Karou

Hey there! 
I just started classes this week and I can definitely say I've reframed my whole way of thinking. The whole being older thing seems to matter not one bit and I'm taking my boyfriend and daughter to a departmental BBQ this weekend. My cohort is very nice and supportive and we are all commuter students, so it seems that social outings will be well planned but worthwhile. Everyone knows I'm a parent and even though I'm the only one among the group it seems like it's no big deal. I'm very happy with the group I have. Given that we're all commuters I'm actually considering holding some sort of social event at my apartment now to get us all together. Long story short I worried quite a bit more than I should have :-)

They won't be writing 10-15 different references. Likely they will write a single reference letter and use it for all of the schools, with small modifications as needed. And if there are supplementary questions, they will spend a few minutes answering those as well. Professors know that you'll be applying to multiple schools. It's part of their job to help you through the process. The best thing you can do for them is not to avoid asking them for letters, but to send out the official requests several months prior to the first deadline and all at the same time if possible. Also give them a list of the schools and deadlines. With all of this information laid out ahead of them, they will be able to work to their own schedule. In my experience, each of my recommenders submitted the majority of their recommendations within a half-hour time period (some within two minutes of each other). Clearly they weren't writing entirely new letters within that timespan or else they couldn't have submitted them one right after the other.

Oh you're already attending McGill! Well I feel a little silly for suggesting it now, sorry about that.
And that's right, I had totally forgotten about that rule. I never took advantage of it but I had a good friend who wrote all her papers in French. Well I think it could be good to try your hand at writing a paper in English during your Master's then. If you want to pursue a PhD elsewhere in Canada or in the US, you'll most likely need writing samples in English anyway.
And if you have 4+ years of experience of being taught your courses in English (as I'm assuming is the case for all McGill programs), I think your English is probably a lot better than you think it is. At least for me, learning the overall "vocabulary", so to speak, to express myself well in an academic setting was as much of a learning curve as learning to write a decent paper was.
I'm sure you'll be fine. Like others have said, we're often a lot harder on ourselves than is warranted. I would say I probably spend longer on a paper than a native speaker, on average, because I re-read everything obsessively, and I look up everything that sounds like it could potentially be grammatically incorrect. But that may just be my perfectionist tendencies! 
Maybe discuss your concerns with a sympathetic professor? They may have suggestions for you. If you have smaller written assignments, maybe start there and work your way up to a research paper. In any case, it seems you've already taken steps by registering for English courses, and I'm sure you'll make progress in no time. Best of luck to you!

I'm going to go ahead and assume you're in Québec? I'd recommend starting by dipping your toes in the world of anglophone academia, you could do a Masters degree in Montréal at McGill or at Concordia, or even a Graduate Diploma program, they last only a year but are packed with courses so they're good training. This way you won't experience a culture shock and you'll be able to develop your academic english before you venture into the rest of Canada or the US. And the suggestion to have a native speaker look over your work is also a great one! I've definitely relied on kind hearted friends to read over my work. Prepositions are the bane of my existence.
English is also my second language and it definitely took some getting used to to write in academic English, even though I'd been fluent in spoken English for years when I started my program. But I learned fairly quickly, and it's definitely doable.  I studied in Montreal for about 3 years, feel free to pm me if you like! 

I think it's pretty natural to be nervous about starting. Age is only one thing that sets you apart -- I'm coming in as a married international student who's spent a single semester at a US college and that's definitely a point of difference between me and others, but in any cohort of humans who've also decided to spend five to seven years getting a history phd you can usually find someone to relate to. It might help not to assume that people ten years younger than you are kids--for all you know there's a 26 year old parent in your cohort, or someone who's lived out of home since they were 15, or (as in my case) a 26 year old whose partner is in their late 30s and whose life might look a bit like your own. So far I've found personality and life experience to be more important than age when it comes to making grad school friends. 

I can't even... I need to stop watching the news and focus on my "summer" paper.

But for the record- Fuck Nazis.
 
In another slightly related note, a girl posted something about how if you don't have to care about politics, it is because you are privileged.  While I agree to some extent, I also think it is important to not get too wrapped up in politics that we neglect our lives and the ways we can make a difference.  Me reading one more article about white privilege or the alt-right isn't going to help our country.  If I *personally* really believe black lives matter, then what *I* need to be doing is spending more time on learning how to teach effectively, because at least 75% of my students are black and being the best teacher I can be is what will really help them in the long run.  
All in all, if you find yourself privileged, stop posting about it and trying to convince everyone you are better than them because you woke, go out and do something!  As much as we all wish we could punch the Nazis, you don't have to do that to give them a big FU.  Teach ESL to immigrants who need it. Work for an after-school program tutoring underprivileged kids.  Volunteer at a homeless shelter for battered women.  Do something! And NOT just for Instagram likes!  Stop just bemoaning the state of things and trying to make the government force everyone to be equal when you won't even go to the "bad side of town" for fear of getting dirt on your shoes.  At risk of sounding cliche- BE the change you want to see in the world.
(Note, this isn't directed at people who bemoan the state of things and try to fix it, just the ones who post articles about white privilege in one sitting and post Instagram pictures of their $5 latte in the next- all while saying they don't have money to give or time to volunteer.  It's all about assuaging their guilt so they don't have to actually do anything.)

Hi everyone!
I'm nowhere near as experienced in navigating the world of academia as other posters on this thread, but I thought I'd give my two cents on the issue of changing disciplines, and doing an MA prior to a PhD as I applied to several MA programs last winter.
First I'd like to strongly second @lkjpoi 's point in that you should treat MA applications just like PhD applications. That's what I did and it worked out well for me. I'd been researching the PhD application process for almost 2 years at this point and I thought I may as well put into practice everything I'd learned along the way (mostly on these forums, which are an incredible resource!). Anyway, I applied to six programs and got into all of them. That said, all programs I applied to were in the UK and I gather it is less competitive over there (I'd guess that this is due to the almost non-existent funding for Masters programs in the UK, but don't quote me on that). But still, I suppose I must have done something right! Amongst other things, I identified potential POIs in my statement and crafted a solid research proposal. Not PhD-application level, probably, but still solid and well-researched.
Now my academic background is very unusual, and although I did have a tiny bit of experience in history, I don't really count it as such. Long story short, I did a BA in English Studies (with roughly one History course per semester over the course of 3 years) through distance learning, and certainly learnt nothing in terms of specific research methods and such. After that, I physically attended university and dabbled in graduate studies of various disciplines for about 2 years (which I very much view as making up for my lack, so to speak, of a true university experience in my undergrad years). It taught me a lot about research in general, but still nothing specific to History. That said, I always managed to pick "historical" topics for my research papers, and I played that up in my applications. You could probably do the same with your thesis, @infovore. And like you, I did a lot of research on my own in preparation for my applications to find my own little niche within the discipline. All of that to say, I doubt the schools I applied to were impressed by my very slim experience in History, they probably paid more attention to the other elements of my application!
Certainly switching disciplines is going to be a challenge, but if you're willing to work of it, I'm sure it will be fine. Or at least that's what I tell myself since I'm headed to Oxford to do an MPhil in History in about a month! I know I'll have a lot of catching up to do, but hey, I wouldn't have gotten in if they didn't think I could do it. 
Best of luck to all of you as you start preparing your applications, and maybe we'll be colleagues one day as I intend to pursue a PhD in the US after my MPhil. And, like I said, I'm not particularly knowledgeable about this process, but if anyone has more questions about switching fields and taking the MA route, feel free to pm me!

Hi everyone!
I'm nowhere near as experienced in navigating the world of academia as other posters on this thread, but I thought I'd give my two cents on the issue of changing disciplines, and doing an MA prior to a PhD as I applied to several MA programs last winter.
First I'd like to strongly second @lkjpoi 's point in that you should treat MA applications just like PhD applications. That's what I did and it worked out well for me. I'd been researching the PhD application process for almost 2 years at this point and I thought I may as well put into practice everything I'd learned along the way (mostly on these forums, which are an incredible resource!). Anyway, I applied to six programs and got into all of them. That said, all programs I applied to were in the UK and I gather it is less competitive over there (I'd guess that this is due to the almost non-existent funding for Masters programs in the UK, but don't quote me on that). But still, I suppose I must have done something right! Amongst other things, I identified potential POIs in my statement and crafted a solid research proposal. Not PhD-application level, probably, but still solid and well-researched.
Now my academic background is very unusual, and although I did have a tiny bit of experience in history, I don't really count it as such. Long story short, I did a BA in English Studies (with roughly one History course per semester over the course of 3 years) through distance learning, and certainly learnt nothing in terms of specific research methods and such. After that, I physically attended university and dabbled in graduate studies of various disciplines for about 2 years (which I very much view as making up for my lack, so to speak, of a true university experience in my undergrad years). It taught me a lot about research in general, but still nothing specific to History. That said, I always managed to pick "historical" topics for my research papers, and I played that up in my applications. You could probably do the same with your thesis, @infovore. And like you, I did a lot of research on my own in preparation for my applications to find my own little niche within the discipline. All of that to say, I doubt the schools I applied to were impressed by my very slim experience in History, they probably paid more attention to the other elements of my application!
Certainly switching disciplines is going to be a challenge, but if you're willing to work of it, I'm sure it will be fine. Or at least that's what I tell myself since I'm headed to Oxford to do an MPhil in History in about a month! I know I'll have a lot of catching up to do, but hey, I wouldn't have gotten in if they didn't think I could do it. 
Best of luck to all of you as you start preparing your applications, and maybe we'll be colleagues one day as I intend to pursue a PhD in the US after my MPhil. And, like I said, I'm not particularly knowledgeable about this process, but if anyone has more questions about switching fields and taking the MA route, feel free to pm me!

Hi everyone!
I'm nowhere near as experienced in navigating the world of academia as other posters on this thread, but I thought I'd give my two cents on the issue of changing disciplines, and doing an MA prior to a PhD as I applied to several MA programs last winter.
First I'd like to strongly second @lkjpoi 's point in that you should treat MA applications just like PhD applications. That's what I did and it worked out well for me. I'd been researching the PhD application process for almost 2 years at this point and I thought I may as well put into practice everything I'd learned along the way (mostly on these forums, which are an incredible resource!). Anyway, I applied to six programs and got into all of them. That said, all programs I applied to were in the UK and I gather it is less competitive over there (I'd guess that this is due to the almost non-existent funding for Masters programs in the UK, but don't quote me on that). But still, I suppose I must have done something right! Amongst other things, I identified potential POIs in my statement and crafted a solid research proposal. Not PhD-application level, probably, but still solid and well-researched.
Now my academic background is very unusual, and although I did have a tiny bit of experience in history, I don't really count it as such. Long story short, I did a BA in English Studies (with roughly one History course per semester over the course of 3 years) through distance learning, and certainly learnt nothing in terms of specific research methods and such. After that, I physically attended university and dabbled in graduate studies of various disciplines for about 2 years (which I very much view as making up for my lack, so to speak, of a true university experience in my undergrad years). It taught me a lot about research in general, but still nothing specific to History. That said, I always managed to pick "historical" topics for my research papers, and I played that up in my applications. You could probably do the same with your thesis, @infovore. And like you, I did a lot of research on my own in preparation for my applications to find my own little niche within the discipline. All of that to say, I doubt the schools I applied to were impressed by my very slim experience in History, they probably paid more attention to the other elements of my application!
Certainly switching disciplines is going to be a challenge, but if you're willing to work of it, I'm sure it will be fine. Or at least that's what I tell myself since I'm headed to Oxford to do an MPhil in History in about a month! I know I'll have a lot of catching up to do, but hey, I wouldn't have gotten in if they didn't think I could do it. 
Best of luck to all of you as you start preparing your applications, and maybe we'll be colleagues one day as I intend to pursue a PhD in the US after my MPhil. And, like I said, I'm not particularly knowledgeable about this process, but if anyone has more questions about switching fields and taking the MA route, feel free to pm me!

I think it's best to treat the MA application as if it were a PhD application in that you should demonstrate in it your seriousness and the depth of interests as well as your understanding of the particular department in which you want to study. I believe the application should be explicit in saying that the MA will serve as preparation for the PhD. By doing that you will prove that you know what you are doing and are not idly stumbling into the profession, but rather that you are attempting to take careful steps towards developing intellectually and professionally before embarking on your doctoral research.
That said, as far as I know from friends in the field (which is a small number of people), it is not absolutely necessary to get in contact with POIs and name them in your statement of purpose when applying to the MA. But I think it is a good idea and it is better to err on the side of overdoing your effort in the application. And, the writing sample, LOR, and SOP are just as important as in the PhD application, especially if you hope to get some kind of funding. You should always be aiming to impress the committee as much as you can!
 

PM me if you have any questions about Edinburgh. Did my masters there about 10 years ago. Always happy to tell people about it

So lovely to see so much joy here today!!  Haven't been posting much either but I've been following this thread and I'm just so very happy for all of you who are going to all of these amazing places!
Meanwhile, I have been fortunate enough to be admitted to the MPhil in British and European History at Oxford (I was completely floored tbh), and am awaiting funding decisions anxiously. In the event that I don't get any funding, I doubt that I will be able to attend, and will most likely head to the University of Edinburgh instead. Although I'll have to give it some serious thought before I make a final decision! Either way, I'll be very happy to attend either one of those institutions.

Goin to Brandeis. It's a dream program, dream offer. With 5 rejections it was still the best case scenario. I loved it from the moment I started researching schools and I can't believe THIS is the school that accepted me.

I haven't posted before on this thread (I think), but I've watched it closely and have been following your ordeal this application season. Just wanted to chime in and say I'm really happy things worked out for you. I'll be going to Hopkins this fall, so it looks like we both made it! Congratulations.

FINALLY! Just got an email from the director of Graduate Studies at Brandeis. Off the wait list and I have a real actual official offer in hand.

I just got accepted to Oklahoma this afternoon. Received email to check the website. No word yet on funding opportunities. Very happy that the wait is over! Is anyone else planning on attending?

Thanks everyone for the advice. The interview ended up being via skype because of the blizzard, but I still wore my interview outfit, which helped with the confidence.
I think it went really well. He said they are admitting 3 funded PhD students next year and that I am considered a strong candidate at the top of their list, which is why he wanted to talk. We talked about all sorts of stuff and he was extremely friendly. The whole thing lasted about 45 minutes. Overall I think it went well.
He said he will email me their decision by Friday at the latest. Wish me luck!

Good lord. Did you ever get back to them? Did they notice their own flub and reach out? I need to know how this story ends.

I am one of those advanced students who comment in this or any other thread. I am paying it forward because people did that for me during the application process here and elsewhere in "real" life, and the years that followed. The anxieties that many feel now, I felt them at the time and feel them in relation to other applications (namely grants and postdocs). So although we are not on exactly the same boat, we kind of are. Applications can be frustrating, tiresome, and exciting all at the same time. If anything, giving advice here is a sign of emphaty. Personally, I like reading this thread because I am thrilled that so many people are excited about history. We are future colleagues and I might as well share your joy of acceptance and try to be there when rejections come. 

As I said earlier, if you've not heard positively from Harvard at this juncture, you should expect the answer to be no. For some ungodly reason, rejection letters take until early March to go out. 
And to tie this back to the theme of hilarious/terrible rejection letters, I was reminded of the... special... way Harvard phrased my rejection: "The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences is unable to take favorable action on your application to the Department of History."
And when I was waitlisted at UToronto, and received this: "We were EXTREMELY impressed by your application, which combined what many of us thought to be an important and interesting project with an impressive and unique background. It goes without saying that the University of Toronto would be a wonderful place to pursue your research, particularly given our depth and strength in Asian history. As Graduate Coordinator, I read all the PhD applications, so I can say with confidence that your application and proposal really jumped out."

Which is nice and all, except I study high medieval France.
You'd think, since they have to do this every year, graduate departments wouldn't be shit at it. And yet. The key is to see them as what they are: a reminder of how universities (not departments) see their graduate students, and a bit of comic relief.
 

Hi! Mainly a lurker, but this is my expertise so whatever. I'm not in a PhD program l yet but I've done the professional range of Intellectual Business Casual™--library job, high school teacher, interviewee--and I've mastered the Look. I also attended a conference in my field a little while ago and took notes of womenswear. My advice to people (a bit too late in your case, but I'll leave it here anyway) is to take the long sartorial tradition out of undergrad, get yourself used to dressing a little upward instead of maintaining strictly separated casual, off-day wardrobes and academic, professional wardrobes. (I have no idea how old you are or what your professional experience is, this is just my generalized suggestion.)
Everybody in this thread is right: be yourself, be comfortable, be able to walk and sit and stand. The fact is that if you look uncomfortable and act uncomfortable then you aren't going to sound or seem confident in your claims and your intellectual direction, which frankly sucks and I hate it. But it's the truth.
Sarah Beth makes an important point, I think, about "swimming in" clothes and feeling like a "kid dressing up." The unfortunate thing is that suiting looks cheap when it is cheap, and that sort of thing is (ugh) really obvious to people on the other side of the payscale. It can make you look more "early career" or "internish." (I hate even saying these things.) This is why I advise against pants or pantsuits unless you have a pair that you love and look killer in (probably either tailored or you're the luckiest person on earth!) It's my opinion that you cannot go wrong with black leggings (yes, leggings!) or tights, a skirt, some sort of top and a cardigan. Cardigan! When in doubt, pretend like you're cosplaying the coolest librarian you know. (There is lots of good inspo on http://librarianwardrobe.com/.) (There are lots of "academic style" blogs of varying class and socioeconomic positions out there.)
Heels? Never. I mean, unless you love them. Boots, pretty much September through May. Boots! It's probably a bit late in the season for a lot of shopping (also, $$$) but for the sake of future readers, I always recommend a comfortable, under-decorated pair of leather or faux leather boots with not a lot of heel (depending on your tolerance)--ankle boots, riding boots, etc. It's what everybody teaches in! (Well, here in the midwest, with the long cold seasons.) This is gonna be extra tough for a size 12 (or maybe extra lucky at a thrift store? not a ton of competition?), and size is always the mitigating factor--sizeism means you have to spend either more money or more labor to maintain even the minimum of professionalism.
For people that don't love fashion and find it oppressive--which it absolutely is, even if you like it--I think it helps to think in formulas: leggings and tights, one or two skirts, tops you like and cardigans. Pick your favorite colors and you can wear them all together forever. Take the guesswork out of it. 
Final suggestion: sometimes around these parts I hear people say that women should, like, suppress their love of ornament and jewelry and all frivolousness lest they be outed as Superficial Women or whatever, and it's bananas. Anyway, every professor I ever had was a Statement Necklace kinda woman :). And don't feel like you necessarily have to sacrifice your gender identity (etc.) in dress for an interview--Academia is oppressive but it's not Wall Street, you know?
Hope this helps--feel free to PM me for specific sartorial advice/solidarity.
P.S. I don't even buy things that need to be ironed vs. tossed in the dryer or steamed in the bathroom. 

I'm out of waiting purgatory! I was shocked to open my e-mail and see an e-mail from my POI at Vanderbilt telling me that I've been accepted. Three acceptances and one rejection is a much better outcome than I dared to hope for.
Good luck to people still waiting for news! Official notifications from Vanderbilt haven't gone out yet, so if you haven't heard yet it could be that your POI is just a bit less proactive.

yeah, I don't want to prolong this argument either, but I do feel the need to point out— I'm not hanging around these forums because I love talking about grad school. I don't. 
but when it was me two years ago, the folks on this forum offered smart, helpful advice, which was invaluable to me in applying and making decisions. so, if there's a way I can pay it forward to new applicants, then I'd like to do that. 
most people are coming from a place of generosity and kindness. there's no need to complain about it.

I don't think I can add much more to everybody's wonderful responses! Incidentally, I found this thread very helpful as I also scored an interview (over Skype, but still) next Wednesday and I'm a little anxious, but, as always, this board has alleviated my anxiety a little bit.
But I want to second @NoirFemme's "be yourself" advice. Of course, you'll want to look especially nice and professional but I know that, in my case, wearing clothes I would never ordinarily wear makes me feel incredibly uncomfortable and thus makes me act accordingly. Wearing something that makes you feel like yourself (albeit maybe a dressier version of yourself, depending on your every day style) and comfortable in your own skin would be your best bet, I think.
I mostly just came to wish you luck, I'm sure it's going to go great!  And yes, do keep us posted after the interview.

Have you considered searching for photos of the DGS and other members of the department either at mixers or at academic conferences? (Examples of the latter are often found in newsletters for professional associations.) If such photos are available, that could form a baseline and then you could decide to dial it up or down as you see fit.
I would recommend that you wear shoes you already know well unless you're good at managing your facial expressions. One never knows when the interviewer is going to change things up ("Let's walk and talk," "I'll show you around the department," "How about a tour of the library system?"). All of sudden, the shoes that looked and felt great at NORDSTROM'S (obligatory jab at POTUS), have a hot spot or two which you discover at the exact same moment someone turns to hear your reply to a pivotal question.
Here's the first of two pivots. Please do your best to leave what ever concerns or doubts you have about your skills and potential behind. You are a historian having a conversation about the craft. You have worked very hard to earn an opportunity that you absolutely deserve. You have done important work and you're going to do more as the decades unfold. While you're looking for someone to support, to teach, and to mentor you, do not lose sight of the fact that YOU are going to bring additional prestige and honor to the historians who figure this out.
Here's the second pivot. Please do come back and provide a debriefing of the interview.