, so my decision has become quite easy to make. But when I thought I did have to make the choice, I spoke to several of my advisors about it, and received (of course) all sorts of different advice. A couple of professors felt that it might be quite a good option for me to attend UCL, but that I would have to reapply to MA/Phd programs here for the next year - so basically I would end up with two MA's. Another professor thought that I would be able to enter a PhD program straight from my UCL MA, but that didn't seem to be the general consensus.

Will you have any teaching opportunities at Tufts? You definitely won't at UCL, so if you will at Tufts that's something to consider.

Additionally, you also should consider the cost of living. While paying for a UK MA might be cheaper, living in London is not. But it is an amazing city, and you will have many many resources available to you academically. Honestly, the real question here is funding. If you're going to receive any sort of funding at Tufts (even just tuition remission), I would go there. The only reason I struggled with my decision is because my boyfriend's entire network of family and friends lives in the UK, and he's been sticking it out here with me for the last five years.

One last little thing to think about - if you ARE planning on applying for PhD programs, if you attend UCL you will have to apply in the fall. After going through applications this year, the idea of having to do it all again in a few months was almost sickening. Going to Tufts at least grants you a years break from application hell (unless you're not planning on applying straightaway, but are going to do fieldwork or something for a couple years).

Anyways, while lengthy, I'm sure my reply is not especially helpful, since I was just as stuck as you are. But good luck with your decision, I'm interested to see what you do!

[DiogenesCynicus]

If you have a better idea of your focus (Greek or Roman), you could try looking at other programs in the U.S., since you're more likely to get teaching experience and funding Stateside. However, you're most likely going to be applying to PhD programs, as I've found that there are few programs that offer an M.A. in classical archaeology. From my experience, you're going to want to apply to more than 2 programs, as the classical archaeology field is very competitive, since you'll be competing for spots in Classics and Art History departments, who will also be looking to admit non-archaeology students as well.

[Brandi]

If you are going into Classical Archaeology DO NOT APPLY TO UCL FOR NEXT YEAR (10/11)!!

I applied for this program and was invited for an interview. After going all the way to London (I was in Europe at the time so it wasn't quite as far as the states but it still was an extra journey that I would have happily avoided) I was told by the department members that I met with that I was accepted into the school, but that the program in Classical Archaeology was not being offered this year! So I had to sit there for about an hour as they tried to talk me into going to their general Archaeology program even though they had almost no course offerings related to Classical (specifically Roman) archaeology, besides like a classical art class. I thought this was very underhanded of them and also reflected on what I think is the general feel of that school. UCL may have a global reputation, but I don't think that it is necessarily adhering to those same standards anymore.

Anyways, long story short if you are planning on doing anything with Classical Archaeology at UCL, their website is wrong, the program is NOT being offered, and as far as I know they won't let you know this until you get there since even in email form they referred to my application as for the program in classical arch.

This is not to say, however, that all British universities are bad. I am going to the University of Exeter next year to do my MA and then reapply in the states. The only thing I would be really careful of is that if you do decide to do an MA in the UK is that you take language modules even though they are not required because PhD programs in the states will be looking at those. But I say look at the facility and students and see who is doing the kind of work that you want to be doing. I didn't choose Exeter just because I wanted to get an MA done quick, I choose it because there are some people that that I am extremely excited to work with, which I think is probably one of the most important things when choosing a grad program, after money of course.

[nike of samothrace]

SD, I'm sorry I didn't see this post sooner. I am an alum of the Tufts program and have current information about the state of the program and the faculty (or lack thereof- they currently do not have an archaeologist there on more than a one-year basis - this is NOT something that will allow you to finish the program in a productive way). Please PM me if you see this. As an undergrad institution, Tufts is selective and very competitive - for graduate work in Classics, it is *not*. The fact that they are accepting archaeology students when they quite literally have no archaeology program is disgraceful.

[crazyhorse]

I sent nikeofsamothrace a private message regarding his/her previous post about the Tufts archaeology program, but as I have not yet received a response, I feel obligated to throw something out here publicly.

It does not seem quite appropriate for nike to claim that it is "disgraceful" for Tufts to run an archaeology program at present. As someone who has taken some undergrad and some grad courses in the classics dept at Tufts in the past two years, I can say that I have seen at least a few of the arch graduate students (and of the classics students as well) go on to study at top schools (I know that one got offers from Harvard and Columbia this year). I cannot say more about placement (I do know that some of the classics students have gone on to teach at the HS level instead of applying to PhD programs). I did not however get the impression that graduates of the program found it quite as "uncompetitive" as nike claims. And while I don't pretend to know anything substantive about the field of archaeology-- my interests are pretty strictly philological-- and I will moreover concede that the archaeology offerings certainly do appear to be slender at Tufts, it still seems to be an overstatement to call it "disgraceful" that the program even exists in its current state. The students who I have met in the program over the last two years (which is almost all of them) seem pretty satisfied by it (or at the very least, not utterly disgusted by what it had to offer them, as nike appears to be).

That said, I would be delighted to hear from nike with specific details regarding the weaknesses of the Tufts program. S/he may have good reasons for speaking ill of it in a public forum and I am not gainsaying the possibility that she is correct-- it would simply be nice to hear those reasons.

Edited April 12, 2010 by crazyhorse

[nike of samothrace]

crazyhorse, I apologize for the delay in getting back to you. That said, I do not appreciate being called out in, as you say, a public forum. Being a PhD candidate, I have demands on my time that don't always allow me to reply to inquiries such as this immediately. I did receive an email from the OP, who I replied to; I have been looking for the time to get back to you.

My information comes, as I said, from being an alum from the program with connections to multiple people still in the loop. Every faculty member who worked with material culture when I left a few years ago is no longer associated with the program, but for two who work with material only very tangentially (and one of these is frequently out of the country and has not allowed students to graduate in the past-at all, not temporarily-based on his lack of availability and guidance). The rate of faculty turnover has been catastrophic for the program, as not a single one of these people has been replaced, due partially to poor leadership in the department (hopefully a thing of the past) and a lack of support from the administration. My understanding of the current situation is that one adjunct taught archaeology classes last year, and that person, I believe, is not returning. Another one-year VAP has been hired for the coming year, with no assurance that they will continue on beyond this time. The simple fact is that this situation does not allow for one to pursue graduate studies in archaeology; aside from the fact that the courses offered must be very minimal, the presence of a single faculty member for one year means it is virtually impossible to write an MA thesis, something that is generally required for PhD applications (not explicitly stated by programs, but being accepted with an MA without a thesis is unheard of), much less does this mean that a professor will be able to set your comprehensive exams (Tufts exams are based upon your coursework, not a reading list, and requires input from the faculty who taught your courses in order to tailor the exam to what you learned).

I am glad to hear that some have been able to move on recently, though the programs you list - Harvard and Columbia - are philologically oriented, and I can only assume they have accepted students because of their philological training, as the philology side of the program remains relatively stable. Harvard, it is no secret, trains its archaeology graduate students as philologists first, so while the name of Harvard has cachet for sure, their reputation for material culture is not strong. Even their own faculty members have told prospective students this. So while it is good that others have gone on, their situations are not ideal for some who look at Tufts' program.

I use the word disgraceful because the situation there is underhanded. The OP mentioned not being able to find out who their faculty members are, and I expect this is directly correlated with the unstable situation for archaeology there. Additionally, the reputation of Tufts is not good, and I say this as someone who is saddled with a degree. I was no underachiever whilst there, and yet the association with the program has been a detractor all around. Since moving on to my PhD program, I have been encouraged to "think tabula rasa" and not continue to advertise my connection to the program. My experience is that this is smart advice.

My experience is just that - my own personal experience. I know many who have moved on since the program, though the vast majority of these come from before the faculty shakeups of a few years past. I have seen several of my friends fail in attempting to get into PhD programs, due to faculty turnover, lack of name recognition, and the growing knowledge of the situation there. Knowing this, I felt I should pass on the information so anyone looking to attend could make a more informed choice, that's all.

[crazyhorse]

nike, I am so sorry if I appeared to be calling you out. I was basically trying to see if I could get the public conversation to continue, because I didn't hear back from you in PM form-- I also figured that whatever you would feel comfortable telling me in public would be useful information for anyone who is considering an offer from Tufts. I have sent you a second PM and (although I understand you must be really busy!) I hope you will respond to it.

And thank you for explaining about the situation at Tufts! I am sure you have helped some archaeologists to make up their minds!

[SD141255]

Hi Everyone,

Thanks for the advice about the Archaeology programs. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate all the insight! I'm still up in the air about the two programs (i guess i'm just really indecisive...it will probably take me up until the very last minute to decide!) but your posts definitely do help a lot!

Thanks!!!

~SD141255

[Brandi]

I'm really not joking. The program in Classical Archaeology at UCL DOES NOT EXIST. It is moving between departments and will not be offered next year. I would at least contact them about this directly (Although I'm not sure how honest they will be with their information as I indicated above) as I would hate to have you be screwed over when you get there. That being said, I guess you do have just "Archaeology MA" as your title so maybe you are not applying for the Classical Arch. MA but still, I think if you absolutely have to pick one of these Tufs, even if it is sort of a disjointed state, at least has more to offer than UCL (basically nothing). However, it may be advantageous for you to do something else this year and reapply to several other programs in the fall. Sometimes waiting is better than getting yourself into something that is not going to work out, especially if you would not be receiving funding from either institution. Hope that helps!

Edited April 16, 2010 by Brandi

[nike of samothrace]

I have to agree with Brandi's last point - don't be afraid to take time off if your current options aren't ideal (speaking to the OP, but also to anyone else in a similar situation). It sounds scary, and feels terrifying at times when you do it, but trust me, there is nothing wrong with it. There's no reason you need to be in a program consecutively, BA -> MA - > PhD. Time off can actually do yoou a lot of good (extra maturity, perspective, money (!), sometimes new contacts you wouldn't have made otherwise). And this is the point that I cannot stress enough - this is your future. The degree you earn now, or the time you spend in a program (say you don't finish for whatever reason) - *that* is something that follows you and defines you for the rest of/a large part of your career. Don't make this decision lightly, and definitely do not make it because you feel like you have to do *something* so you might as well go to X university - you don't! Only go somewhere when the situation is good for you and all signs point to yes, this is a good option.

[melissa1]

crazyhorse, I apologize for the delay in getting back to you. That said, I do not appreciate being called out in, as you say, a public forum. Being a PhD candidate, I have demands on my time that don't always allow me to reply to inquiries such as this immediately. I did receive an email from the OP, who I replied to; I have been looking for the time to get back to you.

My information comes, as I said, from being an alum from the program with connections to multiple people still in the loop. Every faculty member who worked with material culture when I left a few years ago is no longer associated with the program, but for two who work with material only very tangentially (and one of these is frequently out of the country and has not allowed students to graduate in the past-at all, not temporarily-based on his lack of availability and guidance). The rate of faculty turnover has been catastrophic for the program, as not a single one of these people has been replaced, due partially to poor leadership in the department (hopefully a thing of the past) and a lack of support from the administration. My understanding of the current situation is that one adjunct taught archaeology classes last year, and that person, I believe, is not returning. Another one-year VAP has been hired for the coming year, with no assurance that they will continue on beyond this time. The simple fact is that this situation does not allow for one to pursue graduate studies in archaeology; aside from the fact that the courses offered must be very minimal, the presence of a single faculty member for one year means it is virtually impossible to write an MA thesis, something that is generally required for PhD applications (not explicitly stated by programs, but being accepted with an MA without a thesis is unheard of), much less does this mean that a professor will be able to set your comprehensive exams (Tufts exams are based upon your coursework, not a reading list, and requires input from the faculty who taught your courses in order to tailor the exam to what you learned).

I am glad to hear that some have been able to move on recently, though the programs you list - Harvard and Columbia - are philologically oriented, and I can only assume they have accepted students because of their philological training, as the philology side of the program remains relatively stable. Harvard, it is no secret, trains its archaeology graduate students as philologists first, so while the name of Harvard has cachet for sure, their reputation for material culture is not strong. Even their own faculty members have told prospective students this. So while it is good that others have gone on, their situations are not ideal for some who look at Tufts' program.

I use the word disgraceful because the situation there is underhanded. The OP mentioned not being able to find out who their faculty members are, and I expect this is directly correlated with the unstable situation for archaeology there. Additionally, the reputation of Tufts is not good, and I say this as someone who is saddled with a degree. I was no underachiever whilst there, and yet the association with the program has been a detractor all around. Since moving on to my PhD program, I have been encouraged to "think tabula rasa" and not continue to advertise my connection to the program. My experience is that this is smart advice.

My experience is just that - my own personal experience. I know many who have moved on since the program, though the vast majority of these come from before the faculty shakeups of a few years past. I have seen several of my friends fail in attempting to get into PhD programs, due to faculty turnover, lack of name recognition, and the growing knowledge of the situation there. Knowing this, I felt I should pass on the information so anyone looking to attend could make a more informed choice, that's all.

[melissa1]

Hi,

I am new to this board and am wondering about the person who was considering Tufts chose to go there or not. I was also wondering if Nike of Samothrace could elaborate on the "tabula rasa" comment; is the reputation of the program really that horrible. Up unitl I saw these postings, I was considering applying there, but now I am not so sure. I am starting my applications and am wondering if there are any good MA programs out there, and if so, where are they?

Thanks!

[nike of samothrace]

Hi,

I am new to this board and am wondering about the person who was considering Tufts chose to go there or not. I was also wondering if Nike of Samothrace could elaborate on the "tabula rasa" comment; is the reputation of the program really that horrible. Up unitl I saw these postings, I was considering applying there, but now I am not so sure. I am starting my applications and am wondering if there are any good MA programs out there, and if so, where are they?

Thanks!

Hi melissa1,

I'm happy to elaborate on what I said, but the tabula rasa comment is pretty much just what it is; I was encouraged to proceed in my graduate career almost as if I had never attended Tufts. I've taken that advice and it's done me well. I do, of course, discuss it at pertinent times - if I worked with a particular person, took a certain course, and I do allude occasionally to my thesis research, but all in all I am currently a student elsewhere, am exponentially better off here than I ever was there, and I act accordingly.

The reputation of the program varies. You'll find that many who think the program has a good reputation are simply allowing Tufts' very good undergraduate reputation to color what they perceive of the Classics graduate program. Some graduate alumni, particularly those who went through the philology track, found success after, but my experience of the archaeology students is that those of us who did succeed had to kick and claw to do so. I have seen several give up and leave the field entirely, one even without earning their MA. All but one of the faculty I worked with at the time are no longer affiliated with the university. Such a faculty turnover reflects very negatively upon a department, not to mention the damage it does to those attempting to do graduate research. Currently, to my knowledge, the department has one TT faculty member who does archaeology but is rarely in residence, and otherwise they have not been able to secure funding to get a single additional archaeologist for longer than a year at a time.

There are good MA programs, but Tufts is no longer one of them. I would recommend looking closely at Arizona and FSU, both of which have had success with students moving on for PhD programs, but evaluate them carefully; their situations are both far from ideal. Taking on an MA is a difficult choice; it can handicap you in the future. I would strongly recommend doing a post-bacc program, excavating in the summers, and applying for PhD programs rather than taking on an MA. If I could do it all over again, this is precisely what I would do.

-nike