remenis

For a PhD if you want to be a historian, get a PhD in History. It is much, much harder to get a job with a PhD in Medieval Studies than in History. This does not apply for a MA - either an MA in History or in Medieval Studies is a fine prequel to a History PhD. It can be easier to get a Medieval Studies MA funded than a History MA, and usually you can focus mainly on History in the medieval Studies MA anyway.

I have never personally regretted having gotten my PhD in history; it enabled me to have so many experiences I would never have had otherwise, to live abroad, to make wonderful friends, live the life of the mind, etc. I'd be a very different person if I had stayed in the job I worked in before applying to PhD programs; the experience of the PhD helped me grow so much and I would never take it back. But, I want to second a lot of what the OP said. There really are so few jobs. When I was first applying to PhD programs in 2011 I knew that the job market was bad, but like OP said, I didn't really understand how bad and how much worse it was going to get. Everyone should look at this: It could well be that there will be far fewer jobs in the next few years than there have been this last decade. In recent years history has lost more majors than any other discipline. See here https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/11/27/new-analysis-history-major-data-says-field-new-low-can-it-be-saved Admins seeing fewer majors and lower enrollments require fewer history classes, which means they need fewer history profs, so retirees are not replaced and job adverts are rare. The situation is worse than a "bad" job market. There have been more than 1,000 History PhDs awarded per year every year for the last decade even though the number of TT jobs for assistant professors is far, far lower. The numbers are just horrible. In popular fields (American and European) you do literally compete against hundreds of other people - including frequently, nearly all of your professional friends unless they are significantly older or younger than you. The experience of applying for these jobs is extremely time-consuming, brutally stressful and heartbreaking. When I was applying I had this idea that I would come to the end of my PhD and there would be this sort of, referendum moment - either I would get a job or I would not and if I did not, I would move on and do something else with my life. But this is not how it works in reality. One of my advisors told me it often takes people three years on the market to get a job, if they do at all, and frequently in those three years they have to hustle to find temporary positions year to year, whether its extending their PhD, a postdoc, a VAP, adjuncting, "self-funding" (if you're rich), or one of those paper positions where you get affiliation but no salary (again, if you're rich). The reality is that in the final years of this process you often have to continuously make decisions about how much you are willing to sacrifice in pursuit of the dream of a TT job. You may have to weigh whether it's better to work on more publications or take a side job, if you should take an onerous adjucting teaching load that may leave you no time for research or writing good job applications, if it is worth it to uproot your life and move (at your own expense) across the country for a one year position (a bigger challenge for anyone with a partner or spouse). Living with not knowing what you will be doing the next year, and having to weigh these decisions can be very stressful. And, you may feel when you begin a PhD that you would be willing to move anywhere, take any job, do anything, sacrifice anything, in pursuit of the dream, but you cannot necessarily anticipate how those sacrifices will feel when you are older (especially if you have a partner or children). I want to echo what the OP said about how a PhD comes as a enormous cost, even if it's fully funded, because the true cost is time. Yes, if you get into a good program you may be making a guaranteed 30k (though, to be honest, in many cases less) with health insurance for five to seven years. There is something to that, yes. But being a grad student freezes you at entry level, both financially and socially (as you are always in a junior, subordinate position in the career) for somewhere between 5-10 years. Your salary will likely not increase over your time in the PhD, or if it does, it will do so only minimally. Often, it will not keep up with inflation or rising cost of living, especially if your program is in an expensive city so you will actually be able to live less well in your final PhD years than at the beginning. What seems to you like a generous, comfortable salary when you are 22 or 24 may feel frustratingly or embarrassingly low when you are 30 and your friends from college are starting to make good salaries, get married, have children, and buy houses. You will still be making the same money you made when you entered your PhD. You need to consider the opportunity cost. The true cost is everything else you could have been doing and earning during the time you were getting your PhD if you weren't doing the PhD. In all that time you spent being a grad student and making what is a 22-years-olds entry-level wage you lose all the time you could have been investing into another career path, in which you could have been moving up, getting raises and promotions, saving for retirement and getting that sweet compounding interest. If you do go on to get a TT job, your time spent in your fully-funded PhD will have been an investment, but if in the end you transition into another field you may be starting over at square one and you will have lost the opportunity for all those other gains forever. There are enormous benefits to getting a PhD in history. The work of a history grad student is fun, intellectually stimulating, fulfilling, and prestigious. You usually get a flexible schedule, meet interesting amazing people, travel, etc. But you pay an enormous price - financially in lost time and opportunity, and too often with damage to your mental health. Things worked out very well for me personally and I don't regret my PhD at all. But I know for sure that even though I thought I knew all about how the job market was bad, I did not really understand what the true costs would be when I signed up for this path.

I agree with nhhistorynut - the rating of the MA doesn't matter all that much. Go for one that is funded and has at least 1-2 profs who fit well enough with your interests and who are likely to be known to the people you want to work with at NYU or Columbia. I would definitely recommend applying to MAs because a strong GPA in an MA program will look a lot better in apps to top programs, but I wouldn't personally recommend going into 40k of debt for it.

Wait until you get the email from the Madrid office. At least for Research Spain offers a small amount for set up costs which I didn't know about until they reached out a few days after I got the initial email from the US office.

How low is it? How does it compare with the cost of living in Poland?

Just wanted to say that when I received my acceptance on Friday I had the same thing. First an email saying "Congratulations On Your Fulbright U.S. Student Award", then, about a minute later, an email titled "Fulbright Application Status (P)".

I just got an email - awarded a Fulbright award to Spain (research)!

No we are notified by the Institute of International Education. One of the people on this list: https://us.fulbrightonline.org/contact-us

Definitely do the MA in this case because it is funded, the PhD is not well ranked and you yourself mention worrying about adjusting to the workload. You'll improve as an MA student and then can apply to better PhD programs that will be more likely to eventually get you a job. Top PhD programs generally don't care where you did your MA - but the quality of your PhD institution will have a huge impact on your ability to get a job in academia later. TMP is right that you might end up in school for 7-10 years with the MA, but if you go to a poorly regarded PhD program you might spend 5 years in grad school for nothing.

I work in medieval history as well. In general, most of the formal, well-advertised, year-long research positions are only available to people who have already completed a graduate degree. Remember that many of PhD graduates in medieval history do not find jobs as professors and seek out these sort of positions, so unless a job or fellowship specifies that it is for someone holding a BA only, they're going to be pretty hard to obtain. In my experience, the best way to find a research assistant position as a postgrad is to email people who work on something related to your interests and ask if they need a research assistant. In my last year of undergrad I sent out emails to nearby professors whose work I had read but who I had never met explaining my interests and asking if they needed a research assistant - one happened to be looking for a new researcher and was able to pay me (part time - I did have to get a second part time job as well). My advice would be to email assistant professors, because they are highly motivated to get research done (in time for tenure review) but do not have their own graduate students (professors who are advising students will almost always have those students as their research assistants if they need one).

Hi chelsie - have you not heard anything back yet? Two other Spain ETA applicants posted that they heard back on March 16th. I also applied to Spain (but research) and have heard nothing.

You too TotheBalkans! I hope we both hear this week

I'm still waiting on Spain (research).

Yes, it is very likely having an online degree could hurt your chances of acceptance to PhD programs. Whether they're right to or not, many academics have strong negative opinions of online education.

Often, yes - but the Spain ETAs found out on March 16th this year and I'm still waiting for the Spain Research decision - so maybe don't get your hopes up.