laleph
-
Posts
50 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by laleph
-
-
23 hours ago, Michael Scarn said:
I'm not sure where you're from, but was that a part of your undergrad degree or did you go through some sort of alternative certification?
PMed you!
-
10 hours ago, laleph said:
(if you read in French, check out Les courants historiques en France, and the two volumes of Historiographies directed by Christian Delacroix et al., to get a sense of current debates in Frenah history)
Just looked at my bookshelf again and realized there's a third volume in the Historiographies series that I haven't read! It contains chapters on "enjeux et débats" in sub-subfields of French (not Frenah, heh) history -- history of the French revolution, la Grande Guerre, French communism, Vichy, etc.
3 hours ago, NoirFemme said:The other question to ask is what do you want to do with a History MA? It's an awkward degree to have these days, IMO, because of the number of Ph.D holders now applying for the same jobs as MA holders.
[...]
If a graduate degree is something you want to, apply and see what happens. And based on nhhistorynut's experiences, you might find a new research question you never expected to find fascinating.
A related comment: unless you're independently wealthy, going into debt for a terminal masters in history doesn't make the most financial sense. Of course there are people who make it work... But it just seems like too much of a risk to take on debt without the guarantee of a job afterward.
If you find yourself leaning toward France, you might want to consider getting a master's degree there. It's sooooo much cheaper than the US (about 500 euros/year at Paris 1 La Sorbonne, for example, which includes health insurance!) -- and if you get into the SAT/ACT/TOEFL/IELTS tutoring racket on the side, you can make it work without going into debt.
@nhhistorynut is right that the first two years of grad school can help you explore and narrow your interests, but you don't necessarily have to get a terminal master's to do that. Different PhD programs are structured in different ways, and you could tailor your apps to those that work best for your interests. You just have to get in, then you can take a little time to explore! Many programs, for example, require two years of coursework before preparing for orals, and sometimes your topic radically changes over that time. A friend of mine went into grad school planning to study late 19th-c. US literary cultures and wound up working on translations of Haitian literature in the 19th-c. Atlantic world -- not wildly different, but different enough that her subfield label changed. In contrast, programs like Johns Hopkins require incoming students to jump into primary source research right away (in preparation for the famous "first-year paper"), and there is no (officially) required coursework. Such programs work better for people who have an idea of what they want to do going in. Read a lot of grad school handbooks to find out how the programs you're interested in are structured.
-
1 hour ago, RageoftheMonkey said:
Serious question: if you don't know what kind of history you're interested in studying, why are you applying to grad school to study history? Sounds to me like it might be useful to take some time off, have some other experiences outside school, and apply to grad school when you have a clearer sense of what you want to do.
I second @RageoftheMonkey's comment. The best advice I got when I was in your spot a couple years back was from a prof who said: sure you can write history papers for whatever class you're taking at the moment, ok, but that's not enough. You won't be happy or successful in grad school unless you have a reason to get up in the morning for 5+ years. It took me a few years of away-time, teaching history and geography at the high school level and pursuing other interests, for me to get there. I'm ready to go back to grad school this fall because I know (at least for now) what'll get me up in the morning. Dissertation topics always change, of course, but I'd encourage you to wait to apply till you find a knot you can't wait to untie -- then identify schools that will support you as you attempt to untie it.
Edit: If you're trying to figure out which field you want to work in, reeaaaaddd a whole lot, monographs, textbooks, historiographical essays... That's how I started finding my own path back to history after undergrad. I now plan to work in US history, but like you was tempted by French history during undergrad... I still love reading about French historiography (if you read in French, check out Les courants historiques en France, and the two volumes of Historiographies directed by Christian Delacroix et al., to get a sense of current debates in Frenah history), but I know I want to start my work in US history.
-
On 06/04/2017 at 4:56 PM, angesradieux said:
I didn't make any huge changes to the main body of my SoP for each application unless one application had a very different word count/length requirement.
[...]
As far as the MA, I would only do it if it's funded. Personally, I don't think the return on investment is necessarily worth taking on debt. I think how much having an MA helps your application really varies. If you have a chance to talk to people at any of the programs you're interested in, it might be worthwhile to ask how they look upon students with a BA vs. students with an MA and if there's a preference for one over the other.
I did exactly what @angesradieux has suggested, and totally agree re: the MA. The reason many programs have become fully funded for accepted students is because, well, there are hardly any jobs at the end of the road. In the past, a student could justify taking on some debt, knowing there'd be a decent position at the end of it. That time is no more.
One thing I wish I'd known before applying (if you're interested, I wrote about other things in a recent post in the "Lessons learned" thread) was: if you have a first-choice school, communicate that to the adcom and/or to your POIs, especially when it's a school without a waitlist. They want to admit people they know have a good chance of coming.
-
- The social and cultural history of markets and economic systems. History of capitalism seminars have been sprouting up all over the place since the Great Recession, and the trend doesn't seem to be slowing down anytime soon. Historians of empire and historians of capitalism seem to be talking to each other -- wouldn't J. A. Hobson be proud!
- Related to above: a renewal of intellectual history focusing on social network formation and the interaction of various institutional cultures (depending on the time period, "institutions" could refer to think tanks, learned societies, national and local governments, charitable organizations, etc.).
- Bump for the post on world or global history. Work on the global circulation of commodities has been a recent way in to the subject (cotton, for example).
-
Things I Wish I'd Known Before Applying
- If a particular school is your top choice (or even in your top three), make it known on your application somehow, especially for schools that do not have waitlists (*cough* University of Chicago). I made that mistake, and was told later that the admissions committee feared I wouldn't come, and didn't want to take the risk of admitting me.
- The response you get from POIs after writing to them to express interest in their programs is indicative of the relationship you will have with them later, and can be indicative of the department's culture. I don't buy the argument: "Professors are busy and find emails from prospective students annoying." Everyone is busy and everyone finds emails annoying. Professors who care about mentoring grad students will respond, maybe not within 24 hours, but they will do it at some point. I am very happy to report that I continue to correspond with amazing people, both faculty and current students, even though I won't be attending their schools. Those are the people who will become both colleagues and (with luck!) friends.
- Once you're in the pool with people whose CVs resemble yours, acceptances and rejections are extremely difficult to predict. At visiting day events, I met people who were rejected where I'd been accepted and vice versa. So much of admissions comes down to department politics, which is annoyingly hard to figure out before you're in the thick of it. Which brings me to the next point...
- Students who are further along, feel free to correct me on this, but: I kinda wished I'd asked POIs whether their departments were accepting people in my subfield. Before I applied, I thought such a question was gauche and shouldn't be asked. But I ended up applying to one school that wasn't taking anyone in my area of interest, because the school had promised its two spots to people already enrolled in a masters program there. I didn't find this out till after I applied.
- Do deep Google searches on your POIs, and update those search results as the deadline nears. I had compiled a long Google doc of POIs long before applications were due, and did not update the doc much as I was writing my statements of purpose. It turns out that the main person I wanted to work with at one school was going to be moving elsewhere in the fall -- but the school of origin didn't update their website till the end of November. By that time, I had already written my statements, and ended up sending off an SoP full of specifics about that person's work, not realizing that they weren't going to be around in the fall.
That's all I can think of for the moment. Hope it's of some help. -
12 hours ago, Rainy Day Woman said:
Pitching in just to say congrats to everyone who had a successful cycle, and hugs and wisdom to those heading back in next year. The attached comic is my favourite, and is precisely what happened to me this cycle. Rejected from Duke and Chicago, wasn't able to get off the waitlist at Columbia, but I ended up getting an offer from NYU so I will be heading there and could not be happier with how everything worked out. Still a little overwhelmed with the idea of NYC, and sad to say goodbye to Canada, but going to work, read, and prep this summer once I've finished my undergraduate thesis.
Steven Hahn is moving to NYU! Given your interests, you can't go wrong. Congratulations!
-
Now that the US deadline has passed, curious to know where everyone ended up. Which school(s) did the choice come down to?
-
Weeks of agonizing are finally over. Finally decided on Columbia over JHU. Sigh. Congratulations to all, and happy summer!
- NoirFemme, etoile89, RageoftheMonkey and 1 other
-
4
-
Just declined Cornell, sigh. Very difficult decision. I'm hoping at the very least it helps someone on the waitlist.
-
1 hour ago, Calgacus said:
Of course. I don't mean to suggest that 35 is particularly old, and I'm certainly not advocating against admitting "nontraditional students," as you put it. My undergrad advisor went to grad school when she was 35 and has since had a strong career. I took several years off myself, and I think it's probably more productive for programs not to be filled with 22 years olds. I was simply throwing something out that I've heard faculty reference, and wondered whether others had heard the same. Anyway, I'm sorry to hear of your bad luck this cycle. I hope you get good news from the school you're waitlisted at.
This is purely anecdotal, but anyway… I've heard from friends already attending (in history and related disciplines) that the average age for entering students is around 27. (I had inquired about this more than a year ago when I began thinking about applying – I'm now 30.) It should be noted that students entering straight out of undergrad are pretty rare. According to a friend at a top program, only 2 people out of her cohort of about 20 were in that position. Like @Calgacus, I've heard that older students must make a stronger case for their potential to contribute to the discipline, given that they will graduate in their early forties. Yes, 40 isn't 70 – so you're not staring down the barrel of death from natural causes quite yet – but it does mean that you will be starting your career at the moment when your age-group peers have been publishing, teaching, and all the rest for 5-10 years already.
Second, @NoirFemme's comments about familiarizing yourself with the current debates in your subfield were spot-on. Those of us who've been out for a while must prove we have a handle on those debates right out of the gate. I was lucky enough to have access to a research library as I prepared my applications, which allowed me to update my knowledge of my subfield. I honestly don't know how I would have been able to apply without that access. (This goes back to the debate about how students' socio-economic status affects their applications, but that's for another post.)
The take-away, I suppose, is that 35 is not necessarily "too old," but you have a steeper hill to climb. If you know you want to go to graduate school – for all the reasons you mentioned in your SOP – then you should apply next year. As I wrestled with that question last year, I read this article, and it helped.
Fingers crossed for your waitlist school.
- Sigaba, luz.colorada and etoile89
-
3
-
5 hours ago, realmarcelproust said:
Congrats! I just woke up to a very nice email from my POI, too!! Sounds like you have some great options between Cornell and Yale. I'm now going to have a very tough time choosing between Penn, Cornell, Rutgers, and NYU. I'm so grateful to be in this position, though.
Same boat, different choices. But hello to (potential) Cornell cohort!
-
10 hours ago, SarahBethSortino said:
I'm pretty much living my nightmare and my worst case scenario. I've only been waitlisted at one of the six schools I applied to. I know my "safe choice" met last week and I haven't heard anything, and historically the other two schools I applied to would have already sent out acceptances right now. In a million years I never believed I would be at the end of February and have no idea what is going to happen next year. I'm in absolute despair right now seeing everyone talk about getting at least one acceptance. I don't know what I'm going to when I finally find out it's really all over.
As others have said, it isn't over until it's over – and it's almost over! If it turns out you aren't accepted this year, though, apply next year. Acceptances come down to quite a bit of luck. A good friend of mine (who was in her thirties when she applied the first time) was rejected from every school she applied to the first time round. She considered giving up, but instead spent the year refining her applications, working to pay the rent, and interning in her field (architecture). The following year, she was accepted at ALL of the top architecture programs. As @Antebellum said, if you know why you want to go to graduate school, go to graduate school – of course with your eyes wide open about job prospects, heh, but don't take the results of this cycle as indicative of the results you'll get if you apply again!
-
22 hours ago, realmarcelproust said:
Is anyone still waiting to here anything at all from Cornell? From the boards it seems like in past years they've been one of the last places to release decisions, but I'd still like to know something soon either way.
According to my extremely unscientific calculations, it seems acceptances are sent out near the end of February, and rejections are sent the first week of March... So we're almost out of waiting land. I suppose the January 1st application deadline is the reason for the later response.
-
11 hours ago, voprosi said:
I also received news that I was waitlisted at Harvard. Are you planning to stay on the waitlist? In my field, history programs usually take 1-2 people at most per year, so I'm assuming if one person in my field declines their spot, I would get off the waitlist. I don't have high hopes though -- it is Harvard, so I don't think the likelihood of someone declining would be pretty slim.
Oy, I'm torn. I am leaning in the direction of accepting another offer, and am therefore wondering if I should keep my spot on the waitlist till Harvard rejects me on its own. I don't want to prevent anyone from getting in to his/her dream school by clogging up the waitlist -- but as you say, it's probably unlikely to be accepted that way anyway, so why not stay on? I dunnnoooooo
-
1 hour ago, SarahBethSortino said:
Who on here just wants Harvard to go ahead and put us out of our misery? *raises hand*
Dunno if this means anything, but yesterday I got the official notice of my status on the supposedly "short" waitlist. Does anyone have any idea what a "short" waitlist means?
-
-
To people flying in from far away:
How have you decided which visiting days to attend? I'm still waiting on four schools; have been accepted at one of my top choices and waitlisted at the other. Am trying to figure out if I should attend the visiting days of the latter schools (in other words, buy tickets now), or wait to hear back from the last four before booking tickets. And it would be rather presumptuous to email asking when visiting days are before being admitted or waitlisted… Any advice is much appreciated!
-
1 hour ago, nhhistorynut said:
Just curious here...
How many schools did most people apply to this round?
I applied to only one this year. That might sound silly, but because I havent completed my MA yet and my writing sample was from a seminar and not part of my thesis, I felt like it was a long shot. My plan if I don't get in is to reapply to this school next year, and then another 4 or 5. But even 5 or 6 apps is starting to seem like a short list. Is it better to apply all over and see what happens?
Hello,
After ruling out schools located in places I do not want to live, I created a document containing the profiles of faculty whose work I admire. I then looked up their current work and the work of their graduate students. If possible, I tried to figure out whether they were taking on new students, and narrowed the list from there. In the end, I came out with 8 schools.
As for "apply[ing] all over and see[ing] what happens": I applied only to schools located where I actually want to live, with the goal of working with people whose scholarship has been important for my development as a historian. I suppose I'll see what happens from there – in any case, there's a good dose of luck involved in getting accepted, regardless of stellar credentials or "fit."
-
On 2/9/2017 at 5:26 PM, cyclingonthemoon said:
My take away is that faculty fit is more important than overall credentials. Accepted to Harvard while rejected by Northwestern. Not surprised by that.
On 2/10/2017 at 3:23 AM, Neist said:If you float around long enough on these forums, you hear all sorts of crazy stories about admissions experiences. There is no norm, and there's rarely consistency.
Just want to second what others have said: as hard as it is to accept (especially when you've been rejected from schools you thought you'd be accepted to), there aren't too many big lessons to be drawn from all this. Yes, "fit" is very important, but it's not everything. Neither are shiny degrees from top-ranked institutions, test scores, or hours-long conversations with POIs. There are so many elements beyond our control, among them: budgetary constraints, departmental politics, informal promises made to applicants who were rejected last year – the list goes on. To get a sense of the Mountain of Arbitrariness we're up against, I suggest this interview and book. I realize it might be small comfort to recognize that there really is only so much you can do. But there really is only so much you can do. Godspeed to all! It's nearly over.
-
1 hour ago, AnUglyBoringNerd said:
If I am waitlisted I would consider it a huge honor and success (yep, "low" bar).
unfortunately my situation is that I haven't heard anything (at this moment, it would be informal email from POI or department) at all. Thank you for the kind words though! I really appreciate it! 
We all need kind words these days! I should also mention that my POI didn't reach out to me on his own. I contacted him about an unrelated matter and his response was along the lines of: "oh by the way, you've been waitlisted." Chin up!
-
40 minutes ago, AnUglyBoringNerd said:
Japan. Focus is post war Japan especially the American Occupation. (I'm an international applicant btw) However, I haven't got an offer (or campus visit invitation, or update of any kind) from Harvard....based on my understanding I must have been rejected already. T-T But since it's Harvard, I've decided not to be too hard on myself. Last week I had this crazy idea that I must be an entire moron because Harvard doesn't want me haha. (<--First cycle applicant mindset.)
Congrats again to everyone who got accepted by Harvard! I won't say it is my "dream school", but I'd certainly go with dream POI + library + archive system so should I fail to get in UPenn this year I'd keep applying~
You could also be waitlisted! I haven't heard an (official) peep from Harvard, but my POI just informed me that I was waitlisted. Still a glimmer of hope to be had.
-
15 hours ago, russianblue said:
True! That comment was mostly referring to NYU, who came back around the end of January last year. And it seems that some of Chicago's decisions have gone out unofficially, but the dead silence is making me nervous.
I am glad that Columbia seems to send acceptances/rejections out around the same time. Being in the limbo of am I in or out, when at least some admittees seem to know, is probably the worst part for me.
Hello all,
Long-time lurker here. About Chicago: according to one of my POIs, admissions were cut in half this year because the department admitted too many people the last two years. I was offered a funded masters a few days ago – in lieu of the PhD – but haven't received official notice. That doesn't necessarily mean anything, though. Some POIs are just not as communicative about the status of your application as others are. Case in point: was just accepted to Columbia via the portal. No word from my POI. Don't lose hope yet!
A whole new application process
in History
Posted
Columbia has a tiny masters program. NYU has some options for students wishing to pursue an MA in history. (Unfortunately, I'm having issues accessing the NYU site at the moment and can't link you.) In either case, you will be spending a LOT of money to get a degree at a big-name school without any kind of job security at the end of it. As you probably know, you won't be able to go into academia with only a masters, but maybe that's not your goal. If you want to get an MA in history, I'd suggest applying to less pricey schools or to funded masters programs. Otherwise it's just not worth it.
As for the endless grades/GPA question: a good GPA and a good verbal GRE score (exactly no one cares about your math score when you're applying to history programs) will get you in the door, but they won't keep you in the room. The word on the street is that the writing sample makes or breaks an application. Columbia even says so: "We are often asked what we consider important in reviewing applications. First and foremost, we are looking for evidence of scholarly talent and achievement. Grades and GRE scores are, of course, helpful in locating such evidence, but they are not the only things we consider. What you say in your personal statement can be very important, and your writing sample is often the decisive factor in our decision."