Best Program

[IrishScientist]

My research interests are at the intersection between social anthropology and medical anthropology and I am interested to hear peoples perspectives on the programs I am interested in.

Any ideas on how UChicago (Soc Anth), Harvard (Med Anth), Berkeley (Med Anth) and HASTS compare? Best funding, best faculty, anecdotal evidence..... etc.

Thanks!

[gunlesswonder]

My research interests are at the intersection between social anthropology and medical anthropology and I am interested to hear peoples perspectives on the programs I am interested in.

Any ideas on how UChicago (Soc Anth), Harvard (Med Anth), Berkeley (Med Anth) and HASTS compare? Best funding, best faculty, anecdotal evidence..... etc.

Thanks!

They are all really good programs, all are fully funded, and most people would be thrilled to get into any of them. That's the rub however- they are all really, really hard to get into. You need to be a rock star, or have a professor that is willing to fight for you. From what I've heard from people at Berkley and UChicago, there is a rather nasty amount of politics and competition at play which is why I didn't try for either school. You may want to consider Emory (heard nothing but great stuff, and the people I've met are lovely), Northwestern and the University of Washington (Great program, amazing city, and big connections to the school of global health); they all have great med anthro programs. The big thing seems to be finding a department that has not just the same theoretical interested, but geographical as well. Once you do, get in touch with the people you want to work with. Good luck!

[IrishScientist]

They are all really good programs, all are fully funded, and most people would be thrilled to get into any of them. That's the rub however- they are all really, really hard to get into. You need to be a rock star, or have a professor that is willing to fight for you. From what I've heard from people at Berkley and UChicago, there is a rather nasty amount of politics and competition at play which is why I didn't try for either school. You may want to consider Emory (heard nothing but great stuff, and the people I've met are lovely), Northwestern and the University of Washington (Great program, amazing city, and big connections to the school of global health); they all have great med anthro programs. The big thing seems to be finding a department that has not just the same theoretical interested, but geographical as well. Once you do, get in touch with the people you want to work with. Good luck!

Thanks for the advice! I am hoping that I get into one of these programs, but as you say, they are very tough so fingers crossed.

Anybody else have any experiences with these dapartments?

[persiandoc]

Hi Irishscientist,

You got an interview from HASTS so you'd stand a great chance of acceptance. I didn't dare to apply to Berkeley. Have you heard anything from them yet? Which one is your first choice? I also want to add that UNC, Chapel Hill is one of the bests in medanthro. McGill is always lauded as one of the competitive medanthro programs but I've never found it interesting. U Michigan, Ann Arbor has good medanthro faculty particularly if your fields of interest in medanthro would intersect with gender, sexuality and women studies. If I were in your shoes, I would rank it like Berkeley, HASTS, Harvard and Chicago among the ones you have applied. That's my personal opinion though! UC Irvine is indeed cutting edge in medanthro and sociocultural anthro, Boston University is also an interesting school to study medanthro but it depends on what exactly you wanna work on,

good luck in your endeavor!

[far_to_go]

For what it's worth, I have heard from several Berkeley PhD Anthro students that the department, while full of brilliant people, is not a very friendly place to be. The reports of ego-driven infighting, fierce competition for funding, and general unpleasantness were enough to keep me from applying. For me, finding a program with a collaborative/cooperative feel to it was very important, right up there with finding a place that was a good fit for my interests and getting a good funding package.

[IrishScientist]

For what it's worth, I have heard from several Berkeley PhD Anthro students that the department, while full of brilliant people, is not a very friendly place to be. The reports of ego-driven infighting, fierce competition for funding, and general unpleasantness were enough to keep me from applying. For me, finding a program with a collaborative/cooperative feel to it was very important, right up there with finding a place that was a good fit for my interests and getting a good funding package.

That's very interesting to hear. I thought that Berkeley was supposed to be more 'chilled out' than other schools.

Has anybody got any info on what the Harvard anthropology scence is like? I get the impression that the Chicago program is probably the best, but who knows.

[far_to_go]

That's very interesting to hear. I thought that Berkeley was supposed to be more 'chilled out' than other schools.

Has anybody got any info on what the Harvard anthropology scence is like? I get the impression that the Chicago program is probably the best, but who knows.

Yeah, I was surprised to hear that Berkeley was not anywhere near as 'groovy' and laid-back as I thought it would be. Too bad.

[persiandoc]

I have a friend who's at Irvine's anthropology. When she was comparing Berkeley with Irvine, she mentioned the same thing but still she believed they have a fantastic program with scores of super famous scholars. One should choose between such factors. I would apply to both if they were in East Coast. I gather that Irishscientist is in the field of medanthro. For that reason, the joint program between UCB and UCSF is one of a kind and it does kick ass, the best medical anthropologists in quite diverse fields and with really bright students. I don't assume Chicago would be a superb school for pursuing in medanthro. Harvard has lost its vibrance in medanthro and it is only about the remnant of its past cutting edge nature. I'd tell they should have refreshed their department more with taking up bright junior scholars. Duana Fullwiley does interesting stuff but one should be into her character whatsoever. I'm addressing this last word to Irishscientist, I would make it to Berkeley or MIT against all odds, and minor factors aside, if you get admission from both and you don't care as much as I do about East or West Coast, just get in UCB if you're in medanthro and sociocultural. Lucky you got an interview from HASTS and since I didn't get any myself, I would send you my positive energy to get some official acceptance too,

Yeah, I was surprised to hear that Berkeley was not anywhere near as 'groovy' and laid-back as I thought it would be. Too bad.

[IrishScientist]

I have a friend who's at Irvine's anthropology. When she was comparing Berkeley with Irvine, she mentioned the same thing but still she believed they have a fantastic program with scores of super famous scholars. One should choose between such factors. I would apply to both if they were in East Coast. I gather that Irishscientist is in the field of medanthro. For that reason, the joint program between UCB and UCSF is one of a kind and it does kick ass, the best medical anthropologists in quite diverse fields and with really bright students. I don't assume Chicago would be a superb school for pursuing in medanthro. Harvard has lost its vibrance in medanthro and it is only about the remnant of its past cutting edge nature. I'd tell they should have refreshed their department more with taking up bright junior scholars. Duana Fullwiley does interesting stuff but one should be into her character whatsoever. I'm addressing this last word to Irishscientist, I would make it to Berkeley or MIT against all odds, and minor factors aside, if you get admission from both and you don't care as much as I do about East or West Coast, just get in UCB if you're in medanthro and sociocultural. Lucky you got an interview from HASTS and since I didn't get any myself, I would send you my positive energy to get some official acceptance too,

Thanks persiandoc. Yes, I'm interested in medical anthropology. I am particularly interested in traditional medicine and how it relates to biomedicine (STS basically).

I am glad to hear that you hold Berkeley in good regard. I havent heard back from them yet but I would have a good fit there I think. Thanks for the Harvard tip too. I think all of my applications are to great places so I just hope that one of them comes through. I have acceptance in great places in the UK but the chance of funding here is grim.

Wishing you the best with yours too!

[persiandoc]

Hi Irishscientist,

Could you please tell me more about your background if that is OK with you to publicize it. I'd be happy to hear more of your background privately if possible again. Did you apply to the joint PhD between Berkeley and UCSF? The good thing about Harvard or MIT is you'd have the possibility of cross-registering between both. There are a lot of good academics in both that would help your project. For instance, you could get the supervision of STS faculty at MIT and then take courses with Arthur Kleinman and Good who are experts at traditional healing systems and cross-cultural analyses of health. Duana Fullwiley's work is also magnificant, in my words, in terms of anthro of STS and genetics in particular. If you get into Berkeley, you'd have a lot of great scholars in both fields but my suggestion is to make regular visits to Irvine too. It is cutting-edge indeed. I have a good friend of mine doing her PhD in medanthro there. I like Goerge Marcus' scholarship, however, he is not much of an Irvine fashion.

good luck in your endeavor

Thanks persiandoc. Yes, I'm interested in medical anthropology. I am particularly interested in traditional medicine and how it relates to biomedicine (STS basically).

I am glad to hear that you hold Berkeley in good regard. I havent heard back from them yet but I would have a good fit there I think. Thanks for the Harvard tip too. I think all of my applications are to great places so I just hope that one of them comes through. I have acceptance in great places in the UK but the chance of funding here is grim.

Wishing you the best with yours too!

[IrishScientist]

Hi Irishscientist,

Could you please tell me more about your background if that is OK with you to publicize it. I'd be happy to hear more of your background privately if possible again. Did you apply to the joint PhD between Berkeley and UCSF? The good thing about Harvard or MIT is you'd have the possibility of cross-registering between both. There are a lot of good academics in both that would help your project. For instance, you could get the supervision of STS faculty at MIT and then take courses with Arthur Kleinman and Good who are experts at traditional healing systems and cross-cultural analyses of health. Duana Fullwiley's work is also magnificant, in my words, in terms of anthro of STS and genetics in particular. If you get into Berkeley, you'd have a lot of great scholars in both fields but my suggestion is to make regular visits to Irvine too. It is cutting-edge indeed. I have a good friend of mine doing her PhD in medanthro there. I like Goerge Marcus' scholarship, however, he is not much of an Irvine fashion.

good luck in your endeavor

Thanks persiandoc. I appreciate your advice. You seem to be well informed about these programs. I am based in the UK now and while I have good info on the programs here, I have not got access to inside perspectives on these US programs.

My background is in science (PhD biochemistry) and I have done some research in ethnopharmacology (new drugs from trad. medicine). I am also interested in critical social theory. These two interests drive my current research direction: looking at the ethics in translating trad. medical knowledge into biomedicine. I am also interested in amazonian shamanism, but am not tied to a regional focus necessarily.

I applied to the Berkeley-UCSF med anthro program. You make a good point in that Berkeley can benefit from Irvine; and that MIT and Harvard also reciprocally benefit from each other.

Right now I am excited about hearing back from these programs. You know how it is!!!

This is my second year applying. Last year I only applied to UK progs and didnt have great success. This year I am hoping to get something with funding.

What is your research interest and preferred program?

[persiandoc]

My apologies Irishscientist for I can't reveal my fields of interest and project here. I've become kinda paranoid since I started reading these forums. I'll let you know of them in some private message. You'd stand a GREAT chance in all of these programs if you're already a PhD. That is so interesting that you want to do your second PhD. You know what? I bet you'd get into HASTS and UCB/UCSF. If you don't believe in me, wait and see but don't forget to give me a treat! By the way, UCB/UCSF and MIT/Harvard would be great fits for you. I've not applied to Chicago so I have no reservation for saying this but Chicago wouldn't be your thing even though they're one of the bests in anthro these days. Why haven't you applied to JHU? It's a small department but the intensity and diversity combines well out there! I'm not very familiar with UK schools. I just know a little bit of Oxford.

My preferred programs are Yale, NYU, Columbia, CUNY, Princeton and JHU. I've got two rejections so far: Brown and MIT (it's unofficially but established on your previous comments)!

Thanks persiandoc. I appreciate your advice. You seem to be well informed about these programs. I am based in the UK now and while I have good info on the programs here, I have not got access to inside perspectives on these US programs.

My background is in science (PhD biochemistry) and I have done some research in ethnopharmacology (new drugs from trad. medicine). I am also interested in critical social theory. These two interests drive my current research direction: looking at the ethics in translating trad. medical knowledge into biomedicine. I am also interested in amazonian shamanism, but am not tied to a regional focus necessarily.

I applied to the Berkeley-UCSF med anthro program. You make a good point in that Berkeley can benefit from Irvine; and that MIT and Harvard also reciprocally benefit from each other.

Right now I am excited about hearing back from these programs. You know how it is!!!

This is my second year applying. Last year I only applied to UK progs and didnt have great success. This year I am hoping to get something with funding.

What is your research interest and preferred program?

[kateow]

The widely spread belief that Chicago anthro has bad departmental politics, in my experience, is nonsense. I think it was true 10 years ago, but it's a great environment now. Professors are good at keeping any critical opinions of other professors to themselves and there's no competition among the students over funding, now that everyone is fully funded. I found it to be a really warm environment.

As for MedAnthro, there are some students doing interesting work there, so I think there's a community building for it, but most of the SocAnth students aren't super excited about bio-anything (to sciencey).

As for Northwestern, I second the assessment that it is a good program for MedAnth.

[a fragrant plant]

Also check out the University of Minnesota.

[newleaf]

Hey Guys

Just wanted to add in my two cents...

I've studied at the University of Chicago (MA program, hence stalking the forum), and the rumor of it being a cut-throat unfriendly place is definitely *not* true. Now, that said, it has a very weird academic culture and the university as a whole is not a fun place to be (for me). The grad students are focused on getting their shit done and the undergrads are focused on getting into med school or going into finance. And that's about it. You share a lot of classes with (smart) undergrads, entire seminars can be hit or miss, but there is little in the way of competition per se. Everyone is just anxious that the person next you is doing better. That said, I wouldn't recommend applying there if you're super interested in medical anthropology since there aren't many resources in the way of it. However, they did hire a new guy from UCI (Sunder Rajan) who is really good. As for Berkeley I also have a couple friends who have recently finished their PhDs there in social, medical, and linguistic. Though there have been a couple of unfortunate incidents in the last decade or so, I think the routine bashing of that department that goes on is unwarranted and tinged with jealousy...lets be real: its loaded with the most prestige at the moment. I dont know anybody, (including a couple of undergrads) who finished their education at Berkeley and regretted it. I definitely know at least a couple undergrads who were not satisfied when they left Stanford and felt that they were left unprepared for grad school (but they're also trying to boost medical anthro and are making some new hires). From what I understand and have heard, the sentiments regarding Harvard are true. In sum, I think its plain stupid to not apply to a department if it appeals to you because of things you heard, regardless of if they came from your best friend. Your experience will be your experience and not theirs, and you'll never know if you would have gotten full funding from that institution unless you try.

I am surprised that more people haven't emphasized "fit." Every department has a certain posture and grammar to their work, and if your work doesn't "gel" right, you're unlikely to get in regardless of your 4.0 and 1600 etc.

I think that in terms of reputation right now in my head, its HASTS, UCB/UCSF and UCI.

[AKJen]

Hey Guys

Just wanted to add in my two cents...

However, they did hire a new guy from UCI (Sunder Rajan) who is really good.

I just saw Dr. Rajan speak yesterday at The New School. His work is extremely interesting and worth taking a look at, if you're interested in med anthro in India. I ended up not attending a strictly med anthro program, though my adviser is well-known for her related work.

[LongGraduatedStudent]

http://www.dailycal.org/article/185/department_faces_extinction

Please read this before, you even think of calling Berkeley's Anthropology department.

[anthroapp11]

http://www.dailycal....aces_extinction

Please read this before, you even think of calling Berkeley's Anthropology department.

That article is dated 1999... I was 11. I'd be interested to hear how things are developing in the Berkeley anthro department more recently.

[LongGraduatedStudent]

That article is dated 1999... I was 11. I'd be interested to hear how things are developing in the Berkeley anthro department more recently.

They're not. They had 3 physical anthropologists in 1995, two (White and Milton) defected from the department. In 1999, the third one retired. In 2004-ish Anthro hired two physical anthropologists (Deacon and Agarwal) and some time around then IB hired Hlusko. There are five physical anthropologists total, but only two are in Anthropology. There are people in Integrative Biology in addition to White/Hlusko who do stuff relevant to physical anthropology, but who aren't physical anthropologists themselves.

Basically Berkeley's anthropology department is filled with postmodernists that have no respect for science, who let the physical anthropologists retire one-by-one and replaced them with postmodernist socials. It has reached the point where an archaeologist has started to defect from Anthropology to Integrative Biology as well.

Edited February 15, 2011 by Deven

[suerte]

It has reached the point where an archaeologist has started to defect from Anthropology to Integrative Biology as well.

The four-field program was a noble effort. Post-modernists have placed even that into an existential crisis. =)

(Caveat: I know Cal does not have an orthodox four-field anthro program; the comment still holds though).

Edited February 15, 2011 by suerte

[a fragrant plant]

Basically Berkeley's anthropology department is filled with postmodernists that have no respect for science, who let the physical anthropologists retire one-by-one and replaced them with postmodernist socials. It has reached the point where an archaeologist has started to defect from Anthropology to Integrative Biology as well.

I've heard similar stories about the anthro department at Berkeley. It seems to be the trend of our discipline, unfortunately. Fewer and fewer departments are interested in investing equally in the traditional four fields.

[mutualist007]

They're not. They had 3 physical anthropologists in 1995, two (White and Milton) defected from the department. In 1999, the third one retired. In 2004-ish Anthro hired two physical anthropologists (Deacon and Agarwal) and some time around then IB hired Hlusko. There are five physical anthropologists total, but only two are in Anthropology. There are people in Integrative Biology in addition to White/Hlusko who do stuff relevant to physical anthropology, but who aren't physical anthropologists themselves.

Basically Berkeley's anthropology department is filled with postmodernists that have no respect for science, who let the physical anthropologists retire one-by-one and replaced them with postmodernist socials. It has reached the point where an archaeologist has started to defect from Anthropology to Integrative Biology as well.

I'm holding out for four-field and I applied to four-field schools. However, theoretical divergence is making it more difficult to maintain a four-field perspective and keep up with modern post-post modernist qualitative perspective on culture. I think its what leads the evobio in a more myopic abstracted biological direction. That's just me though. Others may see it differently.

[Orzai]

I've heard similar stories about the anthro department at Berkeley. It seems to be the trend of our discipline, unfortunately. Fewer and fewer departments are interested in investing equally in the traditional four fields.

This may be a bit of a thread necro but I can confirm this as well, at least up until 2009. I was socio-cultural but I did a field school, lab work, and got a letter of recommendation from an archeology prof who was not particularly happy with many aspects of the Cal anthro department, to the point that this prof recommended I go to another school if I got in and they offered me better funding. Unfortunately, this person's displeasure was known and, from what I gather, summarily dismissed by many of the socio-cultural folk. There was more than a little speculation that this person's would leave if given the opportunity and for many reasons I would not assign them any blame. And I write this while considering myself much closer to the more postmodern, socio-cultural corner of our discipline.

Gah, replacing gendered pronouns for anonymity makes my writing sound incredibly awkward...