TMP

I agree with Sparky. Languages can be so tricky because of such variations in training around the US. Nothing replaces an intensive language course abroad in the host country (like Portugal or Brazil for Portuguese). Your best best to make such claim for French and Portuguese is integrate them in your writing sample or find a way to show it off to your LOR writers. They're likely to be aware of what's on your transcript. I learned German through auditing an intensive class at my university and then went off to Germany and have worked in the language since. You can't find where I've learned German by looking at my transcripts but you will see some footnotes and clear grasp of German phrases in my writing sample (that I've added) that some of the sources were in German and I just hope that my LOR writers did mention something about my commitment to learning the necessary languages...

List that other person anyway. Apparently the person is willing to work with you but just won't be your primary adviser. Say something like "I would like to learn from POI 2 about gender in Latin American history."

What have you got to lose? Apply if you're willing to deal with her situation (being a mommy of a little kid takes a lot of time and energy...). Most POIs keep their contacts limited until they actually have the money to recruit the student,. As the above poster said, these contacts are more to check in to see if they're accepting students.

Talk about all the faculty you're interested in. Mention what is it about the department as a whole that attracted you to the program.

taybxaxter, how is Yale any different than other programs in terms of acceptance rates? To take examples: Peer institution- Michigan gets about 350+ applications for 30-35 offers to yield a class of 18-20 Ranked in the 20s, OSU had about 325 applications last year for a class of 24 people. Ranked in the low 40s, GWU had about 120 applications several years ago and made 7 funded offers (no unfunded offers) Ranked in the 90s, American University still gets lots of applications and made 30 offers and only 5 of them are fully funded. All the same across the board- 5-10% chance of getting in anywhere. Maybe the quality of applications is a little higher but it's extremely competitive across the board. So don't treat your bottom choice schools any different than Yale- they're darn hard to get into too! It's still a privilege to be accepted, period. The only question then is, will you take it or try again?

Your adviser is being thoughtful here... let her take her sweet time.

I'm just piggybacking on Sigaba's warning to make sure you're going into these conversations with a balanced agenda. True. The important thing is to make sure that you have a mutually beneficially conversation. Make sure that each of you learn something new in your areas of research. That's why POIs ask you about your thesis project: they want to know what's new about your research on a broader topic that's been studied. They know that you're going to learn from them about their research (they do expect you to ask them what's happening with their projects) and the craft of history but what can they learn from you, as a future colleague? I think this is important (an additional bonus, really) for POIs who are in early stages of their new projects and your interests happen to lie in that area, so your future engagements can encourage POIs to think in other ways and you'll be with them the whole time they're working on the book. No question that these conversations are hard to pull off well but with lots of practice, it can be done. And you will continue to do this during your graduate program with other professors (as you search for committee members) and at conferences.

If it's too heavy on poly sci, I would just revise the writing sample to make it more historically narrative focused.

Just keep it simple- "Following up our conversation several weeks ago, I want to let you know I've submitted my application. I look forwrd to the decision." Something like that is enough.

OP, I think you're trying to justify the time you've spent with the professors in increasing your chances of getting admitted and putting a lot of value to it. The buzzword these day is "interesting." I'm working in academia (in a way) and that's the word I hear literally every day by my colleagues when discussing academic research. Nobody wants to talk about a topic that's done to death unless it contains new materials or methodology (assisted by technology). People want to see understudied topics, topics that haven't been well-explored, or even different angles that can shed led on our understanding of that broad topic (bearing a new topic). You really need to let your SOP, LORs and writing sample speak for themselves. That's the best way for your POI and the executive committee to compare you and others in the same field. The quality of your research and writing matters much more than your personality (though that's what your LORs are for- assenting your potential as a colleague). Nobody has the same research experience or education in writing. The 4 of us students that my MA adviser has (had), though we're all interested in the same field, geographical area, and time period, we all couldn't be more different from each other in terms of our language training, educational experiences and thematic interests. My adviser picked people with interesting research ideas/topics and one of the two languages required by my field. So, really, go back to my original thought- don't keep justifying that these are going to help you with the admissions at some level but consider these contacts networking opportunities. Remember, you're not the only one getting in touch. I had actually had a POI say to me once over phone, "I've had so many people contact me. Can you remind me what your research interest is again?" I didn't flinch. Instead, I pitched myself like a saleswoman and get a request for a writing sample. Five minutes phone conversation.

I think, ultimately, these are just networking opportunities. Nobody knows for sure what the executive is going to do and who else are applying (but didn't contact) during the application season. Personally, prior contact didn't get me in but did get me in working relationships with some of the professors. I wasn't bitter and couldn't blame them, even if/when they apologize for my rejection/waitlist, but rather I just wanted to be able to see them as mentors and network contacts. Their feedback and research were too important to my own work that I just couldn't write them off.

Heading, and just list them.

I am going to e-mail you a private e-mail but I do want to write my general thoughts. Departments still have ways to go before they can look at an applicant who wants to be an archivist or work in the historian's office in the U.S. Senate and not cringe and throw it in the REJECT pile. Departments need to be push hard, even if they have excellent job placement records in academia. How many of their students are *actually* happy to work in academia or believe that there's just only one option after getting a Ph.D. simply because of the department's professorship-driven culture? I know of one top program that I did not apply to in 2008 because the professor had said that if I didn't want to be a professor, then I shouldn't apply there. Now the same department is just beginning to make its move to join some of the cutting-edge universities that are ranked in the 20s (by USNews) and it would be a possibility at this point if I apply. FIVE YEARS and those other departments made their moves 2-3 years ago. Embarrassing that its lower-ranked peers may have better job placements in the next few years because of better prepared students? I have seen the ups and downs of these boards and a number of applicants come through here. I have strongly encouraged new posters (mainly who have written very vague posts) to consider why they want to get a Ph.D. and be able to answer beyond "because I want to be a college professor." Sometimes they retreat, other times they use the thread to hash out why they're going through the application process. Lately, I've pushed seniors to take a year off because, with the scary economy, they need to think hard about graduate school and what it will mean for them. Ph.D. is not a place to escape the poor job market (never minding that the academic job market is worse). Also, students are less mature than they used to be so a few extra years of growing up doesn't hurt. At age 26, I feel much more mature than I used to when I entered in my MA program at 22 (about to turn 23). Since graduating with my MA, I've experienced life and my relationships with my professors have improved substantially. My point is, if AHA, Ph.D. programs and undergraduate advisers can work together to educate undergraduates about what it means to get a Ph.D. in history and formulating personal reasons for pursuing it, undergraduates may be all in better position to make an informed decision. Ph.D. programs need to embrace the idea that the applicant may not want to go into academia after the Ph.D. but the degree will still be useful for non-academic positions, especially in think tanks and the government. Also, they need to continue developing professional workshops and training courses (like geography, statistics, editing) so that their PhD.s can come out of the program with exceptionally broad skills as teachers and researchers. Undergraduate advisers at many, many places, especially those that do not offer Ph.D. programs, would be best served to have a panel at a AHA conference that discusses graduate admissions in depth. These kind of professors, especially older ones, are so out of touch what is needed to be a successful applicant. Too often, I think, the students wind up going to a MA program in order to make up for that lost opportunity of strong advising (get your languages early, opportunities for summer thesis research, etc). There should be DGSs from a variety of programs and fields. So the DGSs should provide examples of poor and exemplary statements of purpose (written by seniors, not MA students) and various experiences, and specifics on what is expected in terms of language training and research experience. And continue having panels at AHA and urge some of the best Ph.D. programs to change how they approach post-Ph.D. plans. Why can't someone who wants to pursue a position at a research institution in DC or NYC or a public history job at one of the top museums in the world have an opportunity to attend a top-10 history program? Why should they have to go to a regional school that's just happy to have Ph.D. students? Money-wise, this is a better way for top programs to ensure healthy investments on their students (and make themselves look good to the higher-ups who are busy slashing funds). If their students can land jobs at these kind of places immediately after getting the Ph.D., then those half-million dollars were well-spent- much better than telling that student that they only apply to academic jobs, including CC teaching, and having to wait out a few years before it actually happens. Just my 0.02 cents and I've always admired Robert Townsend's posts.

This isn't hard, guys. No, really, it isn't. Because once you're in, things will get even more stressful with fellowship deadlines... then job applications... then if you're lucky at all, putting together your tenure package... This is a cakewalk in the grand scheme of academia. Holden, I've said this before... do NOT rush your paper as to avoid making as many mistakes as possible. Just edit down the first 10 pages (which they will definitely read) and leave the rest alone if you don't have time. Then move on.

Wow, that's so weird. I've never had that issue. Then again, I probably uploaded them as .doc as there was no special formatting. Either way, it's always worth actually checking the PDF file of your application when prompted. I've found silly mistakes in data entry fields. Like misspelling one of my recommender's names.

"Dr" is preferred over "Mr." or "Mrs." They deserve it after years of slaving away in graduate school!

Professors give each other breaks. They don't give students/applicants breaks. We aren't just *that* special enough.

Do... not... skimp... on the quality of your writing sample. Rushed papers may lead to more mistakes than those that have been looked over and sitting around.

If one takes the time to step back during this process or in graduate school, s/he should accept the fact that it is very hard to be a "control freak." One will get unnecessarily stressed. Why should one be stressed when a professor says, "Look, I've got to teach. I've got my research. I've got my committee duties to do. I will find time to write your letter." The letter will get done unless peers tell you that this person is completely absentminded. You can't tell somebody that s/he has to get this done ASAP when the deadline isn't for a couple of weeks. Allow for a little time and flexibility for anything in academia. The professors aren't the only one overloaded with commitments- so are graduate school and department administrative assistants. I say give it at least 3 weeks for the materials, including LORs. Even with the admissions process. You cannot directly control what the professors think of you as a candidate and how they compare you to others (and you don't know who the others are!). Only your SOP, writing sample, and LORs need to speak for themselves. You have no idea what the department really needs for next year- more early Americanists or Africanists? Same goes for the job market when they're advertising for open specialty in a field (i.e. anyone who can teach early modern European history, intellectual or social or whatever). I was quite bit of a control freak until halfway through my MA program and I eased up a lot after my second cycle of applications. People tried to be pleasant with me when I was stressing out and attempting to keep my ducks in a row but once I loosen up, our conversations were noticeably more relaxed and I was probably easier to work with. I'm very sure that my adviser is sick of hearing me complain about things out of my control. I think this is what natsteel and I are trying to get at with our advice-you can only control what you have in your hands and have faith. Professors will say that a lot- have faith in any process in academia. I've heard it multiple times, especially when I've hit a big brick wall (like getting slammed with tons of rejections). Slowly, I've seen the benefits of keeping it, as painfully hard it was to do so. Generally, I've seen that people don't *think* about these issues until mid-February when they are agonizing over the length of waiting and someone, like myself, have point this out.

Why not apply anyway and see what happens? "Fellowships" are usually university-wide and money from other departments and GRE scores are used to compare applicants. You would still have a shot at the department's own package.

I have to agree with Sigaba about these writing samples. If you're crunched, you have two options A) take a piece of a larger work and just present it as it is, leaving room for the intro (if it's not longer than 2-3 pages) or abstract so the readers know what they're going to read and finesse that text with more concise sentences. or put off your applications until next year (unless you have deadline after December 15th) just so you can cram your entire thesis into 20 pages. It takes a lot of practice. Even I am still learning how to do it. You will be amazed once you've accomplished the task. For example, I just spend an hour reading 2 paragraphs (about 1 1/2 pages) very carefully to determine which sentences were important to keep as it is, which could be more refined/succinct, and which were really just "fillers". I was trying to cut 4 pages down to 3. And, guess what? I did it. It takes time, energy, self-criticism, and patience to do it. But when you are overwhelmed with 20 pages, it's hard to put all into perspective. So I suggest that you determine which sections appear to be a little too lengthy or weak and work on eliminating some of that. You will get better at these things as you move further into academia. You will learn how to describe your project under 2 minutes to someone and get their attention right away. I think what nobody tells you until you write a dissertation is that doing the PhD in history isn't just about doing research and reading the literature. It's about learning how to become a writer. You really should love to write to be able to complete the PhD well. If you told me 10 years ago that doing a PhD meant a lot of writing, I would've rejected the idea entirely. I hated to write. Now I love writing and am always eager to improve and learn the process. Begin to think of yourselves as writers as you finish up your applications. If you have to go back and read some excellent academic writing to help you, so be it. Take the time. You'll feel a little less stressed out when you go back to the computer. You might feel just a little inspired.