ashiepoo72

I got 3 acceptances at the end of February or early March. Once you get to mid-March I'd start wondering if you were informally wait listed or rejected, but not until then.

FWIW, I think department culture is hugely important. If the department has a douchey culture, I doubt I'd be able to do my best work, maybe even finish the program. I wouldn't want to hate the next 5-7 years of my life even if I could push through. Maybe prestige is more important to some people, but the way I looked at it was: which program is offering me the resources--financial, intellectual and, yes, even emotional--that I need to do my best work? The tippy top program in my field can't boost my chances of getting a job if I hate being there so much I do crappy work and/or drop out. I won't pretend rank isn't important, but it sounds like you've gotten into several well-regarded programs--i'd also consider your potential advisers, are they established scholars with multiple publications and generally good reputations in your field? Unless your goal is to teach at an R1 or the placement records at ASU and UGA are abysmal, I don't see why they shouldn't be serious contenders.

You should definitely be happy. The history department at MSU is lovely.

Davis acceptances went out and recruitment is in about 2 weeks, but I know there was a silent wait list last year. Not sure about this year.

I know everyone is hammering home that you should go to UCLA for a variety of reasons--the ridiculous funding, the prestige of the program (it can compete with Harvard...UCLA is a top 10 program, so the fact that this is even a debate boggles my mind), etc. I did an unfunded MA and, while I don't regret it, I wouldn't recommend anyone do the same. And I did it because I had no other option. I would've taken a funded PhD offer in a heartbeat. I'm just going to ask something I have wondered since I joined this forum about 2 years ago whenever something like this comes up: why did you apply to UCLA in the first place? Why apply to a program toward which you are obviously ambivalent? Maybe you need to consider what about UCLA caught your attention and made you decide to throw down the money for the application fee. to all future applicants: when you're applying, consider each program individually and ask yourself--will I be happy here if it's my only acceptance? If the answer is yes, apply. If it's not, don't waste your money and time.

First of all, I think it's great you're planning on declining offers right when you know for sure you won't attend them rather than holding onto them longer. If these programs have a wait list, the people on it will be very grateful. Secondly, you're going to have to email the DGS or whoever coordinates admissions, but I would also send a personal email to any POI you were in contact with. For the DGS, I said something like this: "Dear Professor [last name], after careful consideration of my offers, I have decided to decline [X Program]'s offer of admission. [if you attended recruitment, thank them for their hospitality here. Thank the DGS for any information/assistance provided. Wish the department well if it doesn't feel weird to do so]." For your POI/s, I would be much less formulaic and reiterate that you were excited to have the opportunity to work with them and hope you can stay in touch/grab a coffee at conferences/get in contact when you're in their area/etc. Some programs need you to decline an offer through the online system, so look out for that. But definitely email the DGS even if that's the case.

I had the same experience. Most programs put several admits in a hotel room, but Davis gave each person attending recruitment their own and even reimbursed my travel costs (when I only lived 2 hours away). Not that this was the deciding factor, of course. The general mood of grad students is a good thing to look for as well. Some programs have a "some people get way more money and others struggle" vibe. Also, some places were hyper-competitive because not everyone comes in with funding or enough funding. This totally affects collegiality and department culture. Other places have plenty of money but for some reason the department culture inspires fierce and sometimes nasty competition, which isn't my style so I avoided those places. I was surprised at how honest grad students tended to be, and how negative things came up even during recruitment when everyone is trying to woo the shit out of you. Made me think, how much worse is it once you're attending?

Last year I emailed Indiana and OSU because I didn't get a rejection during the rejection waves. I basically emailed the DGS at each program saying the programs were some of my top choices and that I'd like to know my status so I could make an informed decision when it came to other programs that admitted me. The result: My Indiana rejection had slipped through the cracks and i was wait listed for funding at OSU. I waited til the first or second week of March to contact the programs. Personally I think it's still a bit early to solicit results, many programs have multiple waves throughout February.

My child played a huge role when I decided to pursue a PhD. I thought I'd get the MA and teach high school, but I fell in love with research and postsecondary education and knew I wouldn't be happy doing anything else (after trying other things, so it wasn't an abstract decision). I don't want my daughter to settle in a job that makes her miserable but pays her well, so I'd be the worst kind of hypocrite to do so myself. Might as well pursue what I'm passionate about for 5-7 years and get paid to do it--even if I fail at getting a TT job, I still will have completed something meaningful to me that I hope my daughter can appreciate. No careers are certain, some are just more uncertain. I'll find a job somewhere, maybe not where I want doing what I want, but I wouldn't even have a shot if I didn't take this path. You really need to think about what will make you happy, if you'll regret never attempting to pursue a PhD. I don't know about you, but I don't want many regrets weighing me down when it's all said and done. Go in with eyes wide open when it comes to the job market for your field and the struggles ahead, and if you still think a PhD is for you, I say go for it.

Well, based on memories of the crazy range of emotions from my application season, I think the ridiculously giddy reaction to acceptances and the downright miserable reaction to hearing nada except the joy of others are both perfectly normal emotions, and technically this space is for both extremes and everything in between. All I'm saying is that we all take to heart that there are many people on this forum going through many different things, and to try to show each other a bit of patience and respect. Then again, no one died and made me queen of the castle so feel free to ignore me. I'm a Bernie fan, so you know I'm a dirty commie pacifist.

It's very hard to curb enthusiasm when acceptances start rolling around, and this forum is a place for people to be excited about their choices. I think it's important for people still waiting not to take other people's results to heart, but also for people who've had success thus far to keep in mind there are people still in limbo who are feeling very vulnerable and unsure right now. It's one thing to excitedly report an acceptance, another to discuss the "agonizing" choice between several great programs. It totally is an agonizing choice, and people should be able to discuss it somewhere (There is a "decisions" thread in the general forum somewhere, and you can also create one in this forum, for example) but the fact of the matter is, so many people don't even have an option yet, let alone a choice.

Good places to start on the modern U.S. side: Castigliola, Frank and Michael J. Hogan, eds. America in the World: The Historiography of American Foreign Relations since 1941 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 2014. Hogan, Michael J. and Thomas G. Paterson, eds. Explaining the History of American Foreign Relations 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 2004. (the 3rd ed. of this is being released I think this month, so I would hold out for that one) and for funsies, a classic everyone studying U.S. foreign relations should read: Williams, William Appleman. The Tragedy of American Diplomacy 50th anniversary ed. W.W. Norton and Co., 2009.

Go to recruitment visits. If you're considering all those factors and still don't have a clear idea of which to choose, visiting the programs will help immensely.

That's actually a really personal decision I think. It's going to be different for everyone. Some people think it's more important to choose the highest ranked program they get into because it'll increase their chance of getting a job. Other people think choosing the program with the best fit will set them up to do the best research possible and thus increase their chance of getting a job. I based my decision on a combination of those things, plus funding and department culture. I didn't choose the highest ranked program to which I was admitted (based on US News, which has its own issues), but the ranking between the programs wasn't so far off that I was concerned it would be detrimental. I would look closely at placement at both programs, firstly. Additionally, if the rank difference is extreme (like top 10 vs. below 50 or something), then that would make me lean more heavily toward the higher ranked program. Then again, if I didn't think I could do my best work or might not even get through a PhD at the higher ranked place, that would also come into consideration. Whatever you decide, it's got to be something you're happy with in the end, regardless of what everyone else would choose.

First of all, everyone goes through a sense of inadequacy at some point in grad school. You're in excellent company. You have to be confident that programs accepted you because you have what it takes to succeed. They get plenty of talented applicants and from that large pool they spotted something particularly promising in your materials. I'd also like to give a shout out to all the state school grads! I got my MA at a state school that hadn't sent anyone to a PhD in like 3 years before I applied. The training there was amazing, though, and I still stay in touch with many of the faculty because they are wonderful. Don't let your state school lineage bring you down--some of the best scholars end up teaching at these campuses (which we could say is a reflection of the job market, but I feel like I lucked out getting excellent training for a fraction of the cost). As to writing, I would suggest keeping your language simple, don't try to insert words just because they're trendy or sexy. If the words are awkward for you to write, they're going to be awkward to read. It's just as easy to write "in and of itself" as "ipso facto," and that might feel more natural to your voice as a writer. Also, we like these sophisticated phrases (my fave: raison d'etre), but when we fill our books with a bunch of academese and phrases in foreign languages, we are assuming the people we want to read our books understands what we're saying. Even I struggle with some of the academese I read, and I consider myself a fairly well-educated person. Simpler language isn't worse--it's more accessible. I've never had trouble with writing, and have even tutored others for years and years now (I would suggest doing this--tutoring GREATLY improved my writing because I actually had to think about why good writing is good), but everyone struggles with some aspect of the writing process. When I started my MA, some of my favorite professors tore my work apart and made me question if I ever had any talent at all. There was aggressive removal of passive voice, awkward sentences and words that I shouldn't have been using (because I thought finding sexy synonyms was smart--its only a good idea if you pick words that actually make sense, which I often didn't). What I'm trying to say is, you will improve the more you write, the more topics on which you write, the more people who comment on your work. Read an established historian's first book and read their most recent work--writing is a lifelong learning kind of thing, and everyone improves with practice, time and lots and lots of reading.

UCSB funding is case by case. If you really want to go there you should definitely go to recruitment. You should also get in contact with the DGS and let them know that you'd go to UCSB if they matched the fully funded offers you've received elsewhere.

It was my experience that top ranked programs funded more, not less, or at least funded 5 years. Everyone should be applying for external funds no matter what their funding is, these look great on CVs when you're on the job market. Additionally, many programs have internal dissertation fellowships for which you can apply, and there are external ones as well. My program funds 5 years outright, but part of the reason I chose it was that grad students told me getting a 6th year is very easy, and I came in with a first-year fellowship so that means I'm eligible for a 7th. These additional years would be funded as TAships. My experience in the UC system is that TAships actually aren't THAT much less than what I get monthly via fellowship, not enough of a difference to illicit concern that I won't survive on a TA salary. Depending on the department, there are internal funds for research and conferences as well, and there are many external grants for the same.

Even for people entering with an MA the PhD takes longer than 4 years--one program gave me the same funding offer, so they wanted coursework done in 2, comps and dissertation and language requirements and minors done in 2.5 (so mostly during the coursework phase) and 1.5 years to do research and write the dissertation. Some people can do that--i knew I couldn't, being that my project is transnational (I probably couldn't even if all my research was in the US to be honest). If you have a 5-year funding offer from somewhere else but really want to go to a program that only offered 4, I would contact your potential adviser and/or the DGS and let them know you would choose their program for sure, but having received an offer of 5 years at another program, are concerned and want to know if they can match it. I know a girl who did this last year and got the additional year. Obviously only do this if you'd really take the program's offer if they up your funding.

To the Davis people worried about funding--don't! The program funds all admits for 5 years, they just like to go over funding at recruitment and send the finalized package after. It's actually really nice to have the DGS explain the ins-and-outs of funding in person where you can get all your questions answered. I hope to see you all in March!

I hope this goes without being said, but I'm not trolling for upvotes lol...I meant upvote the original post with the beyond excellent questions list.

Minnesota is likely done admitting students. I'm pretty sure they don't have a wait list, but it's possible.

Congrats to the Davis peeps, if you have any questions, feel free to PM me. I'll definitely be at recruitment in March Good luck everyone!

Here's the list of questions to ask during recruitment. If you think they're helpful, don't forget to upvote! http://forum.thegradcafe.com/topic/52849-dear-2015-applicants-here-is-what-the-2014ers-learned-this-year-that-might-help-you/?do=findComment&comment=1058192567

Go to as many recruitments you can, for any program that is a contender. I will say this--if you know you're going to decline a program's offer, don't go to recruitment. They spend a good deal of $ wining and dining people who they're hoping to convince to attend the program. I think it's only fair that people who go to recruitment go with an open mind. Others may disagree with me, but I think it's in bad taste to use these events as a networking opportunity when a department you already know you'll refuse is covering the expense, though I agree with TMP that you should definitely attend if you haven't made up your mind and network wherever you visit! I keep in contact with profs at departments I never got the chance to visit--you don't need recruitment events for that. I'll step off my soap box now, and suggest that you dress in comfortable, weather-appropriate clothes that aren't sloppily put together--look nice but not like you're going to prom. You're going to be walking around a lot, so wear good shoes. I would bring one nicer outfit, all the recruitments I attended had either a nice dinner with faculty and students or a night where grad students hit the town. There is a FABULOUS list on the English forum that covers every conceivable question you should ask while visiting a program. I'll try to find it and post a link here. Recruitment made a huge difference for me. I was torn between two programs, pretty much thought I had decided then vacillated some more. There is no better way to get a feel for a department and how you fit in it than to physically see for yourself.

You bring up a great point, @SunshineLolipops. There are definitely programs outside the top 30 with good placement records, more commonly if they are known for specific subfields (MSU and African history for example). Everyone should be looking at and asking about placement, as well as closely scrutinizing that study on the top 20 programs that disproportionately place people in TT jobs that people have cited here several times. A caveat is if you're accepted to work with a famous adviser who happens to be at a lower-ranked program. Advisers with rockstar name recognition are a plus, but another caveat--only if people at the departments to which you apply to work know anything about your field.