Sigaba

WB-- I responded to your invitation for feedback as you wrote it.

The differences will vary by program. At my undergraduate institution, every history major had to complete a proseminar and a research seminar (which was devoted to writing a thesis). To be considered for departmental honors, one needed to meet a couple of criteria and then to take two additional classes. One class was to write the honor's thesis (another paper grounded in primary source research) and the other was a proseminar in historiography reserved for honors candidates. One also had to pass a oral exam given by a member of the faculty different than the professor supervising the honor's thesis. Parenthetically, luck and timing can each play a huge role in making it through such a sequence. If your timing is bad, you may go through an experience that will not improve your candidacy (e.g. you do the sequence after you've submitted your applications). However, if your luck is good, you can get a good look at the other side of the looking glass and build some confidence for when it is your turn to step through the mirror (e.g. you get slaughtered with such ferocity during the oral exam that almost every following discussion about history is gravy).

You are assuming that your inferences and interpretation accurately reflect my intentions and my tone. I am addressing members of this BB with the types of questions I've asked classmates and professors and in the same tone. And, as it happens, the types of questions I've been asked as well. It is your prerogative to interpret direct questions about why someone wrote something as a "personal attack." However, your doing so is putting words in my mouth. For you to conclude that my post is "rude and unacceptable" is nothing more than an overt attempt at censorship. Do you think this approach will work when you don't care for what is being said and how it is being said in a seminar? Or when a classmate asks you "What's the point?" Or when you get back a draft for an essay that a reader has thoroughly dismantled? Or when a professor drolly asks "So what?"

IMO, a safety school is not necessarily less prestigious. It is school you know will admit you.

Unfortunately, this statement does not characterize every quadrant of American society. @SK Given the controversial nature of GWOT, the outright hostility that members of the armed services encounter in some hallways of the Ivory Tower, the overall ignorance that we civilians have regarding the armed services, I would recommend that you be very careful how you incorporate your experiences in the armed services in your SOP. Do what you can to know your audience. Will people reading your materials be able to put two and two together? Or will they privilege their own feelings about GWOT, the previous administration, and their preconceived notions? If they're prone towards projecting, will that exercise help or hinder your candidacy? (Will they assume that you just want to get your ticket punched so you can advance your career? Will they assume that you're going to be an Andrew Bacevich or a James Webb or a James Stockdale?) Do what you can to know the institutions to which you're applying. Do they have ROTC battalions? Do they have veterans' affairs offices? (If the answer to either is yes, you may be able to get usable information.)

Does your department require you to write an undergraduate thesis? Do you have the time to write that thesis and then an honor's thesis?

Year before last, I was having a coffee with a mentor. Out of nowhere, he looked at me and started to laugh. "You might have been able to get a job had you been born ten years earlier. Maybe." I understood his point (given my areas of specialization, my theory of history, and my belief that a history professor's primary responsibility is to teach), shared in the laugh, and we went on with our chat. A way to hedge one's bets against the vagaries of the job market is to use the requirements for an outside field to develop a skill set that will make one a stronger candidate in the job market. So, if you're an aspiring cultural historian, rather than doing that outside field in the English department, do it in an area that will give you added value as a member of an academic department. Examples include administration, counseling, grant writing/reviewing, and marketing. Alternatively, you might use that outside field to develop a skill set that can get you a job outside of the Ivory Tower. Examples include IT, computer science, marketing, statistics, project management, and finance. (The private sector is increasingly focused on crunching numbers.) For those aspiring historians already in graduate school who worried about getting a tenure track job, consider the benefits of positioning yourself so that you can not only to attend job talks but observe the discussions among faculty members that follow. If you're up on your historiography, you'll see how the intellectual debate is intertwined with a political discussion. (That is, a department may not be seeking to hire the best available applicant in a field, but rather the applicant that best fits a specific vision of how that field should be studied and taught.) For those considering applying to a graduate history program, I recommend that you apply a level of intensity to researching your options that equals (if not surpasses) the effort you exert trying to get in to a program. Don't just look at which historian works at what department, but also look at where that historian came from. Who were her peers when she was in graduate school? Where did they end up? Where do her graduate students end up (or not end up)? What kinds of biographical information can you find about established scholars that will provide you with a broader view of where the profession has been and where it may be going? Remember, when professors decide who they want to attend as graduate students, they are also implicitly stating a preference as to what kinds of people they want as peers down the line. So, if you look at your classmates in your first week of graduate school, and realize they all want to be cultural historians and you want to be a social historian, you have something to think about. HTH.

Corrall-- What kind of job do you want once you earn your degree? I ask because I spent some time working as a planning analyst at a structural engineering consultancy. During that time, I was exposed to two distinctly different schools of thought on having a policy focus.

I've lived right across the street from campus and twelve miles away. The biggest advantages of the former are that one can get to class (or the library) almost before one leaves and one can really get the most out of time between classes. (On especially hot days, a classmate would notice during the afternoon that I'd changed clothes since that morning.) The biggest advantages of the latter are that the distance requires one to be more focused during campus visits (unless one does not mind sitting in traffic) and that one will have distance from the student body when a flu virus runs through the campus.

Speaking only in regards to coursework in a history department, the downside of recording lectures and seminars is that a lot of information is transmitted non verbally. To paraphrase a point that runonsentence makes above, if you're making a recording, you may treat a class as a lean back experience when you should be leaning forward. As an example, in history seminars you may receive a number of very long bibliographies. Professors will go through these documents quickly. They will communicate which books you might read, must read, can get away with skimming, or should avoid entirely. IME, it is very beneficial to focus on a professor's body language. His tone and cadence may not change noticeably because he's expecting you to understand the sparkle of humor in his eyes, the frown on his face, his shifting posture, and his shrugging shoulders. Also, I had a professor who would express his displeasure/boredom with what some students were saying by doodling on his Styrofoam cup. Many of this professor's students missed this cue because they were too busy leaning back as they threw in their two cents. If you're concerned about the quality of your own note taking, you can always ask classmates who take brilliant notes if you can make a photo copy.

FWIW, I switched institutions and the clear, but unvoiced, message was that I had to start from square zero. IMO, this requirement worked to my benefit as the professors at school B were much more interested in the development of grad students than their counterparts at school A.

A general recommendation. Aspiring grad students might double check the dates of the information on the AHA website and/or consult the printed edition of the most recent edition of the AHA's Directory of History Departments, Historical Organizations, and Historians. (If one has time, one might consult several recent editions of the directory to track both departments and scholars.) HTH.

MOO, your interests may best be served by re-examining your priorities. The blemish may not be your test scores or your GPA but your attitude towards the study history. Why do you want to attend a "first or second tier" graduate program? Is your desire based upon research on the specializations of those top departments and how you might contribute? Or are you just saying that, because you consider yourself a top student, you should go to a top program and the steps you've taken thus far about punching your ticket? You provide a lot of numbers as indicators of what you've done but you've not offered much information about what you know about history, or your interests, or how you see yourself making solid contributions in a graduate program. Keep in mind that numbers alone--especially one's undergraduate GPA--do not gain one entry into graduate history programs. You have peers on this BB who may not have numbers equal to you but they clearly demonstrate that they bring qualities to the table that make them more credible candidates for admission. @Aaron McDevitt. In the short time between now and the time you begin your work at Stanford, you might do well to spend time contemplating your profound insecurity. Your overwhelming need to be the cynosure is not equaled by your ability to sustain the attention you obviously crave. My $0.02.

FWIW, I recommend: A set of blank correspondence cards from Crane and postage to send thank you notes. Purell and lots of it. Your sense of humor--most notably the ability to laugh at yourself. At least one Moleskine notebook as a journal for venting. A +1 rule for taking extra sweaters/jackets with you to campus so that you can make the transition from the outdoors to the often frigid temperatures of a classroom or a library without breaking stride. Using the student discount rates for academic journals specific to your field of study, as well as to popular magazines of your choice that can provide moments for intelligent procrastination. Waterproof shoes. A television and DVD player. A pair of noise cancelling headphones. Splurging on a single item that will really provide you a measure of comfort and luxury, even if that item temporarily stretches your budget. The item can be a pair of shoes, the backpack you've always wanted, a nice outfit, a Gore-Tex jacket, a nifty pair of sunglasses, an air purifier, a portable A/C unit, or some minor consumer electronic device. The years ahead are going to have some trying and stressful moments. And in those moments, it will be the small things that help you rally in the face of a set back. A reliable compact LED flashlight if not also a Fox 40 whistle. A hard copy of the Chicago Manual of Style. (If applicable) Hard copies of all of your software apps and computer OS. Enough plastic hangers for all of your clothes. (The time you save not having to fold laundry will pay off in the long run.) HTH.

MOO, qptacoma's guidance is useful not only to aspiring applicants but also to history graduate students who are looking to define their specific research interests during their first year of coursework. (And the guidance may also help when reviewing a collection of essays.)

Please clarify your question. Are you asking if a student, having proven that he or she would not do the work at the master's level, should expect support to do work as a doctoral candidate at another school? Or did this student earn a master's degree, then decide not to do the work for a doctorate, drop out, and now wants to have a bite of the apple at another school? If it is the latter, why cannot this student go back and continue working towards a doctorate at his/her initial institution? Did the student earn PNG/NTR status?

A concern that I had writing my initial SOP was that the focus of my undergraduate coursework would not be immediately evident on my transcript. On a lark, I figured out the percentage of courses I'd taken related to the Cold War and wrote a brief comment about it. The purpose of this comment was to get the attention of specific faculty members without naming them. Later, I had to write another SOP as a requirement to keep a fellowship. The graduate advisor did me a huge favor by confirming what I guessed when I handed it in to him--it stunk. I knew what was wrong with it without him saying (but he said it anyways--too much angst). The second version was much more upbeat. In the second version, I positioned myself on a trajectory that began with the exact moment I was sitting in a lecture and I decided I wanted to specialize in American diplomatic and military history. The essay briefly traced the arc through the rest of my undergraduate career, and elaborated on the work I'd done my first year of graduate school, and where I saw it going for the next twenty plus. This projection included comments about the types of monographs I intended to write. These comments were off beat in time and tempo. They went from the very general to the specific in a way that suggested I somehow knew where the cutting edge of scholarship would be in ten to fifteen years. The projection also discussed the types of courses I would like to teach as a professor. The essay ended with the hope that, one day, I could provide similar inspiration to an undergraduate sitting in a lecture hall. IMO, the projections of my future work as a professor resonated because I did not tip my hand. At the time, I was much more interested in teaching than in doing research. Instead, I presented myself as an aspiring academic who would enthusiastically do both. An additional comment. When I think back to writing SOPs, what I remember more than what I wrote (or what I did not write but should have) is how much fun the experiences were. The fun came from two sources. The first source was my ability to distancing myself from the notion that I am competing against others and to realize that in these kinds of situations, I am competing against my own potential as a human being and as an academic. Second, was the realization that I wasn't writing for a group readers who had a lot of power over my future and that I needed to impress them. Instead, I understood that I was writing for an audience that included potential peers and that I needed to earn their respect. If I wrote a SOP worthy of their respect, every thing else would take care of itself. One last comment. When it comes to writing SOPs and similar documents, I am a notorious procrastinator. In retrospect, I do not recommend this method. It is one thing to wait until the next to last moment to write that five page review essay on a book you've not yet touched. It is quite another to roll the dice on documents that will figure prominently in the trajectory of your life. YMMV. HTH.

IMO, you should not. From your posts, I know you're apprehensive about the whole process. Nerves aside, you've worked hard for everything you've earned thus far in your academic career. This letter is just another challenge for you to overcome. You've got a year to get solid feedback from a variety of sources and to make revisions. A secondary objective to working on the letter is to diversify your writing skills. I recommend that you save that $100 so that you can treat yourself and a disinterested reader to some beverages while you work out how you want to write the document. Best of luck!

@SBP Ironically, you are beginning to remind me of Carter G. Woodson. Maybe you should better familiarize yourself better with its historiography before you set out on your personal crusade to rescue African American history from the neglect of Americanists such as Steven Hahn and Stephanie McCurry. (Is there a reason why Penn isn't on your short list?) You may be surprised to find that a lot of good research is pouring out. FWIW, in 2000, the late Ron Dellums did a interview with Harry Kreisler for Cal's Institute of International Studies' "Conversations with History." In that discussion, Dellums offered some advice that you may find useful. @ZeeMore21. Perhaps without your realizing it, you are positioning yourself at the cross roads of more than half a century of an increasingly intense debate about the boundaries of history relative to other fields of endeavor. This debate is shaping decisions on who gets into grad school, who gets funded, who gets hired, who gets published, and who gets tenure. As someone who is not going to be a historian, you are at liberty to take what ever approach to this debate that you please--you have no skin in the game. However, those who are going to do the work to become professional academic historians may not have that luxury. Like it or not, aspiring graduate students in history are going to be viewed not only by the merits of their applications, but also based upon how professors think they will or will not fit into this debate. In this environment, applicants such as SBP may benefit from knowing that they are not only competing against other students, but they are also being sized up as potential colleagues, allies, and adversaries down the line. It may well be that SBP is going to be the titan of historical research he believes himself to be. It may that he's a 'chosen one' for whom the ball will always bounce favorably. Or it may be that he's going to be just another guy in the mix. (That is, one qualified applicant among many.) In the likelihood that SBP falls in the third category, should he deliberately do things that are going to make him either (1) the guy a graduate program needs or (2) that guy that a program doesn't want (but maybe admits anyways)? If option (1) is preferred over option (2), should SBP get guidance from those who have successfully earned admission into graduate history programs, have played their parts in separating the wheat from the chaff, and have spent years studying the ups and downs of the historical profession? Or should SBP rely on those who, although accomplished in their own right, do not have that expertise? Certainly, these questions are rhetorical. You will keep giving advice as you see fit. You will continue to use these threads as your playground. And SBP will decide for himself which guidance, if any, he wants to use. But let there be no mistake about our differing agendas. My objective in this thread and others like it, is to offer useful guidance to applicants seeking admission into history programs. Academic history is in serious decline. In certain circles inside and outside of the Ivory Tower, academic history is reviled. This decline will continue until academic historians do a better job of working together when it comes to the teaching and in the practice of their craft. IMO, among the first steps in the journey is for aspiring historians to make informed decisions about their professional identities. In making these choices, I believe they should understand the potential consequences of how they draw boundaries between the personal and the professional. These choices will have consequences--for better, worse, and other--not only for the scholar, but his or her field of study, and the broader profession as well.

I think tutoring may be the way to go for you. I recommend that you figure out what subjects you can tutor, a competitive rate, post an ad on craigslist, and try to develop a solid client base. If you do go this route, I suggest that you only tutor those students you want to work with, and conduct your sessions in a very public place. (Like the library.) If you want to go through the process of applying for jobs, I recommend that you find a way to communicate the work skills that you do have. You know how to work hard, you know how to think critically, you know how to learn, and you know how to write. Which ever route you pick, please note that you may be playing with fire. A year off to make some money and to recharge the batteries can quickly lead to another, and another, and another. . . . (In this regard, you may actually benefit from the fact that the job market is so competitive right now.)

I'll share with you a time-tested sure-fire fool-proof plan for curbing procrastination...first thing tomorrow.

Why? Are you suggesting that people should change the way they do their work for their peace of mind--or for yours?

PC-- You could also ask them about their majors, their extra curricular activities, and what they want to get from the class. And then you could ask them about zombies.

FWIW, I went through the graduate application process twice. I applied to two schools each time. I went one for two each time. (Four different schools.) While there were many rational calculations behind this approach--most prominently, figuring out how to leverage my strengths as a history major and to minimize the importance of my weaknesses (I don't do as well on standardized tests as I'd like)--it also boiled down to some zany non-linear thoughts.

Christian-- I don't know if such is the case with political science, but with history, it is not too difficult to figure out to what degree one's research interests are in line with a specific department. Consider the possibility that your asking "Will I fit in" is sending a message that is contrary to your intent and is not an accurate reflection of your ability. Consider the possibility that you're unintentionally sending a message that says "I really didn't do my homework--will you do it for me?" (Suggestions for a quick and dirty approach: read the short book reviews the professors in a department have published, find out what types of dissertations newly minted Ph.Ds have completed, and find out the dissertation topics of the ABDs.) Also, as noted above, what is a reasonable expectation for a response from a professor to an aspiring applicant's dissertation topic? Your queries may come across like a first year football coach saying what plays he will run in the Super Bowl when he hasn't even coached a pre season game. Your emails might resonate more if you showed that you were focused on more immediate goals (like completing what ever academic program you're currently attending, and getting admitted to grad school) and leaving your comments about your dissertation topic at an appropriate level of generalization. In regards to the short email versus long email debate I ask: Are there ways to find a middle ground? And also, Does anyone write and mail letters any more? Also, and this is just MOO, an applicant should think thrice before telling a professor that she has read their most recent works or that she found them inspiring. If you want to connect meaningfully with a potential mentor/committee member, please consider the value of demonstrating that you understand their work within the contexts of the topic at hand, the broader debates of the profession, and their career progression. My $0.02.