thedig13

Along the same lines of thinking, I should mention that I've recommended a few monographs (off the top of my head, stuff by Jill Lepore, Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, Adrian Burgos, and Kelly Lytle Hernandez) to nonacademic friends; they generally found these historians enjoyable and readable. I would hope that every academic (regardless of his/her target audience) tries to craft an appealing/enjoyable learning experience (I know I hate reading poorly-written histories), and, similarly, I would hope that every layperson claiming to write history holds himself/herself to a rigorous intellectual standard. I dislike the notion that nonacademics are somehow unequipped to read scholarly works -- if a sentence or concept is so dense that only specially-trained people can comprehend it, this doesn't make it more sophisticated or intelligent; it just means that the author lacked the skills (or inclination) to write comprehensibly. I entered the historical profession because I believe in the power of good historical sense and wanted to help others (including nonacademics, if possible) develop it, not so that I could lord over or alienate people who don't have the privilege of spending their entire lives reading books and attending lectures. In short, the dichotomy between readability and academic rigor is preposterous and utterly contrived. Poor writing skills are poor writing skills (not a marker of sophistication or intelligence), just as poor research is poor research (not a sign of "readability"). Regardless of the target audience, historians have little excuse for either, as far as I am concerned.

IIRC, none of the schools I applied to requested any information regarding my finances. I'm under the impression that the majority of programs will offer funding to admitted students regardless of financial status. I do vaguely remember questions about marital status, although I'm not sure if that was used to calculate my funding packages.

I second this. Most programs expect the writing sample to be 20-25 pages; some want it to be as small as 10 pages. For somebody who's put a lot of effort into producing a 50-page thesis, chopping a quality work (one that you've worked hard on) down to 25 pages can be frustrating and difficult. For this reason, I deliberately aimed for the 20-25 page range when writing my thesis -- so that when it came time to send writing samples, minimal butchering would be necessary. Of course, if your undergrad program requires a thesis to be a certain length, that changes matters.

Sent you a PM.

For academic purposes, I am reading Edward J. Escobar's Race, Police, and the Making of the Political Identity: Mexican Americans and the Los Angeles Police Department, 1900-1945. For non-academic reading, I am currently working my way through Kwame Alexander's The Crossover, which mixes my love of basketball with my love of poetry, as well as Eric Shonkwiler's Above All Men.

Thanks! Same to you! Good luck with the admissions process!

As somebody who grew up in California, I already find it criminally cold here in New England.

Based on what you've written in your post, I'd recommend the Urban History Association's biennial conference. The last conference was a few weeks ago in Philly, and it was great. As for learning more about conferences and presenting/paneling, I'd recommend simply showing up to one -- not to present, but merely to observe and learn. I did this with the aforementioned UHA conference in Philadelphia, and even though I didn't present, it was an incredibly enlightening experience which taught me a lot about what people do at conferences, the different kinds of work that are presented, what is expected of presenters, and the general format of a professional conference for historians.

In your application, it will be important for you to be able to explain why/how your interests have shifted. As others have said, it's not an insurmountable transition, and, if you can coherently explain why/how it happened, it probably wouldn't even put a dent in your application. To offer some perspective, I'd estimate that 25-35% of my cohort did their undergraduate studies in disciplines other than history -- we have a few anthropologists, a few media studies people, and even a creative writer. It's not quite the same as the leap you're taking, but it should convey the fact that adcomms are generally open to people studying new things, so long as (again) they can explain how these new interests developed.

IIRC, it varies based on the school. The best thing you can do is scour the department's webpage and the application for instructions on what to do, and (if you can't find anything) contacting the department directly.

I would parrot what the previous two posters wrote. Picking a field based on its apparent trendiness rather your actual interest level is folly. You should pick a field based on what interests you (in your case, admittedly something other than American history). By the time you apply, you should have a reasonably refined field of interest (in my case, it was 20C-US, with emphasis on urban, race, and cultural histories). Right now, it seems like you're still in the early stages of deciding a general, general field (which is not going to get you admitted anywhere), so it's important that you take some time and really, really think about what interests you as a prospective historian and how you can present those interests in a coherent fashion. If you pick a field based on apparent trendiness, I think you'll quickly find that trends reverse and that your own motivation burns out rather quickly. Also, do you speak any languages other than English? If not, you should make an effort to pick some up -- if you can't speak the lingua franca of the society you're studying, you're unlikely to be admitted to a PhD program.

The best people to approach with this question would be professors whom you trust (i.e.: LOR writers). Not only have they personally been through the application process, but many have also been on adcomms, and are therefore in a unique position to offer important insights from the other side. IIRC, you're a few years removed from your undergrad years, but if you're planning to apply for a graduate program, you'll have to get back in touch eventually anyway. For what it's worth, I used my undergraduate thesis as my writing sample. While writing it, I strived to construct a thoughtful, well-crafted research paper that might someday be published. Some general notes on how I went about the project: - During the conception phase, I tried to find a topic that was original and relatively under-examined. - During the research phase, I accessed (and extensively used) primary-source materials at a university other than my undergraduate institution (a fact that I also mentioned in my SOP). - During the writing phase, I made an effort to construct a focused, deliberate piece that still situated the content within current historiography. - During the revision phase, I edited aggressively, scouring every single word and footnote with a fine-tooth comb to ensure that I wouldn't "lose points" over silly grammar/spelling/word-choice/structure errors. - Before I finalized my writing sample, I asked myself this one big question: "Does the project display enough originality, quality research, and writing skill that I could (in theory) trick a reasonably intelligent person into believing that this work has been approved for publication in a respected academic journal?"

For giggles, I plugged in my old SOP from last year's application cycle (when I was reasonably successful) and got an overall rating of "fit and trim," with a slight overdependence on nouns and prepositions. Just in case anybody wanted to know how this webpage would rate a successful SOP.

I would go with something along the lines of: "Also, I will be in [insert college-city's name here] on from [date] to [date]. Would you be open to meeting with me to chat about the department and my prospects as a potential student?" EDIT: Sorry for the late reply. It seems that my input is now irrelevant.

I would like to second this particular tidbit: several professors I was quite interested in working with notified me of their forthcoming retirements, and it helped me narrow down the schools I was applying to, as well as refine my SOPs (i.e.: which POIs to mention) for the schools I did apply to. To re-iterate: None of this would have been possible if I had not sent out e-mails to my POIs.

That's more or less how I did it, and my POIs seemed rather receptive to me. Many even offered to schedule a phone-conversation with me to chat. Be sure to mention to your POIs what your interests are, and (in case it's not obvious) how you see your interests aligning with theirs.

Can you give me an example of what kinds of unwritten social rules exist?

How many conferences does a typical graduate student attend every year? I get that it'll vary from student to student, but I'd like a general estimate.

So, I'll be starting the first year of my PhD program in August. I'm aware that attending and/or presenting at conferences is part of being a graduate student. However, I have a few questions: At what point should I begin attending conferences? And, how should I determine which conferences to attend? Should I seek insight from my own professors, or look for departmental announcements? Will my professors approach me to recommend conferences to go to?

I grew up in the SF area, and can attest that commute via car from the surrounding areas is very plausible, especially in comparison to the commute to/from other major cities. Not to suggest that it won't be an inconvenience at all, but pointing out that commuting around the Bay Area isn't awful.

I'd urge you to delay your application season for one year. On the one hand, a professor who has only taught you once isn't going to write you a great recommendation. On the other hand, while it is quite common (expected, even) for a thesis advisor to be a letter-writer, you haven't really worked with him yet, and he's unlikely to be qualified to speak to your potential. For this specific reason, I found my thesis advisor and began work on my thesis a year early. In addition, a solid thesis makes for a good writing sample, so that extra year may also pay off in that regard. Finally, your remark about asking for letters in person is spot-on. I went to a public university struggling with overcrowding, and learned that even the most devoted instructors occasionally fail to respond. As a direct consequence, I always sought housing within 5 minutes' driving or 15 minutes' walking of campus, and, unless a particular faculty was off-campus for the academic term, always (and I mean always) dropped by office hours instead of sending e-mails.

1. They can be. Normally, quantitative scores are irrelevant at all but the most neurotically competitive humanities programs, but I suspect 20th percentile is low enough to catch anybody's attention. 2. Do you already know any Arabic? Assuming that you took a few introductory courses in college and continued using Arabic in Egypt, that might be enough to get you into a graduate program. If you find that your Arabic still needs brushing up, you can pursue undergrad courses during the year or summer language study, but after you've been admitted to a program. 3. Not qualified to comment on this. 4. I'd urge you not to take out loans, especially for a graduate degree. 5. While I'm sure that having children alters plans a bit, it IS possible to simultaneously pursue a PhD and raise a child. Alternatively, plenty of PhD students were high school teachers in previous lives; perhaps you could briefly put the PhD dream on back-burner while you figure things out, and pick up a teaching job while figuring things out and/or saving money.

For your edification, when an applicant fails to follow basic instructions, notifying an adcomm of this is NOT an abuse of power. Frankly, if an applicant doesn't understand things like "Do NOT send us your official transcripts until after you've been admitted" or "Please send TWO (2) copies of your transcript to this address," that CAN and SHOULD be something held against him/her in the selection process.

As I'll be moving across the country for grad school in the Autumn, multiple professors have actively urged me to enjoy myself this summer. Thus, I am heading back to my hometown, where I have resolved (and made plans) to, in some order: - Hang out with local friends - Play a lot of basketball (i.e.: catch up on all the basketball I missed while grueling away over the school year) - Coach basketball - Brush up on my Spanish - Play a lot of videogames - Work out So, basically, in terms of professional and/or academic development, a whole lot of nothing.

... Said the one who wrote this wonderfully delightful short essay less than 24 hours ago: Wow. Your statements are so damn eloquent. Can you please be my tutor? Between your unmatched skill as a writer and your capacities as a critical thinker, as well as your natural affinity for engaging in stimulating, intellectual conversation without allowing it to devolve into immature mocking, I wouldn't be surprised if you turn out to be the next Noam Chomsky or Edward Said. Seriously.