AGingeryGinger

Does anyone still have the link? I checked and apparently its not working for me. Thanks!

I was recently having dinner with my parents and the topic came up of the job market for PhDs in the humanities in academia. I explained to them how the History job market is dominated by a tier system: the ivy leagues, like-ivy, and major public research. they made the comment how in the world outside of academia, caring about where you went to school generally determines your job success and career for the rest of your life is unheard of. Yet, it seems it’s all that matters in academia. While there are exceptions of scholars who went above their degree granted institution (I think there is a Kent state PhD at Harvard), this is an extremely rare exception. The second exception is if there are very few scholars on a topic at all, my own field is like this, where there are less than 5 Early Modern England scholars at PhD granting institutions in History, where your advisor matters more than the small spread of scholars in the field. yet, overall, your station in life (so to speak) is mostly guided by where you earned your PhD. It is the best you often will do and your career will follow. Why is the academic caste system like this? I could maybe see it in the current market, where I had an advisor in my undergrad say “unless you go to an Ivy League, you’re not going to get a job.” i end with this quote/statistic: “The evidence is not only anecdotal. A recent study by Aaron Clauset, Samuel Arbesman, and Daniel B. Larremore shows that “a quarter of all universities account for 71 to 86 percent of all tenure-track faculty in the U.S. and Canada in these three fields. Just 18 elite universities produce half of all computer science professors, 16 schools produce half of all business professors, and eight schools account for half of all history professors.” This study follows the discovery by political scientist Robert Oprisko that more than half of political-science professorships were filled by applicants from only 11 universities.” https://chroniclevitae.com/news/929-academia-s-1-percent just some food for thought I was curious if anyone else has thought about.

My advisor, whose minor field was Russia, recommended doing Russia/Eastern Europe as a minor field. So it should help more with a more comprehensive view of Europe and help with world history.

Hello! I’m a first year PhD student specializing in Early Modern English history with a focus on religion/Anglicanism and medicine. ive been talking with my advisor about choosing a minor field and they recommend choosing something outside the realm of American or European history. My main thought right now is Russian/Eastern European history, as I can relate it more to my coursework. There also is the possibility of Latin American or Middle Eastern studies (I don’t have an interest in African history). i talked with another advisor and they recommended middle eastern based on the current job market trends. I am just unsure how to proceed going about choosing a minor. Thanks!

I looked at the History department’s group from last year, and I think they only give 1-2 Ross fellowships/year. They take roughly 6-10 new phd students and then give 1-2 the fellowship. Or nominate. I think it’s a nominated award.

Hello! Has anyone heard back about funding for McGill’s religious studies PhD? I emailed them a month ago and haven’t heard back and I’m wondering if anyone else has. thanks!

I was honestly surprised by Vanderbilt's placement rate, or lack thereof. A conversation that stuck with me was U of Miami having an excellent scholar in my field but not placing a tt job since 2008. But I was surprised (pleasantly) about Purdue, who, at least in Early Modern History, has a pretty good placement rate considering how scarce the market is for British historians.

Is there a better ranking system that actually works for History, or a smaller one based on fields?

As soon as i typed in my post I realized the correct link was a few posts above.

Hi!

I thought vandy was in first tier? How did you find/figure out the rankings for PhD programs in History? or do you use US news?

I applied to a ton of places. I was inspired by a phone call by Karl Gunther, at U of Miami, who said that 1) the academic job market for early modern british historians is rather small and 2), U of Miami hasn't placed a tenure track job in Early Modern history since 2008. My focus is on Tudor/Stuart England focusing on Anglicanism and English Religious History. So, i admittedly shotgunned it: PhD History U of Illinois at Chicago - Ralph Keen Vanderbilt - Peter Lake Purdue - Melinda Zook PhD Religion Fordham - Patrick Hornbeck McGill - Torrance Kirby SMU - Bruce Marshall I accepted the offer at Purdue. Purdue and Dr. Zook have an unusually high record of tenure track placements, especially in British History.

Hi! So i was recently accepted, and accepted the offer, for a PhD at Purdue University to study under Melinda Zook. My background is currently in the English Reformation and does not extend much into the Stuart period. I am wondering if anyone can recommend a good historiography written on the stuart period. Dr. Zook's focus is on Anglicanism, and as far as i know she is one of the few that specifically focuses on religion in this period. What is the current list of Stuart Historians that are active? My focus is mainly on Tudor/Stuart Religion, i.e. Anglicanism, so my interest lies heavily with religion. As with Tudor history, i know that there are many who are in Oxbridge, with a small scattering around the United States. However I am not as familiar with the Stuart period historians. Thank you!

I want to post but the link doesn't work, anyone have an updated link?

Middle English is a lot easier to learn than Latin lol