navyblackmaroon
-
Posts
70 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by navyblackmaroon
-
-
7 hours ago, luz.colorada said:
I am wondering if anyone has any knowledge of U of Chicago's MA program through CLAS (Center for Latin American Studies). I was, unsurprisingly, rejected from their history program but referred to, and accepted by, their MA in Latin American studies. They have also offered me a pretty decent funding package so any information on the program would be much appreciated! I have found more about the MAPPS program but can't seem to find much on this one.
I have met quite a few MLAS students. The MA students tend to take courses with the PhD students. Some of them even take the seminar course that all 1st and 2nd year Latin Americanist PhDs have to take. The MA students are also encouraged to attend the Latin American History Workshop or the Latin America and the Caribbean Workshop. Overall, my impression is that it is a rather intense program. Unsurprisingly, by the end of it some of the students decide to ditch academia and do something else (consulting, etc).
-
On 1/30/2017 at 1:21 PM, npliegoc said:
Latin American history. I focus on post-1945 Mexico. What about you?
Congratulations! Paul Gillingham is a great guy. In fact, the entire Latin Americanist group at NU is very friendly.
-
On 9/27/2016 at 2:49 PM, krystasonrisa said:Hi everyone! My name is Krysta and I just finished my M.A. at UIUC in Latin American Studies, but my research was historical and my advisor was Dr. Nils Jacobsen. I'm starting this thread to create a space for prospective applicants to talk about the various steps in their process, but also because I'd like some input while I look for matches.
I study social/cultural history from 1850 in Costa Rica. Moving forward, I'm interested in questions of children's history, identity formation, and the evolution of notions of children's rights and agency. I'm also looking to expand into a comparative lens, looking at experiences in Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and El Salvador.
I have the budget to apply to six programs.So far I have picked:1. Premo at FIU 2. Putnam at Pitt 3. Ghould at IUB 4. Wolfe/Pentzer at Tulane 5. Wills at UCRiverside (not in History, but I like him.) 6. Dávila at UIUCThoughts? Advice? I'm open to anything.
Thank you!
Also, I've been looking for matches for over a year, so if anyone else is having trouble finding matches, perhaps we could mutually help each other.I wonder if UChicago could be a good match for your interests. Dain Borges has worked on the history of families in the Brazilian Northeast. Moreover, Tara Zahra's second book addressed the issue of children in post-war Europe and the political ideas that originated out of efforts to "reconstruct" families after the war.
-
That is interesting. I work on Tijuana's urbanization, planning, and subsequent social changes since the 1960s. As already mentioned before, Ramon Gutierrez may be a good person to contact. Another potential person of interest is Geraldo Cadava at Northwestern. His first book was on the common business culture between Sonora and Southern Arizona (Tucson). His current project, on the other hand, attempts to trace the development of Chicano conservatism in the second half of the 20th century. I think Cadava may be really interested on a project that somehow touches the Tijuana-San Diego border.
-
5 hours ago, fencergirl said:
Yeah that is also my impression. Although two faculty members interests match mine pretty well, it's not that strong overall in Asian history and I wouldn't have many (any?) other Asianists in my cohort.
Unless they admitted somebody last year, they have one Asianist graduate student in the entire program (unless you count the students working on US-China diplomatic history or the British Empire/India).
-
Congratulations to the Chicago admits. If you have any questions about the program, feel free to message me.
3 minutes ago, fencergirl said:Having a chat with POI at Northwestern today. I'm feeling extremely nervous as I really like POI's work and want to make a good impression (or at least not a bad one). The good news is that I'm already accepted. (Still - if you have any advice on how to not make a fool of myself, hit me up). It's my top choice and while I like the other schools I've been accepted to a lot, I feel that if all goes well I'll feel at peace to make my decision. (Although technically still waiting on UCLA and Vanderbilt, which I think after next week I will assume are rejections). I'm working abroad and not really able to take time off to go to to visit weekends unfortunately.
Judging from my time there, Vanderbilt's history department never struck me as a great place to work on East Asian history. I knew a graduate student working on Japan and the support system was not as good as in other places.
-
1 hour ago, ashiepoo72 said:
From what I know, Northwestern doesn't have formal interviews. It's probably POIs reaching out to potential advisees to get more info before making a final decision. Don't fret, it's not over yet!
You are totally right. Last year NU sent me the admission e-mail before my POI contacted me. My impression is that each sub-field/cluster within the department operates somewhat differently when it comes to that.
-
I am going too. I am presenting, but I didn't plan anything until two days ago. The tickets were surprisingly cheap, but when it came to the hotel I had to settle for one of the AHA deals they had (sharing would have been cheaper, but I didn't find anybody).
-
I did that. I was at a barely top 25 program, got my MA, reapplied, and then was accepted into a top 5 program. However, my decision was based on the fact that my research interests had changed so much that my previous program was not a viable option anymore. My advisors supported my decision and wrote me letters of recommendation. I was able to make the case that there was an obvious fit issue and that my project required me to go somewhere else.
I know other people who have done the same thing. Their reasons, however, were very diverse: faculty member left, uncertainty of tenure for a potential advisor, feeling socially (and racially) alienated from their program/campus location, etc.
-
I agree with ashiepoo, I wouldn't be terribly concerned about the quant section (unless you are going into economic history). I had a 21% percentile in quant, 94% in verbal, and managed to get into a top 5 PhD program. At the end of the day, the SOP and the writing sample are key. Unlike undergraduate admissions, graduate admission committees are more concerned about the issue of "fit." Is your potential POI interested in your proposed topic? Is the department looking for more graduate students in your field of study? A good GRE score (or a high GPA) will never make up for a POI's relative lack of interest in your topic.
-
Northwestern University may be another place to consider. Melissa Macauley has worked on how Chinese law changed in the context of European influence and imperialism, while Peter Carroll researches urban history and Chinese modernism in the 19th to early 20th century. The department has a significant cohort of students who work on Asia.
Another possibility may be UCLA. R. Bin Wong has written about the comparative development of China and Europe (from the pre-industrial age to the end of the 19th century). They have some other Chinese specialists, but their work may be too distant from your interests (Von Glahn works on earlier comparative history; Goldman on cultural history of the 18th to the early 20th century).
-
When I think recent studies of the Black Power movement I think Peniel Joseph (at Tuffs). Tuffs PhD program wouldn't be of interest (since its basically Global History), but they actually offer a History MA. I met Joseph in the past and I found him to be a very nice person.
-
I also was a bit shocked when I first got the first U-SHIP email, so I went to back to re-read the acceptance letter and make sure I had that.
I come from another graduate program (and university) that also had free the 'health coverage' stipulation in the acceptance package. Such coverage was done through that university's equivalent of U-SHIP (and named along the same lines). My previous university also listed the price of the insurance but I never paid for it. Given my experience with my previous program (and the fact that U of C is forcing you to take U-SHIP unless you already have active medical coverage to opt-out), I think the department/division/school will pay the listed cost for U-SHIP. U-SHIP is basically their 'health coverage.'
-
Considering your interest on Imperial Russia's interactions with non-Russian subjects reminded me of Yuri Slezkine. He studied Imperial Russia's interaction with "northern peoples." He is at UC Berkeley, which also has another Russian specialist (Victoria Frede, who was working on Imperial Russia's intellectual history and its intelligentsia). Placement wise, Berkeley would likely be a good place (considering they are tied for first for best history graduate program by US News and World Report).
-
I'm thinking in the environmental consecuences of changes in land use of the southwestern US and northern Mexico (something transregional) in the first half of XX century.
Another possible person of interest is Matthew Vitz at UCSD. He works on water use, land changes (draining lake beds to facilitate agriculture and eventually urban sprawl), and forestry resources in Mexico. I work on land and water use in Northern Mexico (but more in an urban planning vein and less as environmental history), and I found him to be very helpful and kind.
I don't know much about Wolfe (except reading his dissertation). I do know, however, that he had been a candidate for the job position at UCSD (which Vitz won).
-
My former advisor considered that a rate of attrition was a reflection of a healthy program. Most people I know who dropped the "PhD track" did so because they found better professional opportunities that fit their interests and needs. Ironically, many of those opportunities are still associated with higher education (like being college recruiters). The one exception I know had to do with 11th hour dissertation defense issues and conflict.
Another form of attrition I saw (and eventually experienced) was leaving one PhD program to join another. I think that is rather rare within top programs (top 15 or so). However, it is possible to see people leave less prestigious programs in favor of a top 15 program. Sometimes programs go through a slump (or unfortunate coincidences) in which a group of graduate students leave for "greener pastures." That was the case in my previous institution (a top 25 program that lost four graduate students to top 15 programs within 2 years).
-
I don't care about his comments. First, he doesn't know my field at all (Latin American History). Secondly, I got admitted to a top 5 program the last time I applied (in the midst of the financial crisis). So, I will return to my state of bliss.
-
I have been near West Lawn. My spouse has family in Burbank (which is next door) and Burbank looked to me like it could be somewhere in Southern California (except for the presence of alleys and the use of brick for housing).
Woodlawn is definitely cheaper than Hyde Park. The market in Woodlawn has not recovered from the real estate crash, but it may if U of C keeps expanding into it (and it really seems like they are).
-
I'm planning on living in HP this summer and for the first year or two of my Ph.D. program at least. It's a pleasant neighborhood and my stipend will make it affordable for me. From current grads I've talked to, at least in my program, it's worth it to be near campus for the first couple years, after which a lot of people move to different parts of the city like Pilsen and Logan Square.
The area around Midway isn't bad in my experience -- pleasant, largely Latino family population. Funny you mention Oakland -- that area feels a little homey to me as an Angelino. Not super close to campus in HP though. The south side gets much more spread out down there and you might feel kind of far from things. You can get to HP if you go on the Orange Line and a bus or two, but it's not exactly convenient.
I knew a grad student who was living in Pilsen. She liked it, but parking around Hyde Park isn't exactly a cakewalk. She ended up moving back to HP.
I was talking about Oakland, California, LOL. I don't actually know much about the Oakland neighborhood in Chicago. In any case, Woodlawn felt fine and one could actually buy there (if you have a spouse who is working).
-
I thought about alternatives to Hyde Park too. I considered places like the West Side, but the public transit commute can be very long or not as flexible (especially when you have to take Metra and if you miss your train and have to wait 40 minutes for the next one). I finally came to the conclusion that living near/in Hyde Park was the best option.
I have actually looked at places around 61st and 62nd (south of the Midway). People generally recommend you to live within Hyde Park (for safety reasons), but I found the area between 61st and 63rd (east of Cottage Grove) to be very similar to the places where I lived in Oakland or when I do research down in Mexico. Besides, its cheaper and its still walkable to campus.
-
Does anyone know where McCurry is going?
She is heading to Columbia (she will replace Eric Foner).
-
I agree with mvlchicago. Do you feel you have made all the appropriate connections you could while at Chicago? If you have, heading to Havard (and getting access to their network) may be a better decision.
-
Now, from what I know about the (historical) perceived reputation of Mexican History programs: Mexican historians placed in good positions often come out from U Chicago, Yale, Berkeley, UCSD, UCLA, and Arizona. Of those, Chicago and Yale strike me more as places to do modern Mexico (especially Chicago). UCLA has a long tradition of doing excellent colonial Mexican history (especially related to the study of indigenous sources, think Kevin Terraciano, Restall, and James Lockhart). Berkeley had a monopoly on colonial Mexican religion for a while. Van Young at UCSD had a crop of very successful graduate students. I always associated Arizona with cultural history.
Another way of thinking about it is who has landed the best colonial Mexican history job openings in the past few years. From the top of my head, Berkeley graduates landed the jobs at Northwestern and Princeton (Paul Ramirez and Vera Candiani), while a UCLA graduate landed the job at UCSD (Dana Velasco).
If I were to do research on pre-Columbian or early colonial Mexico, UCLA would be the top target. Penn State is another possibility (because of Restall), but their placement is nowhere near as good as UCLA's.
-
I find the US News and World Report's rankings to be more useful because they have specialized rankings on Latin American History. They don't do a specific one on colonial Latin America, but at least that is a start.
The placement studies I have seen don't discriminate by field. Just from checking the forums, I have seen a couple. Here is one (posted by telkanuru, if I am correct) that compares USNW rankings and placements: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5p5Vo_V4WG_UWJwTld2bVF0dlU/view
There was another one, an academic study from before 2008, which largely confirmed that the universities that were in the top 15 in the US News and World Report's basically had the best placement rates. I will keep browsing around and post it if I can find it.
The problem with placement rankings for very specific subjects (colonial Mexico) is that their sample size is too small. What do I mean by that? It's fine to keep track of Berkeley or UCSD's general department placement for 20 years or so because they have many graduate students and a sizable faculty to examine. However, if you look at their colonial Mexico placements they will fluctuate wildly because they are tied to basically one faculty member. Once that academic retires (Taylor at Berkeley or Van Young as he will at UCSD quite soon), the placement rates collapse for some years until they are replaced or their replacements take their position.
Decisions 2017
in History
Posted
I have heard from UNC graduate students that their teaching experiences are similar to those of their counterparts in other large state schools: handling sections that have too many students, plenty of grading, and a need to teach to survive. The upside of large state schools, however, is that you have more opportunities to teach your own course once you are a Phd candidate. That is very important in this job market. Vanderbilt is decidedly less accommodating when it comes to graduate students lecturing. Those Vandy graduate students who want to teach their own classes do so during the summer or at a nearby school (Belmont or Nashville State community college).
Vanderbilt has some big names in early modern European history. However, it seems to me that the program is stronger in some of the countries/regions. There are more students working in early modern Germany and England than in France or Italy. Then again, this is not my field, so I am not an expert.
Echoing what amavare mentioned, I would really focus on their recent placement track for early modern Europe students. That is sometimes hard to do with Vanderbilt's non-US fields because some only began accepting large numbers of students somewhat recently (at least compared with better-established programs). I would also consider the overall placement of all Vandy PhDs versus UNC's. At least when it comes to graduating students who eventually land top jobs, UNC has a better track record. UNC has some of its graduates teaching at quite a few top 25 programs (including Vanderbilt).