Sparky

Feedback for others: WOW on the people who have publications. Me: I know Latin. (I'm a medievalist. This isn't actually a bonus; it's a basic qualifier). Great GPA, both from undergrad and MA. I have been told by 2 of my 5 schools that my writing sample is the most important part of my application. My writing sample, if you'll pardon my language and arrogance, kicks ass. Gah. Can't do more right now.

People have posted on previous threads that: U of Texas (Austin) is accepting fewer people than usual, and Michigan is accepting the same number as last year, which is fewer than 2007 and before. Given that THIS is the year that entire departments (in other subjects, no panic, people) have cancelled their programs, I don't think we should put our hopes in a resurrecting economy making schools more generous. Given that UPenn number, I plan to assume that everyone applying for the humanities this year is going for English, and thus, I have no competition whatsoever.

I am less and less confident of ANY acceptances as the minutes pass, but I guarantee that, if I do get in anywhere, the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth things I will do will ALL be: cry.

It's a little different for a specific student organization than a campaign, I guess, but FWIW: I worked part-time (15-20 hrs/wk) on presidential campaigns in both 2004 and 2008, and the advice I received with respect to my CV/list of activities was to title them as simply "Political Campaign." But since the CRs are a national group, I'm not sure "Nationally-Known Student Political Organization" work really work well. But I don't think you should worry about it hurting you for admissions. I mean, unless your personal statement consists of "I LUV GLENN BECK AND HE IS GOING TO SINGLEHANDEDLY SAVE AMERICA!!!11! MY GOAL IS FOR ALL MY FUTURE STUDENTS TO BE JUST LIKE HIM!"... Although then, the profs would be questioning your sanity rather than your politics.

...Just the ones who ran out of candles.

In my dept, the proficiency tests for modern languages are exactly the same as the ancient ones. Additionally, profs--especially patristics and medieval--usually want us (including the MA students) to have at least one non-English secondary source cited in each paper. But this is HT, which seems to be closer in attitude to the Classics dept at my univ. than to some systematics-heavy theology departments with which I am familiar. -- To the OP: for medieval, you will need both German and French. And you'll actually have to know them, not just "know them for the test." But, of course, medieval is totally worth it.

Ugh, wow, I can't even bear to check the e-mail address that I used for the apps. I think I must be going by the "until I know that they've rejected me, my life has purpose" rule.

Karma Lochrie is a goddess. How is your Latin? For medieval lit--even late medieval and wanting to focus mainly on vernacular texts--Latin is critical.

Well, this can refer to two types of situations. 1. I don't actually know Language Y, but in my SOP I'm going to say I studied it independently which means I'll do it this spring. 2. I've taken four years of Language Z, but all I've read is the translation of "Lord of the Rings." Better make sure I can read something scholarly before the fall. Admissions committees are famously skeptical of the first situation ("the myth of the language auto-didact"...very common in religion, which requires an enormous amount of language training). You need to have coursework to back up your assertion, or have an LOR writer address it (even better).

Generally, language requirements for Ph.D HT are: Latin, ancient Greek, modern French, modern German. The rule is that you have to be proficient in those by the time you pass comps, NOT by the time you enter the program. However, it is not a good idea to *start* a Ph.D with zero languages. Most people can knock off 1-2 tests immediately. If your specific focus lends itself to a substitution, you are often allowed to make one (that is, "one" the number; 2 subs is rare)--if you study liberation theology, for example, swapping Spanish for German or French. BUT in other cases you might just have to add. If I stay with HT, I will have to add Italian, but will be able to swap MIddle High German for Greek. So I'll wind up having to pass 5 proficiency tests. THis is how the profs at my current school explained it to me. We're typical for HT. ETA: Proficiency tests Generally, of two types. In one type, you pick an article/text in another language, give X pages to the department; they give you back a few of those pages to translate. In the other type, the department picks a short text (like, a page or so) and you translate it, sight unseen. It's not as bad as you're probably thinking--your Latin does not have to be perfect to pass the Latin proficiency, in other words.

rockchalk, that totally counts. I figure that acceptance rates for history programs are so miserable, we as a collective need all the help we can get. Quick, everyone, apply to lots of part-time MBA programs! Oh, and as for me, I'm a medievalist...Christianity in the late Middle Ages, mostly, although I am nuts about the era in general. Only 2 out of my 5 apps are actually to history departments; I would be thrilled to teach history OR religion. Heh, you'd think I could have found more than five places to apply...

Well, okay, we've already passed the first two major deadline clusters (Dec. 1; Dec. 15), and rockchalk has already been ACCEPTED somewhere (!). So it's probably time for the History applications/nerves/decisions thread. So. All you history, and history-slash-somethingelse people. Who are you? What's your subfield? Your background? If you want to share (I for one I am too chicken), where are you applying?

I have a sudden burning desire to tell all other history and religion applicants to submit their writing samples in Curlz MT.

Okay, so what does the "application fee" actually PAY FOR, anyway? "Processing"? What does that mean? Am I really paying for storage space on their computer servers? (I would not be averse to paying if the money were going directly into the pockets of the departments' grad division secretaries, but I doubt that is the case, so I remain bitter on a personal level, and pissed off on a social justice level). Okay, I realize that an argument can be made that schools "have to" charge something, or else they would be inundated with applications from people who are applying for the heck of applying, and it would be a burden on LOR writers, et cetera et cetera. ('Course, they're forgetting that SOPs are the biggest non-bank account burden in this process, and are enough of a barrier to prevent blanket applying on their own). But if that really were the only reason, you would think the most prestigious schools would charge the most, with the application fees decreasing from there. I know I am just one person, but comparing the schools I looked at (not just the ones to which I'm applying)...that is definitely not the case. It seems fairly random. Anyone have any insight?

Hm. I took the GRE two years ago, before MA apps, so I'm not counting the test fee. But including all the score reports, it's something like: GREs (including mess-ups) : $120 Transcripts: ~$75 App fees: $250 (most of this is for one school, too, /growl) Postal fees (incl. projected) : $40 No-Doz: $15 Total: ~$500 Dang.

Peterson's, though, usually conflates the acceptance rates for the MA and Ph.D programs. Which, at some schools, can have a WICKED effect. (I know the site allows you to select which degree, but I think that only has to do with which schools show up in the results). For the program I am currently attending, averaging in the MA acceptance rate bumps it up 15%, as there are two MA programs within the department, one of which is not selective at all. Also, most of the figures on that side predate the current financial meltdown. A lot of them are now significantly lower. ETA: Yeesh, sorry to be so depressing...hmm...how to contribute something helpful...ooh! Maybe, check the website for the professional associations for your field? The list of graduate departments on the AAR (American Academy of Religion) site gives acceptance rates for a bunch of programs, although the major history organization's site doesn't.

By "bias," do you mean that you take a strongly negative view of the U.S. and IOs throughout the paper, or that your conclusion is that the U.S. and IOs aren't engaging enough or are engaging improperly? Because if it's your conclusion, and it's strongly supported, I don't think it would be seen as bias. If, however, the U.S.'s lack of involvement is a supporting factoid, then I think it might be problematic. Because "the U.S.'s lack of involvement in international conflicts" reads two ways. One--which is how I think you mean it--is "why aren't we doing anything in (for example) Darfur." The other is "um...the U.S. has a really nasty history of being involved in international conflicts that it probably shouldn't be in (e.g. just about everything we did in Latin America since the beginning of the Cold War)". One thing you might do would be to look at the books and articles published by the faculty at the various programs (who will, of course, be the people on the adcomms). Is there lots of support for interventionist policies, or policies that are often supported by people who also support interventionist activity?

So I'm not a classicist, and it is lucky that no program asked me to submit a list, because mine is basically a bunch of medieval hagiography and then the modern translation of Harry Potter. But I just wanted to say this: In intellectual snob discussions, you people have the ultimate trump card. Because whenever the philosophy and literary theory people get all, "Well, I first became familiar with Heidegger through the translations of Schmuckmanheiserheimhausen, of course, but I think in general he leaves too much of an epistemological impression on the work and I find it more helpful to read the original alongside Niffellungenmachen's recent translation," you guys can just say, "Oh yeah? Well, I read the Odyssey. In Greek." Game over.

StrangeLight posted this on a thread on the History board, and I am going to start paraphrasing it to people who give me the "but you're/your application's so [X], of COURSE you'll get in" so as to avoid the potential of assault charges:

I have decided that my theme song for applications is "O Fortuna" from the Carmina Burana. Most of the songs from the CB are really dirty, but "O Fortuna" basically boils down to, fate's a bitch. It's perfect.

Slightly OT, but...I just want to express my undying jealousy. I am so, so desperate to escape the Midwest. I have been trying to get out of here roughly since elementary school. Four of the five programs I am applying to are in the Midwest. Two are in my hometown. Vita detestabilis, nunc obdurat, et tunc curat, ludo mentis aciem

Catilina, it's true that the ranking of the program you attend has a lot of say in whether or not your job applications will get looked at...but whether or not you are a good fit for that particular program has a lot of say in whether you will be admitted. I think that maybe you are conceiving of "fit" too narrowly? I mean, it's one thing to say, as an applicant, "I want to write my dissertation about the depiction of blonde-haired angels in late medieval church art, which is studied by Dr. Who, using psychoanalytic theory as developed by Kristeva and Kaplan, whcih Dr. Who and Dr. Companion both use." OKay, that's maybe a little over the top. But "fit" conceived more broadly would be along the lines of: if my interest is a topic such as the economic impact of the changing definition of rape in high medieval England, then I would make sure I apply to programs with specialists in medieval economic history, medieval women, AND a general strength in English history and lit. Because I might not write my dissertation about that specific topic, but it's a good indication that my general interests are along those lines. Stuff like that.

With only 4 publications? Not likely. You'd need at least a 1591 to make up for that.

"Less educated" is the phrase that came to me. Or, longer but maybe better, "not as well educated." I agree with you that "poorly educated" carries a slightly different meaning. With respect to "intervention to/in", what is the full sentence? I lean towards "in" on the grounds that we usually talk about performing an intervention on a person, meaning, a spatial preposition (on/in), but more context might help here.

Notre Dame had a fee this year. There was a discount for applying early, but it still wasn't free. Re: transcript fees, did you notice a difference between public schools and private schools? I have to send transcripts from 2 private schools, both of which are free, and from 2 public schools, both of which charge a fee. What a way to cut costs.