Grad School Safeties?

[helpmegradcafe]

Hi Everyone,

 

I'm currently going through the horrible process of deciding which grad schools to apply to for art history.  I am mostly applying for my Masters, although my ultimate goal is definitely my PhD, so I am a little on the fence about whether I should also apply for some of those. 

 

I have quickly discovered that the grad school application process is not at all like the one for undergrad.  It seems just about impossible to predict whether or not you have a good chance at admittance.  So, does anyone have any suggestions for schools they would generally consider "Safeties," yet are still worthwhile programs?

 

Thank you!

[fullofpink]

"Safeties" do not exist in grad school. I applied to doctoral and MA programs, and I was rejected from the MA program but given 6 years of guaranteed funding and stipend from the PhD program I'm going into. 

 

Find the best "fit" (an adviser who specializes in your field, and a school that meets your theoretical and methodological goals). You'll have a better chance at the school you are most excited about if the fit is right, than the school you begrudgingly apply to because you can't just apply to one (haha) 

[danieleWrites]

Exactly what fullofpink said. The idea that there is a "safety" school, where you figure that you're guaranteed to be admitted so you apply there in case your picks reject you then you'll at least have a program to go to, is kind of magical thinking. It presupposes that these "safety" or undesirable, but adequate schools exist and always have open spots for the good school rejects. There are definitely programs that are harder to get into than others. You've got a better shot at getting into a state university than an ivy league one. Instead of thinking of it as "dream school" and "safety school", think of it as dream school and the other, more realistic schools you want to get into. Harvard or Oxford, for example (I have no real figures) might have a billion applicants for ten spots, while State U has 300 applicants for ten spots. The "safety" is about statistical odds, not about any guarantees. "Safety" schools reject most applicants, as well. So there is not safety in applying to them. Do what fullofpink said, treat each school as if it is just as important as your dream school. You must research them so that you can find the one that fits you best and you fit the best.

[condivi]

It's true: since all grad programs are so small, they are all very selective. And the relative reputation of the program does not necessarily correspond to selectiveness. I know someone who got into Harvard and Berkeley, but not into Bryn Mawr. Also, I know a lot of people will take issue with this, but if you can't get into at least one very top program (you should apply to several) then perhaps you should reconsider your career path. There are so few jobs out there, and, no matter what you're told, you will be at a distinct disadvantage from your peers from the most prestigious schools--Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Berkeley, Princeton, IFA, Hopkins, etc--if your degree is from a lesser known program. There are exceptions, but the overwhelming majority of people who get the best jobs graduated from the most prestigious programs.

Edited August 4, 2013 by condivi

[fullofpink]

It's true: since all grad programs are so small, they are all very selective. And the relative reputation of the program does not necessarily correspond to selectiveness. I know someone who got into Harvard and Berkeley, but not into Bryn Mawr. Also, I know a lot of people will take issue with this, but if you can't get into at least one very top program (you should apply to several) then perhaps you should reconsider your career path. There are so few jobs out there, and, no matter what you're told, you will be at a distinct disadvantage from your peers from the most prestigious schools--Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Berkeley, Princeton, IFA, Hopkins, etc--if your degree is from a lesser known program. There are exceptions, but the overwhelming majority of people who get the best jobs graduated from the most prestigious programs.

 

I disagree with this assumption - most of our hires in my location (university and museum) are those whose fields align best with what our objectives were, not their brand name. Out of the 6+ recent hires, only one was from your list  (Yale). Semenza in his book details why hiring from ivies isn't all that appealing.

Edited August 5, 2013 by fullofpink

[condivi]

I disagree with this assumption - most of our hires in my location (university and museum) are those whose fields align best with what our objectives were, not their brand name. Out of the 6+ recent hires, only one was from your list  (Yale). Semenza in his book details why hiring from ivies isn't all that appealing.

 

I don't know where you go to school, and I can only go by my experience, but I very rarely encounter scholars who've graduated from places like North Carolina, or Iowa, or even Michigan and who have a good (tenure track) teaching job or are publishing in major journals. By contrast, most of the professors at these schools have graduated from programs like the ones I listed before. Maybe--hopefully--things are changing and people graduating from less prestigious programs are getting a fairer shake, but I haven't seen the evidence. Of course, if you don't have ambitions to teach at a major university, and would be content to teach at a regional college or community college, then you have many more options and opportunities. 

Edited August 5, 2013 by condivi

[fullofpink]

I work at a nationally renowned and ranked art museum with a R1 just down the street. 

[condivi]

I work at a nationally renowned and ranked art museum with a R1 just down the street.

That's great!

[oh_la_la]

I don't know where you go to school, and I can only go by my experience, but I very rarely encounter scholars who've graduated from places like North Carolina, or Iowa, or even Michigan and who have a good (tenure track) teaching job or are publishing in major journals. By contrast, most of the professors at these schools have graduated from programs like the ones I listed before. Maybe--hopefully--things are changing and people graduating from less prestigious programs are getting a fairer shake, but I haven't seen the evidence. Of course, if you don't have ambitions to teach at a major university, and would be content to teach at a regional college or community college, then you have many more options and opportunities. 

 

Seriously?  Are we going to perpetuate this myth again against top quality R-1 institutions that are not Berkeley?  I can't speak to UNC or Iowa (although their grads tend to place at more regional institutions in terms of tt jobs) but I know for a fact that Michigan has been doing pretty well lately.  As I have said on this board more than once, the name factor matters when you go up for a job but it is not everything.  As long as you're good at what you do, have the support of your diss. committee, do not have any major personality issues, and have written a stellar dissertation, you have a decent shot at a job. 

 

This is not an exhaustive list: 

http://cuart.colorado.edu/people/faculty/jp-park/

http://www.virginia.edu/art/arthistory/faculty/higginbotham.html

http://historyarthistory.gmu.edu/people/aho5

http://www.wooster.edu/academics/areas/art/faculty-staff/presciutti

http://www1.villanova.edu/villanova/artsci/history/facstaff/biodetail.html?mail=timothy.mccall@villanova.edu&xsl=bio_long

http://dornsife.usc.edu/cf/faculty-and-staff/faculty.cfm?pid=1017417

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~arthistory/facstaff/hornstein.html

[condivi]

Seriously? Are we going to perpetuate this myth again against top quality R-1 institutions that are not Berkeley? I can't speak to UNC or Iowa (although their grads tend to place at more regional institutions in terms of tt jobs) but I know for a fact that Michigan has been doing pretty well lately. As I have said on this board more than once, the name factor matters when you go up for a job but it is not everything. As long as you're good at what you do, have the support of your diss. committee, do not have any major personality issues, and have written a stellar dissertation, you have a decent shot at a job.

This is not an exhaustive list:

http://cuart.colorado.edu/people/faculty/jp-park/

http://www.virginia.edu/art/arthistory/faculty/higginbotham.html

http://historyarthistory.gmu.edu/people/aho5

http://www.wooster.edu/academics/areas/art/faculty-staff/presciutti

http://www1.villanova.edu/villanova/artsci/history/facstaff/biodetail.html?mail=timothy.mccall@villanova.edu&xsl=bio_long

http://dornsife.usc.edu/cf/faculty-and-staff/faculty.cfm?pid=1017417

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~arthistory/facstaff/hornstein.html

OK I stand corrected on Michigan

[Swagato]

Seriously?  Are we going to perpetuate this myth again against top quality R-1 institutions that are not Berkeley?  I can't speak to UNC or Iowa (although their grads tend to place at more regional institutions in terms of tt jobs) but I know for a fact that Michigan has been doing pretty well lately.  As I have said on this board more than once, the name factor matters when you go up for a job but it is not everything.  As long as you're good at what you do, have the support of your diss. committee, do not have any major personality issues, and have written a stellar dissertation, you have a decent shot at a job. 

 

This is not an exhaustive list: 

http://cuart.colorado.edu/people/faculty/jp-park/

http://www.virginia.edu/art/arthistory/faculty/higginbotham.html

http://historyarthistory.gmu.edu/people/aho5

http://www.wooster.edu/academics/areas/art/faculty-staff/presciutti

http://www1.villanova.edu/villanova/artsci/history/facstaff/biodetail.html?mail=timothy.mccall@villanova.edu&xsl=bio_long

http://dornsife.usc.edu/cf/faculty-and-staff/faculty.cfm?pid=1017417

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~arthistory/facstaff/hornstein.html

 

While this is one side, the other side is that most of the faculty at "leading" departments do come from the top programs around. And given the straitened state of the job market, it's much more likely that a power committee and a "name" program will carry you further (assuming, of course, that your research and work are worth noticing), than will going to a middling program. So if we're speaking to would-be PhD applicants, it's worth pointing this out. 

[EloiseGC]

There are SOME schools I would describe as "safeties", only because they accept almost everyone, but with no funding. So if you have the cash to spend, they will definitely take your money.

[helpmegradcafe]

Seriously?  Are we going to perpetuate this myth again against top quality R-1 institutions that are not Berkeley?  I can't speak to UNC or Iowa (although their grads tend to place at more regional institutions in terms of tt jobs) but I know for a fact that Michigan has been doing pretty well lately.  As I have said on this board more than once, the name factor matters when you go up for a job but it is not everything.  As long as you're good at what you do, have the support of your diss. committee, do not have any major personality issues, and have written a stellar dissertation, you have a decent shot at a job. 

 

This is not an exhaustive list: 

http://cuart.colorado.edu/people/faculty/jp-park/

http://www.virginia.edu/art/arthistory/faculty/higginbotham.html

http://historyarthistory.gmu.edu/people/aho5

http://www.wooster.edu/academics/areas/art/faculty-staff/presciutti

http://www1.villanova.edu/villanova/artsci/history/facstaff/biodetail.html?mail=timothy.mccall@villanova.edu&xsl=bio_long

http://dornsife.usc.edu/cf/faculty-and-staff/faculty.cfm?pid=1017417

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~arthistory/facstaff/hornstein.html

 Thank you so much; that last post got me worried and I actually graduated from Michigan (although undergrad is obviously very different than grad)...

[Herbie]

Many of the schools at the forefront of program formations of the mid20thc in the Humanities, like sociology, archaeology, African/Asian/Islamic/etc studies programs, have -great- programs for those focusing in what we blanket as "Non-Western" art history programs. Many of thess are, in fact, state schools: UCSB, UTA (Latin/Chicano/a, etc.), University of Michigan, Indiana University, UCB, University of Wisc-Mad, Washington University (German Studies), and the list can actually keep going on. And there are plenty of great private unis like this as well, like Columbia. 

 

Many faculty members at well funded universities like Higginbotham @ UV seem to come from such institutions that are accepting more future researchers concerned with identity formation, exclusion, "minority and foreign artists," religious studies, etc. And I would only expect for individuals who have attended a university with a great history of art and target studies program to really put individuals at a better advantage not only for employment, but also networking. "Interdisciplinary," @ its best with complimentary programs and faculty! 

 

Anyway, I agree with everyone. If it's a "safety," you really don't want to waste your time or money just going to school because you think you should be in it. Heck, I've heard of some museum interviews where grads who've been cooped up researching and not stepping out into this thing called "world" (... I should start crying) get the can. Grad school is perhaps, a time of divine narcissism (sprinkled with a pleasant personality), and you want to work with who wants to work with you. And being accepted doesn't.. specifically mean that, hence touring the campus and meeting individuals. Best of luck to you. 

[napoleon87]

There are SOME schools I would describe as "safeties", only because they accept almost everyone, but with no funding. So if you have the cash to spend, they will definitely take your money.

 

Out of curiosity, what schools would you consider to fall under this category?

[Seeking]

What Condivi says is right in most cases (though not necessarily fair), though the list they have given is not complete. Michigan certainly is included in the so-called "prestigious" group - so also UCLA, U-Chicago, NYU etc.

 

But it matters for the PhD program in Art History, not for the Masters so much. If you are looking for a Masters Program, I'd go to any school that gives me funding and is a good fit for what I want to do - and try to do well there.

 

By the way, there is a thread for a list of funded Masters in Art History that may help.