gsc

Seconding At A Glance planners! I've had three or four and I've loved them. I like calendars that have weekly and monthly sections so that I can see what's ahead, and At A Glance always has them - with lots of room to write too!

Thanks for the tips, guys! I'll look into primary/secondary insurance, also. At the very least I can manage on my parents' plan for this year, and switch to the TA plan next year when I'm eligible. This is actually what prompted me to ask this question in the first place. I got around this question in undergrad by using my school's counseling center (which was free) and it was a very good experience for me! But in the future I'd like to have more options than just the school services, as well as a little more privacy.

At the program I’ll be attending this fall, graduate fellows and graduate TAs get different health insurance packages. Fellows get the student insurance plan offered to undergrads, where GAs/TAs get faculty/staff insurance for the years they're TAing. For me that's just two years. (This is a little different than at my undergrad, where all grad students got comprehensive health care through our teaching hospital.) I’m 20, so theoretically I could stay on my parents’ health insurance through the entire program and it wouldn’t really matter. The sticky part is that my parents’ provider network doesn’t go outside of my home state, which I am leaving for grad school. Everything in my new state would be out of network, so I'd have to go home for doctor's appointments (or just pay more) - I'm not sure how feasible it’ll be to schedule all doctor’s appointments for Christmas break or whenever else I might be home. What do you guys do for health insurance? Is it better to stay on a plan that leaves me out-of-network in my new state, but gives me good coverage if I go home, or switch to my school’s plan for health insurance where I live? thanks!

I feel like at the application stage it's too early to cross schools off your list because of funding/budget cuts/etc, unless that program offers no funding for its students at all. At this point you really have no way of knowing what the funding will look like for you or what your options will be. If Wisconsin, LSU, or UNC is your dream program, and you can swing the application fee, then still apply; just be realistic about what could happen once you have actual offers in hand.

Do this! I have posted something to this effect in a couple of other threads, but I am about 99% sure that my senior thesis is what helped me have a successful application season (6 acceptances, 1 waitlist, 2 rejections). It's the only way you can get a really good writing sample at the undergrad level; you won't really get the chance to do a lengthy, original project based on primary source research in your regular classes (the longest paper I ever wrote outside of my thesis was 15 pages).

Me! I'm starting in the fall to do a PhD in history. So excited!

Honestly, I don't see why. Perhaps I wasn't being quite clear enough in my original post, but I do agree with ToldAgain that study abroad is something that if you have, cool, if not, then whatever. I'm in history and I do the history of a foreign country (Britain), so for me, study abroad was important - first because I wanted to and also because I was signing up to do research in that country. You're in rhet/comp, which doesn't have that foreign research component (as far as I know...?), and you've already done one study abroad trip to help with your French language skills. And as you mention, it's fall semester of senior year, and any benefits you would get won't be visible on your application. So would going abroad really net you any opportunities other than being able to check off the "I studied abroad" box? I guess I don't feel that any admissions committee is going to take your application and chuck it because you didn't study abroad. I also don't think that, given two identical applicants, they would pick the person who studied abroad because they studied abroad. If I could have gotten the same sources for my thesis and written the same paper without going abroad, I think I would have (1) saved a lot of money, and (2) still gotten into the same programs. Also, it looks like you have a lot of other things in your favor, like experience and rec letters and language requirements, which would probably hold more sway -- people mentioned my thesis not because I studied abroad but because it was well-written and showed I could do history, you know? That was more important than the fact that I went abroad to do it. Study abroad is a cool thing to do, but if you're leaning towards not going, then don't go.

OP, hi! I'm in history but I studied abroad twice as an undergrad. The first time was your bog-standard "do a semester in a foreign country," and I went to Ireland to do British history. I do feel that I got a good foundation in British history and I mentioned it in my SOP to make it clear (if it wasn't clear on my transcript) that I had some training in British history. The second time I went to England to do research on my honors thesis. I was much more focused this time; I was going to these archives and doing this research, etc. This I did not mention in my SOP, although I think one of my recommenders mentioned it, because I decided (and I'm not sure why...?) that it would be clear enough from my footnotes where I'd gone to get source materials. I do think that study abroad helped my application but not specifically because I could check off the "study abroad" checkbox. When I went the first time, I made some friends with some history grad students who (1) encouraged me to present at their grad student conference, and (2) talked with me about doing graduate school abroad, which I had been considering. So that was helpful for my own sort of professional development. The second time was helpful because I got better sources than what I could have gotten in the US (specifically, I could use government documents as well as a wider variety of medical reports) and that did lead me to writing a better thesis. I really do think that my thesis is what got me into grad school, so in a sense study abroad did help my application tremendously, but not specifically because I went abroad, if that makes sense. (Nobody mentioned that I studied abroad, except for my future advisor who asked me to clarify if I'd gotten an undergraduate fellowship to go abroad, which I had. But everybody mentioned my thesis.) So I don't think it's so much about the actual act of studying abroad but the opportunities that you might get as a result of it. But even those you can't really gauge ahead of time. I really do believe in study abroad, but I think it only works if you want to do it for you, for your own personal and scholarly development. I mean, I went to Ireland for a semester because I really wanted to go and learn about Britain and Ireland, not because I thought I'd meet history grad students and present at a conference. That was a fun side benefit. Also, applying to graduate school is stressful. Study abroad, even if you like it, is stressful. I think it's good to know what you can and can't handle emotionally; I didn't, and I do regret that.

I think it's an interesting question, but if I'm being perfectly honest, I don't see the point of raising it here, in a thread full of people who actually applied as part of this "weak" group of applications. Perhaps I'm being overly sensitive, but all this does is make me wonder if 1) my application was weak, and 2) if I only got into graduate schools because I happened to be a slightly less "weak" candidate and they needed people to admit.

Not related to the baby conversation: I'm excited about starting my program next year, but I'm coming to the realization that I actually have no idea what I want to do after graduate school. I'm twenty years old and I feel like I literally have to figure out my entire life right now and the pressure is killing me.

You could try Rutgers; there might not be a historian of the U.S. south, per se, but they've got women's history in spades (and African-American history, too, which could be relevant for you).

I'm headed to Rutgers, actually! I'm pretty excited about it.

I was also at the OSU visit day! I had to leave because I got horribly sick around lunchtime, but I was there for the morning -- very nice to meet you both!

Definitely; I think when you have very similar funded offers, then there's no need to be like, "well, the stipend here is $19k but the stipend here is $19.5k, obviously that's where I'll go!" because you're just missing the forest for the trees. The offers I've gotten so far were all fully funded, but were just all over the place in terms of what fully funded meant. When it came down to that offer I mentioned earlier, I decided that the potential advantages of going to that program (and there were several) didn't outweigh the fact that I would barely be able to live in that town. Really, the more I think about it, that's what these decisions really come down to, whether you're looking at funding or otherwise -- do the potential pros of this program outweigh its potential cons?

I guess I'm surprised to read some of the responses here, because my professors have all told me that funding ought to come first, then advisor, then department. I mean, you're never going to make bank as a grad student, but the TA stipend of one school (a very large and very wealthy university) was literally half that of another school -- even when you adjusted for cost of living, it was still ridiculous. I declined their offer pretty quickly, mostly for reasons unrelated to the funding, but even if I'd loved the department, I probably would have declined anyways. A stipend that low would've had me taking out loans, and I'm really hesitant to take on debt when there's no clear way to pay it off. Moreover, I think in some cases, the stipend and funding can offer a clue to how the university treats and views its graduate students. I would be hesitant to attend a university where liberal arts graduate students are literally at the bottom of the totem pole. That isn't necessarily true for all schools (low stipend doesn't always mean poor treatment of grad students!), but in this particular case, it threw up a major red flag for me. As for advisors, I turned down an offer from a school where the POI and I had the exact same interests, because I felt her approach to advising was not really right for me. The advisor at the school that I'm leaning towards most works on slightly different stuff than me, but is exactly what I want in an advisor, and I'm really excited about possibly working with him.

I wish I had a slightly more insightful answer for why I like women's history, but actually, it was this book series: The American Girl books were great. Spunky, strong-minded girls in different time periods, getting up to all kinds of adventures? Sign me up. My favorite American girl was Kit, who was from 1930s Cincinnati and wanted to be a newspaper reporter. (I may or may not have pretended to be her.)

Congratulations! That is so exciting. (And go Hawks!)

congratulations!!!!

This is really, really true. Your SOP should be about your research. It can include other things, but the heart of it should be about research. You want to draw a clear line between what you have done in the past (your writing sample, research you've done previously, any relevant experiences like studying abroad) and what you want to do at the school you're applying to. I applied straight from undergrad, so I felt like I had my work cut out for me in showing an adcom that I was ready to pursue graduate work. For me, that meant I wanted to make three things clear: first, that I could think critically about the field I wanted to enter; second, that I could do research and write well; and third, that I was going to work really, really hard if they gave me the chance to come to their school. So, the first was covered in my SOP. It was five paragraphs long. The introductory paragraph talked about the thing I did (working in an archives) that made me want to study thematic field X. Then in the next paragraph, I mentioned, very, very briefly, that I had first studied region Y as a study abroad student; the rest of the paragraph was about how I had researched region Y (but NOT thematic field X) in my senior thesis. Those were my relevant past experiences -- three of them, and one of them only got one sentence. Then I spent the next two paragraphs talking about how I wanted to bring my insights from thematic field X to my studies of region Y. I finished off with a paragraph about how the school was the best place for me to pursue this project. It came out to around 700 words. So even though I couldn't talk about methodologies or even scholarly debates, I could articulate what I wanted to do and how I saw my work bringing together my experiences. The second was covered by my senior thesis. I sent in the first 20 pages (this came out to the first case study) as my writing sample. If you're coming out of undergrad, write a thesis. It's the only chance you'll get to do sustained, self-directed research; the 8 page term paper you wrote for American History 202 won't cut it. Make your thesis your writing sample. If you can get funding to go do research abroad or what-have-you, do it, not because it will impress adcoms (I'm not even sure I mentioned getting funding in my SOP, although my recommenders might have), but because it'll make your paper better and that will impress adcoms. Because I spent a summer in England, I had better sources, and because I had better sources, I wrote a better, more compelling paper. The SOP shows what you want to do. The writing sample shows how well you can do it. They should work in tandem. An adcom should be able to put the documents side-by-side and see how they fit together. The third thing was a little more personal and harder to pin down. It's really a matter of show, don't tell, and if anyone's doing the telling, it's your LORs. But for me, it was important because I wanted to make clear that what I didn't know (coming straight from undergrad, probably a lot) I was willing to learn. All in all, I think it worked. I applied to nine schools, and so far have gotten into 5, rejected at 1, and waitlisted at another -- so not half bad! Hope this helps!

The acknowledgements section is always a fascinating read. You really do learn a lot from just two or three pages -- who studied with who, what grants they got, what faculty members like to work together, etc. (Sometimes, it's the most interesting part of the whole book.)

I've been accepted to 5 schools so far and didn't contact a single POI. I did mention who I wanted to work with in my SOP, and those professors all emailed me within a few days of being accepted and it didn't seem to be a problem.

Not only do I have a million books, I also have a ton of crap in general. Every two weeks or so I just have this moment where I walk around my apartment in a half-daze wondering how on Earth I'm going to move all this stuff.

I'm seriously considering Rutgers and I've cased this thread pretty thoroughly -- does anyone else have new info to add? The main things I gather are 1) New Brunswick is okay but not spectacular, 2) Highland Park is nice, and 3) take a car if you can. Would it be possible to live in Highland Park and/or Edison without a roommate? That's something I'd really like to avoid, even if it means I basically have to live in a shoebox. Also, I get the impression there's some bus service to Highland Park; is it reliable? I prefer public transportation, but I'll also have a car, so if it's less hassle to just drive that wouldn't bother me. I know some people mentioned parking isn't too expensive with a faculty permit, but what about actually finding spots? Sometimes when I try to park on campus at my current institution it's not the price that gets me, it's the 15-20 minutes it takes to find a spot. thanks!

I do! I got an official letter from Ohio State on a Friday but didn't hear anything from the DGS until Monday. I'd expect that they just finalized their decisions and sent them off to the graduate school -- thus prompting the graduate school system to send you the email they received -- but they won't get to sending out the official emails until next week. Congratulations!

Upper Midwest in March is warm enough that I wouldn't splurge on a down coat (the nice ones can be very pricey) until I accepted - just wear the warmest one you have. Patagonia or North Face (I like Patagonia) both make nice fuzzy jackets that will be fine and last you a while; also, the Target in my town is still selling fall/winter jackets that will work. The key is to layer - doesn't matter how warm your coat is, if you're wearing a T-shirt under it you'll freeze. Wear tights or leggings under your pants; if you're wearing a sweater, put a long sleeve shirt under it and maybe a tank top underneath that. Scarves are your friend! They look cute and keep your neck warm. As for shoes, my favorite winter shoes are LL Bean boots and they're usually back ordered up the wazoo by now. Really, all you need in March is traction - there are random patches of ice floating around and you don't want to fall. A good pair of tennis shoes will work, and no one will begrudge you if you just change out of them.