TMP

Agreed. Believe it or not, my first exam questions during the oral were... basic stuff. It's likely that the committee will gradually increase the difficulty of the questions-- mainly to see where the limits of your knowledge are. Kind of think about answering the questions like a game of Who Wants to be a Millionaire? Except your lifelines are "I don't know" and "I'll have to look that up." Review the basic stuff to give you a foundational sense of confidence.

Same here. Just the oral part of the exam. My brain froze out at the second question of the entire exam-- I hadn't even considered comparing two historical events that were a century apart. It was tough to recover but as a marathon runner, I was used to tripping and falling and just getting back up again and continue running for as long as I didn't need to call for the medics. Committee offered other options for passing the second time, which was good. But it sucks because it meant that I would have to turn down a great opportunity to participate in a workshop with some of my favorite scholars in the fall in favor of studying instead of writing over the summer. So, OP, yup, I feel your pain. It's just one of those things you just WANT to get done and over with. Failing exams can happen but it's not spoken much. I did hear of a student failing a written exam a few years back (through word of mouth). But there's a very strong conviction among my grad peers in my department that rarely does anyone ever fail. So my case was... a shock.

Talk to your adviser and the DGS.....

My program is minimum of 220 pages. Book publishers don't want more than 100,000 words so most dissertators aim for that or go below it.

Everyone is different. I'm more of "all at once" type of person. I reserve summer for deep research. I like to use December break as a "real vacation" time and spring break as a chance to catch up/catch a breath from classes. Peers have used those breaks to research. To me, that just requires more money and I'm not interested in going into debt. People stay as long as they need to or are constrained by their own schedules. The amount of materials that an archive has determines how much TOTAL time you need. As for grants, you'll have to read the application guidelines. Of course, within your department and university, you can re-apply.

You do need to have a letter from your adviser. If the application requires another letter, ask your adviser. My adviser told me that in my first year of grad school, I can use my previous professors.

As soon as you can get your hands on funding to pay for your travels! You'll have to justify that you need an "exploratory trip" to make sure that the materials are available for your dissertation topic.

I agree. It's very important to think about leaving a PhD program a success because people are choosing to do something that will improve (in their perception) their lives and make them happier, may it be a dream job, a wonderful spouse with children, or whatever. Life is full of mixed blessings. You will know as you enter in a PhD program what you do have control over what you don't (especially the behavior of the faculty you work with-- you have no control over that) and you will take care of what you can control.

1) I came in with an interdisciplinary MA. I did have to start from scratch. My PhD program did--however-- accept my MA credits but not the courses. What I did have to help fast-track things a bit was a very solid MA thesis, which led to my dissertation topic . I was able to begin my research in my first year. The sooner you can get a sense of your dissertation topic, the sooner you can start planning for your research. 2) US universities are concerned about teaching experiences. It's find if you have PhD from Cambridge but how do they know that you're prepared to teach in a classroom full of undergrads who have no idea what's the difference between Louis XIV and Louis Napoleon?

This is so bizarre. One of my very close friends in the program just went through all of that and I can't help but wonder... The advice above about staying strong, leaning on those who genuinely support you, and having human connections outside of the department will be your best bet for survival. My friend did all of that and she made it to the end of her first year and I am really proud of her and have told her so. I went through the similar issues but my first year ended even worse. Still, with some counseling, I was able to crawl back and slowly make connections with my peers. Most people are insecure and they just want to know that you-- the "Know It All" and overconfident-- can relate to their struggles. Humility, kindness, and professionalism are the keys to surviving. It also helps just a bit to show a "fun" side of you-- that you don't take everything seriously and you also have some anxiety. It may sound dumb but try to relate to whatever non-academic conversations they're having. They need to see that you're human being too. Also, I'd encourage you to say and show less about what you're doing to prepare for classes, exams, etc. It's not "hiding" in sense of being competitive but rather your desire to obtain more knowledge is none of their business. If they make those kinds of comments, just say along the lines of "I'm sorry, I didn't ask for your opinion about me." If you want to go above and beyond the discussions in seminars, then follow up with the professors with e-mails and office hours. The graduate class is double-edged swords-- it acts as a democracy. If most students are tired, but a few want to continue, professor is more likely to end the class earlier than the latter would like. Vice versa-- if most students are excited and others are tired and there's still time, professor will run the class until everyone is too tired. How much do the more advanced students actually talk about the kind of work they have to do? Do they think their professors are dumb? Do they help each other? Take cue and make friends with them. My department's grad student culture encourages relationships across the years and there is almost never any "exclusively X years" kind of thing. Honestly, the worst thing you can do is actually isolate yourself from those bullies. You'll only reinforce their beliefs about you.

What are you getting your PhD in? Sociology? You're taking your exams in Sociology, right? You left that Psych department and are no longer being supported by that program. Your first year is irrelevant. However, I'd still CONSULT with your adviser and DGS on this issue.

Most PhD programs make students choose multiple fields. You'll have a major field and a minor field (or two or three, depending). The minor fields are intended to supplement your training for dissertation research and/or teaching. Most people in my program will choose World History or a non-Western field to enhance their teaching ability. The folks working in Ottoman Empire/Middle East in my program usually choose World History (which they can teach through the lens of Islamic world). The American historians will usually pick up Latin America or a thematic field (like women's history) to expand their teaching breadth. Most programs will want you have some sense of focus but will not push you to choose a field upon entering. Your adviser will expect you to have chosen a major field by the end of your first year. As for job placement, community colleges want to see LOADS of teaching experience, mainly in survey courses. Your best bet for such a CC job is to rack up world history and/or US history and/or Western Civilization courses regardless of your actual research specialty. That's my understanding at least.

Then, don't worry about "hot" fields. Your focus, then, would be more on being able to teach broadly.

Agreed. Also, doing more than 8 applications is a LOT of work and you'll be too tired to tailor your application after the sixth one (I know I was). Doing so also demonstrates that you're A) desperate placing your self-worth lower on the ladder and/or C) Your focus isn't specific enough. It is possible to find so many programs that fit your interests as well but with the job market as it is and your particular post-PhD goals, you can afford to be picky. As I say on these boards, the PhD will always be there.

Who says that your time "is running out"? Take your time! The PhD will ALWAYS be there. You should think about the big questions in history that you're interested in exploring and studying in depth. It sounds to me that you have the time period in mind (early modern) but not quite sure. It's okay. You can ask yourself the big questions about the early modern period (which is actually quite exciting) that can transcend political borders such as science, health, gender, and race (though that's a modern concept but is still workable). I know I wanted to do my major field for a long time-- never thought about anything else. But to dig in more took some time because I was bedazzled by a lot of topics and had to recognize areas that still needed to be researched that could sustain my interest for a long time. Choosing my minor fields for my PhD exams took EVEN longer because I really wanted transcend national geography and do thematic history. But my program required me to pick one geographical field so I chose Modern Europe. I was going to do the US for the other but two of the faculty members I wanted to study with were unavailable to be my committee member so I switched to gender with a favorite professor. It's all worked out quite nicely. While interests can evolve over time, your "big picture" questions need to be more settled by the time you reach your third year/preparation for candidacy exams. (sorry for any super awkward writing... in middle of writing my PhD exam)

That sounds rough. I went through *somewhat* a similar thing though it was more of my doing. Some folks just aren't openly warm to their students and it takes time for them to come around. It also depends on the culture of your master's program. I agree with the above comments though I'd be more inclined to give a handwritten note, which shows more thought and effort.

Ditto on AirB&B. Harvard should be getting out pretty soon and people will need subletting.

I agree- register with the disability services and try your best to settle in with your adviser quickly. You'll also want to let the current DGS (Director of Grad Studies) know as s/he will often play the mediator between you and adviser as needed (and offer perspective). I also agree to be positive about your abilities-- including how you manage your depression. I've found my adviser very supportive and accommodating because she sees the potential and wants to help me achieve it-- as long as I'm committed to working with professionals who can help me manage my own depression/anxiety.

Also, they are not very established in their fields (yet). You'll need to get another professor with a bigger name and stronger reputation to write the second letter of recommendation for bigger fellowships and clout in the department for funding.

I agree with above. You in a special case where you are going to be a first year TA and you need that course in order to do your job. They will have to accommodate you on that. You can also e-mail the instructor of the pedagogy course to help you get this worked out. Also, how much of an overlap is there between the pedagogy course and the TA class? If it's about 30 minutes and the pedagogy course doesn't always run for the entire time, it might be possible to shift the start/end time. We've done that for students who have classes right before their graduate seminars (we'd start 20 minutes later but finish before the end of allotted class time).

I have two colleagues who did their (world) history MAs at NYU. It wasn't a wonderful experience for them-- the atmosphere was impersonal as it could get. It was also quite expensive to live in NYC (though same could be said for DC). But their MAs did give them "hitting the ground running" for the PhD where they took on a different focus (and used "world history" as one of their minor PhD fields). For what i knew about their application process for the PhD, NYU didn't propel into a higher ranked program. If you don't already have undergrad debt, then perhaps it's worth the risk. If you do have debt from undergrad, go to a cheaper MA program or work off the loans a bit. Your PhD stipend will hardly be enough to keep up with the payments (you pay into the interest before the principal).

Absolutely agreed with all above. You can take a medical leave so you have a chance to breathe and recover. I would absolutely change advisers before quitting the PhD altogether. It sounds like you do want the PhD but with the additional stress of trying to deal with unsupportive adviser and committee. Your adviser does have a responsibility for guiding you through various processes of the PhD, including the quals and coming up with a topic.

Do it only because YOU want to.

No problem- happy to offer my own experiences. Congrats again and feel free to PM me

You still have April 15th to change your mind. As someone who is in a department where we have had some amazing American historians leave, it does shake the morale of the graduate students. It's the major reason why I settled for a thematic minor field instead of American history. It's worked out quite well for me. The best one can hope is for transnational hires- where one of the area is American history. However, a friend told me just now that Penn ran a job search ad https://www.h-net.org/jobs/job_display.php?id=50520 Transferring PhD programs is very difficult though it can be done... but it's difficult because A) your chances of getting in another program will be small as this time around and you will need to truly justify why the other department is a much better match (i.e.e you can't say "there aren't that many American history professors at Penn...").