dr. t

So I've been meaning to say something about this for a while, because we have a lot of this type of question - here's my numbers, here's where I'm going, what're my chances. We can't tell you what your chances are with this information. The quantifiables may keep you out if they're terrible (yours are not), but they are not what will get you in. Your knowledge, your particular interests, and your ability to articulate these clearly and concisely in your statement and writing sample - things we will never see and cannot judge - are the deciding factors. The best we can tell you is what any department's website will tell you: your numbers are OK but not great, and that most good programs take about 5-10% of their applicant pool.

I feel like you're both a bit right. The holiday excuses work or email on the holiday or the days where you're travelling, but I see no reason why OP did not respond that Friday. The Friday after Thanksgiving is a work day for a lot of people. Moreover, break ends on Monday - if you're not going to be back in town until 4pm, you need to let your supervisor know.

Same place, so far.

Archaeologies of the Future: the Desire Called Utopia and other Science Fictions Not as good as its amazing title makes it out to be.

Strict failure (ie. F) is not usually the standard required for continuing in a PhD program, as well

Right, that was kind of my question - does he want it to still be their to revisit?

Do you have any concerns over the professor's personal motives?

This is the best practice.

A bit of a delayed response, but have you tried engineering paper instead? It's usually pretty cheap.

No this is fine, and exactly what you should do. Or just use your camera on your phone to take a picture.

Man, I wish graduate applications factored in your ability to make puns. I'd be a lot less concerned about the whole process!

I'm trying to figure out if that pun was intentional.

3/6 submitted. So it begins.

Yes, but also the ways in which the understanding of the past has changed over time and why.

I don't think there is a codified "proper methodology" for history. I would check out Herbert Butterfield's The Whig Interpretation of History and David Hackett Fischer's Historians' Fallacies as good reference guides for how to think historically. Be aware the latter was written in the 70s and has some weird racist bits.

Figure out what's more important to you, school or the relationship. If you try to have your cake and eat it too, odds are you will end up disappointed on both fronts. FWIW, my own opinion is to go to the school and plan on staying there for the full program, and hope the relationship continues to work. I think you're jumping the gun a bit though; it's only been six months.

I would really hesitate to generalize, but in my limited experience, no one looks to have more than five primary students at one time.

This varies based on institution, but the general answer is no, a professor does not have his or her own "slot". Still, you really want to have at least one advocate, a professor who is interested in working with you, and the particular person you fit best with with at a university might not be taking students for a variety of reasons. They may be retiring soon, or they just took a student last year and will wait a few before taking another, for example. In other cases, they may be sitting this round out for political reasons or because they're on sabbatical and won't have as much influence on the selection process. More generally, if you are applying to work at a institution and not to work with one or two specific professors, I would re-evaluate what exactly you want to do at graduate school.

I would talk to people in other departments at your university and see how they handle it. For people who require access to specific archives (history, etc), it's fairly standard to try to take your fourth year at that archive. They would have a better sense of how your university handles things and would be a good source of reference for the various snafus and individual problems which may arise.

I don't think New Haven counts as New England. Or part of the civilized world, for that matter.

I don't think they're stylistic, but rather practical. It isn't really necessary to provide a full citation for the Bible. Similarly, if you were writing for a journal entirely and solely devoted to Paradise Lost, you might cite your edition in the first footnote and then provide brief section and line numbers for the rest next to your quotes. I would not think that you would ever use parentheticals for anything else. But yes, not formal. I would note that Chicago style footnotes are not so much a hard codification - they can't cover every possibility - but rather a guide to how things should look.

I would not use any parenthetical citations in that situation.

With full Chicago Notes and Bibliography, in-text parentheticals are usually reserved for really well-known sources such as scriptural quotations or, in some cases, the single text you are picking apart. Basically, if it's not the Bible, I'd put it in a foot/endnote.

Huh. I remember getting no end of grief from a certain poster when I recommended that s/he look at schools outside of California. Isn't it funny how things change. No one will be grading your essay, but if there's a citation standard in history, it's probably Chicago notes & bib.