dr. t

Most of the process is the same everywhere. What changes is how much of a intradepartmental political fight the decision process is, and that doesn't correlate with any "tier" of school.

Estimate how much you think you can do, and then do half that.

It's not so much that US history isn't a growth field as it is US history PhDs overproduce for the market by a factor of 4:1. I'd say environmental history is really big right now, as well as transnational/Atlantic World history and east Asian history. Digital history is becoming more of a Hilfswissenshaft than a discipline in its own right (rightly so, IMO), and the general resurgence in quant seems to be dying back down a bit.

If you're looking to an MA as a stepping stone for a PhD, no, there are not any online-only programs that I would recommend.

In their popular FPS Overwatch, Blizzard collected "rate this match quality" data for a year before realizing that the only thing they could correlate it to is whether or not someone won or lost the match. In other words, who cares?

Oh boy are you going to love grant applications

My teammates found it less than fun last year, but we'll see if I even have the fitness, never mind the time.

No problem! I'm going to add another thing here, mainly directed at those finding this thread in the future or if you decide/have to apply again after this season. After all, it's unlikely that any classwork you're currently doing will impact this application cycle. Your second paragraph is important, and I want to emphasize it because my advice has very little to do with the SoP vel sim. After all, anyone can write about how they're turning over a new leaf; what you actually need to give is proof that you have already done so. In my own case, I had a major grade surge (0.86 to 3.8) in the final 3 years of my (9 year long) undergraduate career, and I also had to take a year of post-graduate coursework. This also gave me strong LoRs that could talk very positively about my capacity for graduate-level work. Plus, because I've talked a lot about prestige networks elsewhere, I would be remiss in not pointing out that finally getting my undergraduate degree from Harvard (albeit its night school) was also a substantial factor, both for the name and for the reputation of my recommenders. In short, show, don't (just) tell.

Most MA programs are more than willing to take your money; UoT's is no exception. And yes, that sort of long work experience is precisely what I meant by a story for the adcom to latch onto. Let me put it this way: whether it's fair or not, your grades strongly suggest you weren't a particularly engaged or motivated undergraduate. Was your application able to make a strong case that this is no longer true? An interesting research question is nice, but it doesn't substitute for a coherent argument about why the person who was content to average a B-/C+ is not the person applying to the program. And yeah, this sort of thing is possible. I have an MA from Harvard (and am now in a PhD program at Brown) after failing out of my first attempt at college with a friggen 0.86 and a final cumulative undergrad GPA of 3.0. But you have to tell a compelling story

Brown, this year I'll be riding in As (USAC 3).

Your adviser should take the initiative. Integrating you into their professional network is literally their job. Many adviser's don't do this. Whether it's from ignorance, apathy, or simply a skewed perception of the realities of the job market is situational.

This is kind of a meta response, and please don't take it the wrong way - it's meant well: why are you asking here? I ask because this and other questions you've posted on the board seem like the types of thing that are specifically in your adviser's purview, and ones which they should be able to answer with significantly more precision than the board. Do you not have this sort of contact in your program? Is it a problem of access, or do you not feel these are questions you can ask?

Based on what you've given here, and without any real sort of turn-around story for an adcom to latch onto, I don't see any real likelihood of you getting in, and am somewhat puzzled by your application in the first place. I would plan on the answer being "no."

Yes, although I don't think traditional EM England is really a growth field. People who want to do that sort of history are now more in the Transnational or "Atlantic World" moment, in my experience, although that's somewhat due to my program.

If the adviser is of a certain age and training, absolutely yes. The old boy's network is not what it was, but it's not on life support, either.

Wait. I would suggest drinking heavily while you wait, but I understand this coping mechanism is frowned upon in certain circles.

As far as I remember, you won't be able to take advantage of dorm-style housing, and Harvard's other housing options are priced not-too-differently from the surrounding areas. My advice is to look for a 2BR in Somerville to split with a friend/other couple - pretty much the only way to afford Boston-area housing close to campus. Or, look in Dorchester near the Red Line.

Oh, for an MA do whatever you want. That many schools is pretty overkill, but MA apps, unlike PhD apps, are a numbers game. You can disagree with me all you want, but the fact remains that Vandy has, as of 2015, placed exactly 1 graduate in a TT job in the past 7-10 years. That's not a strong or highly-ranked program. Of that list, only Princeton, Davis, and UNC really upper tier. Edit: in fact, I count only 10 tenure or tenure track professors from Vandy overall. Compare that with 324 from Harvard

Frankly, I'm not sure this advice was applicable any time after 1970.

I'm not sure you and I are understanding each other. For a given subdiscipline, there are not more than 10 (realistically, more than 5) universities worth going to, either because of professors or because of funding. I'm not going to rehash why in detail; it's been pretty extensively covered elsewhere. The short version is that the vast majority of schools do not provide either the resources to write a good dissertation or a degree that will get you a job after the fact. Your method gives you a higher chance of getting into a graduate school. That's not a useful or productive goal. For example, for your own list, Binghamton University, Northern Illinois University, Texas Tech University, University of Alabama, University of Arizona, University of Oregon, Vanderbilt University, Western Michigan University, and Wright State University are all not worth attending for a history PhD, even if admitted. They are certainly not worth the effort of completing their application forms, never mind the app fee.

"At [insert university here]." You don't need to blurt out your life story for a small-talk question.

There is no other way to put this: your mentors are horribly, horribly wrong. Please don't do this. It's a waste of your time and money.

Yeah, I'm not sure how or why this comes up if you don't want it to.

I've found specific workflows are pretty personal. My own primary source texts are either digitized or something I've transcribed myself and thus already have typed. But if you extrapolate your process out to the sheer volume of materials required for graduate work, the simple collation and maintenance of the amount of source quotation that would prompt this question (to my mind) becomes untenable. It may be an issue that will fix itself. Upper-level graduate work tends to move away from direct quotation of both primary and secondary sources, particularly when compared to undergraduate work. This seems to be the case for the majority (all?) of my cohort.

No, why would they? They already know what I'm going to say.