Banzailizard

In terms of history? 1. Byzantine history. I cannot help but respect a state that survived the number of near collapses that they did yet still came back. Plus they are something of an aberration in medieval Europe. The fact that they are geographically caught between traditional western and eastern Europe as well as between Europe and the Middle East is also rather interesting. I have little interest though in expending the effort it would take trying learning medieval Greek. Plus it's not really a hot topic right now, would be hard to find a job. 2. I have always had an interest in a public history topic of history in games. (Both video games and table top) Games in historical settings are interesting because, unlike movies or books, the players interact with and to some extent "make" history. Different players also have different tolerances or interests in pursuing verisimilitude. This can also cause inter-player conflict or condlict between players and developers who have different interpretations of historical events. There is also the trade off between strict historical accuracy and gameplay. Some games go a long way towards combining mechanics and history (for example Here I Stand ) others wear history like cheap costume (looking at you Battle Field 1). All make this sacrifice to some extent in the name of simplifying mechanics enough to be playable ( this is also why I never will get anyone to play Campaign for North Africa with me). A well designed game can both be entertaining and warn against being overly deterministic. It can teach that small changes can have large impacts over time by giving the player a choice then letting them see the consequences. Again this is public history on the level of entertainment, not a substitute for proper history. However, because it may be some people's only exposure to history, it's still a worthwhile topic, just not one I think would fly in academia per say. There is also a sub topic of this: fantasy world building. Usually this involves the telescoping of medieval and early modern worlds, with a sprinkling of general anachronism, some explained others not. It's almost a less specific form of counterfactual history. The last one would have some merit in public history, this would get me laughed right out the door though. Finally in terms of non history, a little of everything. I am a bit of an intellectual flake. I get supper excited about a topic for a few weeks or a month, then drop it when I understand it just enough to not be useful to anyone, or when I find a new shiny thing. One of the reasons I picked history as an undergrad was that it was broad enough to study "whatever." Beyond developing an appreciation of history for it's own sake, I also applied for a PhD in history because it's one of the few topics I keep coming back to, and I have also been trying to work on my focus based on the historical topics I keep coming back to. (Had to type this on a phone hopefully not too many typos)

Got officially rejected from Georgetown so I think I am out this cycle for PhD's. I was not even offered admission to the Masters program (unless they chose to follow up later) not that I could do that without major funding anyways. Ohio State and Minnesota still maintain radio silence, but I suspect strongly that is not meant as a positive sign. I did get an e-mail almost simultaneously get acceptance for a Master of Science degree in Environmental Economics and Urban Planning at Tufts. Tufts tends to fund some of their MS degrees. If I got funding then I would need to weight pros and cons, talk to my SO, and make some career choices. Could use the econ masters to go towards an econ PhD. Ultimately I want to be in academia, and the market for econ is better than history. Would even be similar interests in a general way but with a different focus (present day rather than past). Still I think I would be happier with history and that the question I want to answer are a better fit for the field. If no funding I think I will wait and maybe reapply for history PhDs. I also still have the offer for the Rutgers master. I'll have to wait a few weeks before I e-mail my POI. The extent of the reasons for my rejection will also be a big part of any decisions. Good luck to anyone who still has applications outstanding or is on a wait list somewhere.

Like I said I am not without hope, but I am risk adverse so I tend to like to have a solid plan B. I will wait at least until I have an official rejection in hand before doing anything, but inactivity while the odds narrow cuts against my grain. I appreciate the responses. I really was not sure what protocol was on this sort of thing, and if in inquiring at all, as oppose to having the feedback be offered unsolicited, I would be committing a faux pas. I do not know if any of my POI were on the admissions committee, it seemed impolite to ask, so contacting the DGS sounds valuable. If it is just a language problem I would rather audit the courses and self teach. I suppose I could ask them if they require credit and a grade as proof of proficiency. I do like the idea of leading with a specific question though. It seems less prone to misunderstanding that I am looking for something other than critical and specific feedback.

Well nothing from Georgetown and I see a few responses already up there on the results. I am still nursing a little hope, just as with Minnesota and Ohio State, but realistically I think I am shut out this season. What are the norms around contacting POI for feedback on an application? I do not want to come off as whiny ("why didn't I get in"), but I do want information that I can act on. There is a big difference after all between a structural problem (my language background is insufficient, my lack of archival work is too detrimental, my writing sample is so poor as to be unusable) correctable problem (my SOP is still to broad/vague/work workable with my background, I need to find better fits) or if it was just the luck of the draw/ internal politics/ what have you. Each of these would require a very different response on my part as preparation for next year, or further out if it is a serious issue. I am sure some of it depends on my relation to my POI but I stopped e-mailing all of them by October (I am rather bad about keeping up conversations both in-person and online). I was admitted to Rutgers for a MA, its cheep enough in state that I could self fund, though it would use all of my funds so I am rather hesitant. I have also debated auditing courses in the summer, if offered, so that I can have a little structure to my academic learning again. Reading some of the qualification of people on this forum I suspect my problems are structural. I pessimistically feel like my dual major gave me two half degrees rather than two full degrees. I lack the serious mathematical training for an econ PhD (my original attempt from which I would move towards econ history). Simultaneously my history degree was very unfocused, not spending any serious time with primary sources, taking classes with no coherent geographic or temporal (other than premodern) focus, and taking a language (German) because I did in high school rather than as a focus towards anything I was interested in (and which now has little to do with my academic interest). That being said, I am not sure how seriously my academic profile deviates from those admitted to PhD programs, and I am not sure how to find out that sort of information short of asking POI.

Was that your posting on the results or did you just hear something through the grapevine? This is nerve-wracking since I think this is my last chance this year.

Got my first official rejection today from Michigan, which is OK I guess. Of the four PhD programs I applied to it was probably the worst fit. Still stings a bit though.

I would like to do a mashup of economic and environmental history for the early modern world. Personally I am interested in global and transatlantic but my language (German) limits me somewhat. I liked Minnesota because it has some economic historians (in history departments I mean) and some people working on historical demographics, though outside of the area I am interested in ( Steven Ruggles , J. David Hacker, Stuart McLean ) Since I have an econ background with statistics, I and demographics fall sort of under both economic and environmental history, I figured it might be a good match. What were you trying to focus on?

Not sure what to think about my current status with Minnesota. According to the results they sent out acceptance letters. Also clearly they have sent out some rejection letters as was reported in this thread. My status still says awaiting decision. I see two possibilities. 1. I am a possible candidate but not a first pick thus putting me on an informal waiting list. 2. I am so far down the list of possible candidates they are not bothering with sending me a rejection until March. Not sure if anyone has insight into the process. I saw the graphs a few pages back so I am guessing the second. Still have Georgetown left (looks like those should be out in a week or two) but thinking I should just start the research process again now. Probably could have done a better job selecting programs, 3 months doesn't seem to have been enough time.

Saw this checked my status with Minnesota but no change for me. Still says "awaiting program decision." Wonder what that means for me. I am assuming it's a rejection on my part. Hope that means you are getting in though since it was your top (and only) pick.

Twiddling my thumbs waiting in the same boat as most people. No news from Minnesota and Michigan. Ohio State should be sending out soon, or they have already sent. Seems people hear from POI often, but I did not have a sustained conversation with mine. Georgetown looks like its mid to late February based on the results page. I threw three 3 MA's out there 2 econ (my other undergrad major, Tufts and U Oregon mostly because they offer funding and I would probably be somewhat happy in public policy) 1 in history (Rutgers, its in-state so tuition is not killer, I think I could manage it with my savings and part time work, but really would rather not spend all of my net-worth on a degree without much ROI). I half think I did the MA apps for something to do, but I like having plans B and C. Already mentally constructing and reconstructing a flowchart of outcomes and my course of action from there, looking at calendars to plot timelines, analyzing my process this time, trying to cull wasted time. This sort of over-planing is probably not useful, but I think it gives me a false sense of control I need to reduce stress. It is weird having such a binary set of outcomes; either I know exactly what I am doing for the next 5 years, or I have no idea what I am doing for the next five years.

I would say it is fine to mention that a school is your top choice if that is true, but I would not suggest you would commit if admitted. The former might be held in your favor if debating between two equally qualified candidates. There is even a post about it in the stickied retrospective thread at the top of this subforum. However committing to attending would be less advisable because it gives you less room when negotiating funding. Yes its not a legally binding contract, like say, early admission in undergraduate, but saying you would commit is a promise and breaking it (or suggesting you will break it to negotiate) is just a good way to burn bridges early in an academic career. I would wait for a second opinion because I am not sure how valuable my advice is. All my apps were due December 1st. Good luck to everyone who has them due today. Take a short break before you hit submit and come back to review the materials with a fresh mind.

Just as an alternative suggestion then but what about auditing courses? I am not sure of the feasibility, both for your own personal situation and for what Chicago allows, but it could be a good way to explore, meet professors, etc. From what I understand MAPSS is designed to be pretty focused. Then again maybe that is what you need. Not trying to say never do this, but just think about your options carefully. Either way I would reach out the MAPSS program directly and see if they can put you in touch with current students.

But what do you mean by "studying history" here. Archival work? Reading contemporary historians? Just generally figuring out what you like? From what I have heard MAPSS is a good program, but like all masters its expensive. If you are going to drop tens of thousands of dollars you should be clear, if not with us then with yourself, as to why. It's like saying you want to buy a car, and when asked why, answering "to drive." Anyways if the car sits in the garage because you walk everywhere, you wasted money. If you are just trying to get a feel for the field or your interests it is cheaper to buy books on your own. If you need direction, most professors post class reading lists on their website, look at ones who work in areas you are interested in. Most people go to masters to 'fix' an issue with their application. For example they came from a different degree, their research qualifications are not great, they have poor grades and want to show they are serious now, etc. From what you shared you do not show any obvious problems to address. Either there are none, in which case yes maybe you should apply to a PhD if you have a goal in mind, or you need to explain what the problem is you need the MAPSS to address.

In response to this question: Have you received information that is at odds with the recommendations provided here? I will share one piece of advice from one of my professors. I agonized about fit a lot. Economic History is already a somewhat small discipline these days in the US. There are plenty of good economic historians but many are older and focus on post industrial revolution (I am looking for early modern). The fact that I want to also intersect it with environmental history made a perfect fit even harder to find. My professor just advised "Just get in somewhere." In other words, find several quality programs that are really good fits, and put your effort into apply to them. Your interests might change and can transfer between programs, now as a known entity, if you made a really wrong choice. Maybe not useful advice for everyone, but I suffer badly from analysis paralysis so it was what I needed.

So how is everyone else doing? I hit a stumbling block earlier but, thanks in large part to this thread, I am more or less back on track. I very specifically started this season with some deadlines which I have mostly met. August was for background reading and looking at bibliographies to see where to search. By September 30th wanted my schools identified (in retrospect I wonder if there is an optimal stopping method for this). By October 31st I wanted all my SOP done: bit behind here, took an extra week, but now they are semi-finalized. Content is set, now just small tweaks. I sent them out again for reviews. Took a break on a day that I was out of it to do the mindless work of filling in the applications. All done there, other than the stuff that counts. LOR requests are out, 7/12 are submitted. November is for my WS revision. To catch back up I temporarily suspended working on foreign languages. So overall, starting to feel the stress of the irrevocable deadline, but keeping it together because the arbitrary (i.e. unweighted with the actual effort or importance of any given task) progress bar I made looks pretty full.