bulev Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 I've read just about every topic on this forum regarding graduate school in Anthro/Archaeology so I do understand that there is a significant element of luck involved in getting into a good program, especially nowadays. Nevertheless, what sets the top applicants apart? What do they bring to the table, that the merely good do not? I know fit is incredibly important, but what specifically can I do right now to make myself a top applicant rather than a middle-of-the-pack kind of guy? Any information would be greatly appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthropologygeek Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 Everyone has great grades. Gre only matters for handful of programs and then just meet the cutoff for the rest. Do research and pick programs that fit you rather than you try to fit into the program. Fit matters the most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mutualist007 Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 (edited) Everyone has great grades. Gre only matters for handful of programs and then just meet the cutoff for the rest. Do research and pick programs that fit you rather than you try to fit into the program. Fit matters the most. AG, I am volunteering now at a Natural History Museum and plan to volunteer for an archaeological preservation group too. Will these things help if I can't get anyone to employ me as a research assistant? When you write "do research" , what exactly does that mean? Would doing my own research and trying to get mention in some print source or presentation help? I'm not in school, so I have no associations as a student? When you say it's gonna happen "now", When exactly do you mean? (How soon is now?) Edited February 5, 2011 by mutualist007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthropologygeek Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Research proves your interest. Plus, extra research experience with publications and/or presentations can never hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archaeo_Anon Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Fit with individual faculty probably matters more than fit with the overall program the vast majority of the time (you have to inspire someone to pull for you in those adcom meetings, and possibly offer up funding on your behalf; to do this you really have to sell yourself to the individual faculty member). Research your POIs at each program--read whatever they've published most recently, and check out their CVs and faculty profiles on the department website. Whatever they're doing or researching now may not directly reflect what they were working on earlier in their careers, so it would behoove you to make sure you still fit with what they're actually working on. Tailor your application to fit that individual faculty member. Esoteric but recently acquired interests by the faculty may be your best bet (and don't "fake" being interested in these just to better your chances--see point C, they'll see right through you--but be on the lookout for faculty who have suddenly become interested in the same thing you are, and apply to work with them), because they may want a grad student to work on that new interest with them, but haven't gotten one yet. In some cases it helps to directly contact your POI via email or--even better--in person. Not all of them are super welcoming to random emails from potential applicants, but most faculty are more than happy to chatter away about whatever they're working on, and tend to think well of people who show interest, provide a listening ear, and may be able to follow up with some insightful comments or thoughtful questions. This will also help you determine if your POI is even taking students this year, because if not, spend your energy elsewhere where you've actually got a chance. Only extremely well-funded rockstar faculty (and it's not always the people you think, so ask around...ask the current grads if the dept website offers up a few to field applicant questions) are able to take on a new grad or two every year. If you are in touch with your POI beforehand, definitely follow up and let them know when you've submitted your application. Be specific about your research interests. You don't have to have a precise written-out-in-words question that you intend to propose for your dissertation topic at the time you apply, but have a particular general topic and region in mind (e.g. state expansion in x, trade networks between a and b, issues of identity in n culture under colonial rule, etc), be sure to delineate rough time periods where applicable. Just saying you've been interested in archaeology/the Maya/whatever since you were a kid is not enough to qualify as a research interest. Pretty much every archaeologist and wannabe archaeologist has been into this stuff since they were kids too. This approach won't make you stand out at all. Be able to back up your stated interest with something concrete: coursework, a relevant undergrad or masters degree, some kind of research project (undergrad/masters thesis, research paper, poster presented at a conference, etc), some kind of extracurricular work or volunteer experience relevant to the topic (volunteering at a museum with an exhibit to do with your interest, be a shovel bum on a dig relevant to your interest, etc), and/or potentially field school in the region relevant to your interest. Don't settle for just any random archaeological experience regardless of its relevance to what you want to study. Target, target, target, target. Get your interests in mind as early as possible and get going. You absolutely do not have to have all or even most of these concrete experiences to qualify as a top candidate, but having multiple of them under your belt will show them that you're serious and that you have the chops to take action in pursuing your interest even without being affiliated with their (clearly best ever) program. I'll also second the common knowledge that GPA and GRE scores mainly help as a basic qualifier to get you into the candidate pool, and that generally the particular scores don't matter, but I will also throw out there that if you happen to have extremely good scores on both accounts, you may get an extra admit boost because the department may consider you a good bet as a nominee for various campus-wide or other fellowships, which are parceled out based mainly on scores. Fellowships and scholarships awarded to their students help departments look prestigious, and take the funding burden off of them, which makes them even more eager to have you. Basically, if you can't get the tippy tippy top scores for either GRE or GPA but you still have good, solid scores that meet or exceed their minimum, don't sweat it. But if your scores are already high enough that it's doable for you to work a little bit harder and study a little bit longer to reach that tippy tippy top, do it. In summary: Ask not what the department can do for you, ask what you can do for the department. Then prove that you've got the follow-through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthropologygeek Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Archaeo- Perfect description of the field and how it works. One thing I thought I would add its not so much about the school ranking as how is your advisor respected in the field Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archaeo_Anon Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 Out of curiosity, AG, are you on the sociocultural or archaeology side of anthro? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthropologygeek Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 I'm on the archaeology side getting my phd. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archaeo_Anon Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 Ah, cool. I thought that might be the case, but your info didn't specify. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mutualist007 Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Ah, cool. I thought that might be the case, but your info didn't specify. You certainly gave us great feedback on what types of profiles interest adcoms, but what I think the OP may yearn for are concrete examples of activities that will gain them favor with schools. To say that one needs to appeal to a particular faculty member or lab, is to invite a multitude of stabs in the dark, or an overly myopic approach that places all the eggs in one basket. This question goes out to all who have broken in to a PhD path: What pursuits or activities in general are good for building relevant experience? We know the story on GPA and GREs, but for those of us who failed to get a ton of faculty attention and assistant time during their undergraduate time, what do we do now while waiting? I would have been on every puddle of mud available as an undergrad given what I know now and what I know of circumstances, but I was rushing through a second degree and was a commuter student who lived further away from campus than everyone else. What is valuable and realistic for the rest of us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mutualist007 Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Ah, cool. I thought that might be the case, but your info didn't specify. You certainly gave us great feedback on what types of profiles interest adcoms, but what I think the OP may yearn for are concrete examples of activities that will gain them favor with schools. To say that one needs to appeal to a particular faculty member or lab, is to invite a multitude of stabs in the dark, or an overly myopic approach aimed at one school that places all the eggs in one basket. This question goes out to all who have broken in to a PhD path: What pursuits or activities in general are good for building relevant experience? We know the story on GPA and GREs, but for those of us who failed to get a ton of faculty attention and assistant time during their undergraduate time, what do we do now while waiting? I would have been on every puddle of mud available as an undergrad given what I know now and what I know of circumstances, but I was rushing through a second degree and was a commuter student who lived further away from campus than everyone else. What is valuable and realistic for the rest of us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthropologygeek Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Well, field schools are good. And a good sop would be good. I got into four programs four programs and turns out at least one of my recs had a close personal relationship with the adviser who accepted me. I worked hard getting a great relationship with my recommenders and did alot of extra work for them. I also presented and got things published. Also, I paid to visit potential schools before I applied to male sure they were a good fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archaeo_Anon Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 To say that one needs to appeal to a particular faculty member or lab, is to invite a multitude of stabs in the dark, or an overly myopic approach aimed at one school that places all the eggs in one basket. Clearly I can't speak for all archaeology programs, since I'm only in the one that I'm in, and I only have direct knowledge of those experienced firsthand by my peers, but as far as I can tell, archaeology doesn't work exactly the same way as many other fields in which it's recommended that you cast as wide a net as possible and hope that any of a number of faculty will take you under their wing. Even the top tier programs only have a limited number of faculty working in a particular region or on a particular topic, and if you want admission as a PhD student, you are going to have to work specifically with a certain faculty member on that topic in that region. You don't get assigned to a lab which may be doing multiple things, you are essentially apprenticed to a faculty member or their pet project. Is there latitude for interests which may bridge the specializations of multiple faculty? Certainly, but you do have to be careful with it, and it is still absolutely essential that you target your POIs with specific information and interests that you can back up with specifically related experiences. Casting as wide a net as possible will not make one as attractive a candidate as being as specific as possible and as strong as possible in that one particular specialty. It may seem like putting all your eggs in one basket to have that kind of focus, and extremely nerve-wracking to be so reliant on a single professor to make or break your admissions chances, but that's the way it works. No two ways about it. If someone is admitted to my program (which is a top tier program) this year who wants to work in a certain part of the Americas, everyone knows exactly who their advisor is, because that's the only person who works there. If someone is admitted who wants to work in East Asia, again, the pickings for advisors are slim. Classical archaeo? Everyone knows. Archaeology is a small world. It's circumstances like these that make it such a competitive field for prospective students. You certainly gave us great feedback on what types of profiles interest adcoms, but what I think the OP may yearn for are concrete examples of activities that will gain them favor with schools. ... What pursuits or activities in general are good for building relevant experience? We know the story on GPA and GREs, but for those of us who failed to get a ton of faculty attention and assistant time during their undergraduate time, what do we do now while waiting? ... What is valuable and realistic for the rest of us? I'd like to help, but I'm not sure how much more specific you want me to be short of linking everyone to their magical dream activity's website, which I cannot do since it is going to be so case-specific every time. On top of the common sense advice given to applicants in all fields, you need some combination of the things in the list I posted above. Which things are most relevant and achievable for you in your own circumstances are something only you can determine. Unfortunately if the one thing your application really needs to bolster it, for example, is more specific coursework (in languages, say), and you have too many other things going on in your life to realistically make time for that, you simply may not be able to reach that "top candidate" status. You may not always need to be the best of the best and the top of the top for admission depending on your focus and which programs you apply to, but it is something you would have to come to terms with. (Fortunately, in most cases shortcomings of one experiential type can be made up for with others; take a hard look at your application, figure out where it could be stronger, and figure out what specific tasks or activities from the list can fill that gap.) I really, really don't want to be a downer about it, but it's important to keep an honest eye on exactly how hard it is to make it in archaeology. Many extremely intelligent, hardworking people get stuck doing several Masters degrees in a row before they get in to a PhD program or give up. Several of my friends from undergrad are in this exact situation. I feel for them, but I can't wave a wand and give them that perfect combination of attributes that they would need to get into the program they want. They're the only ones who can make it happen, and even then they'll need all the luck they can get. I still have trouble comprehending how I managed to get in myself given how totally arbitrary some of the process seems, and a few grads who have been in the program much longer than me have told me that even after many years into the process they still have yet to figure out how they managed it. You do what you can, and the rest is out of your hands. If you have more specific questions, e.g. making nice with LoR writers, or where to look for info on field schools, I will certainly try to provide what advice I can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthropologygeek Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Archaeo- well said again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulev Posted February 8, 2011 Author Share Posted February 8, 2011 Clearly I can't speak for all archaeology programs, since I'm only in the one that I'm in, and I only have direct knowledge of those experienced firsthand by my peers, but as far as I can tell, archaeology doesn't work exactly the same way as many other fields in which it's recommended that you cast as wide a net as possible and hope that any of a number of faculty will take you under their wing. Even the top tier programs only have a limited number of faculty working in a particular region or on a particular topic, and if you want admission as a PhD student, you are going to have to work specifically with a certain faculty member on that topic in that region. You don't get assigned to a lab which may be doing multiple things, you are essentially apprenticed to a faculty member or their pet project. Is there latitude for interests which may bridge the specializations of multiple faculty? Certainly, but you do have to be careful with it, and it is still absolutely essential that you target your POIs with specific information and interests that you can back up with specifically related experiences. Casting as wide a net as possible will not make one as attractive a candidate as being as specific as possible and as strong as possible in that one particular specialty. It may seem like putting all your eggs in one basket to have that kind of focus, and extremely nerve-wracking to be so reliant on a single professor to make or break your admissions chances, but that's the way it works. No two ways about it. If someone is admitted to my program (which is a top tier program) this year who wants to work in a certain part of the Americas, everyone knows exactly who their advisor is, because that's the only person who works there. If someone is admitted who wants to work in East Asia, again, the pickings for advisors are slim. Classical archaeo? Everyone knows. Archaeology is a small world. It's circumstances like these that make it such a competitive field for prospective students. I'd like to help, but I'm not sure how much more specific you want me to be short of linking everyone to their magical dream activity's website, which I cannot do since it is going to be so case-specific every time. On top of the common sense advice given to applicants in all fields, you need some combination of the things in the list I posted above. Which things are most relevant and achievable for you in your own circumstances are something only you can determine. Unfortunately if the one thing your application really needs to bolster it, for example, is more specific coursework (in languages, say), and you have too many other things going on in your life to realistically make time for that, you simply may not be able to reach that "top candidate" status. You may not always need to be the best of the best and the top of the top for admission depending on your focus and which programs you apply to, but it is something you would have to come to terms with. (Fortunately, in most cases shortcomings of one experiential type can be made up for with others; take a hard look at your application, figure out where it could be stronger, and figure out what specific tasks or activities from the list can fill that gap.) I really, really don't want to be a downer about it, but it's important to keep an honest eye on exactly how hard it is to make it in archaeology. Many extremely intelligent, hardworking people get stuck doing several Masters degrees in a row before they get in to a PhD program or give up. Several of my friends from undergrad are in this exact situation. I feel for them, but I can't wave a wand and give them that perfect combination of attributes that they would need to get into the program they want. They're the only ones who can make it happen, and even then they'll need all the luck they can get. I still have trouble comprehending how I managed to get in myself given how totally arbitrary some of the process seems, and a few grads who have been in the program much longer than me have told me that even after many years into the process they still have yet to figure out how they managed it. You do what you can, and the rest is out of your hands. If you have more specific questions, e.g. making nice with LoR writers, or where to look for info on field schools, I will certainly try to provide what advice I can. First off, thanks. RE: LOR writers and field school, YES! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mutualist007 Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 (edited) Thanks AA BTW, I'm applying to biological and bioarch programs, so some crossover works and some will not. Your answers on "fit" really helped and I worry now that my SOP may not have been specific enough since I did not limit my scope to POI projects. I gave my interests, then related it to the POI, but I did not go into detail about working under the POI. Did I shoot myself in the foot, let, neck? As for the other parts of the application, I suppose I am trying to quantify certain aspects of the candidate profile which I have not seen quantified: How many times should one be published? How many presentations? Years of field experience? What types of field or experiential activities get attention? I may sound like a neophyte, because I guess I am in a sense. I transferred in to the degree from a previous degree, and did everything in 2 years where most people spend 4-5 building experiential credentials. I have other lamentations on the process, but I don't know what to do with it. I'd like to help, but I'm not sure how much more specific you want me to be short of linking everyone to their magical dream activity's website, which I cannot do since it is going to be so case-specific every time. On top of the common sense advice given to applicants in all fields, you need some combination of the things in the list I posted above. Which things are most relevant and achievable for you in your own circumstances are something only you can determine. Unfortunately if the one thing your application really needs to bolster it, for example, is more specific coursework (in languages, say), and you have too many other things going on in your life to realistically make time for that, you simply may not be able to reach that "top candidate" status. You may not always need to be the best of the best and the top of the top for admission depending on your focus and which programs you apply to, but it is something you would have to come to terms with. (Fortunately, in most cases shortcomings of one experiential type can be made up for with others; take a hard look at your application, figure out where it could be stronger, and figure out what specific tasks or activities from the list can fill that gap.) .... If you have more specific questions, e.g. making nice with LoR writers, or where to look for info on field schools, I will certainly try to provide what advice I can. Edited February 9, 2011 by mutualist007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthropologygeek Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 In biological field schools aren't to important but bioarch programs they are. It's not just the times you publish or present it's also where. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now