<p>Im currently doing an MA in Archaeology and want to continue on and do a Phd. I know where I would optimally like to go and it is the same place I did my undergrad. I have been in contact with the Dean of the program who I worked under and she thinks I should have no problem getting in and that all I have to do is come up with a project. Should I put all my eggs in one basket and only apply to one program? I normally like to have other options but I know this is where I want to go. Advice? </p>
<p>Yes, apply to other programs. Why?</p>
<p>First, you never know what could happen. Some years you are the only decent person applying to study area Z in field Y under professor X* at department W… and some years there are five different super-geniuses all vying for the one spot that you want. Until they get all the applications in, the Dean has no real idea.</p>
<p>Second, you want to make an informed choice. You know where you want to go, based on what, exactly? There may be professors out there doing amazing things at amazing departments and treating their grad students, well, amazingly. And you won’t really know that until you apply and visit and talk. If your currently program really is the best, then the small investment now will save second-guessing later on. If it isn’t, then you will have dodged a bullet.</p>
<p>Third, it is good to be able to negotiate. Most grad students don’t seem to negotiate their offers (which is why this is #3), but sometimes it is a good idea, and negotiating is highly difficult and highly risk if you do not have any other offers in hand. Your department head is not a saint, and they have to consider more than just your own interests - if they can get you cheap, knowing that you are not going anywhere else, they might do it. If they really want you, and know that you have a good offer elsewhere, then that RA spot might get a top-up fellowship, or be replaced by a full fellowship.</p>
<p>So yes, apply to at least a couple of other programs, enough to have an expectation of at least a couple of offers. The time and money now will be well worth it.</p>
<p>*: Because I can, that’s why.</p>
<p>I take a different tack here, and I say it really depends on your needs. I see getting a PhD as a means to an end, and you only do it if you can do it the way YOU want to do it, on YOUR terms. Otherwise, it’s too misery-producing and too uncertain.</p>
<p>Is it really important to you to be an archaeologist, and you know that that is the career that you really want? Do you really want a PhD in archaeology in general, and you just think this program is the best of many good choices? If that’s the case, then you REALLY need to apply to more than one program. Don’t take assurances from anyone as fact, especially if they are not written down. Nobody is in until they are in - the dean may have said that to several other students who are good candidates. Thinking someone “should have no problem” is different from saying “You are definitely in and this is just a formality.”</p>
<p>I also agree with cosmicfish - you need to make an informed choice. Being an undergrad is different from being a grad. What if the department is dysfunctional? What if the person you want to work with leaves between now and when you apply? What if the funding they offer you is crappy? You need several good choices so you can be sure you are not choosing them just because they are your only choice.</p>
<p>But. If you do your due diligence and there is no one else who does your obscure research than a particular handful of scholars at that one program; you know that the funding and department is decent for all students; and you would rather not get a PhD at all than attend a different school…<em>shrug</em> then I don’t see a problem with limiting yourself to one program. For a variety of reasons I only applied to one PhD program when I applied - the story is a bit more nuanced than that, but the simplistic version is that at that part of my studies this program was the only program that fit my needs and the only PhD program I was willing to attend at that particular time. BUT I also knew that if I didn’t like the department, or didn’t get enough funding, or there was no one for me to work with that I would turn down the offer and try again after my master’s.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This happened to a friend of mine when I was working on my English degree. We had exactly one medievalist, and she was pretty well known. (She had assisted a mega-star on what was THE standard translation of Beowulf for decades.) Two years into my friend’s program, this scholar up and left for a job she wanted more. The department did not replace her. My friend had the choice of changing her specialization or starting over at a new school. In hindsight, she realized she probably should have gone to a school with more than one scholar in her area.</p>
<p>^Seamus Heaney?!</p>
<p>In any case, this is a perfect example.</p>
<p>Just to clarify I am currently an MA student so I am a little less than a year away from applying for Phd programs. So I am doing lots of research on all schools but since I attended school X for undergrad (very integrated with grad work) I know a lot about the possibilities there and know I could do the work I want to do within a great community. </p>
<p>To answer Juillet’s question yes I do want to be an archaeologist, preferably academically based. Part of the reason I like school X is because it produces Phd’s who are actually hired, its actually an extremely high percentage of Phd holders from the program that are hired in their area within less than a year. </p>
<p>Basically Im asking if it’s worth it to apply to other programs knowing that school X is the one place I feel could give me what I need? Is it worth spending the time on other applications when I could be focusing on making one amazing application? </p>
<p>It might be important to note that the Dean asked me to consider writing a proposal that would be in her upcoming 10 year project. It wasn’t just a “you’re a good candidate.” </p>
<p>That’s fine, but still apply to some other schools. The cost is small compared to the potential benefits.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s good, and you should be looking at those things. However, I doubt that this one PhD program produces 100% of the professors in your field - there have to be other archaeology programs that also have good placement rates into academic positions. Find them, too. Remember that you are making the choice like “Either I go to this one particular program or I don’t become an archaeologist at all.” That’s a valid choice, but it has to be the one you want to actually make. You’re also taking a huge risk in the case things don’t work out - and I know you say that your undergrad work was “very integrated” with grad work, but it is ALWAYS different to be an undergraduate student in a department than it is to be a grad student in the same one.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I get the feeling that students here greatly overestimate the amount of time additional applications take.</p>
<p>Your statement of purpose for each program will largely be the same - after all, your background, experiences, and research interests don’t change. The only thing that will change is the 1-2 paragraphs towards the end in which you talk about the individual program that you’re applying to.</p>
<p>Your recommenders will write essentially the same letter for each school; they may change or tweak a few sentences here and there but that doesn’t take a lot of extra work. Your GRE scores are sent electronically, so it’s not like you’ll be licking envelopes into the early morn. Your CV won’t change. The only task that you have to do over and over again is fill out those electronic applications, and they take maybe 20 minutes tops.</p>
<p>In other words, you can do 5 amazing applications with just a little more effort than it takes to do one amazing application.</p>
<p>Again I say - if your choice is “Either I go to X University’s program or I don’t get a PhD at all, because I don’t want one if I can’t go there,” then just apply to one program. That’s a VERY valid choice, IMO. I felt that way when I was applying to grad school - I had very specific research interests and the program I’m currently in was the only one that completely satisfied those interests. Therefore, I applied to one PhD program; I would have rather gone to a better-tailored/suited master’s program and earned a PhD later than gone to a different PhD program the year I applied. That’s totally fine!</p>
<p>But if you want your choice to be broader - i.e., “I want to go to a PhD program in archaeology next year and become an academic archaeologist/research professor” - well, I’m betting there’s more than one program that will allow you to do that. And I think it’s the safest bet to apply to several programs (between 5 and 10) that will get you to your goal.</p>
<p>Last thing:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You may not believe me, but lots of professors say this to lots of students. They get really excited when another young scholar shares their interests, and they start thinking of cool ways that you can collaborate, projects you can do together, etc. That does not mean that you are in the program. You’re not in until you’re in - you never know, another student could have an even better project idea than yours, or similar ideas but more research experience, or knows some skill that the professor doesn’t and needs, or is related to the professor’s sister. You simply do not know what the rest of the pool looks like.</p>
<p>If you’re close to this dean and you think you have a pretty decent shot of getting in, why not simply ask her point blank? Some professors do give assurances like that to prospective students. One example: my lab’s former lab manager (and currently one of my fellow grad students in the department) knew, through conversations with our PI, that if she applied to our program she was getting in. And even then she still applied to like 4 other programs. Because you just never know - she may have gotten a better offer somewhere else, or discovered a new interest or area of expertise, or our program could’ve crashed and let no one in. <em>shrug</em></p>
<p>
Actually, that depends entirely on the subfield. Archaeology isn’t a generic, common field like biology, English, public health, history, psychology, or what have you. </p>
<p>It’s not at all uncommon for one university to corner the market. Chicago has produced about 75% of Egyptologists in academia, and Penn has produced a fair percentage of the rest. Virtually every working nautical archaeologist has at least a MA from Texas A&M and often a PhD as well. All of the best archaeometry and dendrochronology work is being done at Cornell and to a lesser extent Arizona. I could provide many other examples. </p>
<p>runfun, this depends a lot on your interests and the university in question. If the university is far and away the best for your subfield, it might make sense to apply only there. There’s no point in applying to programs you wouldn’t want to attend! If there’s many other options, however, there’s some advantage to apply to a few other programs. </p>
<p>Archaeology may not be as big of a subfield as psychology or English, but as far as I know it’s not quite as small as Egyptology either. Even, though, if you wanted to be an Egyptologist and all of the academic Egyptologists came from Chicago and Penn…that’s still two schools to apply to. A quick look at the faculty of the top-ranked archaeology program, though (UCLA’s) shows that 100% of the archaeologists don’t come from the same program. The same programs do come up frequently, though - and some of them are international (Leiden University’s program comes up quite often, which is interesting). I of course defer to the archaeologists on the board in the case of which are the best in the field, as the NRC rankings are out of date obviously.</p>
<p>I agree with the rest of your comment too - I said the same thing in my own - that applying to more than one program is usually advisable, but if you think you’ll be unhappy at all but one place, then I see no reason to waste time and money applying to others. </p>