Sigaba

When you do prepare, are you reading the course materials or are you studying the course materials?

When evaluating guidance, consider the source. When someone tells you that you need to do X, Y, and Z and not worry about A, B, and C, ask critical questions. Is the guidance specific to a particular subject, institution, or area of study? Is the guidance based upon hearsay, scuttlebutt, something read in a book, the received wisdom of other aspiring graduate students, actionable information from grad students who have gotten into the same programs, or did it come from a burning bush--that is, from professors? (Hint: while students worry about grades, professors worry about grade inflation.) Did the person get debriefed as to why he or she did/did not get into certain programs? Has that person gone through the application process with a high level of success? Does the person have a good track record for advancing successful applications by other students? An aside. FWIW, I respectfully disagree with the emerging consensus that there's no such thing as a safety school. It depends. Academic pedigree matters. As an undergraduate, many of my classmates knew that they could continue at the same school after graduation. They knew they were the top students in one of the three highest-ranked departments in the field. Some chose to stay. Others took guidance from professors to go elsewhere to avoid the stigma of intellectual incest. Others wanted to go elsewhere (and knew they'd get in--somewhere). Advice in line with the OP. When researching programs, do not be overly reliant upon the internet if your field is history. Do all you can to get to know the professors with whom you'll be working before you commit to a program. Do understand that you won't get a complete picture from a professor's graduate students. As you will all learn soon enough, a graduate student's love, hate, fear, admiration, and loathing for professors will come and go like Lindsay Lohan's sobriety. Similarly, a professor's colleagues will be constrained from telling you the poop. So, there may well be some information you will not learn until much later. These obstacles aside, do what you can to look before you leap. Try not to worry about what you cannot control. Let go of fear. So what if everyone else applying to your programs of choice is fifteen feet tall. You're the one with the sling-bullets. Your arm is strong, your sight is clear, and your aim is true. Focus on crafting an application that will be your sling. Whisper a prayer (if you're so inclined), let fly your best shot, and go from there.* _________________________________________________________ * Fear and terror will be waiting for you once you get to grad school.

Out of curiosity, what factors are driving your order of preference? UConn is missing from your list. Unless you're already there, UCSB might be worth a look. If you're going to write a dissertation centered around the last decades of the Cold War, it may be to your advantage to go to a school that is close to the archival materials you'll be using. (For example, TAMU.) A question about Cornell. Other than Logevall, who else there specializes in your field of interest that is active? A small suggestion. Without a doubt, the University of Texas is a wonderful school in a fantastic town in a great state. However, the heat and cedar pollen are factors you might want to experience first hand before committing to spending years of your life there. If you can, visit Austin. But not in January. As the saying goes at the Forty Acres. There are two seasons: January (winter) and everything else.

clio11-- It depends. What type of project did you complete to earn your master's? Did your marks improve over time? Does your current department have a reputation for holding the line on grades? As you cannot change the grades you've received, I suggest that you focus on what you can control: your statement of purpose, your writing sample, your relationships with those writing letters of recommendation on your behalf, and your selection of doctoral programs to which you're applying. My $0.02

You could also show up early to class with a dozen or so Krispy Kreme donuts. (I say "or so" because it might be bad form for you to offer something you've not first sampled for freshness.) But also, what r_s said. Some cohorts just don't ever develop the kind of chemistry that leads to after hours socializing.

"Failing to plan is planning to fail" -- John Wooden.

If you go with him, how much longer will you be in the pipeline? The recession is going to get worse before it gets better. (Delaying your entry into the job market may not be such a terrible thing.) Before making your decision, make sure that he can deliver on what he's offering to you if you go with him.

Before taking the bait, maybe y'all should read his other posts and, maybe google his username.

Based upon my discussions with the L.A. County Sheriffs Department, I suggest that, before carrying pepper spray, one carefully research the law. If you deploy pepper spray, you may be opening yourself to a number of criminal and civil legal liabilities. (You spray a guy, a bystander suffers from the spray, you get charged with assault because the use of the spray was unwarranted, AND you get sued.) Although more expensive, a viable alternative to pepper spray is a military grade handheld high intensity LED flashlight (an example). Such a light can be used to disorient temporarily an assailant while one makes beats a hasty retreat.

On a case by case basis, submit the essay that best strengthens your application to a specific program.

E-- As a rule of thumb, do not ever self-select yourself out of opportunities to receive guidance, mentoring, teaching, and training. Do not hesitate to ask your previous profs and TAs for support. Let them decide if the request is an imposition. If it is, they'll let you know. Also, I think you should mull over harpyemma's thoughtful question. How well can the writers of your LoRs really know you and your work if your work is so brief? Does your UG major have a reputation that you need to confront in your SOP? Will you be competing against applicants who wrote their asses off as undergraduates? What will your learning curve be like when you get into a graduate program and have these applicants as classmates?

Brilliant! Thank you for a much needed laugh.

Hydralisk86--As soon as possible, identify the subject you want to study and then your sub fields of interest. (You do not need to write in stone that you want to study the history of strategic thought in the United States Air Force during the 1950s, but you should know that you want to study post-World War II American history.) Identify the major professional organization for that field of study. Consult that organization's most recent printed directory of faculty departments in the United States. It is very likely that your current school's relevant departments have these directories. Make a list of the departments in Southern California that have programs and academics that emphasize your fields of interest. Make a list of each and every faculty member that works in your fields of interest. If the directory includes the names of ABD graduate students and the working titles of their dissertations, include these names and those titles on your list. Request all the information and materials you need to apply to these institution's graduate programs. Do not forget to request specifically any and all information on financial aid, grants, and fellowships for graduate students. Concurrently, perform some quick, but detailed research on the faculty members and the ABDs. Take the time to study the interests and career arcs of the faculty members. Study the work the faculty members have done as well as any publications the ABDs may have. If possible, meet in person these academics and the ABDs. During these personal meetings, listen at least twice as much as you talk. Meanwhile, go to the professors and the ABDs in the corresponding departments at your school. Discuss with them your interest in going to a graduate program. Ask for their suggestions/guidance/recommendations. Use the above as you see fit. [*]Throughout, ask yourself questions like "Is this someone I'd want to work with?" and "Is this a subject I want to spend the next X+ years studying?" and, equally important, "What is the job market for a person with a Ph.D. in subject A?" [*]As you answer these questions, you'll be able to narrow down your choices to a manageable handful. [*]By then, you'll have the application materials you need, and then you can start the process of applying. [*]Keep in mind that you're at a bit of a competitive disadvantage. [*]You will be going up against applicants who have known since junior high school--if not earlier--that they wanted to go to graduate school in field Z. [*]These applicants will have designed their academic careers--if not also their personal lives--to get themselves into graduate school. [*]I am not mentioning this point to dissuade you, but rather to suggest that you have realistic expectations, and that you manage those expectations. HTH.

FWIW, I agree with dimanche0829. Due to the ongoing recession, it is very much a buyer's market. I would not give admissions committees any excuse to put my application in the 'no' pile before they gave it careful consideration. Staying within the specifications of the task. Also, please remember the rule of thumb. There are about 250 words to a double-spaced page. If you can fiddle in small ways with the fonts and margins to get your SoP to about two pages of double spaced type, you should be GTG. @KitKat One way to trim down a word count is to do individual proof reading passes looking for specific things. For example, use one pass to get rid of passive verbal constructions. Then make another pass to cut down on prepositional phrases. IME, such proof reading exercises can make a difference.

As an undergraduate, I attended an institution that tactically allowed--if not encouraged--the "five year plan". As a beneficiary of that plan, I suggest that you consider those other aspects of your application when you weigh your options. Would the extra year also give you the opportunity to let those who might write LoRs on your behalf to know you better, to prepare for required entrance examinations, to do more research on the graduate programs you'd like to attend, and to participate in a research internship between your fourth and fifth years? As for an honor's thesis, keep in mind the timing.

harpyemma-- In contrast to the thoughtful replies of qbtacoma and dimanche0829, I suggest that you consider the advantages of continuing the discussion you've already initiated with your guy sooner rather than later. Many small discussions over a period of time might work better for you than a big one at the next to last moment. What ever choices you make, make sure that both of you know that you're doing it for yourself. This frame of mind will liberate both of you from the "I did this for you" argument that might be especially uncomfortable after a sitting through an earthquake. (Notice how I tied together "big one" and earthquake? That's because after a modest 4.1 earthquake last week, the experts reminded us how overdue we are for something major. )

What about option 3? Go to law school, develop your practice, and then go back to school and get your MA in IR. What is the median income of first year associates who graduated from law schools on your list? (I was recently told that for Duke University, it is $200,000) Can a practicing attorney in the U.S. deduct any part of the fees to get a M.A. in IR as a business expense? Are their law firms that will subsidize all or part of an associate's educational fees if those fees will enhance the firm's marketability?

I respectfully but strongly disagree with this comparison. Today, job interviews center around an employer trying to figure out if a potential employee can do a job effectively with as little training as possible. In this regard, job applicants understand that they imperil their own chances if they admit outright that they are deficient in one area or another. By contrast, an interview for admission to a graduate program centers around the assumption that the applicant doesn't know everything and that even the most qualified applicant is going to be a 'work in progress.' Moreover, the collegiality of an academic department is, IMO, drastically different than that of the work place. (Not better, not worse, just different.) My $0.02.

Omnibuster-- IMO, a big risk of labeling yourself is that unless you've done your background research on the department and know where faculty members stand on a variety of professional issues, you can inadvertently push buttons that you might otherwise avoid. In this regard, I leaped before looking in a SOP in support of my application to my first choice school. After I was rejected, I learned through back channels that it came down to the "politics" of the department. Had I been a bit more savvy, I might have done a better job at figuring out a way to say what I wanted to say without activating an ongoing internal debate. (This is not to say I'd have gotten accepted, but rather that I might have written a more thoughtful essay.) Consider the benefits of writing that your scholarship is "informed" by X, Y, or Z. Or that you find X, Y, or Z very compelling and/or influential to your way of thinking. You can either leave it at that, or give a very brief example of what you mean and then move on. This way, you let X,Y, or Z fight the battle for you. I wonder if such is actually the case, at least in American history. I'm working my way through two brilliant works that are, IMO, over theorized. That is, if feminist approaches to history have been accepted (as they should be), then why do two established academics spend so much effort justifying their methods of analysis when their analysis is so strikingly--and obviously--brilliant? (Are they defending themselves against anticipated criticism or are they helping those of us who are not as conversant in feminist approaches to catch up?)

I collect backpacks, messenger bags, and satchels. (Satchels, not murses.) So I usually have the right tool for the job. As I've got a tricky back, I've taken to heart the guidance I got from a chiropractor. When the load is heavier, I go with a backpack and I wear it over both shoulders.

SL-- With respect, I suggest that you abandon the frame of mind where you're saying you read "too slowly or too carefully." Read the way that works best for you. If you need to change those methods and develop different skills, look at those revised methods as improvements but not the older versions as "failures." That is, see yourself as going from good to better, and from better to great. In regards to managing time, an approach that worked for me is that I would say, no matter what, the interval between the end of my last class of the week and at least the next twenty four hours was my weekend. What ever I did during that interval, it could not have anything to do with history. Equally useful was teaching myself how not to stress out about taking a break during the week. So if I was going to watch a game, I would enjoy the game and not worry about what I could/should be doing. On occasion, this practice did lead to some very long nights, but then, sometimes there advantages to having insomnia. HTH.

KAMALAGRAD-- With one exception, my recommendations center around the goal of getting you to develop a historian's skill set. When you apply to graduate school, you will be competing against individuals who have been working on these skills since they were in junior high school. Start reading works of academic historians in your field of interest. You can start 'small' with relevant journals and from there develop a list of monographs you need to read. Concurrently, you can read text books that provide you a lay of the broader terrain. Start developing a list of the leading scholars in your fields of interest, regardless of their location or institutional affiliation. Read what they've written. Communicate with them. Find reading lists/syllabi for upper division undergraduate courses and graduate classes in historiography, and then start reading. Build your endurance as a reader to the point where you can digest on the average one densely written monograph a day for weeks at a time. Start writing review essays on the books you're reading using the published reviews in journals as templates. These essays should vary in length from approximately 1-2 pages, to 5-7 pages, to 12-15, and then 20-25. You will need to know how to say as much about a work in two pages that you can in five and in twelve pages that you might say in twenty. (When you go to graduate school, your professors will summarize five hundred page books in one or two sentences.) Start thinking of small projects (10-12 pages) you can do that center around the research of primary source materials. Find a historian who can mentor you through those projects. Initially, it won't need to be an established scholar. Many graduate students will be able to provide adequate support. [*]Start developing bigger projects (25-30 pages) that require a substantial amount of primary research or familiarity with the historiography of a specific subject. [*]Execute both projects within the same four month time frame. [*]Start the process of understanding how the study of history differs from the craft of journalism. [*]Figure out which skills and sensibilities have good lateral transfer. [*]Figure out which skills and sensibilities are going to trip you up. [*]As you perform any of the above tasks, do not allow yourself to use wikipedia or any other source that is not peer-reviewed. [*]Keep in mind that the task is not to read history, but to study history. [*]Keep your sense of humor about things. [*]Understand and accept the premise that the more you study history, the less you will know about history. [*]The answer to a question is going to be more questions [*]Finally, do not burn any bridges as a journalist. Seven years from now, you may well decide that professional academic history isn't for you. HTH.

GL-- I think staying with your tried and true methods is wise. When you get back, you can use Adobe Acrobat to convert your images to individual PDF files or to combine them all in digital binders. Your school's computer store may have offer a discount for Adobe products or you can go to academicsuperstore[dot]com. In any case, make sure you get a version of Acrobat that has this conversion functionality. (I'm still using Acrobat Professional version 7 and Adobe has since diversified the product line.) Er, I'll say it just because. Please remember to make multiple back ups of everything (both digitally and print outs) and to store some of the back ups in entirely different locations.

One of the harder, more valuable lessons my professors/mentors had to beat into my thick skull was that there is no comparison between one's undergraduate coursework and the work one does in graduate school. If you approach graduate coursework with an undergraduate's mindset and if you look at studying history in graduate school as a more rigorous iteration of majoring in history as an undergraduate., the you may find the work amazingly easy. At first, second, and third blush, this view is understandable--you're performing many of the same tasks albeit with greater frequency. However, despite the apparent similarities, you're working toward an entirely different goal as a graduate student. That goal is the creation of new knowledge in your field of expertise. To achieve that goal, you will have to develop a different set of tools that include (but are not limited to) the ability: to define fields of specialization, to develop and to demonstrate a sufficient level of knowledge in those fields to pass qualifying exams, and also the ability to research and to write about a narrowly defined topic with a level of understanding that only thirty or forty people alive will really understand your dissertation. So however you pick and choose the methods that will get you through your course work, I respectfully urge you to keep in mind that you're striving for goals that your expected to fulfill even though you may receive much less guidance on defining those goals and how to achieve them than you'd like. (To paraphrase, it is graduate school, not historians' school.) I also recommend that what ever choices you make in terms of method, if you study history, you will be responsible to meet all of your professors' explicit and implicit expectations. If you end up with even tempered, experienced professionals, the process of defining the expectations will be excruciatingly difficult. If you end up with professors who are less so, you will be in for one of the most daunting intellectual, emotional, and psychological challenges of your life. (But I'm not bitter.) Now, in terms of studying assigned works, I recommend that you first figure out where a book or article fits within the historiography of the field. This task can be done by reading the acknowledgements, the introduction, recently published historiographical essays on the field, and a handful of shorter reviews. The process of reading the historiographical essays and the shorter reviews can be especially beneficial if you do background research on this historian who wrote the work you're reading and also those who wrote the reviews. If you perform this set of tasks often enough, you will get to the point where you will be able to talk about where a work fits not only within the historiography, but also in the trajectory of a historian's professional and intellectual development. (Or, at the very least, you'll get some phone numbers and email addresses to use if you have questions, comments, or concerns.) Then, I suggest you read the bibliography backwards (i.e. secondary works first, primary sources last). If your understanding of the historical facts (who, what, when, where, why, and how) within the book is less than what you would like, you may want to read the book very carefully--including every footnote/end note. If you think you're good to go on the basic facts, you can probably get by studying the book for its argument. In any case, I do suggest that if a professor articulates an expectation (such as to read every word of every book), do all you can to meet that goal. You never know when a professor is going to be grumpy (or playful) and decide to pull your card. (If you find yourself getting pummeled by your professors during a semester, you may be doing things very right.) I also suggest that while you build relationships with fellow graduate students, please consider the possibility that regardless of how highly you think of them (or they of you), your peer group is actually the professors in your department and that your primary competitor is your own limitations (whether real, imagined, or self imposed). When you're talking about history, demonstrate (with the appropriate amount of civility, intellectual generosity, and good cheer) that you are more than capable of eating everyone's lunch--including the person who wrote the book under discussion, if she happens to be in the room. HTH.

I suggest that before your friend makes any changes that she first ask around to see if her current adviser's recent behavior is in line with his past conduct. If it is, she will still have to decide if she wants to continue the relationship but at least she'll know for certain it is him and not her. If it isn't, I suggest that she carefully weigh the pros and cons of making a switch, and also the possibility of having a 'clear the air' conversation to articulate expectations, to establish boundaries, and to build (rebuild) rapport. In regards to your role, I strongly suggest that you recuse yourself from her deliberative process as much as you can--and then some more. Give her a lot of support but very little advice. This suggestion is so that her management of her relationship with her current adviser does not impact the relationship you have with your room mate.