TMP

BadgetHopeful and Strangelight, I know, I know, I know. My first college was an all-women's college! I was seriously never exposed to this kind of thinking, thinking about gender, and it was quite bit of a shock. The least I can say is that I have discussed gender history as one of my professors in my MA program. She was a historian of Jewish women and, believe me, you could not have a discussion with her without thinking about gender. So her seminar was quite enlightening when she included women's history books. I just haven't quite found where precisely women could fit in my research projects for me to take advantage of this popularity. History_PhD, it IS a gross generalization to say that historians tend to identify with a particular group Subscribe to a H-Net listserv and you will see conferences held and books published all over the world. To cite an example, ancient history, particularly religion, has serious scholarship in Germany and Austria even though one wouldn't expect it there. Historians in China have an interest in other fields besides Chinese and Asian history and their perspectives are so fascinating. So get your passport ready for some international conferences!

It's still a fuzzy thing. Historians have yet to grasp the exact definition or it or exactly how to conceptualize it. Some historians get very annoyed when it's used interchangeably with "International History," with is supposedly more diplomatic focus. Why? I am already am very interested in quantitative research and it certainly has nothing to do with politics but rather an analysis of budgets from business lens and community from sociological lens. I like numbers to give more of a stark view of what exactly happened and how it all tied with my findings and analysis. Also Internet is proven to be incredibly. You just need to be adept at keyword searches. It takes serious practice and spending a lot of time with the Subject category in your library's database. You also learn to read your sources much more closely to find more specific keywords that will help you with your computer searches. Even better, it has taught me to be more efficient researcher by scanning only for those keywords and telling the archivists precisely what I'm looking for and get the right reel. On the other hand, I am glad I'm not going to be Obama's or Dubya's historian, with all the news and blogs out there. There's also the problem of determining whether or not that blog is legit for a source. I have mixed feelings, really. I do use presentism in my work because I deal with immigration and public responses. I have to show their emotions to dramatize my story and make my point clear. My advisor also goes for that style. The next Cold War, or World War III. Although it can come back, but will be more focused on the current hot spots (Israel-Palestinian conflict, Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan/India, N. Korea). So I wouldn't expect much of US-focused military history. Oh, I agree! I'm actually getting a kick out of reading my topic from feminist or female perspective, as well as gay. Although I'm still reluctant to take women's history seriously but I am open to it. I'm just more drawn in ethnicity, which I do believe that within American history, it's very, very important. It would be interesting to see if it spreads over to Europe with the recent immigration. Agreed. I use a combination of sociology, psychology, anthropology, and economics to analyze my findings. This is why I despite methodology classes. I just find "straight" history to be quite boring. I've challenged my professors on the readings- asking why this or that, taking from another discipline's approach. Agreed. I've been asked whether I do transnational or comparative history. If I suggest comparative, they find it a lot less interesting than if I say transnational. Sometimes you'll discover that historical events are truly apples and oranges that there's nothing to discuss. However, one can salvage a project by making a fluid connection between subjects in a way that it all ties to one them instead of saying "A is this, B is not that." But more like "A went through this, and then later B went it and we can examine through the lens of one and another of what was available and what was not." If one gives a full picture, it's much more engaging than doing a comparative paper like we used to do in elementary or middle school. Always funny to see historians read books written by someone who would not strongly identify with the subject. They become baffled but truly appreciate the perspective. My prediction is a chance to step back and re-examine 20th century when papers become declassified and as this generation becomes part of a more globalized world than in the past... And then take our perspectives and connect themes to previous centuries to see how much the human world really has evolved. Sometimes, though, I fear that historians will say that nothing's evolved, and then I'll ask what the hell I was studying for, if there's nothing to study. Also, Wikileaks is SO not part of the future. It's my nightmare as a historian. Anyone see that latest Chronicle opinion article about it?

One cannot apply as a "transfer" student. S/he has to start all over again, if credits don't meet the school's approval. S/he may also be subjected to 4 year package instead of 5, because if the credits transfer. So, I can see why s/he might want to take a chance and see what happens at these schools with more stable funding situation.

You're leaving Wisconsin?

FYI- Just spoke with NYU about something else. Applications have to be in by MONDAY, by 5 PM EST. So you do have a few extra days!

Yipes! Good thing I crossed it off after a prof told me he was retiring and wouldn't be taking in new students!

The early notification, usually, is reserved for the very, very top applicants. There are certain schools that just do early notification like Minnesota, Yale, and Emory. Most schools let people know around late February or early March. If you are waitlisted, you won't hear for a good while because they want to see if they can get you accepted before formally rejecting you. If by late March, you still haven't heard, it's appropriate to e-mail to inquire if you have been waitlisted. I suppose that they also figured that by not telling wait-listed applicants that they're wait-listed when they send out acceptances and rejections, it would cut down the number of e-mail inquiries ("Am I off yet? Am I off yet??") Strong fluency in languages do usually trump mediocre GPA and GREs, depending how the professors look at your overall application. After all, you couldn't possible suck at languages if you got a low GRE score and you can read, not one, but two foreign languages quite well. The GRE would just be a poor reflection of your abilities. Your Portuguese would be advantageous as one LA historian said, I think, at one point that most LA applicants don't have that and often have to pick it up while in the program.

OP, What nobody has mentioned so far is department politics. It is the worst kind of rejection that one could possibly get because you ARE actually qualified for the program but the executive committee doesn't want you. Not only is the applicant hurt, the professor is as well. You can have all of your ducks in a row and your professor could be ready to aim fire for you, but other professors may have more power or better arguments for why their students should get in. It's a blow to a professor's ego when he or she cannot get a new student, especially if the professor happens to love mentoring. I was turned down/waitlisted at several schools last cycle simply because of this. I have spoken with a professor at 2 different schools and I could tell, just from reading their e-mails, that they had truly hoped that I would get in and tried their best to get in me. But there were things completely out of their control. They felt horrible. I think they still did when I contacted them again earlier this fall when I told them that I wanted to re-apply. And, of course, they're interested in trying again and encouraged me to apply again. This is the difference between graduate and undergraduate admissions.

If they encouraged you to apply and you've been in great contact, then there's no reason NOT tosend a confirmation e-mail. If things had been so-so or quite formal, then don't do anything. Depends on your relationship.

#1 rule of grad school: Don't take anything personally. People still have gotten in without meeting or e-mailing faculty members. It all really depends on the departments. You can take a hint from looking at department webpages. If they encourage contact, chances are that these professors do care about meeting and making connections with applicants before the actual process and it's an advantage. If the website discourages it or absolutely does not give a hint, then contacting them would not matter all that much. If you e-mailed the faculty member within the last two weeks, chances are the professor's just a tad little too busy to be thinking about PhD applicants because it's finals period in US universities and there are a lot of due date for other things. It could also be that the professor isn't interested in making personal connections before he reads all of the applications in January and wants to be able to do so with an open mind. I've gotten several responses like that. I inquired about these professors' general reputation and if people assured me that these people were good, then there's no reason to be offended and I should just submit my application anyway. It's not a bad start. A bad start would be a professor writing back to tell you that he's retiring and not taking new students, or that the program is not a good fit. Anything to give a real excuse on why you should take the school off your list. This one isn't one of them.

Really, you need to relax. As someone else said, you will discover that academia is a lot of waiting. You need to be very patient with everything. I've got a journal article that I submitted back in September and am still waiting on the revisions. It took me 7-8 months for a book review to be published. One of my LOR writers took a LONG time with my thesis drafts compared to my other readers (including my super-busy MA thesis adviser) but her edits were well-worth the wait of over a month. I learned it all the really hard way while getting my MA- academics don't know what deadlines mean in general. I learned that it's better just to let it go and start on something new and exciting to pass the time, and then, before you know, you will have almost forgotten about it. I didn't mean to offend you with the number of schools. I considered applying to 9 but it just seemed too daunting. At the 9th school, the professor said that he was officially retiring and wouldn't take any new students and I considered adding a new school to replace it. I decided at the end that I wanted to keep my sanity and the other 8 were just great fits and I would be happy to go to any of them. My hope is that you will be happy with your first acceptance, regardless of where it comes from as you did apply to a range of schools. It was a hard lesson that a few people learned last year. Quite a few got into top-20s but were holding out for higher-ranked and better-funded schools and thought they were on the ball after their first acceptance or two. But that didn't happen and they didn't savor the moment of being accepted somewhere, period.

Maryland! I submitted the main app back in late October and for the next month or so until I finally submitted the supplement application, they sent me a reminder e-mail EVERY OTHER DAY. Account creating on OSU was quite a surprise. I tried every combination related to my name (first and middle)/initials and familiar numbers and OSU's system would not accept any of those. So I ended up using my younger cousin's name and her birthdate for my usher name. Let's hope that, if I get into OSU and go there, the IT Gods will let me pick out a different user name for the e-mail. Out of 8 schools, 4 of them would allow me to e-mail my LOR writers immediately. 3 of them had to be done AFTER I submitted the app. And 1... had to be submitted... hard copy while the rest of the application was online.

No, history departments do not give interviews. They'll contact if only they have more questions or just want certain applicants to elaborate more. Even so, that's not a guarantee that you will be accepted. There was just something shiny in your application that caught their eye. You WILL survive. February is the worst month but you will survive. There'll be days that you just want to hide in your bed in hopes of passing the time so tomorrow would come. I promise. I've survived 2 cycles.

Seriously, 15 schools?!

No, it should not be a problem. Talk to the DGS. Tell him/her that you've just decided that you would like to try for the PhD as you are truly serious about it and you have changed your mind since you last talked to your LOR writers. You want to go for it and mention a few reasons why it'd be a good move (archives, etc). But also ask if it's possible to apply to both or, should you not be admitted into the PhD program, could you also be considered for the MA, at least? You always have the option of switching to another PhD program if the program itself is a MA/PhD program, not direct PhD.

Excellent. You have a lot in common with your wife already. I have several friends who have been applying to med school over the last few years. Even though the admissions processes are so different, one just has much of a chance of getting into a med school as one getting into a history PhD program. Maybe you and your wife can come up with some kind of betting game? As for posting stats, frankly, it's pointless. Your SOP, writing samples, and LORs (and perhaps language fluency), the most subjective aspects of your application, are far more important than your GPA and GRE scores. I just don't believe in evaluating chances or see the point of posting such stats. Especially when there are really a lot of highly qualified people out there. The recession has very little impact on the overall quality of applications, surprisingly (as professors have told me).

What have you go to lose? Give it a shot, seriously. Especially if you already have the languages(s). Try to apply for the PhD in those programs that also have terminal MAs because why would you want to pay for it? Worst that can happen are these: The process for each is separate and you may need to ask the DGS if you can apply to both or have to pick one, or if you don't get into the PhD program, you always go back to the DGS and say "Hey, I really love your school and would like an opportunity to be considered for the MA." Usually, especially if you're competitive enough, they'll say yes.

Who is just a bit peeved that OSU's main graduate admissions office changed its address only just recently? I just discovered it a day or two ago that the history website updated that while doing a final check. Of course, my online app status says that the transcripts has yet to come in and I ordered them way back in mid-October! I suppose there's a reason why the history department prefers to have transcripts sent to them as well. I couldn't get one of my transcripts sent out until just now because the registrar at my UG insisted on a proof of signature as they don't have an online transcript form system set up. Very old fashioned indeed but their claim that it's really by law that they have to see proof of signature. /vent

Ah, that's Yale for you. If you want to go there that bad enough, you'll write the review. Now, who's getting slightly annoyed by constant reminders from Maryland that the supplement application is still incomplete? Every OTHER day I get that reminder in my inbox. *groan* And sometimes they're about my LOR writers... But, wow, W&M sounds like something else... I'd choose archival or research for assistantship.

Awkward? What awkward? You'll be so amazed how many academics are socially inept. I graduated from a very, very social school where it's hard to be awkward, and when I went to my MA program at a huge research university, I don't think I've stopped dropping my jaws. The main thing I've discovered is that to put my peers and professors at ease is to get them talking about something they're really, really interested in at the moment. So, small talk is absolutely essential. The professor is likely going to ask you about your research interests in the first few questions. So look over your SOP and talk it aloud to whoever is around, the trees, your dog, whatever. This act of talking is rehearsal for the interview so that once you actually talk about it to the professor, you've said it all already at least once or twice. When it's time for you to ask questions, ask about the program or the professor's current projects. They are going to be much more excited about it than what they've done because these projects are something new to them. Write it all down if you have to and read it all over again and again. Also it's Thanksgiving time! Use the time with your family/friends to practice talking about your interests and why you want to do the PhD, etc. Everyone's going to want to know what's going on with your life, including PhD apps, so go and exploit your family/friends, your worst critics!

It never gets easier. You'd think after one cycle, it would be easier. No. Drama still happens. Anyhow, 1 app down... a bunch more to go. But everything's pretty much done... just need to learn to let go. One by one. No more communication with my LORs now that I am abroad and they're assuming that I've turned in at least 4 as I told them that I'd get them done before I left... Wrong. All PhD stuff just flew out of my mind while getting myself together!

That's outdated. The current DGS is a different guy now. here's the recent one: http://www.brown.edu/Departments/History/grad/grad.html

Brown doesn't.

I agree with the above comment. Professors will understand if you're still in school. But perhaps not so if you're not. So find a way. I've found that there are professors who are not terrific with e-mails. They're curt. They don't give full answers. But it can all change once you've met them. I was in a communication with a prof at one of my top choices for several years. Her e-mails were always less than 2 sentences. ALWAYS. She always offered a coffee chat whenever I mentioned that I'd be in town. I finally met her in person a little while ago. She turned out to be an absolute delight. Since then she has written me more full e-mails, peppered with advice. Sometimes professors don't want to dedicate time unless they're serious about the student who is serious about their school. So, if you're totally serious about this place and you want more conversation, visit. No phone or Skype. Visit. Unless it's more than 1,000 miles away.

That is true. We are usually referring to USNEWS, whatever the year is. I don't recommend looking at NRC's because the data was collected in 2005 and obviously a lot has happened since. It"s a complicated thing. Basically one should go to the best program that they can get in. However if one doesn't really feel any connection there or has little support for his or her research, it may be the person's best interest to accept an offer from a lower ranked program with a superstar, pending that the superstar's students do actually get jobs. I am in such a situation and I have decided just to apply to all programs that are good fits and then see how the cards fall in the spring.