Concordia

For every department who remembers a first-gen student who flamed out, there are several others getting heat for not going beyond the usual crowd when selecting students. Again, focus on what you can control. Proposal, writing sample, recommendation choices, etc.

If that record stops you from any career, there is probably something wrong with the career.

+1. Options are good. Don't get rid of them if you don't have to.

Or, at least, it covers a fairly small area.

After being dinged by Merton, I got an acceptance from St Antony's. As Igor said "Could be worse-- could be raining!"

As long as the 1-credit course stays a week ahead of the other one, you'll be fine.

Yale's MBA has always been more interdisciplinary/public sector-friendly than most. And taking courses at the rest of the university (IR, law, econ, etc.) is less hard than at some other schools, which deliberately make it difficult.

At Cambridge, you are a Probationary Student when you arrive for your PhD. Only when your dissertation proposal is blessed by the right committee do you become a Candidate. They make no such distinction in their MPhils (or MSts, for that matter).

UK deadlines are different, but there will be time to freak out later. Actually, I will only have 2 or 3 to choose from, when everyone gets sorted out. The big issue now is weighing the virtues of two places. At one, I have exact fit of my research project with a wonderful-- if inexperienced -- supervisor (at an excellent, up-and-coming department at a very good school). At the other, there is a well-established personal/pedagogical fit with someone who likes my work already, general high quality of life, endlessly diverse academic opportunities, and much better chances of making contacts with peers. The second one is also much more marketable brand, not that I am ever going to be anyone's ideal tenure-track candidate. Leaving specific attributes behind, it's kind of a Tufts/Harvard split on the prestige-o-meter. If the third option comes back positively it will complicate things a bit, as it re-mixes many of the attributes in Option 2. At the moment I am sitting on 2/10 with some guilt and shame about not leaping at Option 1.

Mine is a bit of a different situation (except for having underperformed in undergrad), but advice almost on the inside for my research proposals was helpful for me, as well. My master's supervisor was great about helping me with his shop's admissions committee, and a potential advisor at another university was happy to give lots of advice about getting past the dragons at his place. His suggestions were differently slanted, but not conflicting, on the whole. I tend to be self-effacing and too willing to point out qualifications and limits-- perhaps stemming from a background with securities regulations. So having an experienced reader tell me it was not emphatic, enthusiastic about the big picture, or general enough to be interesting to non-specialists, was useful. Also, I had two people argue opposite sides of whether I was too focused, or too broad in my proposed venue-- my project started from interest in a situation in Boston, but one guy asked why anyone [on his committee] would care about the significance of that one example. Another seemed leery about the practicality of moving to New York, Philadelphia, Virginia, et al., and repeating everything. So I ended up finding a way to say that it would be easy to transport my approach to different regions and situations if/when I found time, but that I could also tailor my research if I found more than I could cover in this one project. [Unlike Jazzman, I won't have two years to change my outlook completely, so some precision was necessary even if I also needed to communicate flexibility and humility.] I did a little revision and tailoring to re-shape for each application; some places wanted a maximum of 1,000 words, and another had no word limit but wasn't getting a writing sample. For that one, I inserted a pithy summary of one of the high points on my thesis. [FWIW, this committee figured that if your referees wouldn't spew enthusiastically about your writing in their letters, then they didn't need to waste their own time on it. I dropped a hint to my referees that quoting from the more flattering parts of my readers' feedback on the master's dissertation would be useful to me, as well as time-saving for them. My readers were anonymous, so I couldn't ask them for recommendations. ] But once I digested the POIs' feedback, it wound up being the same basic essay.

Pivoting to history PhDs from related disciplines doesn't seem to be ridiculously uncommon. Also, bear in mind that I'm a little cranky and cynical this morning, and you should definitely try to hear from someone on the other side of the PhD barrier. BUT... do you really want to study at a place that's going to be flipped out by that sort of credential?

There isn't really any "course work" at Oxbridge for doctoral students. I gather there are a few bits of face time you are recommended to do, but otherwise your main job is to get a proper proposal accepted by the end of Year 1, and then turn in a masterpiece two years after that so you can go off and practice your craft. When you're not busy writing, you can attend pretty much any lecture you want, be it for one of the undergrad "papers" (courses or modules), or one-off events held by a department or a college. There will be some kind of weekly seminar hosted by your niche of the department, as well. If you think your work would improve by learning a language or getting on the ball about software, fixing those problems will be possible. If you need to hear smart people explain quantum physics, there will be places to do that. It sounds as if each place found you a supervisor in the history department who thought your interests were plausible. Do you know either one, by having interviewed with them or looked at their writing? It might be worth a conversation with each, to see how they'd suggest you start answering your question and developing new ones.

There may be some flexibility built in. Oxbridge require 6 terms (out of 9), but can waive up to 3 of those 6 for worthwhile off-campus work. That could be field work (e.g., geology, anthropology, astronomy), archival visits, or maybe just lurking around another university nearer to your home. Does Edinburgh have specific things you need to do locally, like teach undergrads or attend seminars?

Doesn't their website direct you to any of those regulations? In general, writing and (to an extent) researching a dissertation doesn't have to be done in their classrooms. But I would guess that every one of the UK universities slices that problem a little differently.

I am 52 and more or less in the same boat, although I finished a part-time master's last year. Partially because of my age and the specific degree I took, I'm applying in the UK only. The duration of the program is a real consideration, and I don't want to butt heads with ratings-conscious US departments who only want young warriors bound for a tenure-track job. Also, if you've seen Spinal Tap, you'll know that Boston isn't much of a college town. And having recently earned my stripes at Cambridge (and Oxford, where my supervisor was) was an unexpected plus. We'll see. If all works out well, I will create the germ of an interesting book-- and postpone dementia for at least a little while. I certainly wasn't ready to do this kind of thing after my undergrad, when I was completely burned out from family crises and saddled with an unremarkable transcript.

I finally heard from someone at London. They found my background "interesting" (they obviously went to charm school for that), and would process my application once my second rec came. For reasons unexplained, my thesis advisor hadn't already submitted one there, so I got my master's program director to forward one over instead. The tone of the note made it sound like an acceptance unless something weird comes up.

Afraid so.

Another possibility-- he or his secretary might not have uploaded to non-Oxonian platforms properly. When I looked at the Cam reference tab immediately after putting on someone else, I could have sworn it said "not accessed" instead of something like "not submitted," which it had said for the first person's rec. So maybe my original choice logged in correctly but screwed up before finishing the job, Anyway, that space got accessed and the second/third referee's file submitted today so I'll not be able to look at either person's data now. But you are right. Either way, a conversation might be helpful. I've always liked this guy and he was the most encouraging of all my faculty, but if he is a raging, manipulative, psycho under stress I suppose I should know that in advance of making any big decisions. The real dilemma at the moment is Oxford, with its institutional might and potentially congenial college life--- assuming I am not slam-dunked into a hell-hole of a college-- vs a school in London that has a fantastic young supervisor lined up, and another good Americanist on the faculty whose new book I am enjoying tremendously. That combination could be most stimulating. Against the latter, as much as the US programs in London have their extended community, is the fact is that there is virtually no social life to count on at this particular establishment. Peers will effectively be scattered everywhere over town, especially after dark. No harm if I were planning to do this all by Skype, or already based in London, or neck-deep in the Academy, or a well-organized extrovert, but I am currently none of those things. Cambridge adds another complication, as my candidate for supervisor is a bit of a rock star and apparently a brilliant teacher, but may be too overworked or distracted to take me on. If not, I have to figure out where that whole thing stands. Apparently about 70-80% of master's students who try to continue on get accepted. I do love Cambridge more than Oxford as a place to visit, but 3 years of coming in and out from the States may dilute that advantage. And there is a pleasant, cheap bus between the two cities.

A good fit works both ways. Congrats. (BTW, I live about 5m away, so feel free to ask any questions about the area I might be able to answer.)

Dinged at Merton a few days ago, probably because I am not in line for any prestigious funding, but my supervisor offered to have me pulled into his own (lovely and convenient, if dirt poor) college. He still hasn't sent my recs to Cambridge and London, so I'm a little perplexed even though it might just be further evidence that he wants me at Oxford. Anyway, the London offer came today, conditional on getting another rec (which I can get from another source).

You'll want guidance from a current student or two, but absent that, get to know the Green Line of the MBTA. If you don't want to drive to campus or be a biker, this is what will probably make your life easiest.

And the crowd goes wild!

The big unknown here is compensation afterward-- robotics is probably unlike the humanities in its salary potential, and (like a good business school) Stanford might be able to pay its way with better connections, etc. On the other hand, if people in this field are so highly sought-after, one MS graduate may be the same as the next. We just don't know right now.

I've got a weirder problem-- my most important reference was my master's dissertation advisor. He got me into his place of work, but hasn't yet filed the [same] letter for my other two choices (for which there is still time, thankfully). Flattering, but annoying.

Cross-post: If the opportunities are genuinely identical, then think about the opportunity cost of WPI vs Stanford. Being out of pocket $40-60k is one thing-- missing 5 years' salary in what may be a lucrative field (I don't know at all about that) may be worse in the long run.