ashiepoo72

Last class with the worst professor I've ever had is tonight. My body is ready.

My MA adviser told me specifically to apply to around 10 schools because it's so competitive and because she knew I want the PhD for the sake of spending 5-7 years getting the PhD and won't die if I get shut out of academia after. I don't think applying widely makes you desperate or your interests too broad (based on my experience at least--my research is fairly specific) but I think TMP and telkanuru are right in their advice based on your career goals. I think top 25-30 is a good range to look at, and I've told my classmates who are applying this year not to even look below 50 even though I did, because let's be honest...it's career suicide if you want an academic position. If you ARE planning to apply to a bunch of schools, the best advice I can give you is to fill out all the basic information of the applications ahead of time. I had all that done before November even rolled around, so then I could just upload documents and click submit when I finished my statement and WS. That said, I think this is an extremely personal and personalized experience, and you need to figure out what schools you truly want to apply to. Don't apply anywhere you wouldn't go. If that adds up to 10 applications and you can afford to do it, or if it ends up being 3, that's totally fine.

You should have a histiriographical review in your paper somewhere. It doesn't need to be more than a paragraph or 2, but show you know the relevant works. Everything else can be primary source with the pertinent secondary works you're using to frame your argument.

Several reasons. I was wait listed for funding. After visiting Minnesota and Davis I knew those were my top choices, even though I liked Salim a lot and plan on maintaining contact with him throughout my career. My adviser at Davis has a lot of qualities I admire and hope to learn from. She knows the professional side of academia really well on top of being very active in the field. Finally, Davis offered me a lot more money and security. I cannot stress enough how important having financial security is. I wouldn't be able to do my best work if I was scratching pennies together and eating ramen and hot dogs for dinner every night (which I did in undergrad). Visiting the programs made a huge difference in my decisions--as in, I was almost decided on Minnesota and completely changed my mind. It's a fabulous department, I absolutely loved the professors and grad students, but in the end Davis was the perfect fit for me. I am still in the honeymoon phase for sure. I couldn't be more excited to go there. I should say that I thought Davis (and Minnesota) was a shot in the dark, and I very nearly didn't apply, so when I was accepted I went into shock. I hadn't even considered going there because I never thought they'd take me. So to all of you who feel "unworthy" of programs, don't. Do your due diligence in researching and applying to places that can help you grow as a scholar and you may be surprised where you end up.

Salim is amazing, he is a dream adviser and such a nice man--another coincidence, he really inspired me to move my research in the direction I'm now taking it. I PMed you some suggestions. Keep in mind that if your main adviser is strong in your general period, as long as the department has people who can supplement their knowledge you'll be just fine. My adviser is an expert on the Cold War but doesn't study the exact area I want to look at, but she is excited about my project and said Davis has good coverage for me. Basically, you want an adviser who feels they have enough expertise to help guide you and a department that can fill in any gaps. For future applicants, I highly recommend/suggest/cajole/insist you research entire departments in depth before choosing programs. Look at related departments, too, if you're interested in area studies and interdisciplinarity. Look at university resources, archival material. Look at what the surrounding area has to offer, if anything (Archives II near UMaryland comes to mind). When you write your statements, show the departments you did the legwork and know how you fit there and how the department and university fit you.

That's super exciting Heimat! I'd love to hear what you think of the classes and thanks Chiqui! I'm glad it's finally over (and my hand has finally recovered). I registered for classes this morning...it's, like, officially official guys. Now I just need to finish the million papers I neglected while prepping for comps...

Try to apply to places with multiple people you can work with. In the event one adviser can't take a student that year, or has already taken their "quota," you'll still have a shot. I credit my applying to multiple people at institutions that had strong coverage in my field to my surprising number of acceptances. Coincidentally, I applied to some of the same people you're considering haha Also, an adviser doesn't need to match you exactly--contact Logevall and see if HE'S comfortable advising a project like yours. When I researched programs, it seems like he had students all over the place. I would also suggest you not apply to work with someone who you may not get along with. I don't think "because Yale" is a great reason unless there are other professors there who you're interested in working with. Keep in mind a bad adviser will make your life a living hell and maybe even prevent you from getting all the way through. I've heard plenty of horror stories from my MA adviser. I like that you're keeping your career options open. I will say that someone at OSU suggested I tighten up my career goals in my statement, so I ended up putting my "dream job" of teaching at the postsecondary level. Not that these don't change, but programs like to see you have some direction.

Like I said, you'll wanna go somewhere like Oxford or Cambridge. Keep in mind the job market is ridiculously flooded with American PhDs, so unless you go to a tippy top UK PhD you're going to have an even harder time. It's not a "lesser" credential. American universities take things like training in pedagogy, teaching, etc very seriously. These are things not as systematized at UK PhDs that jump straight to the dissertation.

Some programs will allow you to transfer maybe one or two MA courses--usually this is listed in the grad handbook or department website, so you should be reading these with a fine-tooth comb as you research (actually, you should do this anyway). But the impression I got was that programs want to leave their particular stamp on you, and part of doing that is going through coursework, including methodology and historiography. Honestly, having taken a few MA courses doesn't mean you won't get anything out of PhD coursework. There is always more methodology and historiography to learn. You may want to research PhDs in the UK, they jump straight into the dissertation, but keep in mind unless you do like Oxford or Cambridge you will have trouble getting a job in the U.S.--because UK PhDs forgo the coursework part, programs here view them as (generally) less rigorous.

I survived comps! I felt like money when I finished the exam haha I'm so excited...I get to sign up for Fall quarter classes next week AND my adviser is teaching a U.S. history seminar Hope y'all are doing well

Soooo looking forward to taking comps tomorrow....

I look at footnotes when the author makes an interesting/new/controversial/contested claim or something along those lines, and skim through the rest. I also like to read any extended commentary in the notes, often these are historiographical arguments. I've gotten in the habit of scanning bibliographies to trace foundational works and interesting sources, things I should read and potential material for future projects. Acknowledgements are pretty important, for all the reasons Sigaba said. These are people that influenced the author in some way. I go through and underline names of important historians in the acknowledgements before I even look at the intro.

Absolutely. I can even do it for courses entirely outside my field, and pretty well. Basically, you need to read the intro and conclusion very closely. I also pay close attention to the table of contents and index to find what concepts/events/people are important. Once that's done, I look at chapter intros/conclusions if the book has them, if not I either gut the chapters pretty quickly or choose 1-2 chapters that seem particularly important to read more closely. Sometimes in a pinch I don't even crack the chapters at all. Book reviews are a great supplement, too. JSTOR is your friend. My first semester of the MA I read books cover to cover. Now that I've become fairly experienced at gutting, I understand the books I read even more than when I read word for word. The whole point, as everyone else has said, is to get down the author's thesis, main points, evidence and historiographical positioning. All the other stuff is superfluous when you're studying history at the graduate level.

The best advice I've gotten on gutting a book is to take no more than 3 hours. Limiting time is one of the keys to effective predatory reading because it forces you to just read for what you need. Obviously some books need to be read more closely (like the pillars of your field), but for the most part I limit myself to 2-3 hours regardless of book length.

That's so exciting, Heimat!! My MA program just posted the class list for fall and I'm drooling over it, they of course decided to offer courses I would kill to take right when I'm leaving. I got a weird email from one of the first programs I declined congratulating me for accepting the offer of admission (??) and when I replied that I had actually declined the offer they wrote back something like "we have noted your withdrawal of you previous decision." Wait, what?

I wish I could move in September! I'm aiming for July, so I can get my daughter acclimated and in school. I'm gonna get so much pleasure reading done!

That's exciting Chiqui! I can't imagine how stressful selling your home is. I'm pretty lucky to be staying with family, so all I need to do is pick up and move. Fingers crossed your husband gets the job! Keep us posted and cross your fingers that I find an apartment tomorrow, too! Even if I don't, I'm looking forward to visiting campus. I haven't had much of a chance to check it out.

I think that's pretty accurate. My GPA is probably the lowest of my friends who are planning to apply to PhD programs. My MA adviser told us that you can explain one B, but more than one is a red flag.

OP asked the average, so my answer stands. Most MA grads would be close to 4.0, especially the ones applying to PhD programs.

As close to 4.0 as you can get. Mine is like 3.9, and that made me nervous when I was applying to PhD programs. It also helps if you have a strong history GPA from undergrad (I think an A- or better average is good, so like 3.7ish).

Don't worry! I'm starting this early because I have to move earlier on account of my daughter starting school over a month before I do.

Historians have strong opinions...who would've thought? On another note, I'm pretty excited to go look at apartments around Davis this Wednesday. After the nuts and bolts stuff, I'm planning on spending the day at the library, doing hw and generally geeking out. How is everyone else's moving prep going?

That's exactly why I'm taking this a little personally, although I know that I was a damn strong applicant and I'm confident in my abilities. What good does it do for each new cohort to be perceived as lesser by the people who came before? That attitude is not conducive to a collegial department in my opinion. I hope each new cohort is strong so our discussions are high level and I can learn from them, as much as I hope I can contribute to their doctoral career in some way.

I don't think it's possible for a professor to know that this year's applicant pool is the worst "ever." Maybe I'm sensitive too. I don't want to think that I was accepted because I'm a little less shitty than the rest. And that's not the impression I got from my adviser, who told me her department has gotten more applicants than ever and is slowly decreasing the cohort size. Honestly, when I read that a bunch of tenured profs were discussing how much better applicants were before, it reminded me of the nostalgic feelings people have when discussing the 1960s radicalism or WWII. I'm not saying that some programs might not have gotten a bunch of bad apples this year, but I find that attitude suspect when I look at sources in the archive or listen to oral histories, let alone when people today harken back to the "good ol' days" when people sucked less. There is no greatest generation y'all.

School is the one thing going extremely well for me. My entire life is a complete shitshow, utterly falling apart, I wish I didn't quit smoking mess. But school is fabulous. Also, I have trouble crying even though I probably need to badly right now.