OHSP

Oxford and “the ivies” are not equivalent and MA admissions work differently in different countries. Ivy MA programs are often cash cows. I’d also question why you assume “the ivies” (a relatively diverse group of schools) will be the best place for your research, and why you’d assume they’re necessarily better than other schools—it rings some serious warning bells.

No, but I'm not sure he's taking new students or around very much -- it'd be something to look into.

btw did you consider applying to NYU, as an Africanist? There's Julie Livingston, Michael Gomez, Robyn D'Avignon, amongst others--all big names with good records of placing students.

I’m not sure if I mentioned that I was also flying from Australia to the east coast—there are often (at schools like these) weird pockets of secret money that only appear when you ask if they exist. I’d just ask, visits are crucial.

YUP. Since starting (in 2017) our health insurance has been reduced and the once "virtually guaranteed" 6th year funding has become available only a competitive basis (this is across the school not the department, and the department's response has been very good, but shit happens etc). I'd also add that you don't necessarily want to get it done in 4. Taking time to let your research interests evolve is important--and, more cynically, the more years you have in the PhD the more time you have to try and stack up a few things that (depending on your field and where you want to go after) can really, really matter--whether languages, prestigious grants/fellowships, publications, or serious teaching experience (running your own units, etc). I don't really have much insight into whether you're less competitive on the job market if you take an inordinate amount of time to complete, but that seems logical.

See if they'll fly you over. I attended all of mine and one school booked my flights home with less than a weeks notice.

Sorry--wasn't meant as a personal dig. Every time I apply for anything I spend months on the verge of sending a stream of emails all to the effect of, "ACTUALLY DON'T WORRY GUYS I'LL TRY AGAIN NEXT YEAR".

I feel like I'd really enjoy a slow video montage of the same set of applicants pre-emptively declining offers for grad school, grants, post-docs, and then tt jobs over a 15 year period.

This advice only applies once you've been admitted. At this stage in the month I wouldn't be pre-emptively declining offers from schools that you haven't heard from at all.

I would just leave it. I'm pretty sure they've made decisions/finished meeting, so you're not reducing the decision-making workload. Possibly a few people are yet to be notified (though I doubt it at this point), and if you're amongst them it's probably just going to irritate your POI if you pre-emptively turn down the offer after they've spent time making decisions. If you receive an offer, turn it down then. Otherwise you're just sending unnecessary emails (a big academic sin).

I’m not talking about topic, I’m talking about phrasing. You can make anything sound urgent and relevant. If everyone getting in were studying these “popular” topics our work would all be very similar—that has not been my experience in grad school. “Nationalistic movement of an imperial subject people” is strange phrasing, so I’m betting it’s probably more about how you’re framing your project than it is about your topic (especially because this actually sounds like a “trendy” topic). Good luck with future applications, application cycles are brutal and rejections are frustrating, but there’s a lot of good advice going around on this forum.

The thing about fit is that you can’t really know whether it exists until maybe a year into the program, and when you’re deciding where to go based on where you’ve been admitted, the best way to determine fit is to talk to your POI, and their grad students, and to visit the department and try to get a feel for it. If you’re talking about a fit that’s based on research interests alone, that’s basically less important. Re the placement thing, what I said earlier. If you’re looking at a school like the university of rochester though I’d want to be taking a look at who of their students is being placed—across schools placement differs field by field and advisor by advisor.

Nope. Said as someone who turned down a “highly ranked” offer for one of these “15-20” schools. How important is it for you to be at a top 1-5 school (just going to call them “prestige schools” from here on in, because that’s what they are), and why is that so important? Like yes something about the job market but the job market is truly terrible for everyone, HYP type schools don’t place all of their students. You have to choose the best program for your work, not the most prestigious school for your resume, because chances are wherever you go it’s going to be tough to get a job, and you’ll have a better chance of ending up with good options later on if you choose the program that’s best for you specifically and not notionally best for producing historians in general. The PhD program that’s admitted you obviously thinks you’re a good fit for them so talk to them. You might find your POI there can tell you more about your prospects than any of us. **also: do not take on debt for a masters degree (or a PhD).

It literally could just be that you haven't been notified. Not trying to false hope anyone but it's really not over until it's officially over.

I’m guessing information is coming soon, they’re organizing events etc now. Feel free to PM.

Sorry to deliver what is probably bad news--should definitely be stated that I don't know for certain that all admitted students have been notified, though. When I got in my POI called me many days after a stream of acceptances were posted on here, so I assumed I was out, but the POI was just super busy.

...plenty of people successfully admitted to PhD programs in the past few years are not working on the "popular themes" that you've listed. I'd really get yourself away from thinking that people are getting in over you because their work is "trendy". Often it's less a matter of "topic" (I don't know of anyone who talks about the topic they're working on, really), and more a matter of research questions -- how are you presenting the questions that are guiding your research? Do the questions sound urgent, relevant, feasible, worth pursuing etc, and do they show that you're thinking about how to intervene in historiographical debates, methods etc etc. Instead of blaming the "trends" you're identifying, think about how you can re-frame your project (beyond the transnational thing) by explaining where it fits and who you're speaking to. On the same note, the SoP is very, very important--more important than having publications or a completed thesis or some random fellowship that your POI's never heard of etc. I'd go so far as to say that without a strong SoP you can't guarantee that admissions committees are going to do more than skim the rest of your application (at two schools I was admitted to it was obvious that my POIs had not read my writing sample, beyond maybe the first page--this is just a practical reality. They have very little time, they're not actually reading every 25 page paper closely). So the SoP is where you frame your project and "stand out" from the hundreds of other applicants. I used to think the advice on this forum was harshly phrased--it's kind of necessarily so. Without tough advice you won't make the serious changes required to get into a program, so my advice is to find a professor (assistant profs are often closer to the process/remember their own SoP) who can give you that brutal advice in real life--it was the most helpful thing I did when applying.

Unfortunately it's actually just that the incoming cohort is designed to be very small, weather didn't really affect the department this year. The prospective students day has been announced.

You'll work this stuff out once you're there.... I'd try to go into a phd without too many expectations (academic or social). Chances are it won't be as you imagined, which is often a good thing.

Ask to be put in touch with current grad students in your field, because they’ll tell you how the program actually operates.

Your research sounds very interesting—not boring at all. I wonder though are you applying solely in the UK? This particular site is very US focused (I am not from the US but now study in the US, and I came here mostly for US specific advice). When I was applying to US programs it was after having made the decision not to apply to UK programs because of the lack of funding, so being able to fund yourself is a big advantage there (as you would know). Where have you been applying and are you willing to move for the PhD—I wonder if you’d find a good advisor (or someone who could point you to a good advisor elsewhere) at St Andrews?

The world where people are thinking about ivy prestige and US news rankings ? Placement-wise the program has serious strengths and serious weaknesses but that's a different matter. Also a friend in the program who's a few years further in has received similar emails this year and has never received them previously. Maybe a fluke, maybe not.

Yes. I'm not entirely sure why people think it'll be easier to get into schools if they apply as Americanists. Also worth being a bit careful about how you phrase these things, especially when you're asking for advice from current graduate students. I've recently received a few messages in which prospective students/applicants say things to the effect of: "I figured 'your school' would be easier to get into than x school, I don't know what I was thinking applying to ~~better schools~~" or "I thought about applying to your school as a safety" or "I'm worried that if I went to your school I'd struggle on the job market". Obviously these kinds of statements can rub people the wrong way, whether you're talking about a specific school or a specific field! Develop tact early.

If the Villanova MA is funded and there's room to shift your regional focus, I'd recommend the MA--it'll give you some time to get a grasp on where you want your work to go. I've shifted around a bit in my program, though always with the same advisor (my advisor was always more of a methodological than a regional fit), and no one minds/cares. Pretty sure it's actually a relief to my advisors that I abandoned my shitty SoP idea. Ultimately, given supportive advisors and a supportive program, you'll end up writing the work you need to write--but if you're noticing now that you might want to change fields entirely (it's different if you're interested in something approaching "global" or transnational history), then it might be a blessing in disguise if you don't end up with a PhD offer this round. Don't think of your undergrad thesis as defining your future, it's really more of an exercise in working on a sustained research project.

I understand the frustration, but the barriers exist (in some, not all programs) because most reputable PhD programs (especially in the US) are designed to train people for careers as professors, even despite the realities of the job market and even despite nice words about alternative pathways. They pick people who they think will be best placed to become professors after the PhD, which tends to mean people under 40. What is it, specifically, that's drawing you to the PhD? Do you need it in order to carry out the research you want to carry out, and/or to write the publications you want to write? What's your research on, by the way? And where have you been applying? There's a lot of PhD knowledge on this site, and a lot of people (of various ages and backgrounds) who are frustrated by their current inability to get into a program. Maybe someone can offer some specific advice about good programs or pathways for your specific interests.