TMP

Hate to say this but if you really want to go for a PhD, switch thesis advisers ASAP. You need to work with someone who is excited about you, your work ,and your future plans....AND help you prepare for graduate school. Even if he's in your field, you should think about switching to someone else- perhaps another European historian. Adcoms are going to look at your application and realize that a LOR from your honors thesis adviser is missing and wonder why. So you definitely need to find a honors thesis adviser who can be happy recommending you for a PhD program.

annieca, I sent your a PM.

It sounds like you don't have a clear idea of what you want to or get out of your phd. I think you need to sit down and think about why you want to do the phd and your end goals. From there I hope you can develop some kind of working plan. Btw- people never share their bibliography. Why would they share something that they spent hours working on and give it to someone else who doesn't need to labor over it? It's defacto copyrighted.

What do you want to do with your PhD.... besides being a professor? Some thoughts: A) Have you checked out job opportunities for your particular area of interest? I'd start with that. CUNY's funding is not guaranteed from the start. So it's not a safety in terms of funding. C) There are no safeties when it comes to PhD admissions. D) Be prepared to apply at least twice.

It's already been discussed in this thread... somewhere in March I think. Use the search function.

Also, I should say that be very grateful that you have this opportunity right now to find out if archives are for you. That's the point of the internship. If you don't enjoy the work or content, then you aren't going to enjoy that profession. As I went through the National Archives and a few others, I've come to deeply appreciate the archivists and staff. Well-written finding aids are godsends. Deep knowledge of a particular collection can be a lifesaver. Without those two, a researcher may well be in more frustrating position of having manually go through the collections without support (as I did) and facing a prolonged agenda (luckily, I didn't because I work fast). I do consider being an archivist as an excellent position for service to the historical profession. Archivists are like navigators, helping researchers stay on course and finish the agenda quickly and productively. It is simply unfortunate that they are generally under-appreciated. Those who remember those helpful archivists will mention those people in their acknowledgements and referrals to other colleagues. Yeah, being an intern sucks.. that's the way it is.

It is more than studying history but you need to LOVE it first. What you are hearing are likely true. A PhD student should be doing more than coursework. S/he will be expected to create a publishable paper in one of his/her research-based seminar by the end of the second year. S/he will be expected to present in conferences and collaborate with colleagues for future panels, presentations, and workshops. S/he could serve on a committee with other graduate students or something in their department for "service" (though best to avoid it as much as one can unless it can directly beneficial like being involved on a search committee). Not to mention.... one still have to teach! Teaching loads can vary from school to school, usually about 2-4 sections of about 18 students max per week. Too often, TAs spend too much time on this. Even if one gets release from teaching in the first year due a fellowship, the adviser will expect serious productivity in coursework, research, language fluency (if applied), and prepping for exams (because teaching reduces your course load and everything else). All of these are simply preparing you to be a professor. Grad school is a good time to trip up and make mistakes without serious consequences as grad students figure out how to balance all of these duties. There is much more than being a professor. It depends what else you're interested in. Are you interested in libraries? Archives? Museums? Digital technology? Government work? Historical editing? You just need to be creative. The AHA blog has been doing a pretty good job of covering "alt-aca" (alternative to academia) careers. Take the time to read AHA stuff- those people are standing on the ground. Departments and programs are still a bit up in the clouds, though more and more of them are coming down. Historians realize that, out of all humanities programs, we stand the best chance of surviving during times of budget and program cuts, and we have to show that we can do more than being professors by offering our talents and service to the government and public.

I agree with Sigaba and alyss. Congratulations on a Smithsonian internship! You should feel accomplished. Internships are what you make of it. I won't name where I interned but I can tell you, good supervisors care about their interns and want to make them happy. You don't get paid well (or at all) for what you do and the least supervisors owe you is a great learning experience. You need to sit down and explain your future goals and ask what aspect of your internship can help you decide if those future career goals are worth it. When my supervisors realized how much I loved working with one of the editors on a research paper and an instructor on a teaching seminar, they basically left me alone (i.e. reduced the amount of time I do "menial" tasks). As for doing those menial tasks, take the time to actually read those things you're scanning and the finding aids. You will learn far more than you think! Those two people mentioned above were outside of my geographical and/or thematic area and I've benefited tremendously from our intellectual conversations.

New England Nat basically answered most of them for the rest of us. Also, there's so much subjectivity in the process that we simply cannot give straight answers. That's blatantly wrong. You do need to be a good student but your research interests and work matter much more. If someone with a 3.1 GPA but has a stellar writing sample and research agenda, that person will be admitted over someone with a 3.9 and no idea or doesn't demonstrate original thinking. So honor societies don't really matter... The Phi Alpha Theta chapter my undergrad only required a 3.1 GPA in the major. What stands top students in the major apart from others is the honors seminar, which requires a GPA of 3.5, 3.7 for high honors. Professors will say so in their LORs. The OP will be a SENIOR. S/he still has a year to pursue a thesis through a honors course or independent study. S/he *should* consider delaying applications for an Fall 2014 entry. The experience of researching and writing for a year will make the difference in deciding if it's worth pursuing graduate school. Also, by reading up literature in the field, s/he will gain knowledge of who's out there and doing what, which will then help him/her create a list of PhD and MA programs. #5, that's all totally out of the OP's control. I cannot emphasize how important it is for applicants to shield themselves from departmental and academic politics. Only to understand that it's not about them. When an applicant realizes that his/her application was perfectly fine but was shut out due to politics, that's very painful. This kind of revelation can make an applicant feel very powerless and discouraged because s/he spent so much time and money applying., and it seems like professors don't even care that. So I'd warn to keep this thought on the horizon but don't obsess over it. Simply go through the motions and show confidence. There never is. There's no one magic formula. Applicants never *quite* know what adcoms and potential advisers are looking for. They do want to see intellectual curiosity. They want to see what kind of questions you have at macro and micro levels. Just don't freaking start the SOP with "I've always loved history and wanted to be a professor ever since..." I had completely forgotten that my new adviser was in beginning stages of writing a book in an area that I'm very interested while I was applying and now I realize that it's hardly a surprise that she's always been so interested in my work. On the surface, we would seem like a mismatch but when people learn of her work, they understand why. So an applicant could write about 19th century German religious politics all s/he want and expect this POI who just wrote a book on that to accept him/her when in fact that POI has just moved onto exploring the social politics in East Germany in the 1960s. Oops. Even if the applicant is asking great questions about 19th century politics. The SOP is indeed the toughest part and it should be done with care. But the writing sample matters just as much. What's the point? There was a lot of diversity in my incoming cohorts both at Ohio State and Wisconsin. There was a great mix, yes, even at Wisconsin. Adcoms want the brightest students. Then again, these two are public schools where diversity is greatly emphasized. And of course, no question about it that students coming from schools with PhD programs are at advantage because they're working with professors who have sat on admissions themselves and read hundreds of applications. He's a resentful idiot, IMHO. Karen Kelsky's site (The Professor Is In) is far better and more realistic with some crowd-sourcing.

How else can graduate school be interesting? You're right. But so as long as we're not specific in our details when we need to discuss "bad" advisers. I've had to constantly evaluate the quality of my MA adviser's advising, particularly given that I had a kick-ass undergraduate thesis adviser. I've come to realize that a professor just cannot be everything. It's exceptionally difficult for them to be top-notch in the categories of scholarship, teaching, advising, mentoring, and service to the profession. There are also variety of circumstances that can make a professor a good adviser or a bad one, and considerations of whether or not to give them the benefit of the doubt. What I can say is that, I think, once a student loses (near) complete faith and trust in an adviser (or vice versa) it can be quite difficult to re-build it. Advisers, indeed, are human beings even if students don't always see that way. They are emotionally and intellectually invested in their students. There had been some situations that caused near complete lack of faith in my MA adviser. I wasn't shy about letting my MA adviser know that she wasn't doing her job (quietly!). She eventually realized it. She did appear a little hurt but did learn that my own pain was even greater. She's a human being and she did care but didn't realize my own feelings and needs. Since I was in middle of applying and deciding on PhD programs, I was able to express why Prof X or Y would make SUCH a good adviser, my MA adviser was getting hints what she could've (or can still do) to be better. So it worked and I do very much appreciate her efforts to be more engaging and attentive, and continue to instill confidence in me. Now I am ready to be done and move on. Those were emotionally and mentally exhausting several years. Given my past experiences, my new adviser, in my perspective, has been nothing but absolutely nearly perfect. Though we're just in the beginnings, we have a great working relationship- matching personalities, working styles, and interests. Her advising style is precisely what I've always wanted. She's also my huge role model as a mid-career academic. In many ways, I feel very relieved to know that I won't go into panic attacks (at least I hope not) because she's totally no-nonsense and it's kind of argue against her when there's nothing to discuss if there's no point to continue discussing it. I think, there are plenty of good advisers out there. I have a number of PhD friends and I haven't heard too many "horror" stories. Roommates.... on the other hand, i've got plenty.

You may not be getting a lot of responses as you'd like, OP, because nobody wants to "trash-talk" their advisers. even on a public, anonymous forum. It's just isn't professional and it's just not best to get in that kind of habit. Also, every adviser-advisee relationship is highly individualized. So an adviser can maintain 5 different relationships, all of completely different nature. I could tell just by taking to my POIs' students during my campus visits- who was the favorite, who was "whatever, just gotta graduate," etc. That written, it's always best to keep your mouth quiet with other advisees, at least not be the one to bring something up like "I haven't heard back from Dr. X and it's been 36 hours!" and you, ONLY you, know that Dr. X responded to your e-mail within 3 hours... in that same time frame. Do you open you mouth and say that? Of course not if you don't want to be dealing with an immature, jealous colleague. Better to know little than to know a lot when it comes to this kind of thing.

I think it's perfectly normal. I'm sorry to have turned down my other choice. It was very difficult decision because the POI and I had invested in each other intellectually. But I have to remember that A) I had solid, very solid reasons for choosing my program and My new adviser has been nothing but perfect so far. So it's kind of hard to complain and have any regrets..

If you want that PhD bad enough, it won't be out of your mind. I can promise you that. I have gone quite a few months forgetting about the PhD and doing totally different things in the last 2 years (and during a year abroad as an undergrad). But that "fire' always came back.

It's a bit of a broad generalization. The admits who had other highly competitive offers did a lot asking and pushed for more funding information. The DGS didn't hold himself back. Neither did the graduate students- they were hardly shy about their experiences being (un)funded and searching for additional funding outside of the department. So, we all did end up being pretty nervous about our decisions- were we willing to live with this? Our responses varied, depending on our situations. (I didn't find out until about a week later from another student who wasn't on campus who had the same fellowship package as I was being offered and was told not to worry a bit. So for my situation, additional funding would be a non-issue). So, going to Wisconsin in my specific situation was a real option. But I chose not to take it for other reasons.

I second on Wisconsin. I would simply not expect funding (only about 15 out of 369 applications received full funding this past cycle)- just focus on putting together the very best application possible. Wisconsin has wonderful French and environmental historians so it's worth applying there at least. Also, I think the department tends to prefer "straight out of undergrad" applicants given that they have a MA/PhD program and don't really grant any kind of MA credits if you do your MA elsewhere. The DGS (Director of Graduate Studies) told me and other recruits that they really do look for "raw" potential and take chances on those people. It's true, I was the only recruit that weekend with a MA and full funding. How I managed to be in that position is still beyond me. But do focus on finding scholars whose current projects and books really interest you- you'll have much more fun working with those kind of people than someone who just happens to do general French history at some top tier program.

What do you expect us to say? You have to do what you can and it's your decision. Just get the loan if you want to go. Remember there are a lot of grad students choosing to goto grad school with undergrad debt. So you really are in a better position- start grad school without debt.

Excellent suggestion to read... the whole thread on the first link, Sigaba. A little preview of the drama.

For me as a historian, it's a godsend. I have far too many PDFs for articles and JPGs/PDFs from my archival research than I can manage on my laptop. It's just wonderful to have all of that in a tablet device that I can down put down next to my laptop while I'm writing/revising my papers. And that camera? The iPad is quite literally the only thing I ever need to bring into archives (as opposed to a camera, a laptop, a notebook, pencils...). It really depends what you would like to get out of your iPad.

Do it. Before I wrote my SOP, I couldn't see how the schools that I was accepted at this year could be my top choices. When I wrote it and drafted it (and again and again), it became so clear. My personal ranking changed around. I remember e-mailing one of the POIs (who had rejected me the year before and wrote that she couldn't see why her program would be a good place for me) and said, "You know, after re-writing my SOP, I think this program is really an excellent fit!" It was kind of bizarre how things happened like that and thereafter. Now I am going there and every week I find another thing to like about my program in a way I could not imagine myself elsewhere. My list also was smaller- I couldn't expand it without sacrificing my ideas and questions. So try this "backward" strategy of writing the SOP and find programs that fit IT, not trying to make your SOP framework fit the programs. As a friend said, it takes a while to find that Program.

I am with CageFree and Sigaba. See my post, Point #2 You narrow down your topics by taking classes, reading, and having conversations with others. People go through the archives and read journal articles and come up with questions. We all have more questions than we can handle or simply not in our particular area or are not qualified to actually pursue those kind of questions (like a German historian would not be qualified to study Soviet politics of repatriation of its citizens in Germany despite the location being in Germany). So you may pick up some ideas there and there. Like Sigaba and CageFree said, you also need to find themes that you've been interested in for a long time. There is no way that an Americanist can truly be interested in everything in American history. For example, I'm really not into early American history unless someone's questioning whether or not the colonists were attempting to commit genocide against the Native Americans through forced labor and migration. That would get my attention in an early America seminar, as opposed to discussing the logistics of pulling off the Boston Tea Party. As Sigaba said and I've gone through this trouble, you really do need to be able to convince someone outside of your field or has zero interest in military history (particularly that most people aren't interested in the military) that what you are interested in is genuine.

It's cash cow. I don't expect this to be rigorous.

You do read a book every week. You probably should ask the current students for an idea of how much you should expect to spend in your program.

What Sigaba said on the last point. Good luck finding a way to get to the conference! And yes, yes, you do have to go. You've already identified yourself and people will assume you're Director B's student. They don't need to know how you actually got to the conference- go at your own expense if you have to. When they see you, whether or not they've forgotten about this e-mail, they will think, "Director B knows how to take care of his graduate students." By showing up regardless, you will make yourself and him look good.

Just ask. It's part of their job.

I think what the coordinator is saying is that she believes that your supervisor is a kind person and would be open to making things work that would make both of you happy. She's seen enough dynamics in the department to believe that this person may be open to co-supervision. If she didn't think your supervisor would be open to it, she probably wouldn't suggest that option and instead tell you point blank to change supervisors. But the question is, is your supervisor open to having a mentor? You don't know what's going on behind the curtains. Your supervisor may have too much of an ego to reach out to find a mentor for himself and wants to do the job alone to prove that he can do it. That is not your decision to say "you need a mentor and I need a better mentor than you but I want to keep working with you." Even if he says okay, don't expect the new co-supervisor to actually mentor this guy. Mentoring is a very personal decision. It is a difficult conversation to have with your supervisor to say that you've been working with X and Y and Z. But if you can be specific about the issues in a way that your supervisor can think, "Wow, I didn't know about X and Y, I'm glad that s/he sought help elsewhere." Also, it also helps to sit down with your supervisor and be diplomatic about what kind of supervision you need moving forward. Sometimes I find it helpful to schedule a time and sit down with the professor, even if it means watching him/her read my paper while I'm sitting there. The lesson for that situation being- "If you had read my paper before this meeting, this time could have been more productive!" Remember, you are in charge of your committee. You are the one managing people and deciding what kind of role each person will play, not your supervisor. Your supervisor's basic job is to make sure you pass. If one of the committee members has been acting like a mentor you want, then adopt that person as a "surrogate" supervisor. I've heard more often than not that students have leaned on other committee members for support, not their advisers.