Sigaba

TD13-- IMO, the way you decide to handle this situation will say as much about you as the underlying dynamic says about your parents. If you want to take a Machiavellian approach, that is your choice. Remember that choices have consequences. MOO, it is the unintended consequences that prove the most haunting. While it appears that your mind is set on a path and you're looking for approval, I do suggest that you develop more alternatives before making a decision.

I would suggest that all entering graduate students in history carefully "consider the source" when getting advice from experienced grad students. A tactic that works very well for J may prove self-destructive to you. A mindset that provides balance for S may push you over the edge. X,Y, and Z may warn you away from a professor that might be the best mentor for you. This is NOT to say that experienced grad students are out to screw you. It just means that experienced graduate students should not automatically be treated as consultants who have the training, the skills, and the emotional detachment to help you reach your goals in ways that are authentic to your vision and that reflect a firm understanding of your strengths as a student. There is a big difference between good advice and useful advice. As an example, take the discussion on this BB on how to approach reading assignments. There is a lot of very good advice on how to tackle the mountain of words graduate students will need to navigate each and every week. However, for those students who would be better off reading every word, the well intended suggestions to read specific parts of books in a specific order are not very useful. Instead, these students who would be more comfortable reading every word have to wrangle with the notion that they're "doing it wrong." In fact, all they may really need is useful guidance on ways to stay alert and focused while they read everything. My $0.02. .

The best revenge is not a dish served cold. The best revenge is living well. It is possible to put oneself through school and to maintain a high GPA and to get into good graduate schools. Doing so will require tough choices, sacrifices (large and small), and a steady diet of less than ideal meals. (I preferred malt o meal over cream of wheat.) I recommend that you not do anything that compromises your core vision of who you want to be as an adult. Apologize only if your intent is sincere, not because you need the money. Get married so you can qualify for more financial assistant only if you don't mind being called some very harsh words by someone down the line. (Imagine the advice you would like to give your own teen age daughter when she will face the choice between principle and money. If you go with the money now, don't be surprised if she does, too. What will you say then about "revenge"?) I recommend that you immediately go to your school's student affairs office and talk to the adults who have the expertise and the resources to help you develop viable options to your dilemma. HTH.

Hypnotoad-- It will depend upon the specific program you are in and the professors tasked with vetting your ability to fulfill the requirements. In my experience as an Americanist, the requirement was two languages. I satisfied one with course work in statistics that I did at a different institution. I cleared the other hurdle by passing a course in the German department where the grad student teaching the class did a lot of winking. From classmates who were doing work in different areas, I heard a lot of horror stories. These stories included exams being administered by a history professors who had a very high level of fluency in a given language, and a part of those exams being oral. Something that I realized while studying the cognitive psychology behind skill development for my outside field, and from hearing of the experiences of class mates who took their emerging language skills on the road, there can be a HUGE difference between learning a language well enough to fulfill a requirement and knowing that language well enough to do archival research. Therefore, my suggestion is that you have a very clear idea of your goals when you study foreign languages. HTH

Mal83-- Thanks for the feed back! Yes, I'm well aware of the dynamic between her and the regulars. However, I do have a slightly different POV on her experiences as she describes them in her posts and, I believe, a different end state in mind for her. It remains to be seen if my comments/questions will resonate with her.

Unfortunately, I have no useful advice to offer one's physical appearance and comportment. For better and for worse, I am often perceived as a serious, even fierce, person. Grad students and undergraduates tend to fall in line when I am focused on the agenda of learning. One of the best pieces of advice I got was to my outside field in my institution's school of education. Not only did I luck out by working in a sub-discipline that enhanced by understanding of the craft of history as well as one of my primary research interests, I also learned a lot about teaching from a senior professor of educational psychology. I also benefited from having a very close relationship with the professor in my department who was tasked with training all teaching assistants. (Years later, he was tasked to train all teaching assistants for the college's graduate program.) What I learned from the former was to discuss course materials in small blocks. Based on this guidance, I only sought to cover five to seven basic points in any discussion section. I also adopted the education professor's practice of giving out evaluation forms at the end of every class meeting. While most students would not fill out these forms, those who did sometimes gave solid feedback that allowed me to make adjustments for the next class. Additionally, this professor provided several valuable insights. First, teaching is a domain of knowledge that is distinctly different from one's field of study. Second, it takes years of experience and directed practice to become a decent teacher. Third, a teacher's primary responsibility is to support a student's efforts to reach her goals (not yours, hers). Fourth, if a motivated student fails to reach her goals, it is the teacher's fault. Fifth, dealing with students is a time consuming, psychologically challenging experience. (He often used the metaphor of 'abused children.') As for the mentor in my department, he taught me many valuable lessons. First and foremost was the importance of handing out a document laying out the general objectives of the rules of the game. Second, the value of holding the line on grades (he was part of a broader effort to curtail grade inflation). Third, being accessible to students when scheduling office hours, and, perhaps most importantly, Fourth, a professional academic's primary responsibility is to teach. (This view is controversial and his career suffered because of it.) To these pieces of guidance, I tossed in bits and pieces from previous instructors whom I'd admired. First, I made a point of emphasis of learning all the students' names by the second class meeting. To facilitate this process, towards the end of the first section meeting, I took Polaroids of each student and had them print their names. The next several days, I used the photos as flash cards. Thereafter, if I misremembered a student's name, I paid that student a modest fine out of my own pocket. Second, I made myself accessible. To help this process, I collected information on the students' class schedules and arranged my office hours for when most of them had free time. If students needed to miss class discussion, I'd let them make up for missed time during office hours. In the lead up to graded assignment deadlines/ test dates, I arranged additional office hours and study groups around the students' schedules. Moreover, I made it clear that they could submit to me as many drafts of essays beforehand as they'd wished. I made sure they understood that for this practice to work, they'd have to make sure they gave me enough time to turn drafts around. Third, I made it clear that I was their advocate in relation to the professor for whom I worked. Time and again, I would urge them to put me in the position to make the case at the end of the semester that a boarder line grade should be bumped up. This approach really helped students who may have slacked off at the beginning of the semester (sometimes for legitimate reasons) and were willing to make up the difference through hard work. Fourth, I offered "extra credit" assignments that were immediately relevant to the course materials. (As the structure of these opportunities made clear that students would really have to earn the extra credit--in the form of an oral exam--I got very few takers.) Sixth, for those students who expressed an interest in attending graduate school (in any field) or getting professional training (in law or medicine), I would "prep" them on ways to establish a relationship with a professor that could lead to a favorable letter of recommendation. I also offered to support their applications to the best of my abilities. But most of all, I made it clear to students that they were going to get the grade they earned, that they would earn the grade they got, and if they didn't like their grade, they had no one but themselves to blame. In my experience, the upside of this approach was that it facilitated an environment of learning and intellectual growth for those students willing to work very hard. It also gave me confidence that no student could make a sustainable argument that I did not care or that I did not work as hard as I could. My approach had several downsides. First, it required a lot of time. For certain two week intervals during a semester, I would arrive at campus at seven am and leave at two am the following morning for days at a stretch. (Sometimes, having insomnia is an advantage.) Second, I received sharply worded feedback from students who did not care to be held to well defined standards or were uncomfortable with the notion of individual accountability or just don't like the topic of the class, or history in general. Finally, I learned through back channels that this approach encouraged a certain level of resentment among fellow t.a.'s who did not consider teaching a priority--even though were getting paid to do it). This was not an issue for me as I wasn't working for them and I did not socialize with them. However, if your program has a number of graduate students that are ambivalent about teaching and you socialize with them, it might be an issue for you. HTH.

Just Me-- How many hours a day do you sleep? Do you fall asleep easily or do you have insomnia? Are you taking numerous 'cat naps'? Are you sleeping deeply but wake up as tired as you were before? Have you talked to your professors about your issues? Have you consulted any medical professionals at your school's student health service? Notwithstanding the haranguing you're getting on this BB and your belief that you're an "exception," many of the issues you're encountering may not be as dire nor as unique as you fear (or, as you hope).

Based upon your conduct on this BB so far, I wonder which "they" your recommending professor was questioning.

JimboNo9-- The fact that you made it through law school and are a practicing attorney will help your candidacy because you have a proven track record of hard work. IMO, having had a class mate who left his law practice to study history, you may balk at some of the hoops you'll have to jump through in grad school. (My pal often wondered why he needed to do coursework in an outside field as he already had a JD.) You may also find the intellectual and cultural transition jarring. And if your politics are right of center, you'll need to figure out how to hold your cards very close to your vest or refine your ability to listen very carefully and to disagree respectfully. (To be clear, my point here is not that the Ivory Tower is intolerant of different political views. Rather, the American political right's ability to communicate with academics with different viewpoints is in very bad decline.) Insofar as your unhappiness with being a lawyer, my advice mirrors TMP's. It is better to be unhappy with money in the bank than to be unhappy while worrying about being able to afford that book you need versus paying a bill. I recommend that, before you leave law, you invest time (and money) figuring out the roots of your unhappiness. It may well be that a small lateral step, and/or a change of career trajectory, and/or a long vacation, and/or a leave of absence may prove to be a more sustainable option than going to grad school. Meanwhile, you could to some reading to get a sense of "the state of the art" in professional academic history in your fields of interest. Such reading may give you an indication of the vast differences between the way undergraduates study history and the way you'll study history as a graduate student. While there are a few books for general audiences that can help you here, you might want to read some densely written monographs, journal articles, and dissertations as those are the types of works you'll spend most of your time with in graduate school. As for the job market for historians, especially Americanists, it is actually worse than what many here say. That being said, I don't think you should let it shape your decision to go to grad school. You already have a marketable skill set.

That was the one thing that really bothered me about my school--no Coca Cola to be found in any vending machine. And then, I discovered the wonders of a twenty ounce bottle of Mountain Dew and all was golden. In regards to Just Me's grousing, for those of you who have not yet started grad school, she's offering some of you a look into your future. Eventually, the bloom will come off the rose and you'll see the elephant. The question will be: What are you going to do about it when it happens to you? (A hint--a little autoplasticity goes a long way. Learn how to look unflinchingly at yourself in the mirror and how to embrace the suck.) FWIW, a primary reason why I don't socialize with grad students is that too many complain incessantly about everyone and everything--except for themselves--and don't try to work through issues with their professors.

Generally, I wore jeans, a navy or a gray t-shirt, sneakers, and a sweatshirt to class. From time to time, I'd wear a polo over a white t-shirt, with casual shoes and socks to match the shoes. I didn't get any feedback one way or another from professors. Their comments centered around topics such as the course materials, the refinement of a historian's tool kit, picking research topics, getting ready for qualifying exams, and some of the secrets of the trade. FWIW, I don't think Just Me is a troll. Nor do I think it is appropriate for members of this BB to offer psychological evaluations of someone they've not met in person. Having worked as a planning analyst at a structural engineering firm, I project that Mr. McDevitt is going to have a steep learning curve when it comes to building good will with team mates, clients, and stake holders. By that same measure, if he's as socially awkward as he presents himself on this BB, he'll make principal within ten years of getting hired. My $0.02.

MOO, one of the first things you should do is take down all information in your profile/signature that this person could use against you. Do not write anything on line about this person that you'd not say to his face or would be uncomfortable reading on the front page of the New York Times. Next, I recommend that you ask your advisor what she thinks of the substantive portions of the comments. Concurrently, take yet another look at the comments from a disinterested point of view. Separate how you feel about the guy from what you think he's trying to tell you. Then, develop a plan to address the alleged deficiencies in the literature review. If you can make the corrections, do so. If you think the corrections are unnecessary, think about ways you can tell him "no." This last option will require as much tact as you can muster. Finally, going forward, consider the value of taking with a five pound bag of salt what people say (good or bad) about academics. Keep in mind that every relationship is different. In my experience, the professors that made students exceptionally wary have been the ones I've gotten along with the best.

TRG-- I think my situation was helped by the fact that I spent a lot of time in that particular library--while not known by name, I was probably recognized by sight--and that I provided good details of the mass book drop (date and time).

T4PHD-- Please keep me in mind if you need a sounding board on the Reagan administration and/or the CIA and/or the historiography of that period in relation to American foreign policy during that period.

Edost-- Here's a suggestion that may position you to use the literary figure to write you a letter of recommendation. The suggestion entails some research and some risk. Spend some time finding monographs and journal articles by political scientists that talk about "what is wrong with poly sci today." When you do this research, do not rely too heavily on digital resources. Spend time in the stacks. Look at every major article and book review for the last ten + years for the top three or four journals in your field of interest. (You could accomplish this task in a day or two if you're properly powered by caffeine.) Determine if a fair amount of established scholars worry about the quality of the writing and/or reaching a wider audience. (That is, other academics, if not the general public.) Then, in your statement of purpose, point to this concern and present yourself as part of the solution by saying something along the lines of "I can research AND I can write." Now, your guy's recommendation is much more relevant because it will point to your skills as a writer. The risk to this approach is that you might come across as a bit aggressive and you might hit a nerve or two on the admissions committees. Also, you may invite extra attention to your writing samples (if you're required to provide them). HTH.

How would this figure's letter help advance your candidacy? First, as he does not have a doctorate, he cannot offer an informed opinion on how you may do in a graduate program in your field. Second, as he is not in your field, he cannot offer a credible appraisal of how you might contribute to it. Third, the skill set he's helped you develop--your writing--will be evident in the documents you provide to support your candidacy. MOO, you will be better off finding an established academic to write that third letter of recommendation. In the future, you will be able to ask this figure to help you in other ways where his expertise will be more relevant and his reputation will open more doors. My $0.02.

I respectfully disagree with TMP. IMO, your statement of purpose needs to address at least four questions: Why did you apply to law school and not a graduate history program? Why/how did you decide to leave law school? Why do you now want to go to grad school in history? What reassurances can you offer that, if admitted, you won't withdraw if you realize you'll be happier doing something else? To be clear, I'm not suggesting that you spend a lot of time wringing your hands. I'm suggesting that you get in front of any challenges to your commitment to the craft of history that will be asked by members of the admissions committee.

I've heard professors say that they can easily tell when a letter of recommendation has been written by an academic who really did not know the student. I suggest that you rank the four by who knows you and your work the best and go with those at the top of the list. If you have the time and the tact, you can work on the relationships with those at the bottom of the list.

Good finds, qbtacoma. I am hoping for a more narrowly focused discussion as what works in other fields may not work in history. Another thread looking at this issue is

I'm an Americanist. My primary research interests are naval strategy and policy during the Cold War, the army during the Gilded Age, and the impact (or lack thereof) of historiography on American civilization. FWIW, based upon my research, I think Datroy has the relationship between military historians and the academy a bit skewed. Because so many military (and naval) historians take a utilitarian approach to their fields of study, and because these historians have the advantages of popularity among laypersons and often produce works relevant to the American armed services (and for other reasons as well), they have not yet participated sufficiently in the big debates among academic historians over the last fifty or so years. I'm increasingly convinced that this lack of critical, intense engagement with our peers in the Ivory Tower is one of the primary reasons why the study of war is in bad decline in history departments throughout the U.S. My $0.02.

Yes. One day, I returned 125+ books to the school libraries. A bit later, I got an over due notice for two books. After some frantic triple checking, I affirmed my initial conclusion that I'd returned these two books. So I went to the library and insisted that I had returned the books and that they'd made an error. The librarian proceeded to list the two books as "missing."

T4PHD-- You've voiced concerns about the reputation of various programs. Professors alone do not make a program's reputation--some graduate students play a part as well. I think you will fall into that category regardless of where you end up. (Bluntly, my personal opinion is that you do yourself a great disservice by underestimating the strength of your candidacy and what you'd bring to a Ph.D. program.) MOO, UCR sounds like a good fit given your interests, the research interests of the faculty, your roots in Southern California, and the prospects of getting funding. If you have the time, I do recommend that you visit UCR to talk to some of the professors for a "chemistry test." I also recommend that you double check the UC intercampus exchange program so you know what is and isn't allowed. If all of these things add up all right for you, why not apply there?

I found the experience of preparing and taking Ph.D. qualifying exams quite stressful. (The exams consisted of four three-hour written exams--one in an outside field--and an hour long oral exam by a five person committee.) Three steps that I found very helpful were: Accepting that one can never be as prepared for qualifying exams in history as one would like. One simply cannot know every detail of every event and the historiographical debates surrounding interpretations of those events. If a member of an exam committee decides he wants to play "stump the band," you're going to reply "I don't know" sooner or later. [*]Scheduling to take my exams in as short as an interval as I could tolerate. (I borrowed this concept from a class mate who took his written exams on consecutive days and the oral exam as soon as possible thereafter.) [*]Using the intervals between exams to rest, to think ahead to the next exam, and not to think back. HTH.

The purpose of this thread is to encourage discussion on ways entering graduate students are preparing themselves for their first year of study in a history program. Possible topics of discussion include. Basic goals for the academic year. Formulating a broader plan to get ready for qualifying examinations. Tools/resources you plan to take with you. Skills you plan to improve. Skills you plan to develop. Taking notes. Selecting courses. Managing your study schedule. Managing stress. Integrate work obligations (if any) with course work. Interacting with fellow students as well as your department's staff and faculty. This thread is also for those grad students who have completed that first year to toss in their "If I only knew then what I know now" comments.