Harvard GSAS The Study of Religion

[Hector Varela Jr.]

Has anybody heard anything about this program?

[11Q13]

nope, never heard of it

[theonionman]

Hi, the brief answer is: avoid like the plague.

 

Longer answer: the program in Religious Studies at Harvard is not actually a "department" per se, but a "group." Basically, it is an umbrella organization comprised of roughly half Div School professors and roughly half GSAS professors. But the factions don't get along--at all--with the end result that students have been caught in the middle of a vicious academic territory fight, with terrible results for their scholarship. Literally everyone I've spoken to at top PhD programs (in the UC system, at Chicago, and elsewhere) has warned me to stay far away from Harvard's GSR until they get their act together. The words "toxic environment" were used more than once.

[Hector Varela Jr.]

Wow...incredible for such a prestigious university. Thanks!

[la sarar]

I'm not sure where the notoriety described in #3 comes from.

I do know one student currently enrolled in the program and she seems pretty happy. More than that I can't judge. Her concentration is HB/OT.

Edited March 18, 2013 by la sarar

[Hector Varela Jr.]

I'm not sure where the notoriety described in #3 comes from. I do know one student currently enrolled in the program and she seems pretty happy. More than that I can't judge. Her concentration is HB/OT.

This sounds better. I was really surprised about the conflicts described previously, but I understand the situation that could cause it. This is the program I applied to in Harvard, and I am still waiting for an answer. Realistically, I think my chances of getting admitted are slim to none, but I am still hoping for a yes! UChicago was my #2, so pressure is off. But I would really like the choice... Thanks, H. PS. If I get into Harvard, I might ask you for that student's email, if you're willing to share it. Getting an insider's p.o.v. is priceless! Thanks!

[theonionman]

To be clear, the problems I heard about concern the PhD program. I'm not sure about the MA program. Also, my area is Buddhism; that said, the institutional problems I've heard about extend beyond Buddhist Studies-land. It comes down to the GSR being unable to decide whether it is (methodologically) Area Studies or Religious Studies.

 

In any case, I certainly hope you're afforded the choice! Good luck!

[sacklunch]

Wait, what are we talking about? I thought they didn't have a terminal MA...? What am I missing? Or is the OP referring to HDS?

[sacklunch]

Actually now that I have you all here....I'm curious how one decides between HDS and the Comm. on Religion? Or even NELC? I know on their respective websites it says to go ahead and apply to each department if you desire...but does this actually work? I have read someone on here getting into one and rejected from the other...so I'm assuming one should apply to each separately? And if so, are folks submitting the same materials? This seems a bit odd given that they have many of the same faculty between departments, right?

Edited March 18, 2013 by jdmhotness

[theonionman]

Wait, what are we talking about? I thought they didn't have a terminal MA...? What am I missing? Or is the OP referring to HDS?

 

In fact I think you're right, GSR doesn't have a terminal MA. And if the OP is talking about HDS, then what I said most certainly does not apply.

[theonionman]

Actually now that I have you all here....I'm curious how one decides between HDS and the Comm. on Religion? Or even NELC? I know on their respective websites it says to go ahead and apply to eat department if you desire...but does this actually work? I have read someone on here getting into one and rejected from the other...so I'm assuming one should apply to each separately? And if so, are folks submitting the same materials? This seems a bit odd given that they have many of the same faculty between departments, right?

 

...Enter the dysfunction I was talking about above.

 

I can't comment on HDS vs. GSR. What I can say is that I weighed GSR and ended up deciding to apply to GSAS (in South Asian Studies) instead. Yes, even though I'd nominally be working with many of the same people. I am fluent in both classical and contemporary Tibetan, with 5+ years spent studying in a traditional Tibetan monastic college, taking classes directly in Tibetan without a translator. GSR told me my language skills and scholastic training were "not directly relevant" for a doctoral program in Buddhist Studies. GSAS sees the value of, you know, real world language skills and experience in studying a religious tradition. Your mileage may vary with GSR vs. NELC.

 

Bottom line, if you're interested in both, you should absolutely apply to both, and yes you should write different letters of intent for each. They are completely different programs. (Yes, even though they nominally have many of the same professors... again, enter the dysfunction I was talking about above). Despite what I said, if you are dying to go to Harvard and must have "Religious Studies" on your PhD, GSR is probably the better bet.

[sacklunch]

...Enter the dysfunction I was talking about above.

 

I can't comment on HDS vs. GSR. What I can say is that I weighed GSR and ended up deciding to apply to GSAS (in South Asian Studies) instead. Yes, even though I'd nominally be working with many of the same people. I am fluent in both classical and contemporary Tibetan, with 5+ years spent studying in a traditional Tibetan monastic college, taking classes directly in Tibetan without a translator. GSR told me my language skills and scholastic training were "not directly relevant" for a doctoral program in Buddhist Studies. GSAS sees the value of, you know, real world language skills and experience in studying a religious tradition. Your mileage may vary with GSR vs. NELC.

 

Bottom line, if you're interested in both, you should absolutely apply to both, and yes you should write different letters of intent for each. They are completely different programs. (Yes, even though they nominally have many of the same professors... again, enter the dysfunction I was talking about above). Despite what I said, if you are dying to go to Harvard and must have "Religious Studies" on your PhD, GSR is probably the better bet.

 

Good to know. So just to clarify: Harvard has doctoral degrees in GSAS, GSR, HDS, and NELC (relevant to most of us on this forum, I mean)? Seems a bit overkill...eh?

[theonionman]

Good to know. So just to clarify: Harvard has doctoral degrees in GSAS, GSR, HDS, and NELC (relevant to most of us on this forum, I mean)? Seems a bit overkill...eh?

 

GSAS is one, large, unit of Harvard University. NELC is one of the doctoral programs offered within GSAS. But it is an "Area Studies"-type program, not a "Religious Studies"-type program. Functionally, this means a greater focus on texts, languages, and history as opposed to critical theory.

 

HDS is another, not quite as large, unit of Harvard University. As a Divinity School it offers a very different framework for graduate studies than an Arts & Sciences college.

 

The most basic and fundamental problem with GSR is that it is neither within GSAS nor within HDS. It is in a kind of institutional limbo. The faculty are drawn from both GSAS and HDS, but they can't agree on anything. So there is very little coherence to the program, no methodological unity, fierce competition for internal resources, etc. I know some people who are successfully navigating these difficulties, though the one I'm closest to transferred from UVA and spends most of his time in Brazil. I also know people (well, a person) who ran screaming to UCSB despite his cushy fellowship at Harvard.

[Neem217]

Good to know. So just to clarify: Harvard has doctoral degrees in GSAS, GSR, HDS, and NELC (relevant to most of us on this forum, I mean)? Seems a bit overkill...eh?

 

There is no GSR (by which I assume you Graduate Study of Religion) at Harvard. There's the Committee on the Study of Religion under which the PhD (GSAS) and the ThD (HDS) are administered.

 

I think what you study will greatly affect your experience at Harvard. It is true for OT/Hebrew Bible you could apply to the PhD (GSAS), ThD (HDS), and NELC which do have overlapping faculty. Same for Buddhist studies in which you could apply to more area studies departments. But, I know people who study say, Religion and Society (both PhD and ThD students) who are very content. I think the previous posterss are right that Harvard's Committee on the Study of Religion (under hte PhD - w/ it's 18 subfields) tries to be too many things to too many people and perhaps ends up being not much of anything for anyone, but this is a sweeping statement. At the same time, it does have its benefits, namely, its resources and the ability to say, learn from scholars in Buddhism while studying Christian history -- though at the doctoral level, I'm not sure how often this plays out.

 

As others have mentioned, they are thinking of combining the ThD and the PhD so there will no longer be two doctoral degrees under the Committee on the Study of Religion. No one knows when this will happen.

[Neem217]

This sounds better. I was really surprised about the conflicts described previously, but I understand the situation that could cause it. This is the program I applied to in Harvard, and I am still waiting for an answer. Realistically, I think my chances of getting admitted are slim to none, but I am still hoping for a yes! UChicago was my #2, so pressure is off. But I would really like the choice... Thanks, H. PS. If I get into Harvard, I might ask you for that student's email, if you're willing to share it. Getting an insider's p.o.v. is priceless! Thanks!

 

Hector, Harvard's GSAS PhD has sent out it's admittances (via email) and rejections (via mail). Harvard's GSAS doesn't have a masters degree.

HDS (the ThD, the MDiv, and the MTS) has also sent out its notifications.

 

I suggest you email the admissions office if you don't hear anything soon.

[theonionman]

Sorry, yes, my posts above should read CSR ("committee") rather than GSR ("group").

[Hector Varela Jr.]

Hector, Harvard's GSAS PhD has sent out it's admittances (via email) and rejections (via mail). Harvard's GSAS doesn't have a masters degree.

HDS (the ThD, the MDiv, and the MTS) has also sent out its notifications.

I suggest you email the admissions office if you don't hear anything soon.

I applied to the Committee on the Study of Religion at Harvard GSAS under the presumption that it was a post-bachelor's program leading to a PhD. In the site info, I read that they do confer the MA but only when you are admitted into the PhD program at Harvard GSAS. In other words, you can't get an MA from Harvard GSAS and run to another institution. You must get the PhD at Harvard.

I already have a MAR from another institution and am counting that will give me a little bit of an edge to get into this program. But, honestly, I think my chances are slim.

I emailed today.

But, all this to and fro regarding conflicts, intrigue, and drama between two departments at Harvard is troubling to me. I heard that they were in flux, planning to merge all programs under HDS, but wasn't aware that things were so bad. Makes me reconsider the possibility.

Hector.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Hector Varela Jr.

[Lux Lex Pax]

As an outsider, based on what I've read and what I've heard from students at Harvard, it seems as though the study of religion at Harvard, whether in HDS or CSR, is seriously looked down upon by other units. For instance, I've read that Steven Pinker lead a faction of the faculty against requiring a course in religion as part of its curricular reform. Can anyone verify this antipathy or hostility toward religion at Harvard?

[la sarar]

This sounds better. I was really surprised about the conflicts described previously, but I understand the situation that could cause it. This is the program I applied to in Harvard, and I am still waiting for an answer. Realistically, I think my chances of getting admitted are slim to none, but I am still hoping for a yes! UChicago was my #2, so pressure is off. But I would really like the choice... Thanks, H. PS. If I get into Harvard, I might ask you for that student's email, if you're willing to share it. Getting an insider's p.o.v. is priceless! Thanks!

 

You are welcome. I suspect that you can now check your online status via website, for it's already past Mar. 15. Harvard usually gives students about a month to make their decisions.

But it's true that as far as the application goes, all different fields would have to compete for students and some of them don't get a new student in a particular year. However, isn't that the normal situation in any department where there are different sub-fields? I might be mistaken though. 

[la sarar]

As an outsider, based on what I've read and what I've heard from students at Harvard, it seems as though the study of religion at Harvard, whether in HDS or CSR, is seriously looked down upon by other units. For instance, I've read that Steven Pinker lead a faction of the faculty against requiring a course in religion as part of its curricular reform. Can anyone verify this antipathy or hostility toward religion at Harvard?

 

Are you referring to the general antipathy towards the study of religion in our society as a whole? Or the underestimation of humanities in the whole world? If that's what you are talking about, I would say that it's probably true and all of us can feel that. Where I come from in China, if I tell others that I study religion, they would probably ask me: are you a monk and want to starve after graduation? :-)

 

Otherwise, so far as I can tell, I don't feel this hostility towards religion at Harvard. There are people who don't like religious studies, religions or humanities in general---like Dr. Sheldon Cooper in the big bang theory---but how can they hurt students and professors of religion? It seems that HDS has independent financial/administrative systems so it doesn't have to fear some FAS professor who hates religion...

 

If what you said of Dr. Pinker is true, I can only call that stupidity. I'm not religious, at least not Christian, but I think it's necessary to know something about religion. 

[yhujikol]

Are you referring to the general antipathy towards the study of religion in our society as a whole? Or the underestimation of humanities in the whole world? If that's what you are talking about, I would say that it's probably true and all of us can feel that. Where I come from in China, if I tell others that I study religion, they would probably ask me: are you a monk and want to starve after graduation? :-)

 

Otherwise, so far as I can tell, I don't feel this hostility towards religion at Harvard. There are people who don't like religious studies, religions or humanities in general---like Dr. Sheldon Cooper in the big bang theory---but how can they hurt students and professors of religion? It seems that HDS has independent financial/administrative systems so it doesn't have to fear some FAS professor who hates religion...

 

If what you said of Dr. Pinker is true, I can only call that stupidity. I'm not religious, at least not Christian, but I think it's necessary to know something about religion. 

Very well said. I applied to both the ThD and PhD at Harvard. I was admitted to the ThD and waitlisted for the PhD. I visited last weekend and absolutely loved it. The situation with the Divinity School/GSAS is problematic, but only bureaucratically. It's an amazing program with exceptional faculty. I'm very excited to attend.

 

The social scientists who deny or reject the study of religion are fools, simply put, becuase they choose to close their eyes to the role of religion as foundational to every thing we do, at least in this country. I'm not American and I'm not religious, by the way.

[AurantiacaStella]

It is true that HDS is looked down upon by GSAS. When you cross-register for a class in GSAS as an HDS student, you feel like you have to prove that you aren't an idiot, because for some reason that is what GSAS assumes.

This mindset can be attributed to the fact that the MTS admits almost 50% of applicants, while the grad programs (all phd-level I believe) in GSAS are incredibly more selective. I don't think this is as true for HDS ThDs, but within Harvard as a whole, CSR PhDs would definitely be more well-regarded by other humanities grad students.

[PeanutButterJellyTime]

It is true that HDS is looked down upon by GSAS. When you cross-register for a class in GSAS as an HDS student, you feel like you have to prove that you aren't an idiot, because for some reason that is what GSAS assumes.

This mindset can be attributed to the fact that the MTS admits almost 50% of applicants, while the grad programs (all phd-level I believe) in GSAS are incredibly more selective. I don't think this is as true for HDS ThDs, but within Harvard as a whole, CSR PhDs would definitely be more well-regarded by other humanities grad students.

 

Can I ask where you're getting your 50% acceptance rate? From everything I've heard and read, it seems to be much more selective--while not as selective as the PhD (of course,) the numbers I've seen have been at least half that. One year's acceptance rate--from HDS material--was 7%. The only time I've seen the 50% rate was on here.

[sacklunch]

Can I ask where you're getting your 50% acceptance rate? From everything I've heard and read, it seems to be much more selective--while not as selective as the PhD (of course,) the numbers I've seen have been at least half that. One year's acceptance rate--from HDS material--was 7%. The only time I've seen the 50% rate was on here.

 

I don't think it's that high, but I will go beyond what the poster said and say that this type of 'antagonism' from doctoral students to M* students exists in most (every?) university settings. It's not necessarily true that the M* students are not smart. They clearly are (esp at HDS), but I imagine there are times when you have an M* student with a limited amount of training/coursework take a course with a lot of doctoral students. I have been in courses like that where I have felt I needed to 'prove' myself simply because they assumed I wasn't 'at that level.' And perhaps they were right, honestly. Their training has been thoroughly screened based on pure academic ability, while many M* students (at a divinity school) often are accepted because of other factors (ie not always entirely academic). Doctoral students know this and make generalizations about the M* students based off such experience, I think. For example, say HDS accepts a transgendered Muslim who wants to work in Islamic law. A students particular background, area of study, et cetera, are all factors in their acceptance (and they should be, of course). And then they enroll in a doctoral seminar where all the students are fluent Arabic speakers, have had tons of training in related fields, ect. It's easy to see how they might 'look down' on the masters students. My .02.

Edited March 23, 2013 by jdmhotness

[PeanutButterJellyTime]

I don't think it's that high, but I will go beyond what the poster said and say that this type of 'antagonism' from doctoral students to M* students exists in most (every?) university settings. It's not necessarily true that the M* students are not smart. They clearly are (esp at HDS), but I imagine there are times when you have an M* student with a limited amount of training/coursework take a course with a lot of doctoral students. I have been in courses like that where I have felt I needed to 'prove' myself simply because they assumed I wasn't 'at that level.' And perhaps they were right, honestly. Their training has been thoroughly screened based on pure academic ability, while many M* students (at a divinity school) often are accepted because of other factors (ie not always entirely academic). Doctoral students know this and make generalizations about the M* students based off such experience, I think. For example, say HDS accepts a transgendered Muslim who wants to work in Islamic law. A students particular background, area of study, et cetera, are all factors in their acceptance (and they should be, of course). And then they enroll in a doctoral seminar where all the students are fluent Arabic speakers, have had tons of training in related fields, ect. It's easy to see how they might 'look down' on the masters students. My .02.

 

I can see your point, completely. You get that everywhere, even with upper-level undergrads vs. incoming freshman. Of course you have something to prove, it just makes sense. The reality is that this is a highly competitive field, and most academics tend to err on the side of feelings of superiority, if for only as an attempt of self-preservation. I don't think I could ever walk into a doctoral seminar and expect to be taken as seriously right out of the gate as an M* student as if I were a D* student. 

But my question still stands, I would really like to know where the charge of a 50% acceptance rate comes from. Like I said, I have never seen it that high--except on here (and excuse me, one other website--something like college confidential--and who knows where that info is coming from.) And even if it were true, that the HDS MTS acceptance rate was still that high, the fact remains that the program is much larger than other institutions (on par with the size of UChicago, I would imagine) and that there are so many different students studying different things, all under the umbrella of the MTS degree.