kdavid

Yeah, that's my conundrum. I'm hoping that it will be more or less supplemental. I read a good piece of advice that stated that your SOP should draw the readers' attention to other aspects of your application for more information (if, indeed, they're interested). That's not to say that the SOP contains esoteric statements which necessitate flipping between the various components. Instead, if he/she is generally interested, they'll want to read more. Link is fixed. Thanks again!

Alright, so what's going on with this group? I'm about to finish my first draft and I'd like to get some feedback on it. Anyone interested in sharing/proofreading, please PM me and we'll swap emails to get started.

@telkanuru Thanks for your feedback and the links. (I don't have permission to view your CV, per Google.) The resume format seems to provide a bit more room for details. Also, as you saw, my application has a lot of work experience, and not so much in terms of conferences, publications, etc. Most schools requesting a resume/CV generally say either/or is acceptable.

@Seeking Thank you very much for the detailed feedback. Your suggestions were so helpful that I've implemented most of them. I mention in my SOP that I am a white American, so I don't feel the need to state it again here. I also believe my transcript is clear enough regarding the history courses I took as an undergrad. I've uploaded the new copy here: http://docdroid.net/53mj My only worry now is that it's too long, as I've added details regarding my MA and BA research theses. I was told that a resume should never be longer than one page. However, I'm really using this as an extension of my SOP in a sense, as there's no way I can cram everything I need to into a 1,000 word SOP. Thanks again for your help (and to anyone else who chimes in)!

Hello All, I'm looking for some constructive criticism on my resume, which will be included with my graduate school applications. Please find a link to it below. http://www.docdroid.net/52h3/kdavid-resume.pdf.html Any feedback would be appreciated! Thanks in advance!

I've heard some professors mention that they always try to mention some weakness and how that weakness was improved upon in LORs. Do the most competitive applicants have absolutely perfect LORs, which mention no weaknesses whatsoever, or do all "ideal" LORs mention some weakness (and how that was improved)? Thoughts?

Yeah, that makes sense. I read on Berkeley's website (though I'm not applying to Berkeley) that they only accept translations certified by the American Translator's Association. I'm currently contacting a few freelancers I found on their directory for pricing and details on the provided certification. I'll also contact the registrars to see what they suggest. I'll be sure to update this post once I get more details on my situation. In the meantime, if anyone has firsthand experience with this type of situation, please do share your thoughts!

Thanks for your reply. I was planning on having the letters uploaded to Interfolio, from which I could then deliver them to schools as needed. I understand many websites require "extras," from professors, such as questionnaires, etc. While a translation service may help with the LOR, they won't help with these extras. My professors will need someone to walk them through these websites, uploading the letters, etc. Additionally, I've read that professors which provide an email address (for contact purposes) which is not with an institutional domain may be contacted by AdCom's. Neither of my LOR writers use this type of email address. As such, it needs to be clear somewhere that my Profs don't speak English, so that *when* they are contacted, it's known beforehand that a Chinese speaker will be required. I don't want to hide anything from anyone. Yet the simple fact is that my two Chinese LORs cannot complete the required tasks without a translator, and there's no one except for me who can do this for them. (None of my classmates speak or read English well enough that I would trust them with this task.) Thoughts?

Two of my LOR writers are Chinese professors, whom I've worked under for my MA. They don't speak or write English. As all Ph.D. applications require LORs written in English, my LORs need to be translated. The only option is for me to translate them. There are no other native English speakers in the department to do this. My dilemma is that I'm afraid my "writing voice" is going to show through in the English. How will this affect the adcomm's view of the LORs? Will they count for less than a purely confidential LOR? Should I include somewhere that these are translations? There's no way around this as I finished my undergrad back in '05 and I have no other options. I must use these 2 LORs.

I'm completing an MA at a local PRC university. My sub-field is the Republican era, which is not studied here on the mainland. For mainland Chinese, they essentially stop study/research sometime between 1839-1911. In fact, the one course I took on "Modern Chinese History" ended at the 1911 revolution. My MA is technically for the Ming-Qing era (1368-1644), but my professors understand my interests lie elsewhere, and so they've provided ample leeway in allowing me to choose paper topics outside of this period. The downside is that they have not been able to help much in regards to the historiography of this period. Additionally, none of them speak or read languages other than Mandarin, so they're also not familiar with any works written in other languages. So, I've essentially self-trained myself in this particular period, but not as a historian; if that makes sense. It's actually been the most frustrating aspect of doing an MA here.

FYI: I modeled my first emails to Profs using TMP's guidelines here.

That's a good idea. So, you don't think I'd be shooting myself in the foot by saying I've pretty much trained myself/self-studied?

Two of my LOR writers are Chinese professors, whom I've worked under for my MA. They don't speak or write English. As all Ph.D. applications require LORs written in English, my LORs need to be translated. The only option is for me to translate them. There are no other native English speakers in the department to do this. My dilemma is that I'm afraid my "writing voice" is going to show through in the English. How will this affect the adcomm's view of the LORs? Will they count for less than a purely confidential LOR? Should I include somewhere that these are translations? There's no way around this as I finished my undergrad back in '05 and I have no other options. I must use these 2 LORs.

To follow-up on the last two posts: I'm applying to 10 - 15 programs because I have an inferiority complex. The idea is to cast a wide net in hopes that *someone* will take me. It's imperative that I begin a program in the fall of 2014. Sitting around for a year waiting to apply to different schools and/or reapply would be detrimental to my savings. This is by no means affecting my ability to due my due diligence on each program, department, and POIs. I've been working on this for two years now. A follow-up question: In following fuzzylogician's advice, I'm preparing some details on each institution for my letter writers. Aside from NRC designations, libraries, etc., what should be included in institution-specific references?

I have a follow-up question: What is the topic you propose in your SOP has already been researched? To make a long story short, my undergrad is in English. I graduated back in '05. I'm currently completing an MA (in Chinese history) at a mainland (PRC) university. The professors here, while nice people, are not very knowledgeable in my sub-field, which is the Republican era (1911-1949). When I bring up potential topics with them, the only feedback I receive is "that's a good idea." Whenever I ask about about potential leads to established scholarship on xyz I'm essentially told to Google. So, I'm afraid I may propose a topic which has already been done. As I don't have really any contacts in the US to help weed stuff out, I'm essentially restricted to my own research, with severely limited resources.

Re: whether or not to translate the name/title of the source being translated In many cases we're writing for a specific audience which is likely already familiar with the language from which we're translating. In these cases, translating wouldn't be necessary. However, if you're writing for a larger audience, translated and original titles would be convenient. When I'm writing in English (as opposed to Chinese), I write the pinyin, or romanized version of the Chinese text, along with my English translation [in brackets] after the pinyin. (Though I prefer characters over pinyin when reading others' works.)

Whoa. Okay. Guess I'll wait a bit longer....

Didn't classes begin late August? Also, I've emailed 8 POIs. I've yet to hear back from 3. I'll wait four weeks (from the sent date) before resending.

Thank you, czesc! You're always very helpful. Do you have a copy of that SOP, as well as yours, which you wouldn't mind sharing?

I've been told that it's important to have a general direction. I've also been told that knowing too specifically what you want to do may be counter-intuitive as committees may ask, "Well, then why does he/she need our program?" Is it enough to say, for example, "I'm interested in the period between 1911-1949. In particular, I'm interested in race, ethnicity, identity, and nationalism?" Or would something like, "I'm specifically interested in how consular jurisdiction was applied to mixed-race individuals residing in the city of Tianjin between 1916 and 1927." (Those are just examples, btw.) The main obstacle I'm having for this portion of my SOP is that I feel I still need guidance and feedback from knowledgeable people to help refine my specific interests, and assistance in locating the proper sources for which I can construct a project. Ideas?

What would you say these major trends are?

Yes!!!!! Sign me up, or tell me what I need to do to join!

I'm trying to put together a list of those I need to be familiar with.

I've been reading a book recently which posits its arguments on/around ideas postulated by Jurgen Habermas. I've also seen Foucault cited quite a bit. This has led me to wonder which key thinkers/theorists are crucial to understand for historians? I'm sure this is going to vary by sub-field, but I'm curious what everyone believes the "must-reads" are for all historians. (Feel free to add in specifics for your various sub-fields.)

I've heard a lot about graduate students (in some areas) being very competitive and uncooperative. What stems this type of approach? Also, how many advisees would be considered too many for an adviser? I know this will vary greatly by adviser, but if a POI is telling me that they have a dozen or more advisees, what could that mean for me? It seems to me that the adviser-advisee relationship is the most important part of the Ph.D. experience. To steal a phrase I believe I read here recently, if I'm going to marry someone, I need to know it's going to work.