Neist

I'm sort of late to this discussion, but I wanted to say, as others have commented upon, you really need to consider the cost of living. I only make slightly above $18.5k, and I have a competitively awarded GA-ship. Granted, I'm still going slightly into debt every year, but I'm also supporting a family of three on that. What you were offered, at least here, would be quite livable for a single person.

Really annoying when you find a fairly significant typo after you've lost the ability to edit a post.

I guess it depends on what one considers common, but it's unheard of, at least. And I imagine this is largely dependent on the department, university, and POI. If you did or did not hear back from a POI, I wouldn't necessarily believe it distinctly applies anything in particular.

Not required, but currently moving through at my leisure (I am an insane person who reads extra on top of history coursework): The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat: and Other Clinical Tales by Sacks Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance by Duckworth Librarianship in Gilded Age America, An Anthology of Writings, 1868–1901 Library Daylight, Tracings of Modern Librarianship, 1874-1922 One can never read too many books.

I receive those emails, and I never even applied to Harvard.

Good to hear ringing endorsements. I look forward to reading it this weekend!

How do you like Nature's Metropolis? It's to be discussed for next week's class. I thought it look pretty interesting!

... Huh? @psstein pretty much stated my thoughts @ltr317. There are very few independent history of science programs anymore. And the ones that can kind of be considered history of science are more interdisciplinary fields, such as STS. Regarding jobs, if you want a job in a history department, it's my understanding that a history degree is usually preferred, be it history of science or good ole fashioned history. However, freestanding HoS departments tend to be more interdisciplinary in my experience, and I imagine that most freestanding department are likely less picky about degree type and more picky about demonstrated research focus. Edit: Ugh, this forum software...

Congrats! Also, I apologize in advance if my responses are a bit... incoherent. I've read over 1000 pages in the last few days. Things are starting to lose clarity.

Oh, and on top of what @psstein stated, because cohorts in history of science departments can be smaller, classes are smaller. That fact can be good or bad depending on your preferences. Personally, I excel in directed reading sort of situations, so I love it, but I can see how people might equally despise it. I'm in a class right now that only has 2 students enrolled.

I think this question will greatly depend on the department, and while I'd like to avoid blanketing statements, I'd say that it's likely that as a history of science student in a history department you are likely required to take more non history of science courses. Of course, this isn't a bad thing, but it's something to think about. For example, some of my fellow students never read Orientalism, and I'm fairly certain that most regular history graduate students have at least dabbled with it. Again, while not always the case, there also might be a greater number of a greater variety of faculty members who may potentially align with your interests (i.e., committee members) within an independent history of science department.

I'm sure you're already aware, but for the sake of tossing bits of information into the winds for the benefit of future readers of these posts... Most HoS departments are pretty tiny. Harvard is moderately sized, but they are the exception. My department is only a dozen or so students, ranging from new students to PhD candidates. Last year, we matriculated but one student. It's sort of a byproduct of the size of the discipline, but generally, if one attends a dedicated history of science program, one will likely have fewer local peers than you'd guess.

My knowledge is mostly anecdotal, but I believe that most history of science programs, or at least most history of science departments, do not interview. Now, if you applied to HoS in a regular history department, that's a bit outside my expertise.

Currently reading Making Modern Science, A People's History of Science, and Nature's Economy. That's a lot of book to review over the course of a few days. Think my brain is beginning to fry.

I did not know you could do that. That's good to know.

Unfortunately, I only have anecdotal experience with myself. My vision is actually quite horrible. I have to use text-to-speech for most of my reading or my reading speed is too slow for the pace necessary at a graduate level. Justification just makes it worse because it makes the text more difficult to track fluidly. That said, a lot of justification nowadays functions better than it used to. It doesn't tend to insert giant chunks of space within lines. Hm.. I'll think about it and see if I can't think of a good example. I don't have one off-hand. Sorry! A lot of typesetters will adjust the text with hyphenation if it looks too "chunky." Or maybe they'll imperceptibly adjust the kerning. A little raggedness isn't a huge problem, and I imagine it's probably more of an issue in the sciences, where authors may utilize longer and more technical words.

I could never bring myself to use justify, but I worked as a graphic designer, and the spacing of justify profoundly offends my sense of aesthetics. I don't necessarily see anything particularly wrong with it, but it might make a piece of writing more difficult to read. Something to think about for the sake of accessibility of others.

If it's in regards to my earlier statement, I meant that it's not as competitive in admissions as many other disciplines. Really, getting into library school isn't all that difficult, or at least getting into library school somewhere. However, getting funding is incredibly difficult. There's absolutely no comparison to the difficulty of getting into library school compared to something like, for example, psychology. I've read discussions on these boards from hopeful graduate students in psychology who've applied to over a dozen programs for years on end and still haven't received an acceptance.

Yup. Lived here my entire life.

Hello! As @catsbloom noted, MLIS programs aren't as competitive about admissions. Also, this is purely anecdotal, but it'll likely be easier than an English Lit MA. However, funding is very competitive, if available at all. That said, generally, although not always directly through the library school, the University of Oklahoma has several assistantships available in the library proper in a variety of departments. I attend the University of Oklahoma, and I know quite a few people funded through the library. If you have any specific questions about the University of Oklahoma, you can ask here or pm me, if you like.

I would not retake the GRE. I'd generally only suggest such a thing if your scores discluded you from consideration. A 161 score is hardly terrible, and I would think that only in the more extreme of cases might it be an issue. Besides, the GRE is expensive. Save the money.

Same, but if I'm doing something less composed, like a précis or review, I tend to write from the hip. While the ability to compose an elegantly planned piece of writing is certainly worthwhile, the skill to quickly articulate one's thoughts more casually is probably as equally useful. You'll likely need to write fairly quickly at some point in your graduate career (i.e., in a shorter frame than what outlining might allow), so I'd suggest getting in some practice if one is presented with the opportunity to do so.

I haven't had the time to support everyone on here as much as I would have liked (this will likely be the worst semester of my academic career). I wanted to wish everyone the best of luck and not to stress the details too much. You can only prep your application so much, and it is likely that events and considerations outside of your potential will largely play into your acceptances or denials. Try to roll with the punches.

Chiming in here, @syza if you're interested in policy, you might look into STS programs. I have a lingering suspicion that they parallel your interests more than a typical history of science program may.

Graduate student office politics suck.