AP

Unless reading those four languages is very desirable (like for medievalists), I don't think language is an issue in the way you describe it. At least I haven't heard of being an issue. Yes, your most important task at hand is to do graduate work in Korean history. If you come to a PhD with an MA in a different field, you won't be as competitive, even if it's from Cambridge. From my understanding, that MPhil is British-oriented? or can you tailor it towards your interests? As you research doctoral programs, check current graduate students in your fields. Sometimes you can see where they got their degrees, sometimes you can contact them to ask questions informally, and those that are more advanced usually have their own webpages, so you can check their CV. This might help.

That's a question best answered by each program because different programs (and different professors within each program) has different expectations. The question of languages is important because you need to be able to relate to others beyond your field, especially if you are not an Americanist. Learning a language takes time, and some languages take more time than others. If you haven't asked this to your POI, I suggest contacting them. Though the question to them should be: What level of expertise should I show command as a graduate from this program? That way, you don't disclose that you are anxious about admissions or if you are lacking the training.

That's a great question and I'll answer it this way: I didn't (culturally, I was not aware Americans are big on thankyous) and I got in. No one will stop admitting if you don't send a thank you email, it's just nice. If you decide to send a thank you email: just one line.

Lol I’m faculty. Several students also reached to me, but I’m not on the AdComm and they filter applications first.

I agree that you need a hook, I disagree that you need a whole paragraph to say "I'm into interdisciplinary work," especially since you are doing it through the eyes of another scholar, not your own. I second @TsarandProphetthat is not very clear. The heartbeats metaphor (noise of the present to understand lived experiences) made me think of anthropologists and how they do participant observation (or you could even argue oral history). This ambiguity does not work in your favor. You want to be as clear as possible. While I grant the benefit of the doubt that you will eventually explain what subfields you are referring to, you have little space in a SOP, so if you are not mentioning your field/subfield/etc right away, in my eyes it goes to the "no" pile. This might be just the wording you chose *here*, be aware of passages such as "I think historical scholarship should and ought to be conducted" which doesn't appear verbatim in the intro but there is that kind of tone. While I understand your argument to have a distinct philosophy to distinguish yourself from other applicants, the *tone* in which you say sounds like you are telling faculty what they are supposed to be doing. As you proofread, pay attention to that and if you are satisfied, then send it along. Good luck.

I realize maybe my post might have contributed with the anxiety. But it was aim this way: are you waiting it out? Put your time to use and prepare for possible interviews. And yes, "interviews" can be an umbrella term for anything from an informal phone conversation to a more structured meeting.

No. If you send a second email it should ONLY be to thank them.

And a great question, for either the interview or the students weekend (which I doubt they'll do these...) is "what are you working on right now?"

As you may begin to receive interview invitations (not all programs have them, and not all faculty do them), let me share some unsolicited and by no means exhaustive advice. Try as much as possible to detach yourself from your UG identity. Don't be a student, be a prospective colleague. Interviews aren't that long, about 30 minutes (has anyone had a different experience?). You want to answer as many questions as possible so practice answering questions in 2-3 minutes. In general, faculty want to know that you are not a jerk. Don't be a jerk. You will get a question about why you want to come here. This is a chance for you to talk about about your research interests in terms of what they are offering (not in terms of you). So, talk about how faculty research inspire/inform/fir your interests, how course offerings and other training opportunities fit your professional goals, and how university-wide mission fits your persona (and this doesn't need to be very broad, think intern opportunities in the museum). You will be offered to ask them questions and this is a question. Have smart questions ready, like how does the program sees itself in five years? (you'll ~on the market). This is the most urgent themes I could think of.

This is if you have any other skill you want to add and you didn't have a box to do so. For example, a friend of mine worked as an editor before her PhD. I had job experience that I re-worded in this box. A colleague was in the film industry before his PhD. You can word all this to market your skills (project management, data management, etc etc etc). I don't think this box is going to be consequential. However, if you show an ability to recraft non-traditional research skills into research skills, then you can also learn research skills during your PhD to apply later on in other industries. In a very constrained job market, this is attractive.

Unless there is a clear policy written somewhere, I'd refrain from thinking like this. I've received some applications and will be contacting people, but I don't think some of my colleagues with more applicants will do the same. In other words, unless there is a departmental policy, assume you are in the run until they tell you you are not (or other evidence becomes available). You will be in this type of situation from now on every time you apply for something (there is an entire wikia for jobs).

No one know exactly how many students will be accepted any given cycle except faculty in the AdComm. People might be drawing on conversations, on past statistics, or on conclusions drawn. Programs have a number of offers they make and a typical yield. However, that number depends on many things. Eg: if the previous cohorts were large, they might shrink this year.

Yes, but also keep the applicant pool big.

As the latest hire in my department, the professor organizing a professionalization session with PhD students asked me if I could share my cover letter and join them for a Q&A. The first I noticed when I re-read it was a typo this big. And I got the job. So, yeah.

No, this is not an absentee advisor. If you want to present, go and present. If you want to publish, go and publish. Your advisor is there to advise, not to tell you to do things. If you want specific advice, then ask. "Where do you recommend I present a first paper?" "I'm interested in presenting at X Conference, but registration is expensive. What support can I get from the department?" I took a course with my advisor for all semesters I was in coursework. It was hard, because it was evident he was harder on me because I was her student. I almost failed one course and she said if I didn't redo the paper, I'd have to leave the program. I re-did because, like yours, it was a crappy paper (to their fairness, she preferred to do that than give me a B). All in all, I don't see why you can't meet with her and ask for feedback on how to improve as a researcher, a writer, and a historian.

Most people are experimenting with ideas. Lower your expectations for "incredible" paper.

No. Joan Perez MA Student, Chemistry.

I'm sorry you are going through this unquestionably stressful situation. I agree with @Sigaba in that something seems to be missing from what you are telling us. While you might no be ready to share, I would take their advice to salvage as many relationships as possible. For the sake of just putting things out there for others, be aware that professors can change jobs at their pleasure. They should not have any loyalty to any institution and, least of all, to a student. Seriously, you'd expect someone not to change jobs because of you? That said, I am very surprised that this person completely disappeared. I've had friends whose supervisors changed institutions (even countries), and they continued to advise them. Each program has it rules and maybe this was discipline-specific, but is there a way to apply to their current program?

This is an important thread and one of the most insightful ones I've read in years here. I'll second @Sigaba's comment of not wanting to opine on people's professional goals. I think those fluctuate a lot, and this forum is only a slice of the history community. I want to be clear about something. There are no jobs. This is not grim or sad, it's the reality and the hand we are dealt with. In my field, there are two. I could go into the weeds of how this is ridiculous as higher education costs continue to increase, but we won't solve here. If you want to do a PhD in history, then accept that you will not probably get a TT job. Further, if you want to do a PhD in history, do not attend a program that is only geared towards the academy. More programs now are expanding their objectives and preparing students to other careers. We could discuss if that should be the aim of a doctorate, but for argument's sake, let's say it can be done. This is what @TMP referred to as their grant writing skills. Programs today offer certificates in digital humanities or public history, and many graduates end up working in these fields. For those of you asking of professions outside the professoriate, here is where friends of mine are working: librarians at research libraries, preparatory schools (they pay as good as a TT prof!), digital scholarship coordinators, advanced education directors, writing center directors, archivist (I don't remember exactly the job, but he is working for a federal archive in programming). A friend of mine with a Theology degree went on to work for sports rep agency. I'm not saying you should do a PhD for any of these positions. But, alas, basically, weigh everything in, and remember the costs of doing a PhD that are not advertised in the website.

My response was to someone asking why professors hadn't responded, I wasn't saying that no one is responding. (I am answering emails, for instance). Re: follow-up emails, absolutely. I think the wording is fine, and I'd recommend attaching the original email as well.

We are overwhelmed with figuring out how our departments will look like next year, with burned out undergrads also struggling with mental health issues, with domestic responsibilities, with re-structuring entire courses (no, teaching online is not easier), with isolation, with the uncertainty of our research (i.e. our production, i.e. our job security). So, I'm sorry to tell you that an email from a potential student is not a top priority right now.

I really like how @Sigaba turns my short, clumsy comments into what I actually meant. (Maybe you should be my book editor?) ?

Precisely my point. The SOP should not be a prospectus. Yes, having a project absolutely helps but not so much as the project itself but because it is the easiest (but not the only) way to show what questions you are interested in.

Re: Reading sample SOPs, here's my all-time suggestion with a link to a good, annotated sample SOP:

I am not sure why you (and other applicants) are so obsessed in having a clear project. You are applying for a program, not defending a prospectus. In the SOP, you need to show that you have interesting questions, that you have a strong base to begin thinking about them (such as language skills), and that you want to grow as a scholar. What questions move you? Disclaimer: I haven't written a SOP in a while and I've only seen those that students shared with me when they want to apply to our program. I also thought you were doing a comparison. So, you need to clarify the questions that you have. Do not say you are open to any topic (there is such thing as being too honest, I'm one of those so I can understand!). Walk us through what intrigues you. Remember that, as historians, we are fascinated by the stories, by the specifics. What makes these two countries so cool to study side by side? and then you bring us back to the big question and your contribution to that conversation (what would a historian from another field learn from you?) Finally, I want to appreciate your openness. It's not easy sharing your work, especially with strangers and taking criticisms as professionally as you have. This is a good example of us critiquing your work (not you) and you knowing the difference. This is a great examples for others, and a great skill for graduate school.