historygradhopeful

I have a few reservations about Vanderbilt. First of all, it's in Tennessee, which is god awful for women's rights. Sure, if I don't get myself into "trouble", I'll be fine, but why risk it? Then, they don't really have a Plato scholar, which is super unfortunate. I'm kind of sad about that. And then a whole host of reasons why the south is terrible, but that might just be northern prejudice. I'll try to iron all of these out by the time I get back from my visit. 

This is a bit of a prying question, but what's your publication record like?

That's a really good point I hadn't thought of. I picked a safety school, but honestly didn't think I'd need it. And I have a friend there who's really really pressing me to attend, so I felt bad not applying. 
The combination of high cost of living, along with a town I don't really want to be in, furthered by an average reputation really makes me think I'll be unhappy. The program is OK, the schools OK, it's all top 50 but not my best showing. To compound it, it's my undergrad alma matter. This is generally seen as a black mark on your pedigree. Since I graduated I've had a successful career in academic science at other institutions, which I judge by publication record, and it just seems like a backslide...
As to the GRE score, I think I can pull it pretty far up. I increased 10% between walking in cold (arrogant mistake) and having only 3 weeks to study (pressured to apply by a mentor). I don't do well with the type of questioning, I'm unsure what they're asking for some of the times, other times I freeze. I've also been out of school and working in the field for quite a few years. I need to cough up the cash for a proper prep course, it's just hard to come up with. That being said, another 10% and I'm above the threshold that generally excludes people from my desired program. 
I looked into transferring during grad school, and it's just generally a cluster....
I'm worried that I'll screw myself and won't get in anywhere the next round, or won't get my GRE up. I suppose if I start prepping now I'll have a better idea if I can outperform my previous score. And if so I can take a few classes at the local little college to buffer my lack of formal computational training.
I wish I'd applied for a masters in the mix...

kotov - just because you do not like my discipline or my opinions does not mean I am too inflexible or uneducated. Again, two of my four undergraduate majors are interdisciplinary and I am familiar with other disciplines. However, at the end of the day, different disciplines exist for different reasons. If everyone thought all disciplines were equal there would not be different disciplines (and there is a sect of scholars out there that hate that there are various disciplines, but they are a fringe group that few take seriously). I have never said that I will never review the scholarship of other disciplines, but that does not mean I will weigh it with the same value or praise it as if the other discipline's standards as are good as History's (perhaps you are not familiar with the Sokal Affair? have you not read Kramer's Ivory Towers on Sand? - for example). Every non-interdisciplinary scholar I have spoken with agrees with my opinion on that. With all due respect, I would argue that you are in the minority, not me. You seem to forget that the entire fields of Middle Eastern History and Middle Eastern Studies have been dealing with these questions very difficulty over the last few decades and there is not a consensus on this matter, just like there is not a consensus on many, many, many things in Middle East scholarship (such as Bernard Lewis vs. Edward Said, whether the Armenian Genocide was a genocide, who is indigenous to Modern Israel, and so on). So, I will of course read publications like the Journal of the Middle East & Africa and see what non-Historians have to say about the Middle East, but if you are going to insist that I abandon the discipline of History because criticizing other scholars "offends" them, then you are going too far and arguably against the Western academic tradition.
 
As for language training, I appreciate your recommendation. I have being doing summers with Middlebury College and find that they teach foreign languages better than any other university I have ever studied at. I would also recommend them to everyone else out there who needs to improve their language skills.

Don't worry; there is plenty of funding for East Asianists.  We have quite a few East Asianists in my program and they have been able to coast compared to Americanists.  There are so many external funding and the East Studies Program on most campuses have their own funding too that you can apply for.

As I understand it, most schools do have some internal funding options for students who are in later years (you do have to apply, but they tend to be far less competitive than external funding - hopefully). Sometimes you are able to apply for TAships (though some schools reserve these for recruitment packages). You should probably research/ ask about such funding options at any particular school that you are looking at.
Many schools do fund students for more than 4 years, 5-6 is probably the standard. I don't know your specific status, but some programs fund those entering with an MA for shorter periods. As for your specific school choices, I have been given offers by Penn State and Washington University (or are you referring to the University of Washington?),  and both were for more than 4 years (entering with an MA). You are welcome to PM me for the details.  

As tipmar mentioned, the standard is generally 5 years guaranteed funding. But don't fret; there is money to be had! External funding is always an option (Fulbright, SSRC, etc), and universities often offer graduate school-wide fellowships that you can apply for. For example, my school offers endowed fellowships and dissertation-finishing fellowships that are added onto your original package. TAships are also another option, as many schools are always in need of TAs and can offer funding that way. 
Also, I noticed you're doing East Asian History. I've found most East Asianists are done in 6-8 years, so it's not as dire as you think! We take a bit more than Americanists, but there is a lot more funding for us if you need to do research abroad or do more language work.  

I'm planning on doing so!  Congrats to you!!

I'm in the same boat as you are, ForlornHope.  This is actually my second time through applications.  The first time I applied out of undergrad (3.91 GPA) with honors degrees in History and Philosophy with Honor's Theses in both.  I had traveled abroad and spoke some of the language of my field (3 years training).  I applied to UVA, UNC, Duke, Michigan, and NYU and was rejected across the board without so much as a waitlist.  After that debacle I went overseas to teach English and study my language to fluency, then came back and completed a master's program at a low-ranked liberal arts university.  I still excelled in my field and graduated with a 4.00 GPA, had a portion of my Master's Thesis published, and added reading competency in another language related to my field.  With all of that combined, I also presented my research at a number of respected conferences and had good networking.  I scored a 165 on my GRE verbal and 5.5 on my writing.  I had recommendations from professors out of Columbia and Brown.  
 
After I graduated from my MA last summer, I applied to UVA, Harvard, Columbia, Princeton, and Chicago.  In the meantime, I was awarded a teaching fellowship at the University I graduated from and my teaching reviews were among the best in the department (including longer-tenured professors).  I continued my research, talked with POI's at all the schools, and reported all of these achievements on my applications.  I was dropped in the first round of rejections in every. single. school. I applied to.  I wasn't so much as waitlisted at any of them, although Columbia had the gall to offer me an unfunded MA in East Asian Languages and Cultures that would have cost me ~200K over two years.  
 
I'm, frankly, devastated.  I love teaching and it has always been something that has filled me with joy.  I have always wanted to be a tenured professor and inspire students to get to new heights and, frankly, I think i'm damn good at the job.  However, it seems for some reason I just can't get my foot in the door.  As sad as it makes me, I'm toying with the idea of completely switching fields.  I may try and go into medicine so that I can actually get a job.  
 
So that's my story.  I did all the right things, I learned the languages, I excelled in my field, but apparently that wasn't enough?  I'm just about ready to throw my hands up and switch out of this profession entirely towards something that can support me without killing me emotionally.

I thought I'd chime in on this thread now that my dust has settled and I've got a bit of a clearer head about the situation.  
 
I applied at 5 schools (UVA, Columbia, Princeton, Harvard, and Chicago) at the suggestion of my adviser and recent research that suggests that the majority of tenure track jobs currently and in the future will continue to go to Ph.Ds from top 10 and top 20 programs.  I struck out at all five schools (Except for Columbia, which offered me an unpaid MA that would put me 200k in the hole) and was severely disappointed.  I think it may be useful for future applicants to see my academic profile and overall strengths/weaknesses:
 
Background:
-MA in History, 3.91 GPA and graduated with "high honors" by acing my comps.  
-2 BAs in History and Philosophy, both with honors from a small liberal arts college
-4 years teaching experience (one overseas in my research area, two as a teaching assistant, and one as an adjunct professor at the University I graduated from)
-Master's Thesis using only untranslated primary source documents as the basis (obviously secondary historiography as well)
-Language proficiency in Japanese and Chinese (both are my subject area)
 
 
Things that seemed to be going well for me :
-High GPA and GRE scores (167written, 161quant, 5.5 essay)
-Language experience
-Excellent thesis (My contact at one of the schools I applied at asked if he could share my thesis with his other Ph.D. students)
-Teaching experience
-One very good letter of recommendation 
 
 
Things that seemed to go against me : 
-I never contacted any of my potential POIs at the schools I applied at, per my adviser's suggestion
-Two of my recommendations were from professors who were not in my main field, as my small University did not have a large staff of orientalists
-All of my degrees came from the same, not-prestigious school
-My area of research is not in the forefront of the discipline at the moment.  (I study pre-modern border conflicts, whereas the trend today is towards modern/20th century)
-I don't have publications in major journals
 
 
So that's my situation.  Reading other people's admission stories seems to suggest that having good contacts, networks, or at least dialogues open to your potential POIs matters a great deal.  Additionally, and this I suspect is my biggest failing, my degrees were all from the same non-prestigious University.  This hurt me in two ways : It immediately hurts my resume compared to applicants from Ivy Leagues and other schools on name alone, and I didn't have the adviser pool at my school to really get targeted recommendations.  My suggestions to those starting out in the future is to focus on those things first and foremost, and make those personal connections count!  Good luck!

This has been my view of the entire situation. Along with the thoughts of my LOR writers, I was not interested in spending 6-7 years of my life working toward meager prospects of a truly rewarding career. At this point, my thoughts turn to the legal field, since many of the skills would seem to translate fairly well. My own self-examination leaves a torn picture: I still am ardently wishing to enter this field, but practicality is always an issue. I did not intend to apply to any program under the top-30 (with Boston College being an exception due to its MA possibility since I do not have one, yet).
 
My overall hopes were to be involved in a profession where prestige and accomplishments are limited only by one's ambition. I was not interested in spending several years working for less than minimum wage after completed a PhD at a lower-ranked school. As brutal as it sounds, I do not have the patience for such trials and have no interest in being taken advantage of in such a way as academia tends to do in the current job market.
 
Historygradhopeful, my best wishes go out to you in all your endeavors.

Rant or not, this is probably not a healthy or productive way to approach a SoP.
 
 
I have to disagree with this, even if it is advice I received from one of my professors; he has not been on the market for three decades. Find the professors who interest you, whose work excites and inspires you, and who are close to your interests either in methodology or subject (or both). I would be surprised if this number is higher than 5. At the same time, recognize that prestige does matter. Do not tell yourself the lie that if you go is more important than where you go. If you find yourself saying, "It's OK, this is not for the job, this is because I want to do this," stop and evaluate that impulse. For some people, it might be true. For the majority, I suspect, it's a way to internally justify a bad decision. And if you "just want to teach" then you don't need or want a PhD.
 
Have a stopping point. Set it early, and stick to it. When I first started, I allowed myself three cycles, and then I would try to do something else. Do not become so focused on this one goal that you lose sight of everything else.
 
As I'm sure I don't need to tell you, to do graduate work you need a critical and analytic mind. If you've found this forum, I assume you have one. Don't forget to use it on yourself every once in a while.