Jump to content

greenwintermints

Members
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Iowa
  • Application Season
    Not Applicable
  • Program
    History

greenwintermints's Achievements

Decaf

Decaf (2/10)

2

Reputation

  1. If you can afford 15 applications, I'd go for it! But make sure you have the time to thoroughly research 15 schools and tailor your applications to each one - you'll be more successful that way! My list had about 15 schools but I'm slowly narrowing it down to 8 or 10 (12 is my maximum!) so that it's more manageable.
  2. Not a political scientist or an economist (although my best friend studied both, does that count?!?!?!) but here's what I'd say, just from personal experience, talking to professors, and sniffing around here/related blogs for a bit! 1) Why do you think poli sci is easier than econ? I've never gotten the impression poli sci was a cushy major at all - it's a lot of number crunching and research analysis, things that I think would be useful in public health. But more importantly, I don't think you should think of them as "easier" than the other. I study both history and anthropology; I don't think one is inherently easier than the other, I think they use different skills. History feels easier to me because it uses skills I'm more comfortable with, but I don't think that makes it objectively easier, and it's kind of reductive to think of them in those kinds of terms. 2) I think graduate schools have a sixth sense for people who choose things because they are easy/easier, or who restrict themselves because they're afraid of doing poorly, and conversely, they may not forgive a lower GPA just because it was "harder," or pick someone with an economics background over a poli sci background if all things were equal. I really would go with what interests you more and perhaps what you're most suited to pursue and work from there. If I were in your shoes, for example, I'd pick poli sci because I, personally, would not be comfortable with the math required in an econ program. But maybe if I were better at math and thought economics was not soulcrushingly boring, I'd go for econ. That's just me, and only you are really qualified to say what you could and could not accomplish. No matter what you study, you should make the most of it - you should challenge yourself, look for research opportunities, et cetera. (Is there a B.S. option you could pursue? Do that. Definitely definitely do that.) 3) Cheaper instate school, all the way. You will get a lot more out of going to a physical school - professors you can talk to, on-campus work experiences, etc. An online program doesn't really compare, and it's not like you could even get to a physical school without significant hassle. Perhaps if this were an online program at UNC, that would merit another look, but Penn State is quite far. And I've never found that undergraduate degrees significantly hurt chances of admission if the rest of your application package is strong. If you look on academia.edu or somewhere and see the CVs of current graduate students, plenty come from the Ivy League, but just as many come from your local Compass Direction State University. School's what you make of it. Plenty of Harvard grads are totally unprepared for the real world, where plenty of not-Harvard grads can run circles around them. 4) Obviously one person's experience doesn't mean it'll be an experience for everyone, but my brother's degrees (BS poli sci/geography, he dropped econ because he hated it) from Local State U got him into eighteen law schools, some of which were in the top 14. However, more important than the degrees themselves were what he did while getting them: he was a research assistant first for an actual professor, then as part of an NSF study; he was head writing tutor at the Local State U Writing Center; etc. Those experiences, combined with his actual coursework, gave him useful skills that law schools found attractive. Hope this helps!
  3. Oh gosh, I completely understand that admissions are competitive, and I'm sure they'd be extra so at OSU! So that's not quite what I meant - I was more asking about the culture of the department itself once you got past admissions - they didn't seem super cutthroat, while still being a high quality department. That's more what I was asking after, but thanks for the tip!
  4. I'm a fall 2015 applicant (as I've got a pesky anthropology degree to finish!) but I didn't think this warranted its own thread, so I hope it's okay if I ask this question here! Does anybody know much about Ohio State? I'm interested in modern women's history (US/Britain), and I really liked what I saw from the website - multiple faculty members I think I could work with/a good research fit, to start, but I also noticed what I thought was a "we're pretty low key/not super competitive" feeling from the department, which, if it's true in reality, really appeals to me. Is the department actually like that, or am I just projecting my ideal program onto them? Thanks so much! Any other info on OSU would be fantastic too if you had it! (Edit - man, I'm at the top of the page again.)
  5. I think that may depend on who's in your adcomm. One professor might see you being done in two years as a sign that you're focused and committed. Another might see that as a liability - that you've only had two years of work in history, so 1) you may not be as well prepared, and 2) you might jump ship because you haven't had as much time working with history. I'm not sure if you need to address it directly in your SOP (someone else can weigh in on this?), but I think it's extra important that your LORs are glowing, and that in your SOP you present yourself as someone who's had experience in history, is well-prepared, and can add to the department. Things you'd want to include in any SOP, I guess, but of extra importance here. And this is just a bit of a pro tip from someone who started at sixteen (two years behind everyone, which is where you'd be in a PhD program) - everybody will automatically assume you did four years and that you're the same age, because the possibility of someone having finished college in two years and gone on to graduate school won't even have occurred to them. So don't let the age bit intimidate you (as it has for me), but don't advertise it, either - if people know or it comes up in conversation, that's one thing, but I find that if you keep that quiet, people won't label you in their heads as "SUPER YOUNG GRAD STUDENT" or whatever, which can be pretty counterproductive. I work as a writing tutor, and instead of being "that eighteen-year-old writing tutor," my supervisor instead thinks of me as "writing tutor, who happens to be eighteen," which is where you want to be.
  6. Hey guys! I didn't think this warranted its own thread, so I thought I'd ask here - can you take the paper-based test even if a computer based test is available? I think I'd do much, much better taking the test on paper, and I can make the paper test dates (also, there's a paper testing center on campus, where the nearest computer testing center is a 20 minute drive away). Thanks!
  7. People apply to degree programs outside their majors all the time. What's more, you're not switching from a hard science or something; you're still very much in the liberal arts, so it's not as far away as you think. From what I understand, sociology is more quantitative, but that's not a bad thing - in fact, a lot of history majors (myself included) wouldn't know what to do with a statistical regression if it hit them in the face, so you'd be bringing something new to the table. You can use your sociology background to your advantage in your SOP, too; what skills did your soc degree give you that you can apply to a history program? How will your previous background in sociology inform your studies in history? For example, I have a friend who studied geography and then went to law school. When interviewers ask him about his geography degree, he explains that it's a way of thinking about things spatially, and interviewers love it. It doesn't matter that he spent four years mapping rivers and urban landscapes. What matters is how he can use that experience to think critically. (He also knows how to use GIS, which is a hugely in-demand skill. If your sociology degree gave you skills like that - SPSS, statistical analysis, anything - that's always a good thing!) However, I would make sure that it's clear that you're switching to history for a particular reason. You don't want to give off the impression that you didn't like sociology so now you're trying history (even if that's the case) - act like an MA in history is the natural next step in your educational journey. But if you work it right, the answer is yes, you should try.
  8. You're not signing up to be a model; you'll only give off the wrong impression, even if you mean well. Rule of thumb: if it's not asked for, don't include it. No matter what.
  9. I'm not an expert on medieval studies at all, but for the UK, anything in the Russell Group (http://www.russellgroup.ac.uk/our-universities/) would be worth your while - those are the most research intensive schools in the UK, so some of them might have medieval programs that would work for you! (Missing off this list are St Andrews, which is very prestigious, and Sussex, which also has a very good reputation.)
  10. Thanks for your replies! Re: ArtHistoryandMuseum: I did see that thread earlier, but I'll take another look at it! Thanks! Re: enchanted24: Thanks so much! I didn't quite make it clear at the beginning, but neither my possible internship nor my upcoming research would be paid - I referred to them as jobs because it makes it easier when talking to my family, but I'm not getting paid (I do have a paying job, as a writing tutor) and I'd be pursuing them even if I wasn't! But I think you're right and your perspective is spot-on - I need both the internship and the research, so I think I'll do some playing with my schedule and see how I can fit both in the spring (I can't fit them both in now). Thanks for your help!
  11. This month, I applied for two jobs - I emailed some professors to try and get a job as a research assistant, and I sent out some cover letters to local museums to try and pick up an internship at a museum. I'm pretty sure I've got the research job (heck yes!), but now I'm debating what I want to do if and when any of the museums and archives get back to me. At first I was going to just explain I'd already taken up another commitment, and then try to delay my internship until the spring, but then I started looking at my schedule - if things go really well with this research job and I wanted another semester (is that a thing? can you even do research for more than 1 semester?) of research, I couldn't do that *and* the internship and the classes required for the rest of my degrees. I'm not entirely sure what's best for my application - longer, sustained research, or a museum/special collections internship that might diversify my CV and give me some real world experience (also, placing my foot in the door in case I don't get in anywhere). So, I guess I'll give the tl;dr version: 1) Going into junior year, interested in PhD programs in history 2) Most likely have a job as a research assistant for a professor 3) Can I do research with that professor for two semesters if it goes really well? 4) Should I try and do another semester of research, or should I add a museum internship? Thanks!
  12. To go off of what others have said re: conferences, I wouldn't advise applying to the most prestigious, famous conferences you can find - even if you got in, it'd be overwhelming. Conferences (in my estimation) are draining experiences (I'm really introverted and all the socializing, networking, etc, exhausts me after a while) - start off with some smaller, regional conferences to ease into it first. If your first conference experience is positive (like mine was - I presented at a conference for grads/undergrads), it's much more pleasant to talk about and much easier to apply to more.
  13. Thanks! I'll definitely check out IU - not sure why it slipped my mind, since my mom went there! As for narrowing my focus - I have actually narrowed it some! I did a major term paper on James Bond, Playboy, and the sexual politics of the 1960s, and I loved it - so I think social/cultural history with a focus on gender/sexuality is where I'm looking right now. It's just that I think the same period in Britain is interesting as well, and how the same cultural zeitgeist (as it were) takes different turns in each place (and, I mean, James Bond is a British export, after all, albeit with an American flair). But perhaps if I can narrow down the approach/angle I'm interested in (gender history, political history, etc) I can have some freedom geographically when I'm pitching to universities? I hadn't thought about Maryland at all, so I'll check that out too! Thanks so much! (Also, what are you doing at Iowa? I love the school and the state, so it's always good to see some other Iowans/Hawkeyes around!)
  14. I'm making up a short list of programs (applying in fall 2014) and I'm having a bit of trouble with my list. I'm interested in both U.S. and British history, particularly in the postwar era, and I don't want to pigeonhole myself into one field or another, at least not at this stage. What schools could I study both countries at? So far I've got Michigan, WashU, Iowa (that's where I go now), UC-Berkeley, UNC-Chapel Hill, Penn, Rutgers (I'm not keen on living in New Brunswick, though, but I've heard their program in gender history is really well regarded), UT-Austin, Washington, and then Colorado and Oregon as major backups (at this point I'm wondering if it's worth even applying there). I really like Michigan, Wisconsin, and UNC. UT-Austin and Iowa are good choices because they're close to family. Am I missing some other schools? Should I move some schools up to the top of my list? Would Harvard/Yale/Princeton have what I'm looking for? I've never been interested in the East/Ivy League, but if they'd have what I'm looking for I'm open to it. Also, will it throw up any red flags to admissions committees if I say I want to study both the US and Britain (within the same time frame)? Sorry if I've made any mistakes posting, this is my first post here! Thanks so much!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. See our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use