Sigaba

The purpose of this thread is to discuss the different approaches to reading that one might use as a graduate student in a history program. I respectfully request that all participants in this thread state clearly how far along you are in your program. This information can be as simple as "I'm in my second year of coursework," or "I'm taking my qualifying exams in two semesters." I also respectfully request that participants differentiate between methods that they've heard and ones that they've used and to distinguish among those methods that have worked very well, moderately well, and those that have crashed and burned. And, since history is the study of change over time, please do mention any significant changes or even minor tweaks you've made to your reading methods as you've progressed through your program. It might also be helpful if participants in this thread said a little about their views towards reading historical works. That is, what are your basic objectives when you read various types of works?

One could easily make an argument that compare the sensibilities towards this issue or that one between two institutions, if those sensibilities are that important to you. For example, if an aspiring environmental historian wanted to go to a "greener" campus, she could compare the EIRs for facility master plans. Or, if an applicant had an interest in military affairs, she could point to a campus's approach to its ROTC battalion and veterans' affairs. is there a risk to such an approach, yes. But some people take risks for causes in which they believe. I can step on my crank as well as anybody, and I'm unlikely to be confused as a "people person." However, I think that my perspective towards the craft of history has positioned me to throw in my two cents in ways that resonate more often than they ruffle.

Maybe there should be a tips for reading like a historian thread, if enough people think it would be helpful.

Please do not miss the opportunity to contribute to the 2012 results thread, located The information may provide helpful to future applicants.

There is what you're assigned to read, what you're expected to read, and what you will end up reading. Assigned reading In my experience, the assigned readings varied greatly by the type of class. At the upper end, in terms of pages, courses in social history tended to have each week a monograph and up to six or seven articles so that one could get a sense of the historiographical debate in which the monograph is situated. On top of these assignments were book reviews--generally two or three a semester. Military/diplomatic courses were middle of the pack in terms of assigned books. However, one got to do extra reading for book reviews and class presentations. In my experience, one got to read at least two books for each of three book reviews, and to do what ever additional reading necessary to frame those works in a historiographical context (e.g. the causes of the War of 1812, the "military revolution," the influence of Mahan upon sea power, the origins of the Cold War, the "nature" of the War in Vietnam). At the lower end in terms of total pages assigned, were classes in theory. However, as theoretical works can be very, ah, turgid, the sledding could be rather difficult. Expected reading On top of what one is assigned, there's what one is expected to read. Some professors will pass out from time to time bibliographies. They will then go through them during a seminar and indicate the titles that can be read, skimmed, or avoided altogether. There's a certain "code" in these conversations that you'll either figure out very quickly or end up reading the wrong works while avoiding the ones you need to know. The body language of professors during these conversations can also matter. Then, there are your reading lists for your qualifying exams. These lists can be built from a combination of your coursework, the bibliographies, your own historiographical research, and negotiations with the professors who will administer your qualifying exams. Another source of information will be those graduate students who are ABD. However, they can be hard to track down and they are not always inclined to be as helpful as they might. (The bottom line is that qualifying exams can kick your backside and make you feel two inches tall. You may not feel like talking about them after you've passed. You will find out how deep the scars are when you're going through your qualifying exams and every professor in the department you meet will go out of his or her way to salt the wound with some playful ribbing.) On top of these two categories, your department will expect you to do more than enough reading to learn the broader contours of your profession. Names will be dropped, and titles referenced in passing, and then you'll go to the library and spend enough time with a work so that you understand the historiographical significance of that work. And then there's the reading of periodicals your department assumes you're doing. One professor made this assumption clear by giving first year students-- at the end of their first class meeting as graduate students-- one week to write a five to seven page essay that discussed ten years' worth of issues of three periodicals--with one having to be completely outside our fields of interest. What you'll end up reading The rule of thumb is that you'll average a book a day, just about every day, until you take your qualifying exams. For some, this guideline will translate into reading about a book a day. For others, it will be about developing an understanding of the core arguments of one book a day. The variables that make it difficult to make the rule of thumb a hard and fast rule include: individual differences (some feel best reading every word of most books), a department's parameters for qualifying exams, an exam committee's combined expectations, one's relationships with the professors on one's committee, the individual differences among professors, and the historiographical sophistication of one's fields.

Congratulations, Pugsley87!

I just want to re-enforce Andsowego's guidance to figure out ways to do chemistry checks. (Oh, if I only knew then what I know now, I'd be even more not bitter than I already am.) An additional method is to look at a POI's acknowledgements. Does she thank those who sit on the opposite side of the aisle of very controversial issues? Does she leave no stone unturned when it comes to getting guidance from SMEs? Are there signs that she incorporated the feedback of graduate students into her work? Do her thanks ring true or do they sound routine/pro forma? Is she herself often thanked in the acknowledgements of the work of others? Please also note that at some point, you may need to say "no" to members of your committee. When you're doing your chemistry tests, see how potential committee members respond to that word. (And also, please consider the value of developing your ability to say "no" well before you pick a dissertation topic.)

Target1600-- Do everything you can--and then some--to solve your issue in house, face-to-face, and behind closed doors. If you escalate this situation, your victory may plant the seeds for future sorrow. That is, the worst case scenario is not your current POI throwing sand in the works. The worst case scenario is you getting a reputation for being a PITA and that reputation leading you to PNG status at the program you're going to attend. Professors, like bosses, have the discretion to have off the record telephone conversations, and make decisions based upon those conversations alone. And while you try to chase down the bouncing ball, they will move on to the next issue.

First, ask yourself the question: do you want to be a historian? If the answer is an unequivocal "yes," your choice is clear. If you're not sure, please do read on. Compare your current decision-making matrix to the order in which laid out your interests in an earlier post of yours (quoted below). Add to your decision making matrix potential dissertation topics and the types of sources you might use. Would you be closer to the most critical sources in California or in Illinois? Also factor in the extended network of SMEs within driving distance in California compared to their counterparts in Illinois. Additionally, unless you've already established a good relationship with the POI at Northwestern University, please do understand that relationships between a graduate student and his/her professors/role models can be very dynamic. (Have you looked at dissertations that Professor Yuh has supervised? Have you spoken with any of her ABDs? Do all you can to look before you leap.) Finally, keep in mind that your list of interests is very long. The research interests and areas of specializations of American historians are increasingly specialized (some say overly so, but that's a different conversation). Sooner or later, you're going to have to make some hard choices. If you make some preliminary choices now, before you pick a program, you might have a clearer vision of which program is best suited to get you where you want to go. HTH.

As you go along, you'll find that historiography is remarkably consistent. As an example, many of the professional issues Charles Oman discussed in his autobiographical essays of the 1920s and 1930s are still relevant today.

I like using lamps with full spectrum bulbs. If you can find such a lamp at your local COSTCO, consider getting two.

In addition to the methods laid out in post #33, one could also look at the top journals in your field for articles clustered as "round tables." Also, featured reviews may focus on works that reflect theoretical innovations. Another way to find the leading edge of innovation is to look at the schedules of presentations for conference panels. A third option is to find published collections of essays that explore "new directions" in a field. I do exercise caution when looking for the leading edge. Sometimes, what seems to work today won't necessarily pan out tomorrow. And often, when historians incorporate the sensibilities and best practices of other disciplines, important issues get lost in translation.

Even though your decision to disclose your concerns to an undergraduate helped you, I do not think this type of behavior is going to help you in the long run.

^The proof reading skills are offline today. The post should have read "latter," not "later."

No. He was basically a quirky guy.

Nice post, Goldilocks. Let me develop my point. In my experience, academic institutions benchmark themselves against "comparable" schools. The comparisons include everything from entering freshman SAT scores to faculty prestige, to parking fees. When a school or a department gets serious about moving ahead of comp schools (or taking its status to the next tier) few stones will be left unturned. As a recent example, last spring there was a thread here that might have been relevant to a specific program. I shared the information with a mentor associated with that program, and I was told--not asked--to get more information. So if an applicant picks one institution or another because the selected institution has a superior IT infrastructure, a specific collection of papers on microfilm, or a greater commitment to the environment, or a different sensibility towards diversity or the environment, or increased opportunities for mentoring, a "rejected" department might decide to do something about such variables. However, these choices are difficult to make if a department does not receive thoughtful and informed feedback.

In what ways is the program you're going to attend more dynamic? Are there ways you can phrase this dynamism in ways that can generate a conversation among the POI and his peers on how they might improve their own program?

Thank you for the clarification. MOO, it reflects well on your character that you are willing to take a step back from an idea and ask "Is this the way to go?"

And I thought this thread was about developing relationships with POIs. If some of you want to make conversations about getting through graduate school and professional development into snarkfests and/or popularity contests, that's your choice. However, don't be too surprised if members on this BB who offer guidance based upon the mentoring and training they've received, as well as their experiences make choices of their own.

The downside of the later is that you don't know if the professors who wrote the syllabi are going to change up the reading lists. Sometimes, a professor will assign a cutting edge book he/she thinks is great but later puts aside after graduate students in a class have torn it to shreds and the work has received unfavorable reviews. The downside of the former is that you might end up going down the rabbit hole for institution A only to end up at institution B and to discover that the rabbit holes there look different. What you might do is grab some of the "must read" books in your areas of emphasis, familiarize yourself with those titles, and then look through the bibliographic essays that they contain (if any). Another alternative is to figure out what are the most prestigious book and essay awards in your areas of interest and read selectively from the list of prize winners.

What if the POI has a 100% success rate in tenure track placements but less than 25% of his/her students ever get that far? What I'm driving at here is that just as a historically significant decision is not made based upon one factor alone, the decision of where to go should not be made based upon one criterion alone. I also recommend that one consider the possibility that just because you go to a school to work with a specific professor or in a specific field doesn't mean you won't change your mind down the line. (And such changes don't have to reflect souring relationships or bad chemistry. You could set out with an interest in A and find B to be more compelling.)

From the information you've provided, it seems that your guy values his sense of fulfillment more than he values your desire for a self-efficacious life. It also seems that your guy is willing to trade your opportunity for self efficacy for his vision of his future. If this dynamic works for you, it works for you. (However, were you my friend, I'd be asking "Does this dynamic really work for you?" until I was blue in the face.) FWIW, I've done fields for two professors in two different fields of psychology. Both made the point that a person isn't fully formed until he/she reaches his/her late twenties/earlier thirties. That is, the person you are now is not who you'll be ten years from now. In ten years, there will still be plenty of men around who will think you're the bee's knees. But will there also be opportunities for you like the ones you have now?

I think I should have emphasized the following a bit more. His second Ph.D. was in a field that calls into question the premise of a knowable "objective truth." From this vantage point, he would, from time to time, take on the entire department at once by offering a stinging critique of the craft of history. He'd then sit back, his eyes glimmering with humor, as his colleagues formulated their replies.

Before buying anything at a school's student store, I recommend that entering graduate students consult with their department's administrative staff to see if they receive a discount on purchases for working as a T.A. (Some staff members might green light the discount regardless.)

The Forty Acres has a program that might be of interest to you <<LINK>>.