Amelu

@rising_star: I don't want them(telkanuru) to be wrong, I hope I didn't come off as such. Their clarification was as helpful as the rest of their feedback so far. Several of you have made a good point re:research vs. teaching, and just how prepared(or not) I would be upon completion. Also appreciated is the insight into degrees of autonomy, should I achieve professorial status. I've considered the MA+ route, and there is a good History MA program near me(Duke). I'm taking a minor that requires attending classes at both UNC and Duke, so that will be a good opportunity for me to check things out. I've already looked at alternate cert. programs(often called "lateral entry"), which would allow me to teach k-12 without an education degree, but require more frequent re-certification. Or, like you said, I can consider private schools with different requirements for becoming a teacher. As you mention, I'm certainly not walking a new path here. Knowing others have done something similar before me is something of a booster, however, in that since it has been done it can still be done. Hopefully that makes sense. @telkanuru: Thanks for expanding on what you meant earlier, I didn't mean to come across as contrary, and apologize if it were so. Again, someone already doing this thing I'm considering doing is definitely an appreciated source of feedback. @juilletmercredi: Thanks for the insight re:opinions on k-12 teachers in PhD programs. That was among my biggest fears, should I try for the doctorate later on. I want to be taken seriously as a scholar, but couldn't happily/willingly compromise my ambition to be an educator for that sake. Also appreciated is the feedback about degrees of engagement in various institutions. I felt that teaching AP/IB history courses would help in that regard, but even then I know some people just want to "get through". You confirm some of my worst fears about post-grad employment, which was a big factor in initially having decided on the MA+ track. I had that as my goal at first, but all the friend/family/adviser pushback on "settling" and deciding not to go for a PhD out of the gate had me second guessing. My adviser is among the hardest to discount, because they worked outside of academia before getting their PhD, and now happily do departmental advising and teach several(very personalized/"cool") courses each semester knowing they won't ever be eligible for tenure. They pushed the whole "autonomy over common-core rigidity" angle, and its hard not to believe them knowing they've seen both camps. I don't want to be dragging this out for a decade, but my time at an associate's-dispensing "diploma mill" has me worried about rushing through things, also. I'm very grateful for everyone's feedback so far. It sounds like I was onto a good thing when I first decided for the "MA + lateral entry" route. The (slim)potential of a PhD leading to a teaching position seems a little too tenuous for my tastes. I hate that, because being called "Prof" sounds like just my kind of ego-booster. More than that, though, I hate that at a school like UNC, I'm getting sold some bogus line like "it will all work out". That smacked of 'just-so' storytelling, and again I'm grateful to hear the truth even if it is bitter medicine. I've got a year+ left before finishing my undergrad, and my dual-enrollment minor will hopefully give me the opportunity to check out Duke's MA program. I'll keep y'all posted as I proceed, and in the meanwhile I welcome any other thoughts/suggestions on the matter.

@telkanuru: I think I've been given a much more "dire straits" portrait -of both the likelihood of finding funding, and also of finding collegiate employment afterwards- than what you describe. It's reassuring to hear that I'm not facing a figurative choice between "Harvard or nothing". I especially appreciate your feedback as someone already pursuing a History PhD. That said, I disagree re: "PhD's aren't for teaching". If I want to teach at a college, where I can be given full discretion over the scope/depth of my program, I most certainly do need a PhD. Some of the people who have been most influential on me so far are PhD-holders who teach/taught. I could rattle off famous figures in a variety of fields who are educators, but I feel like that doesn't strengthen my case so much as merely add volume to it. Obviously, we disagree on the matter. What would you say is the purpose of pursuing a PhD? My departmental advisor, and others whose opinion I hold in some regard(family, SO, friends, etc.), say they don't think I'd be happy teaching at a lower level. They say "you're fine, the really good grad students get fellowships and find work, you've just got to stay committed" The grad students at my school(UNC-CH) and schools near me(Duke) paint the grimdark picture, and my skepticism of collegiate credentialism makes me trust that 'peer' feedback more than I might ought.(also, I got taken for a ride when I was younger by an associate's dispensing diploma mill with sweet-talking recruiters, so now I'm borderline paranoiac when it comes to believing school officials as to the benefits of their respective institutions). While the prospect of doing original research and/or breaking ground in my discipline is certainly appealing, it is the potential to teach subject matter I love from my own perspective that I find most desirable about the PhD track. Choosing to aim lower would give me less autonomy, but allow for faster matriculation and entry into the work place. If this is pragmatic or just rationalization is, I guess, my core dilemma. @GeoDUDE!: Don't worry, I have a healthy ego regarding my abilities. I want to rule MY world, whatever that may be. I certainly don't intend to take any longer than is necessary to complete a program of study. I have no illusions that the PhD would actually equate to mastery of the subject, more that we give it that weight socially. IMO, mastery of any study is generally a lifelong pursuit rather than accomplish-able goal. I want a job doing what I love, and it really SEEMS like that requires a PhD. I think, based on what telkanuru has said here, that I've been given a more grim picture of my prospects than might actually exist. As I get into my senior year and start to see what my options are, I'm sure this will get clearer. I think at this point I'm just being neurotic, and stressing at the thought of being that bitter grad student who scares the undergrads with stories of 100k+ debtloads.

@GeoDUDE!: part of wanting the PhD is that it represents, to me at least, effective mastery of a field of study. I love studying history, and really love talking about it, but I'm also distinctly aware of how little I actually know. Achieving a PhD certainly doesn't mean I would know all there is to know, an impossible proposition if ever there were one, but it would represent a consensus of already established scholars that my knowledge of the field is both thorough and respectable. To be blunt, a degree is what separates the (nominally unrespected)amateur from the (nominally respected)professional. Also, a doctorate would be the penultimate credential in a world which highly prizes credentials. I am quite certain of, and comfortable with, the notion of being an educator at some level. I understand that the more advanced levels of study offer more opportunities to discuss historical nuance, and at greater length/depth, but again I also believe some of our most important education occurs while we are in our "early" years. I know it sounds hubristic, but I believe I could bring something beneficial to the academic experiences of pre-college students. I'm also afraid of how stiff the competition is for college-level employment, and know that I could, relatively speaking, more easily find work at lower levels of academia. Even some of my community college professors had their PhD's, both tenured and adjuncts! Everyone I speak with about this IRL says essentially the same thing, "you're fine, the really good grad students will get fellowships and find work eventually, so you've just got to be committed to that struggle", which to me carries the implicit statement that those who don't get full fellowships are being given notice of their inadequacy, and should accept the likelihood that they won't become professorial material. Am I over-thinking this? I've been told by several professors and advisors that I have the academic potential to get into grad schools, but it seems like if I'm not accepted into the top-tier then I'd be wasting my time and accruing a lot of debt in the process. I struggle to accept that I could achieve on the necessary level, but also worry I'm rationalizing not trying by saying "my job/debt prospects are better when I look lower".

@telkanuru: First, thanks so much for your response!l Let me clarify a bit. I don't mean "absolutely without funding", so much as "incompletely funded". There are lots of History grad programs that offer some assistance, but only the "creme de la creme" offer full fellowship for your entire period of study. I would be happy with a program that offered a TA-ship or TA + partial fellowship, as my end goal is teaching, but I question whether this would cover my tuition costs in such a way that didn't leave me saddled with debt afterwards. I had initially planned to go for an MA and do lateral entry into the upper K-12 levels, but the possibility of getting into a grad program, combined with recognizing I might have the academic potential to do so, has left me somewhat overwhelmed with choice. I would probably be happier teaching at a higher level, where both engagement and depth of study are greater. That said, I think some of the most formative educational experiences in which I could participate occur in high schools. I've lately been viewing teaching at the high school level as a sort of fall-back, so that if I didn't get any offers that included full assistance packages I could still entertain accepting the partial assistance offers. It sounds like you think the lack of full assistance means I should pass, in which case I again wonder what effect teaching at a high school would have on my candidacy for a grad program? Thanks for the input!

Just like the title says. If I don't get into a program that offers pretty comprehensive financial aid, I really can't afford to get a PhD. I'm working while in undergrad now, and receive need-based grants that amount to roughly half my costs per year. This is great, but I'm afraid even this percent of aid would leave me pretty seriously indebted at grad school. I want the PhD, but not as much as I want to teach in general. If I don't make it into a funded PhD program, could I do lateral entry into k-12 to save/tackle debt, and then reapply later on? Am I a better candidate if I'm already working, or a worse one? Is this a decent fallback plan, or a poor line of reasoning?