levoyous

Know how you feel about running out of steam - I'm applying to departments in three disciplines, so have had to write so many statements. I've done it both ways: some places where my project is a less obvious fit, I made that part more concise to avoid sounding too strongly committed to one way of looking at it. On others where I know certain faculty members will find it congenial, I said more and was a little bolder.

There was a similar story about philosophy jobs recently that reported something like 40 percent of the PhDs from a certain recent period now had tenure-track positions. When I saw some philosophers sharing it gloomily on Twitter, I was like, people have complained so bitterly about it for so long now that I took 40 percent as an encouraging number.

I'm surely not the first person to think of this, but in case it's helpful: I'm running a CTRL+F on every SOP for the names of every place I'm applying. So if there's accidentally a School A in School B's SOP, voilà. Already found one.

Or quit my job - that would definitely help.

Thought I would relieve my anxiety a bit by reading the thread from last year. Terrible mistake.

Speaking of deadlines, has anyone had nightmare experiences with submitting apps at the last minute? I wondered when to assume the deadline was if no time was specified - ie, if it says December 15, does that mean before 12AM December 16? I have no intention of cutting it that close, but just in case.

I have solid reading skills and average speaking in my regional language, but it's just French, so nothing that special.

Obviously you're correct - the sample should be as good as humanly possible. Another thing I should have specified in my case is that the sample question for me wasn't bad sample vs. good sample, it was strong non-history sample vs. rushed-probably-not-quite-there history sample. Due to various academic/life circumstances, I had to choose between spending my time on rushing (possibly hopelessly) to complete a new sample, or devoting it to deep research on departments and strong SOPs. Every one of my advisers and POIs recommended the latter. So the impetus for my comments was that, in my specific circumstances, I wish I'd worried less about doing a new sample and gotten an earlier start on the other elements. It's possible, even likely, that using a non-history sample will hurt me, but I won't be sunk because my sample is bad. That's something different departments feel differently about, so it's hard to know; I look forward to reporting back on the results.

Sigaba's interpretation of my comments is exactly right; I may have sounded arrogant, but I am not overconfident (or confident at all). In fact, I've been (and remain, despite these profs' comments), concerned about my sample. I'm applying to a number of non-history programs precisely because of that concern. I simply wanted to report what my experience had been, and only mention their credentials and my own to indicate that these are serious people, and that their advice to me might have been out of the ordinary. I also think Sigaba's earlier comment is a plausible interpretation of my situation; it has gradually dawned on me that some of the advice I have gotten has been motivated by stressed, overworked professors wanting to do less work. Of course people place very different emphasis on what's important, so I wanted to remind people that you never know. This process just made me skeptical of relying on formulaic advice, or trying to use formulas to guess on one's chances. You just never know.

I'm not disputing you, just reporting what I've heard, and these are all from people in Ivy League history departments. Several described their process of reviewing applications, and it was all some version of: they focus most intensely on the LORs and the statement, and then potentially read the first couple of pages of the sample if the applicant seems strong. When I asked for advice about which out of several samples to use, the only responses I got were "that barely matters," or "you don't need to worry about it." It's possible this is because I'm already an accomplished graduate student, and they assume from my communication (or in some cases my writing they have already read) that it won't matter for me, personally? I could see it being much more urgent that an undergraduate have a stellar sample. But I don't mean to suggest this is universal advice; everyone should certainly go by what advice their POIs gave them, not what they read on here. PS. Just saw thedig13's comment above, and they were definitely not referring to the GRE. I would say in general my advisers and a couple of POIs have been dismissive of the "shibboleths" of application advice, ie, the idea that GRE scores are super important or that a single typo is going to get you rejected (a faux pas like cutting and pasting the wrong school name, or mentioning a professor who's left, is of course a different story).

Agree with the poster above. I just had a silly argument with my wife while she was editing mine (ie, way less hardship than jkirtz!), and I decided she was right that it needed to be more positive and focused on what I bring to the department. I would say: lose the vague first sentence, start with the grisly details, and then talk about how those challenges shaped you intellectually, rather than physically. What kind of unique thinker did they make of you? Also agree on the Canada part - play it up.

Are you guys applying in the US? I have never been to J-school, but I'm an editor at a major publication in NYC, have taught journalism, and did it in undergrad. Happy to look at statements or answer questions if you DM.

I'm still communicating with POIs as I finish up statements, and have been surprised how many - almost all, actually - have said something to the effect of "the writing sample doesn't matter" or "no one cares about the writing sample." Now I wish I could have back those countless hours I spent worrying about using a philosophy sample for history programs! Just thought I'd share in case there's anyone else worried about theirs.

I was on the fence about saying what mine was for fear people would be all, "Man, you've got your work cut out for you..." My writing sample is a chapter of the MA thesis I'm currently working on (due next spring). I'd say I have nearly a third of it written, though I suspect hope it'll move more quickly when I get to the easier section. Will probably start on the SOP in the next couple of weeks - my adviser will be heavily involved in that, as well. But yeah, at this point I'm mostly consumed with finishing these on time.

We were joking - 21st century was a mistake. I'm doing 20TH century, though still pushing the edge of recent events (1980s).

"History of the present," you know. I will take a look at Chicago.

Hi everyone - longtime reader, first time poster. I geared up to apply last year, but decided to wait. I'm doing 21st-century France/Europe, with a strong interest in intellectual and political history. Couple of questions: 1) Is anyone working on a writing sample for December deadline - as in, writing something new, as opposed to an older project? I'm planning to use the first chapter of the thesis I'm writing this semester, but getting a bit worried about having so little on paper this close. 2) Anyone doing modern France or intellectual history? Where are you applying? My list right now is NYU (History-French Studies), Harvard, Columbia, Cornell, and UPenn. Finally, general comment, especially for you precocious undergrads on here: PLEASE stop freaking out about your grades and GRE scores. Obviously if you have terrible grades (especially in an MA program), that's not good. But I've talked to countless faculty members about this, and they are much more concerned with the parts of the application that demonstrate you are a professional academic than they are with those figures.