TMP

All of those awards are helpful, especially if you can provide evidence of how you used those funds (i.e. research trip to another city or abroad) in your (eventual) writing sample. I would leave the amount to your thesis adviser to discuss in his/her letter, although I'll say $4,500 is nothing to sneeze at for an undergraduate. You simply list those awards and conference presentations in your vita, which the admissions committee will look at. If these papers serve as springboards for your interests in the subject for graduate study, the adcoms can make the connections. It is going to be your research interests, statement of purpose (SOP), writing sample, and LOR that will matter the most to the admissions committee for the final evaluation.

Where do their graduates go? That's the avenue you should pursue to see what kind of reputation UK has.

I did in one cycle... unfunded PhD offer. Obviously, I turned that down and tried again the following year. I know of people in my program who didn't have any other choice--at least their offer was funded! Remember the mantra: ALL IT TAKES IS ONE FUNDED ACCEPTANCE.

Nothing at all. Just a nice thing to say unless said at least several times, then, maybe it's really genuine Or as a means of doing his/her part to contribute to raising number of applications just to show that the program has low rate of admissions and thereby declare itself highly competitive (especially in the eyes of the Graduate School/University).... Either way. It's kind of like Harvard saying "We have so many applications but we're still putting tons of money in marking to keep the applications rolling so we can be even more selective than Princeton!" Along those lines. Sad to say, as @telkanuru and I have pointed out, the bottom line is always about putting value on the program's existence vis-a-vis the Reality of the Decline of Anti-Intellectualism in America.

And MANY others (lurkers, too): These professors know you want to get in. They have so many other things that they have to do besides reviewing applications such as teaching, committee work, advising students, reading dissertations and exams, their personal lives, and the list goes on. Oh, and research if they even have 10 minutes. Not everyone's schedule mesh so it takes time for communications to go back and forth.... via e-mail and phone calls, not texts or social media. You have the results board on Grad Cafe to give you an approximate timeframe of various levels of decisions (they are usually consistent from one year to another). Please refrain from contacting anyone unless you were specifically asked by your POIs to check in. What you do not (or want to) know is that your POI has likely been in touch with other eager applicants like yourself. S/he cannot show "favoritism" because the Admissions Committee is the one making the absolute final decision. It is exceptionally rare for a POI to identify a "favorite" applicant early and and expect that person to be admitted outright because there are just too many good applicants and the student needs to be able to fit with the imagined cohort being built by the committee with other faculty members' nominations. This is a good but HARD lesson to learn because you will not be able to do such things for fellowships, grants, and journals (unless there's been a serious delay; journals don't expect you to check in until 6 months after the first contact) and, eventually, academic jobs. All you will get is a very annoyed admin, no matter how nice the reply (If you've worked as one, you'll know what I mean). I generally recommend holding off contacting the POI/department until the beginning of the March when the last of most PhD programs have notified for acceptances/rejections. This is my tough love. /mic drop

When I turned down the other program... let's say I was rather immature My guilt lasted until I saw the POI again 2 months after I turned down his program's offer. He said he was a bit hurt but understands it's all part of the game and we both need to move on. Since then, we've exchanged friendly greetings and our project status when we run into each other at conferences. He knew it was a very, very tough choice, particularly that my current adviser's research interests aligned with mine more more closely than his.

The realities of state schools. I was under some pressure by my two POIs at their respective state universities to test my commitment to their programs. I certainly said that I was very interested but remained non-committal. The POIs in private schools, in my experience, didn't seem to care. I know that OSU did not have a "waitlist" last year per se as we wanted to try a year without admitting TAs as we did not have such tremendous need for TAs and wanted to be more competitive overall. The Director of Grad Admissions worked very, very hard on those fellowship nominations for students who he was convinced would come to OSU in order to continue getting more fellowships from the Graduate School. Programs in state schools are in competition with other departments for limited number university-wide fellowships. If the Graduate School doesn't see improvement in the yield or consistent decline, it will threat the program to cut the number of fellowships it can apply to. By consistently showing high yield each year, the program can be assured (at least) that it has plenty of resources to offer attractive funding packages to compete with peer programs. Ultimately, my program had a quite strong yield of fellowship students, higher than in the past. Sort of like your parents cutting your allowance if you aren't keeping up with your chores and when you do keep up with your chores, your original allowance comes back and if you take up more chores, then you might get a raise in allowance. It is a very tricky situation for applicants but fortunately this history board has funding spreadsheet on hand for applicants to see beforehand what kind of funding they're likely to get.

Case in point without specifying the field: We petitioned to have a TT line to replace a retired professor in geographical field X, time period Y and speciality in Z and the College kept rejecting that proposal. Only did we end up with two professors, both in X and Y but with one specializing in A and the other in B. Those new hires came to us via spousal hire and a newly established endowed chair in X and Y. Now we are fighting to get a hiring line in field of O and period of P.... how the position will eventually materialize will be a mystery. Sadly, universities/colleges tend to disregard positions we deem important and they are geared towards student interests and ongoing international affairs, not of our own self-interest.... for whatever unknown reasons. Especially in public universities that generally face budget cuts every year. The battles for hires differ from one year to another depending on many factors that occur between application cycles.

If you have the urge to write, a simple thank you will do and you will be in touch as you wait your options. (Yes, I put option in plural form because one may decide that at the end, it does not make sense to attend a PhD program right away as I've heard several stories about that whether due to a better job offer, realization it's just not for them, or whatever.)

Re: negotiations. Don't worry, I didn't even learn until I got on this forum too! I was also eventually told by my advisers after I got my acceptance letters. Yes, some programs, especially the top ones, won't negotiate because they likely believe that their prestige will matter to students more than money (despite number of times I've heard of students choosing money over prestige for other well-ranked programs). Remember, the dollar amount differ from one area to another because of Cost of Living. NYU's stipend of $25K (If I remember) would do very well for someone living in the Midwest (outside of Chicago) whereas a NYU grad student would be barely scraping by. Use the Cost of Living calculator to see how much more you really need to be convinced to go. Sometimes schools can raise stipends but only as a lump sum on top of the regular stipend for the first year or so. There are other strategies-- you may want to request summer research funding, you may want another year tacked on (especially if you've been offer a 4 year package, not 5). These two aspects are critical to completing the PhD on time with a strong dissertation. You can live within your means on that given stipend (we all find ways) but the opportunities to conduct research for your dissertation and focus on writing instead of more teaching or finding a job to supplement your summer expenses are priceless. No matter how much you want to argue for more teaching experience as a TA or instructor of record beyond a year or two, the dissertation is the thing that will get you a job, if not at least an interview.

Allow me to take a step a bit further.... negotiations are best done when you have more than one offer in hand and your favorite program's package isn't as good as the best funding package you've got. Otherwise it's hard to justify why you need more money to come... and, oh, don't declare "thank you for your acceptance! this is my TOP choice!" until you've heard from other schools. Not saying so upfront will help your case a bit when you have another offer and can negotiate. You need plenty of carrots to eat, not just one. (I spoke a little too soon declaring my current program a top choice but my adviser had said that the funding was still being negotiated with the Graduate School so I used the opportunity to mention a very prestigious fellowship that I was being offered by another program. After all, she wouldn't want me to come knowing that I might have given up a better package )

No matter how one looks at it, "full-funding" is truly never "full-funding". There were a lot of small hidden costs that somehow grad students seem to forget such as memberships to learned societies, pay for items not mentioned on your funding proposal budget (Stuff from places like CVS doesn't belong there), stipends running only for 9 months not 12, the fact that departmental/university contribution to healthcare isn't always 100%, etc. I agree with @telkanuru about reimbursement. I've been out nearly $4,000 for the last 6 months because I've had to pay airfares and lodgings so far in advance for my two trips on opposite ends of the world and now just submitted everything for reimbursement! I was extremely lucky to have that much in reserve... which reminds me, most grad students don't realize that they need to get their reserves in place as early as possible. instead, they've splurged on nice apartments for themselves (meanwhile, I had a roommate with me in a decent apartment for 4 years). @khigh, you are definitely in a fortunate place to be, especially having a very supportive spouse with a good job to help with the costs.

Do you have access to ProQuest Dissertation database? If so, use your POI's name in the search field (especially under "adviser") and look up the students' names in Google to see where they've ended up. I would save that particular question for in-person/telephone conversation as it's direct and you won't want to give your POI time to think. It is true that advisers and departments lose track of their graduates because the graduates are likely too embarrassed to report (change of career direction, adjuncting) or don't care.

Congrats! To your question, yes. All PhD programs that are part of the Council of Graduate Studies that offer funding must abide by the April 15th deadline. After that, they are allowed to rescind funding offers if applicable and make offers to others on the waitlist.

Transnational, global, most definitely. Empires, different types of migrations, environmental. The "Global South", East Asia, Middle East are all desirable. Just read H-Net Job Guide and you'll see a pattern. Interestingly enough, I sometimes feel like Early Modern European history is still in fair demand (because one can teach global history before 18th century).

@kenalyass and everyone else, More seriously, work on finding inner peace within yourself knowing that the world will not end if you do not get into Chicago or any place this year. This year is only your first year and it may take at least two cycles to get in. This isn't unusual: this is the fact in academia. Nearly everyone has to apply more than one cycle to get that fellowship... that job... that highly-selective conference. We learn to build cautious optimism/pessimism (depending how you look at the glass). Developing a realistic outlook from the get-go will serve you well on the long run. Everyone also learns to create back-up plans and find peace with them until they have achieve their ultimate goal or realize that the path they've been on wasn't right after all. It will be emotionally difficult to cope with and you are absolutely entitled to your emotions but.... do not let them take over your entire life. Speaking from experience You are just entering the Real World of Academia.

Any particular reason for it?

Happy New Year @langcacdell24556! You still haven't answered most of my questions. I realize that they are tough ones and that is the intention: to make you think whether or not you want to do the PhD. And I don't quite think a one year master's is enough unless it's very research focused.

@TheHessianHistorian and @andnothing, keep in mind as you apply... have these potential advisers' students gotten jobs in academia, that is if you wish to go into academia? Have the students received funds to go to Germany or other places to research? Applying to places with solid track will be worth the investment of your time and money, even if it may mean applying again next year. @andnothing, don't forget that DAAD has a summer language grant that you can apply for to brush up your German

Oh... plenty of times. I've joked with my adviser that she needs to get a tissue box in her office for me. We're all humans (well, most of us anyway) and nothing to be really embarassed about.

Not so much as long as you have a solid application for the PhD. And it's far, far, far, far better to avoid debt as much as possible. Go to a MA program that puts you in the least amount of debt, has financial support for students (including research funds for the thesis), and some sort of track record for putting students in PhD programs.

I'm in touch with scholars on 4 continents including North America. It is quite challenging to navigate the academic cultural norms outside of the country you're earning your PhD in but you just have to keep observing and listening. You might want to reach out to a trusted colleague who might be able to answer your questions about what's appropriate. Always be conservative and have excellent manners (according to the country's standard anyway) and you can adapt as you get to know the scholars and the academic culture they work in. People are always interested in meeting others from outside their country because foreigners bring different (if not refreshing) perspectives and share knowledge from their academic training (I've had quite a few people in Europe being envious of my US PhD training because it's so broad).

To follow up on @telkanuru's points to @langcacdell24556 @langcacdell24556, you mentioned that you graduated from top 5 US institutions, which also have excellent history departments and I cannot imagine that its undergraduate majors would not have been through rigorous training. Having done a thesis, you should know now what it means to do a PhD, which is essentially a research degree. The MA/MPhil track is quite similar to first year history PhD (and you get paid!). I assume that you spent a good amount of time exposing yourself to primary/original sources. @telkanuru's point about working is a hint to the bigger statement of advising potential applicants: "Don't go for the PhD if you can imagine yourself doing something else." Are you finding yourself pondering on questions about the past? What, exactly, questions are leading to choose Oxbridge for your graduate study? Who are the people you want to work with who can help you explore the questions you want to answer? You've already been to/lived in the UK, which makes me wonder why go back for graduate study in American history? The only thing i can think of is if you are interested in obtaining British perspective on US history (i.e. How did the British public perceive the US' efforts to fight the Nazis?) I did hear from a colleague doing his PhD at Oxford that Oxbridge tends to lose a lot of excellent applicants to US institutions because of differences in funding timelines, so you may or may not be able to get funding (the trickle-down effect). Americans don't go to the UK unless there are very specific programs and professors they wish to be part of and are willing to deal with the different timeline, or like another friend of mine, didn't get in any US programs and Cambridge came through later with funding (it happened to have an excellent program for her field of historical study anyway). I know she's sorry that she didn't get into any US programs because she's had to cope with the British system of finishing much earlier and dealing with different ways of finding funds. Finally, what have your professors thought about your schemes?

In the midst of my dissertation research, I literally can't answer this question because archival findings keep changing things up.

A few things.... 1) I don't like to respond to these kinds of posts because it demonstrates the real nativity of the OP to sensitivities and sensibilities that current graduate students have about their programs. I'll be defensive about my program but I am also willing to be critical yet it doesn't always make me feel good when my program's strengths aren't acknowledged. I literally groaned when I saw this thread. 2) To follow up on @telkanuru, he's raised good points about connections. (A) The importance of visiting guests and the program's budgets. My program operates quite similar to Brown's. However, I will point out something that programs can't control: the behavior of the graduate students and visiting scholars. Not all graduate students recognize the importance of making time to attend such functions unless, perhaps, the person was a real superstar (like David Blackbourn at Vanderbilt for German history. Sometimes guests can be real mixed bags (I can name one or two who turned out to be airheads). Nonetheless, I was proactive to attend such functions and engaged with relevant guests over breakfast. (B) @telkanuru's final conclusion is workable. The finances to be able to connect students with outside scholars matter whether through invitation of solid people to give talks or sending students to conferences without needing to present a paper. Most of my early contacts who contributed to the development of my dissertation project for the prospectus actually came from my department's financial support for my conference attendance. I also learned that the intellectual quality of your network matter far more than quantity when it comes to producing fascinating research. So The Professor Is In is right to look up senior scholars in your subfield at the conferences (I mean, don't stalk them, but just attend their panels when they're actually talking as respondents or giving papers, not chairing). By the same token, attend sessions that interest you as you never know who the panelists know. (C) I have a number of job market stories and, honestly, I am finding that prestige gets one only so far and the quality of advising matters. Students who didn't get good advising at top programs have much of a chance of landing a job as someone from mid-tier even with a great project. In short, the quality of advising and intellectual life within the subfield and resources of a program matter and whether the students are willing to drink the water. Together these make most methods of ranking futile.