psstein

Why? I was always very open about not wanting to go on the US job market as an international student and no one has ever batted an eyelid. But I also did not mention this in my SoP, because I dedicated that piece of writing to current historiographical questions/project + past work + why i would be a good fit for x school. My advice for the SoP is that given you have very few words to play with, it's a waste of space to talk about your current career goals for any more than a sentence or two. Profs want to know about your project, your questions, your ideas etc because that tells them about your potential in their program. If the program is renowned for producing museum curators and you've been working towards being a museum curator for the past five years then that's the sort of thing you would mention, but imo it's not worth mentioning that you do/do not want to be a prof.

I wasn't even going this far! A MAPSS with 1/2 tuition is something that one should consider; the MAPSS program is really good as these things go. Chicago is much better than, say, Columbia, when it comes to just taking MA money and running, although this is also a difference between the MAPSS and MAPH. 1/2 tuition is just not a good deal. 

Yes, there are indeed many programs which you should not attend.

Calling even 1/2 tuition on $60k without stipend "generous" stretches credulity. 

Hey folks, I have gotten a bunch of messages since posting my one acceptance, asking about my application process, etc. and I am happy to provide any feedback and answer questions whenever I can (as long as people know that this is not like a magic potion. I'm very lucky to have gotten in, but I don't pretend to know the secret to applying that nobody else knows). I have long felt that the nice thing about this community is that it's a group of wishful scholars supporting each other and providing a little clarification where possible to the more mysterious parts of this grad application process. 
That being said, I got an message this morning asking me if I was admitted to a particular program because it was the only program the writer had applied for and they stated that they hoped to "influence the outcome any way I can." This is so unbelievably inappropriate. It makes me sad to think that members of this community are going around trying to talk others out of attending programs that they were admitted to in the hopes of clearing their own way. Deciding on a program is a hard and intimate decision, and nobody should be trying to influence each other in any direction, let alone out of a good placement. 
I am going to step back here, and won't be reading any new messages. Please everyone try to be good to each other, and supportive rather than covetous when it comes to others' admissions. I know we are all desperate for good news in a hard year, but just be kind.

FYI UChicago is on the quarter system, so it starts much later than most US schools. I think next year's start date is September 27, which is decently close to the Cambridge term start date, so I think you'd have approximately the same amount of time to work on applications for the next cycle. 

Agreed, with some qualification. There are some faculty members outside of Ivy/comparable schools who are notorious for pumping out TT faculty members. Even at top-tier universities, you have advisors who produce a disproportionate number of PhD students who go on to TT jobs.  I would counsel potential graduate students to look not only at the program's placement record, but their advisor's as well. 
Some faculty members are magnificent scholars and writers, but terrible advisors. I ran into several during my time in academia; I'm sure most of us have.

Agreed, with some qualification. There are some faculty members outside of Ivy/comparable schools who are notorious for pumping out TT faculty members. Even at top-tier universities, you have advisors who produce a disproportionate number of PhD students who go on to TT jobs.  I would counsel potential graduate students to look not only at the program's placement record, but their advisor's as well. 
Some faculty members are magnificent scholars and writers, but terrible advisors. I ran into several during my time in academia; I'm sure most of us have.

You can work with a great advisor at a great school and still not get a single academic job interview in today's market.

True, but also the other way round: There are brilliant and kind professors who'll be wonderful advisors, but they work at institutions whose graduate programs typically (or decisively) lead nowhere. Like always, the unhelpful response would be "you need a great advisor in a great school," with a great advisor in a low-tier school and a bad advisor at a great school being equally bad alternatives.

Agreed, with some qualification. There are some faculty members outside of Ivy/comparable schools who are notorious for pumping out TT faculty members. Even at top-tier universities, you have advisors who produce a disproportionate number of PhD students who go on to TT jobs.  I would counsel potential graduate students to look not only at the program's placement record, but their advisor's as well. 
Some faculty members are magnificent scholars and writers, but terrible advisors. I ran into several during my time in academia; I'm sure most of us have.

Scarlet makes a good point on setting up a good filtration system and probably one that relies on multiple things. Eg: if a POI does not respond by x date, reach out the the DGS. 
Other forms of filtrating:
Programs that offer waivers on application fees or standardized tests.  Funding, not only your stipend but also the fees you'd pay (there are always hidden fees), healthcare coverage, available competitive funds, dependency of funding on your labor, etc. Additional support: mental health, digital humanities, graduate certificates, nearby consortiums of libraries, etc. Location, especially for those doing international research or from abroad, is there an airport? does it fly to your area? etc. Additionally, I mentioned this already, but also remember that that a POI that doesn't communicate much does not mean they are not interested in you. There are a million reasons before your project that could prevent any faculty from writing back: they are on leave, they are busy, they are doing research, they are prioritizing their own students, they are busier, etc. 
Similarly, when they do respond, while a great sign, it also doesn't mean you are in, as sadly many of us have learned. My best conversations during application season were in schools I was rejected. 
So, I agree with Scarlet in setting up a more intentional filtration system that matches your interests with the strength of the program, without paying so much attention to arbitrary rankings. 

What do you expect to hear from us? Why making all these assumptions based on a form, instead of filling it and opening a dialog with them?

Hm? Usually this just means if you don't have a PhD you should get a letter from a direct supervisor who's willing to say you're qualified. That you think your BA, whatever your gpa, should fulfil this requirement just means you don't really have a good grasp of what your skills are relative to others.

Documents are fragile and can't be used without qualification. Those dirty fingers (or even clean ones) destroy the documents over time.
They should digitize them, of course. But access to archives isn't what's killing the humanities.

Please don't get me started on this...

Please don't get me started on this...

I seriously doubt that in programs where they care about students they will increase cohort sizes, unless they care for their cheap labor. Top 20 programs that insist of admitting 10+ cohorts with absolutely no jobs is irresponsible. I'd also advise you against such programs. You want your program to be straight with you and support you.
I know Cambridge and UCL are excellent schools (I have friends that attended them and friends that teach there). However, don't think that just because you went to these schools, that would put you farther up in the list. The best schools for US history are... in the US and you would be competing with graduates from these schools. Focus on what you bring that is different, not on pedigree. Writing sample: The most recent polished work. It's about showing you can do research.  I don't know if you did this, but you are applying to a lot of programs. Are you tailoring your SOP enough?  Sorry, no.
I mean, yes, it's nice to do things that bring you joy, and I'm all for that. But absolutely no one questions people are passionate about history if you are applying to twenty programs. 
If in your SOP you say something along the lines of "I don't really expect a career," then you are not giving them any reasons to make you an offer. Passion doesn't get you in. 
If in your SOP you say something along the lines of "I'm passionate about history," welcome to the club, you and 200 other applicants. 
These are the things that put anyone in the no list. 
AdComms are looking for colleagues, for people hungry to change the field, for teachers eager to get into the classroom, for administrators ready to advocate for the humanities. Some others, sadly, are looking for cheap labor, a huge problem in our system which exploits people's "passion" and sucks them dry. I've seen it. 
What do you mean by big/small school? Size of cohorts? "Rankings"? Funding? 

I do know that Princeton trimmed its cohort size a little, but not like other schools (I think down to about 20 from about about 25, but don't quote me on that).

Pretty sure that was my first impression of you as well ?

Sorry about the extremely tough cycle. The GRE is so intensely meaningless when it comes to hist application that when depts keep it I assume it has to do solely with the university. If it's optional and you can avoid it, then avoid it -- it's a waste of time and money and says nothing about your abilities as a historian. 

FWIW, the sensibility has been addressed by @TMP a couple of times in this thread.

The ongoing COVID-19 crisis theoretically makes completing the requirements for a doctorate more difficult to complete within the accelerated timelines departments may be using because of the financial uncertainties.
If you're an Americanist, you need one or two languages, one of which may be swapped for a skill. If you're  not an Americanist, one has to know the languages one needs to know. If you're an Americanist, you likely find enough archival sources nearby or even on line to do a great deal of research. If you're not an Americanist, the ebb and flow of the pandemic may make necessary travel impossible. If you're an Americanist, you can work as a teaching assistant in courses that may be more popular among undergraduates without needing to sacrifice time to get up to speed on a subject. If you're not an Americanist, and a department trims back on offering courses not centered around the United States, you are going to be behind the eight ball of a learning curve. A comment. I understand that this is a period of extraordinary uncertainty for applicants and that there may be a strong sense of frustration, even disappointment, because events are not unfolding as one would like. This being said, I urge all to understand that posts at the Gradcafe don't go away, and that there are faculty and staff among this BB's members.
Now is as good as a time as any to work on one's personal professional comportment. It's not what one says or what one asks that can lead to issues down the line, it's how one says something or how one asks a question that can prove to be an issue. FWIW, I have learned the hard way that professional academic historians pay very careful attention to tone and temperament. Or, as one professor with whom I subsequently became close asked himself "Who is this asshole?" The question came after I said something that was meant to be an ironic / humorous statement of respect.

Good post and one that really bears repeating. Leaving with the MA was one of the best decisions I've ever made.  And for the record, I see the "alt-ac" thing as a crock. With a few exceptions, "alt-ac" jobs are jobs you can hold with a PhD, not jobs requiring a PhD. I'm sorry, but your dissertation on discourses on bodily fluids in the 18th century or the literary culture of immigrants in the early 20th century isn't a key element of becoming an insurance adjuster or a grants manager. These are jobs you can hold with the PhD.
By the way, if I sound angry about this, it's because I am. American graduate education is rotten from the core. The "alt-ac" push is, in part, a way to justify the cost (financial and opportunity) of students who complete a PhD and cannot find permanent academic employment.
If it's at all possible, mods, please, sticky this thread. Every prospective graduate student needs to read this post.
 

Transnational Europeanist here.  There were VERY few jobs for Europeanists this year:
1) At a regional campus in a major city (222 applicants)
2) In a Christian college in PNW
3) In a teaching college in middle of nowhere in the Plains
4) In a semi-rural area of Kentucky
 
That's it. 4 tenure-track jobs alone.  Plus 2 on "France and the World" in liberal arts colleges.  Meanwhile, there are over 35 tenure-track jobs in.... you guess it, African American history or US history emphasizing race and ethnicity. PhD programs are certainly responding to the demands of BLM too.

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). 

Guessing blindly...
Less inclined, fewer posts, people waiting for next season or deciding not to pursue a doctorate in history at all.

IRT fewer posts, it's my hunch that over the last several years, each application season brings more lurking and searching and less posting.
Intuitively, I think that among this season's applicants will come a handful of graduate students who will go on to achieve great things as professional academics. Maybe not Klio's answer to the USMA class of 1915, but one for the ages nonetheless.