[Made a Bad Impression]

How do you know you left a bad impression?

[African History Responses?]

Great to see some Africanists on the boards. I'm rooting for all of you!

Anyway, since I'm already starting to think about another round of application, for the other African History applicants, what sort of language skills do you have? I've just got French, with the idea that I'd learn an indigenous language over the summers. To be competitive, do you think it's good to try to show you've started learning an African language already?

Congrats on Michigan! I'm applying next year, and I speak one African language related to my area of study. I plan to pick up a European language later -- perhaps Italian, since it is the most relevant to the colonial experience of the region I plan to study. From what I gather it is not generally expected that students will have a language (European or African) for admission, but will have to pass language exams for one or two languages at some point during graduate studies. I'd imagine it can certainly help to know a language or two as an applicant, but it won't be the death of your application as it would be for applicants in fields like East Asia or the Middle East. You got into a top program for African history just fine!

[Academic Complex because of Funding]

Safferz, I do get what you are saying. But I think the first year teaching issue is important...mainly because if I am not unable to balance teaching and my coursework the first year, I could potentially lose the teaching assistantship and have no funding.

It's certainly a valid concern, but the majority of students in your program will be in the same boat as you and they manage. I was just speaking to your initial post, which seemed more concerned about not being a "top candidate" and your feelings that the school did not think highly enough of your abilities to *only* offer admission with full funding, which is why so many found the post to be rather insensitive and ridiculous.

[Academic Complex because of Funding]

I really fear that I am already developing some type of complex and doubting this school's desire for me as a doctoral candidate. I am also feeling that perhaps I wasn't their top candidate if other applicants did get fellowships.

If you were offered admission with funding, what more do you want? That's precisely how schools show that they want you in their program, and a sure sign that you ARE one of a select group of individuals who were identified as top candidates from a large pool of applicants. The vast majority of doctoral funding packages in any field involve teaching duties, and only a small minority of exceptional applicants are fortunate enough to win fellowships. Teaching experience will also be important once you're on the job market.

To go to a lower ranked school (with less funding!) simply because a fellowship that makes you feel good about yourself would be absurd.

If you are this disappointed to know you are "average" among the incoming Ph.D cohort, how will you handle the setbacks and disappointments of academia?

[New York, NY]

So I've heard that it provides free housing to students.

It does not. Here's a link with details on types of housing and rates:

http://facilities.columbia.edu/housing/types-accommodations

[What does "fit" mean to you?]

I personally am not sure to what extent Africa is typically subdivided for the purpose of exams and teaching and it probably varies.

It's not! Just an example for a typical scenario - we have two African history professors in my current history department; one studies colonial law and identity in Ghana, and had an advisor who studies missionary medicine in Tanzania, while the other professor studies women and gender in Uganda, and was supervised by someone who studies slavery in Senegal. The entire continent is one field.

[What does "fit" mean to you?]

Hi all,

I'll be applying next year for the 2012 admission cycle, but I've been reading the fora for quite some time and it's been interesting to see discussions of potential advisors. As an Africanist, it's more than likely I will end up in a department with an advisor who studies an entirely different region and/or time period, which is not so unusual in the field. I do know for certain that the one historian (at an institution with a Ph.D program, that is) who studies the country I plan to study happens to already be in his 70s, and will retire soon. I'm on my own!

Yet it seems that with Americanists in particular, there's an emphasis on finding a "match" with the professor who supervises your research. Is this also the case for those specializing in Latin America, the Caribbean, Europe, Middle East, Asia?

Any insight? What are your expectations of an advisor? How important is it to you to have that match?

[The old/revised GRE and post 2012 admissions]

I had written out a lengthy reply, but somehow managed to delete it by accident

I can't answer with certainty, but I think this is a non-issue. GRE scores are valid for up to five years I believe, so I can't imagine admissions committees all of a sudden deciding not to accept scores from the same year. Seems like something that will slowly phase out over the next few years. I'm also applying for the fall 2012 cycle, and I plan to write the GRE in July.

[The future of history]

The USSR was most certainly not a nation-state. A polity occupying one-seventh of the planet's surface, it inevitably included hundreds of distinct ethnic groups. The exact number has always been debated by historians, partly because the number itself was used as a political tool by the Soviets, but most Western scholars agree that the USSR was home to somewhere between 150 and 200 non-Russian peoples. As a result, the USSR (and present-day Russian, too) does not qualify as a nation-state (which tend to be much smaller, both in terms of geography and population). I would consider, say, Iceland or Mali or Laos to be nation-states, although those are also generalizations.

Mali has upwards of 60 ethnic groups. You'd be hard pressed to identify a nation-state anywhere if we define it on the basis of ethnic, linguistic and cultural homogeneity.

I define a nation-state broadly as a discrete area in which the most legitimate actor is the formal government. Almost all people who live in the discrete area are citizens (except those who the formal government explicitly, consistently exclude) who are bound together by shared, overlapping imagined communities. The two main points are the formal government which interacts with people/governments outside national borders (and, less importantly, with its own citizens), and that generally most people feel like part of the national community.

Agreed!

[Canadian schools]

Wait, even master's programs? For international students? Could those be used as reliable safety programs when you can't pay your way through a master's program?

Is master's admissions even distinct from PhD admissions?

I suggest you research programs, because it's very difficult to give a general answer when Canadian schools vary so widely. MA funding depends on the school and program, while Ph.D programs are generally guaranteed funding.

[The future of history]

Something I'd like to throw out for the Americanists - will we be seeing the study of the 1980s?