Cornell07
-
Posts
406 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Cornell07
-
-
I've never even heard that term before, "practical history."
It's mainly been a Harvard thing, from what I can tell. Check out http://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Time-Uses-History-Decision-Makers/dp/0029227917 "Thinking in Time" by Ernest May and Richard Neustadt, who are/were (Neustadt is now dead) Harvard history professors who co-taught a course at the Kennedy School on using history to influence policy decisions. Also at Harvard was Philip Zelikow, who now teaches at UVA, who wrote on the subject with May, with a focus on the Cuban missile crisis. Both May and Zelikow served on the 9/11 commission. Not your average historians, eh?
I first became interested in the field as an undergrad when one of my professors asked me to partake in an experimental seminar that ran like a policy course at the Woodrow Wilson School (with which my professor was coordinating the class) except instead of using analyzing current policy issues, we broke down and critiqued policies from World War II (e.g. bombing policy, the rescue of European Jews, and coordination with the Soviet Union).
-
Hello, all!
If any of you are still here from last year's round of admissions, you may remember my plight of trying to apply to history programs with an interest in studying the role of historical perspective in US foreign policy. It suffices to say that I was rejected everywhere. A number of professors wrote afterwords that, essentially, most academics frown on "practical history".
Well, bollocks to them. So, I've gone another way: left the legal field, worked on Team Obama for a while, and then applied to actual foreign policy MA/MPP/MPA programs, where my field of interest is actually considered to be worthwhile by a number of professors. This change essentially means that my academic interests will be one aspect of my professional career, rather than its totality. Unfortunately, most programs don't have a research component, which will make applying to a PhD program in the future (if I deem it necessary) to be a bit of a pain in the rear.
I wish you all the best of luck. See you all in March or next Fall!
-
I just took a shot at the policy memo for the Princeton application. I'll probably revise my memo for the Harvard app as I give it more time to let it gestate. In short, I wrote about the complex role and effects of cotton subsidies on the war on terror, my recommendation for their immediate removal, and potential impacts both good and bad.
Actually I arranged it a bit like a policy debate affirmative constructive speech
- Plan - What you advocate to solve a given problem
- Inherency - Issue in the status quo preventing the problem from being solved
- Advantage 1 - A supplementary benefit of the plan additional to solving the problem which shows why the world under the plan is better than status quo
- Advantage 2 - Another supplementary benefit of the plan
- Solvency - Specifically how the plan solves the problem
-
Well, as someone who just finished working with the Obama campaign, though many of us are applying for transition jobs, most are applying directly to grad school because it will be awful going from having so much power and responsibility on the trail (running local/regional field offices) to being recently minted undergrads in paper pushing jobs.
-
I'm a bit nervous since I do not have research experience -- I applied to dozens of research related jobs over the years, but many of the entry level positions required a master's degree!
Well that really seems to be the rub. I too have looked at many researched related jobs but been disheartened due to the requirement of a masters degree. You need experience to get into a masters program but you need a masters degree to get experience! (On a related note, thanks for the encouragement FSIA. I've noticed that Masters in IR degrees very often require or encourage having a solid background in quantitative/economics).
-
Most people applying to Intl Affairs/Relations programs seem to have a few years of professional experience under their belts. KSG, for example, says that their average incoming MPP student has about 2 years of professional work behind them. Any ideas about what is considered to be good enough/appropriate/sufficient experience for them?
I have about a year and a half of experience working for a large corporate law firm in NYC on international finance matters as well as post-undergrad experience as a volunteer alumni researcher/foreign affairs guru/adviser for my university's policy debate team. At the moment, I am trying (desperately) to get an internship/research assitanceship position at a number of foreign policy think tanks. I am pretty sure I'd be in good shape to apply if I get a think tank position, but given my background, do I already have sufficient experience to consider applying in the next round of apps?
-
So, what's new with Cornell07?
Surprise, surprise. Thanks to the economy, I'm having an early taste of post-grad school life and am now unemployed. Woo for layoffs! No matter. I am (I hope) able to jump ship from my temporary field of corporate law and start working on applications and other things related to my long term vocational prospects. As my interests still lie in US foreign policy and international relations, I've been applying to a number of research assistantship/internship positions at think tanks and policy institutes. I hope that real work experience in my field of study will give me the leg up to apply directly to PhD programs again, rather than leave me to throw most of my apps into the terminal MA ring.
Here are some ways I am improving this year (if you are new to the game, hopefully this will help you learn)
1) Contact Profs You Want to Work With Has anyone started writing to professors who they would like to work with? Too soon? Of course, one wants to get them before they are too swamped with the semester, but one does not want to contact them so early that they forget you come January/February. What to talk about? I always assumed you point out why you contacted them in particular (say, a book of theirs that you read), tell them you are interested in applying to their school's History MA/PhD program in X-subfield, ask if they will be taking on new graduate advisees next fall, and, of course, say a little about yourself and your interests to pique their own interest.
2) Write a 1000 Word Personal Statement Draft by the End of September, Let it Rest, then Revise, Revise, Revise Should be obvious, but it isn't. Your personal statement is so hugely important for humanities people that it must be in-freaking-credible.
3) Have as many people as possible read your personal statement
4) Find 10, 15, 20 and Extra Long Research Paper Snippits and Edit them to Death
5) See if your interests fall into any other fields, besides history proper I may apply to a few fields related to my research interests that may not be "history" exactly, such as government, international relations, and public policy. "Woody Woo", anyone?
-
I don't know. In the liberal arts, you need a damn good reason to stay at the same institution -- say, you want nothing more than to study F. Scott Fitgerald, thus you must return to Princeton because they have the F. Scott Fitzgerald papers. Otherwise, no. You can study US-China Cold War relations or sexuality in 18th Century feminist novels almost anywhere.
In the sciences, intellectual incest seems far more allowable. At Cornell, plenty of my engineer friends stayed on with their honors thesis advisors to do a Masters. Similarly, I know a handful of my friends from high school who went to MIT ended up staying on for PhD programs.
In short, it depends on the situation.
-
Summer is about halfway done and by now everyone who applied for 2008 admissions has heard back, for better or for worse. As for me, it feels like last year's admissions never really ended as I tried to get into a last ditch MA program, was waitlisted, and thus the process didn't really end until mid-to-late May. It suffices to say that I don't know if I am hitting the ground running for 2009 admissions or just being thrust forward with inertia.
Whether you are new to this game or are just coming back, feel free to post a little bit about yourself, what you want to study, and where you want to apply. As things get moving, join in the angst and hand wringing as we complain about professors who never respond to our emails, admin offices that lose our files (Repeatedly. I'm looking at you BU.), and rumors from a friend of a friend of an advisor of an email contact that the adcoms might, are just about to, are eventually planning to release their decisions.
Just remember, if at first you don't get in, apply, apply, apply again! Or you could go out into the real world and get a real job that offers decent pay, benefits, 9-5 hours, vacation... Oh what am I saying!? Screw that! We want to be GRAD STUDENTS! :wink:
-
It can help. Anecdotal evidence: I know a guy who just could not get into grad school, but really wanted a certain program so he reapplied roughly three years in a row. Eventually the program took him. I'd guess that proved to them he was seriously interested in their program and would not be throwing away an offer with him.
-
Last year, I applied to a slew of overly competative PhD programs in History that just didn't pan out (i.e all top 15 programs except one in US history, the most bloody competative track in History). At the last minute, I redid my application and applied to an MA in International and Global History at Columbia/London School of Economics, was waitlisted and eventually was told that I was just on the cusp of not getting in (it was a new program and they were unsure on how many to take) and that I should reapply next year. I want to reapply in the Fall, but not focus so hard on a PhD in History. So, plenty of MA apps in the Fall.
Is anyone else here an across-the-board reject from this recently-ended round of admissions applying again in the Fall?
-
I ultimately did not get in to my last-ditch masters program, but the results were very encouraging. I redid my personal statement, applied to a new MA program at Columbia/London School of Economics, and was waitlisted for an exceedingly long time. Ultimately, I was rejected but received two very nice personal emails from the head of graduate admissions and the program director, both strongly encouraging me to reapply next year. Why not! They said they'll waive the application fee! Not a bad bang for my buck. I applied to the Columbia PhD program, was rejected, had my app transfered to the MA program free of charge, was waitlisted, and then get to reapply free of charge! Three apps for the price of one. Pretty sweet.
Thanks for all the helpful comments. See you in the Fall!
-
Out of curiosity, what is it you want to do with a degree -- academics vs. a policy-related job? Or none of the above?
Ideally, a little bit of both. Call it youthful optimism, but I'd like to both contribute something academic and something practically useful to the world. Some historians can do this by publishing for NGOs, advising policy makers (e.g. John Lewis Gaddis @ Yale who advised Reagan and Bush), and by serving on government committees from time-to-time (e.g. Ernest May @ Harvard who co-authored the 9/11 Report). Thusfar, it seems to me that policy makers have an easier time publishing historical works and finding teaching positions later in life than academia-based historians trying to find work in the policy arena. The number of policy makers who have published histories boggles the mind (e.g. Kissinger (Dept. of State / Harvard) and Kennan (Dept. of State / Princeton)) whereas the number of academics who work for the government seems miniscule. Ultimately, I think it will be easier to move from the policy world to the academic world than visa-versa, which is why I have expanded my scope to policy degrees.
-
Last year, I applied to a slew of overly competative PhD programs in History that just didn't pan out (i.e all top 15 programs except one in US history, the most bloody competative track in History). At the last minute, I redid my application and applied to an MA in International and Global History at Columbia/London School of Economics, was waitlisted and eventually was told that I was just on the cusp of not getting in (it was a new program and they were unsure on how many to take) and that I should reapply next year.
I want to reapply in the Fall, but not focus so hard on a PhD in History. My primary interest is the intersection of history with international relations theory and application. After widening my scope, following my rejections, I determined that without an MA, it is fantastically difficult to convince a history professor that you are serious history student if you say you want to apply history to the modern day. I was told that I should first earn an MA to show my commitment and then reapply. Fine.
So, I am now trying to draw up a list of potential programs to which I should apply. I've already mentioned my interests - the intersection of history and IR. Right now, the best program I've seen that matches my interests is:
* MSc - Theory and History of International Relations at the London School of Economics http://www.lse.ac.uk/resources/graduateProspectus2008/taughtProgrammes/MScTheoryAndHistoryOfInternationalRelations.htm
Another decent match is:
* M.A. - Global, International, & Comparative History ("MAGIC")
http://grad.georgetown.edu/pages/graduate_programs.cfm?dept_id=16&show=requirements
Do any of you policy people have any recommended programs or people I should talk to? The leader in this history subsect, in my opinion, is Ernest May at the KSG / Dept of History at Harvard.
-
Final update: I didn't get in, but they said that they liked my app enough to waive my app-fee next year if I wish to reapply. So, that's some good news at the end of this whole process. Thanks for your support, everyone!
-
The thing is, Cornell, with the exception of Boston, you only applied to prestigious universities that get hundreds of applications each year from people with perfect pedigrees.
My suggestion to the OP is to apply not only to dream/reach schools, but also to some good top 50'ish schools, as well as a backup or two in the top 100. People have this idiotic idea about prestige in graduate school, as if it means anything; this is not undergrad, where a Harvard acceptance is all that meaningful. You're going to get a rigorous education from an American "research 1," no matter which one it is. Apply to programs that work on various levels: prestige (if you must), location, financial support, advising, and especially program fit.
Ugh, I know! I feel somewhat silly now having really eatten up what my advisor told me. We sat down and he came up with a list of schools that he thought were good matches with my credentials and interests. I looked a little dismayed when all of the school were so competitive. He reassuringly said, "Oh, Cornell07, don't look so worried! Schools like Harvard and Yale are dying to get students like you. I'm sure you'll be fighting off programs with a stick." So, I pushed off my worries until early January when I realized that my advisor just may be a bit out of touch or a bit too encouraging and thus I sent off my app to BU.
The moral of the story: don't believe everything your advisor tells you. He have lived 100 years, won gobs of prizes, published a library of books, and served on ad-coms, but that doesn't mean he knows everything. Take his advise with a grain of salt and apply to a wide range of schools, no matter your credentials (within reason). He might not know, for example, as was the case this year, that because UPenn had far more Americanists enrole last year than expected, they took only about 2-3 this year (or so I was told).
-
Well, I had a 3.6 overall and a 3.9 for my last 4 semesters, but I didn't get in anywhere this year. So, read into that what you will. The MA with a 3.8 should be a good bump, though.
-
-
Well, it is now the end of "next week," still no word, and I am sorry to say that my anxiousness has devolved into something of an annoyed ambivalence.
-
Sure! As it seems that funding and guidance is much rarer in a Masters program than a PhD program, departments appear to be much more flexible in terms of how many Masters students they can admit.
-
It seems that CU has had an "overwhelming" number of applications and cannot get back to me until next week. :?: :?: :?:
-
I've called the dept who told me to email the program coordonator who has not gotten back to me.
???
-
-
*twiddles thumbs* *checks watch* *twiddles thumbs*
Anyone else applying with limited Econ background?
in Government Affairs Forum
Posted
I wrote to GW a while back explaining that I've worked for over a year in quantitative structured finance (securities trading), earned a 770 Q on the GRE, and had taken Micro and two Stats courses, but had not taken Macro. I asked would my application be a significant disadvantage as a result. In short, they said it probably would. Yar.
So, in short, it seems that these schools place a huge weight on having a strong econ/math background. (Then again, the statistician in me says my sample size is lacking to make such a conclusion)