Fall 2017

[equestrian19]

Hi all!

Just thought I'd start this thread. Where all are you applying? How's the GRE coming along? SoP...? Writing samples? Let's commiserate. I'll start. B.A. (top-ranking public school on the East coast) and M.A. (well-ranked, medium sized public school on the West coast) in art history. GRE registered for end-July. Currently working on my SoPs. Writing sample in my area, but needs much work/editing to be a self contained 20-page essay, as is customary for most programs.

Schools shortlisted: University of California, Berkeley, University of Minnesota, University of Chicago, New York University's Institute of Fine Arts, Columbia University, City University of New York's The Graduate Centre, Harvard University, and Johns Hopkins University.

Area: Early Modern Europe

Here's to another season of applications. May the odds be ever in your favour!  

Edited July 16, 2016 by equestrian19

[betsy303]

You may want to think of Wisconsin. They have both Tom Dale and Shira Brisman (who has a new book coming out in a month or so). Grad Center is largely 20th cent and contemperary - FYI.

[equestrian19]

On July 28, 2016 at 2:53 AM, betsy303 said:

You may want to think of Wisconsin. They have both Tom Dale and Shira Brisman (who has a new book coming out in a month or so). Grad Center is largely 20th cent and contemperary - FYI.

Thanks, betsy303! It's on my list now, I didn't know Thomas Dale was at Wisconsin. On a different note, isn't Wisconsin facing a funding crises? 

[betsy303]

 I have some colleagues who claim that its not great, but its not terrible either.  I think its fair to say most humanities disciplines are facing a funding crisis nowadays. The cool thing about UW-Madsion--  they have mega English, history, sociology, and environmental history departments. Those departments appear to have many opportunities for funding and have some very famous faculty members. 

[Gundohinus]

The situation in the UW system goes beyond the usual funding crises that many universities have experienced. The budget cuts have been disastrous for all programs, tenure has been dismantled, and faculty are leaving in droves. The Madison art history department is fantastic, but I would not bank on it having its current shape two years from now.

[Gundohinus]

If you're interested in northern Europe, I'd also strongly recommend Northwestern. Christina Normore (very late Middle Ages), Claudia Swan, and Rebecca Zorach are all there.

[betsy303]

I was quite curious and went through the CAA funding stipend booklet. The fellowships at UW Madison seem to be at ~$20,000 a year. The health benefits seem really great too. Cosnidering the low cost of living, I don't get the hullabaloo. If you think a program is a good match, you might as well apply and not worry about funding until your offers roll in. 

[poliscar]

Don't do Wisconsin—they're absolutely bleeding faculty in the humanities. The English department has lost three of its most prominent faculty members—including the department chair—in just around a year. You'd best believe that the Art History faculty are planning their own exits. 

[betsy303]

44 minutes ago, poliscar said:

Don't do Wisconsin—they're absolutely bleeding faculty in the humanities. The English department has lost three of its most prominent faculty members—including the department chair—in just around a year. You'd best believe that the Art History faculty are planning their own exits. 

 

Where did this information come from? I'm not saying anything other than that seem to have a good program. I don't attend the university so I don't know. Unless yu attend it, I'm not sure if you should say such harsh things about a program.  They did recently, it seems hire a few new faculty members, all of whom have books coming out this year. 

[poliscar]

3 hours ago, betsy303 said:

Where did this information come from? I'm not saying anything other than that seem to have a good program. I don't attend the university so I don't know. Unless yu attend it, I'm not sure if you should say such harsh things about a program.  They did recently, it seems hire a few new faculty members, all of whom have books coming out this year. 

Uh, in English Anne McClintock, Rob Nixon, and Caroline Levine have all left recently. The university faculty recently voted unanimously in a vote of non-confidence in the Board of Regents and the UW president, because tenure is being completely undermined. It's not rocket science; anyone who thinks that other faculty there (including those in Art History) aren't looking for a way out is pretty naive. 

And I'm not saying anything harsh about the program, really. It should be a great program; they have an excellent faculty and good funding.That being said, the political situation in Wisconsin should be enough to terrify any prospective grad student, regardless of how stellar a program is. Scott Walker & his cronies are actively undermining public education, and without drastic changes they'll absolutely gut the U Wisconsin system. 

[Gundohinus]

It's not a harsh opinion; it's a fact. The UW disaster has been all over the national news during the past couple years. People are all the more up in arms about it precisely because the school (esp the Madison campus) is so great. As I mentioned above, this is not the usual question of grad student stipends, health benefits, etc. The long-term health of the university is suffering and it's just going to get worse as the best faculty leave for brighter pastures. (I know several faculty members at this university who are actively seeking other jobs.) There is a very good chance that if you get into this art history program you will be well funded but will find yourself without an advisor in short order.  

http://chronicle.com/article/The-Withering-of-a-Once-Great/231565/

On a happier note, U. of Michigan's art history program is also worth considering. It has been a bastion of stability and there are some terrific people there.

[betsy303]

Can someone please comment on this UW-Madison business? I am quite curious now, actually. My dear friend who is working on his/her PhD there recently affirmed to me that the stipend is ~20,000, 5 years, and includes "outstanding" health insurance for a "small" fee. Granted, this is not as high as other institutions, but the cost of living there seems low. Also, I thought the point of grad school was to break even, not spur a profit for yourself. I guess = I'm just confused. That doesn't exactly scream a department in collapse. I don't know if news articles are the most accurate source for information....

[noprovenance]

4 hours ago, betsy303 said:

Can someone please comment on this UW-Madison business? I am quite curious now, actually. My dear friend who is working on his/her PhD there recently affirmed to me that the stipend is ~20,000, 5 years, and includes "outstanding" health insurance for a "small" fee. Granted, this is not as high as other institutions, but the cost of living there seems low. Also, I thought the point of grad school was to break even, not spur a profit for yourself. I guess = I'm just confused. That doesn't exactly scream a department in collapse. I don't know if news articles are the most accurate source for information....

I think you're focusing on the wrong issue. Did you read the Chronicle article linked to above? The issue is not stipend funding, and no one is proposing that one should profit off their graduate education stipend. In Wisconsin, the university system is being undermined by the political climate and faculty are suffering because of it. Talented faculty members are being denied tenure and those who already have it are leaving because it effectively is meaningless there anymore. Ultimately, art history professors will leave for brighter, more secure pastures like their peers in other departments, and their advisees will be stuck. It sadly seems like a really easy way to permanent ABD.

[betsy303]

But even if a prof leaves, can't you still have them on a committee? 

[knp]

Would you really want to pick a PhD committee at an institution and then to have all of its members leave before you graduate? That's still not probable at Madison, I think, but at any other institution it's probably impossible unless a meteorite comes plowing into a departmental meeting.

[poliscar]

4 hours ago, betsy303 said:

But even if a prof leaves, can't you still have them on a committee? 

Usually, though sometimes it depends on the timespan. However, it's far from ideal to have a mentor/advisor who is no longer present, both physically and in terms of institutional commitment. In some cases students have to work with new advisors (a former advisor might remain on the committee, but no longer as the primary advisor) which can understandably throw the process off. There's also the fact that you're losing a departmental ally; you might not have someone to push for you in terms of additional funding, teaching positions, etc. It's just generally not a position you want to be in. 

There are other issues too, specifically in terms of academic environment. As prominent faculty leave, events like conferences, colloquia, and guest lectures will become less common (and less stimulating). You'll see the quality of the academic conversation on campus decline, because a lot of the faculty who had influence will no longer be there to bring other prominent scholars to campus. I also imagine there are scholars who are much less likely to participate in events at UW-Madison, because they're aware of the political climate. Eventually, the academic culture on campus will sorta die off, and it will take decades to build up again. 

[Gundohinus]

Also, it's one thing if your advisor leaves during the years when you're writing your dissertation. It's quite another if they leave just before your second year of coursework, and thus before your comprehensive exams, your dissertation development, your fellowship applications etc.

http://www.citypages.com/news/scott-walkers-budget-cuts-drive-wisconsin-madison-professors-to-minnesota-8280152

BTW, the exodus of faculty is just the tip of the iceberg. The deeper problem is that the governor has gutted the UW system's funding across the board (not necessarily reflected in graduate student stipends), and many departments/programs are being (or are in danger of being) significantly reduced if not cut completely.

[CArt]

Hi all! I'm sorry to interrupt you. I'd like to answer to this thread in order to have some suggestions from you and to compare myself to people who have the same goals of mine.

I'm an Italian graduate student: BA and MA in Art History in a public university and a MA in Museum Studies in a private university (GPA 4.0); some experiences in Italian museums  and a traineeship abroad (UK). I'd like to apply for a Phd program in Art History in the US. I've made a list of the most interesting programs with scholarship, but I'm wondering if you can help me to understand which program could be the best for me. My specialization is Modern and Contemporary Art and I'm focusing my studies on the conceptual European art.

Do you know other European students who have already done my choice to study overseas?  Do you know by any chance if they can be a little bit more flexible about the GRE score?

Any additional advice is more than welcome

Thanks for your help!

[artster119]

Can we please not talk smack about other programs, especially if they aren't the program that we are enrolled in? There's no way of knowing unless you are a current enrolled student. To rely on secondary articles for information isn't what we are/were taught to do with our research. 

[poliscar]

5 hours ago, artster119 said:

Can we please not talk smack about other programs, especially if they aren't the program that we are enrolled in? There's no way of knowing unless you are a current enrolled student. To rely on secondary articles for information isn't what we are/were taught to do with our research. 

Oh come on.

There are a number of material facts at hand here. 

1) As Governor, Scott Walker has made significant cuts to the state budget, particularly in relation to public education. Because of this, funding has also been cut from the U Wisconsin system, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars. It's no secret that Walker holds public education in contempt, and it's unlikely that this will change. These cuts are part of a more general wave of privatization, in which education is seen as a profit vehicle, rather than as a public asset. 

2) The U Wisconsin Madison Board of Regents, in response to state policy, is making significant changes to how tenure works at the university. These changes make it so that tenured faculty members can be fired for budgetary reasons, or due to the nebulous reason of "educational considerations." Basically, tenure becomes merely symbolic. If the Chancellor and Regents want to reallocate funding from one program to another, they're able to do so by detenuring faculty, and moving the related funds to another program. This completely undermines the role played by tenure, and you can bet—because the motivations here are completely ideological—that those stripped of tenure aren't going to be the business/engineering/econ professors. They are going to be the professors whose work isn't sufficiently "profitable" or "justifiable." 

3) Because of the above reasons, the UW-Madison faculty reached a vote of non-confidence in the Board of Regents and the University President. Reaching back to my first point, their vote reflects a lack of faith in the Regents' and President's commitment to the public good. The budget cuts and changes to tenure are pretty clear indications that the governance of the university is more or less on board with Walker's agenda—i.e. the privatization of public assets. As far as I'm concerned, the faculty acted by rejecting that agenda. 

4) The university is bleeding faculty. I can think of faculty—some of them big names—who have fled to Minnesota, UT Austin, Princeton, and Cornell. Walker signed the state budget in July 2015, so this has happened within just over a year. Some tenured faculty with reputations may have been able to get out quickly by bargaining with other institutions, but I imagine as things progress, we'll see other faculty leave as well, through public job searches, etc. To be blunt, this is the beginning, not the end. As I said earlier in the thread, you can bet that there are still faculty members looking for other opportunities, and I don't see why Art Historians would be the exception. What is the upside to staying at a university where you can be arbitrarily stripped of tenure? 

Here's the deal: it's possible that a student at U-Wisconsin Madison would be able to confirm all of the worst. It's equally possible that current students will be relatively untouched, and that the weight of these changes will fall primarily on future students. The point is that it's absurd to rely on the experiences of current students to make a decision, assuming you're event getting the full story from them. This principal applies to grad school applications, and to future academic endeavours, like job searches. If you can't make your own judgement calls based on the available information, you're going to end up in a bad spot. It's pretty clear that UW-M is not a very healthy institution at the moment, and I think it's fair to state that in public. I also think it's fair for potential students to be able to make decisions based on information like this before they find themselves experiencing the dysfunction from within. To suggest that only enrolled students can make knowledgeable judgement calls is a pretty bizarre statement, IMO. 

PS I was taught to read secondary sources critically, and to be equally critical of primary sources. Not sure what sort of research you're conducting, but it seems sort of off-base. 

Edited August 19, 2016 by poliscar

[ushistorian311]

I attend UW-Madison (albeit in a different program). I will admit that the funding situation can be rough (I don't have as much funding as some of my friends at the ivies), but I have significantly greater funding than my friends at many other large public universities (and some private ones too). On my committee, 2 faculty members left the institution. One retired. The other relocated PURELY out of a desire to live closer to her partner and get out of the rough winters. Indeed, faculty, university admin, and the government butt heads on many issues. However, this has been improved since the appointment of our new chancellor. In terms of the academic climate, we post speakers from all over the world on an almost weekly basis (and of course UW-Madison covers their costs). Faculty including graduate students like myself, earn automatic raises each year. In addition, there have been many donations and money invested in retaining highly qualified professors. It is true that the university is facing problems. But, I don't think we will see the extent of them for a much longer period of time. I know for a fact that the art history department has some fairly generous donors.

In short, AS A RECCOMENDATION TO PROSPECTIVE APPLICANTS, I sincerely hope Scott Walker isn't an end all reason for not applying to Madison.  I chose the insuttuion due to having the top notch folks in my field and a very generous 5 year fellowship package that not only covers living expenses, but often leaves me with a little extra. While its interesting to hear what people from outside of the university think, I agree with the implications above -- it is hard to judge an institution through articles, often with particular agendas of their own. I am not trying to argue with or dispute the claims of any of the above comments. I jus think its important to note that FUNDING is a problem at MANY public institutions. In fact, a recent movie highlighted not only UW-Madison, but UVA, Chapel Hill, and Michigan as well. The UCs have problems of thier own. Rather than arguing about who has an institution with better politics or more money, we should be thinking collectively about how we can get society to value education (especially in the humanities). 

[betsy303]

Just now, ushistorian311 said:

I attend UW-Madison (albeit in a different program). I will admit that the funding situation can be rough (I don't have as much funding as some of my friends at the ivies), but I have significantly greater funding than my friends at many other large public universities (and some private ones too). On my committee, 2 faculty members left the institution. One retired. The other relocated PURELY out of a desire to live closer to her partner and get out of the rough winters. Indeed, faculty, university admin, and the government butt heads on many issues. However, this has been improved since the appointment of our new chancellor. In terms of the academic climate, we post speakers from all over the world on an almost weekly basis (and of course UW-Madison covers their costs). Faculty including graduate students like myself, earn automatic raises each year. In addition, there have been many donations and money invested in retaining highly qualified professors. It is true that the university is facing problems. But, I don't think we will see the extent of them for a much longer period of time. I know for a fact that the art history department has some fairly generous donors.

In short, AS A RECCOMENDATION TO PROSPECTIVE APPLICANTS, I sincerely hope Scott Walker isn't an end all reason for not applying to Madison.  I chose the insuttuion due to having the top notch folks in my field and a very generous 5 year fellowship package that not only covers living expenses, but often leaves me with a little extra. While its interesting to hear what people from outside of the university think, I agree with the implications above -- it is hard to judge an institution through articles, often with particular agendas of their own. I am not trying to argue with or dispute the claims of any of the above comments. I jus think its important to note that FUNDING is a problem at MANY public institutions. In fact, a recent movie highlighted not only UW-Madison, but UVA, Chapel Hill, and Michigan as well. The UCs have problems of thier own. Rather than arguing about who has an institution with better politics or more money, we should be thinking collectively about how we can get society to value education (especially in the humanities). 

 

This is so beautifully stated. I'd love to talk more about ways we can promote the value of the humanities. I think part of the problem with Wisconsin is the rural/urban divide. I think some local communities feel that institutions are too esoteric/separated/hoity-toity for them. This applies to all places. 

[Neist]

I concur with @ushistorian311.

Funding is rough in a lot of schools currently. I don't even think the U. of OK funded any history MA students this cycle, unless they managed to dig up funds after the initial wave of acceptances. Oklahoma had a $1.3 billion budget shortfall this year, and education took a heavy hit. I'm sure there are states that are equally as affected.

People should just apply where they want to. And what's the worst that could happen? If you get accepted, even with funding, and later decide to decline the offer, all you have lost is an application fee. I had seriously considered applying to Madison's life sciences communication program, and I would have if there weren't about a half dozen other programs I found to be a better fit over it.

I tend to comment in weird sub-forums that have nothing to do with me.  I hope you don't mind! I was an art history minor. Maybe that halfway counts?

[knp]

I agree with all of that, but I don't think anyone's saying don't even apply to UWM. Right, @poliscar? By any criteria for which you shouldn't apply there, there's a whole lot of other universities, especially public ones, to which you shouldn't apply. I am in favor of giving places the benefit of the doubt during the application phase, and then making decisions based on more detailed research conducted after admittance. But things at UWM seem serious enough—and maybe not now, but likely to become serious by the time new students might graduate, eight or nine years after this all started going down—that it seems worth flagging so that prospective students know to weight it as a decision-making factor. Personally, unless UWM had a) my perfect POI and b ) I had had the awkward conversation with my POI about whether they were job searching, the institutional considerations would mean I'd lean pretty heavily toward my other options, if I had them.

@betsy303 I wish it were only rural universities that were separated from their communities because their communities see them as elitist snobs, and that some other category of university had figured it out! Cf. Yale's community relations. But I absolutely agree it's an important challenge.

[baddie]

It's almost that time of the year again! Where is everyone? What's going on this year??

I Just joined and I am going to apply to 10 programs. I know the next couple of months are going to be beyond thrilling, but I'd love to fast forward through them and get to what's on the other side! 

 Best of luck to you all.