annieca

I am not going to say I don't want a teaching job because it will be an option post-PhD - not an option I'm considering as of the moment but... I digress. No, in general I am not a fan of MOOCs at all. But Latour is one I would take simply because of who he is. It makes his genius a little more accessible.

Love Latour! Turns out he's teaching an MOOC sometime soon too! http://www.bruno-latour.fr/node/532 In case anyone is interested.

HUGS! I will preface my advice by saying that I know absolutely nothing about geochemistry and my field(s) are about as far away as you can get from the sciences without being fine art. That being said... When your advisor is talking about these projects that you "could" do, perhaps he wants you to take the initiative and join them yourselves? My experience with advisors is that although they talk in suggestions, they are usually actually talking in demands. For example, my advisor said "You should probably learn Romanian this summer." What he meant: "You will learn Romanian this summer." He said it nicely which helped but it's still... a demand. As for expectations, I would have an honest sit-down with your advisor. Talk about what you enjoy researching. Talk about how you're not happy with the program. If he's a nice guy and like most academics, he'll want to see you succeed and help you get to where you need to be. I hope that helps! In the mean time, keep your head up! The first year is one of the hardest.

I'm at the University of Maryland doing a double masters in History and Library Science. I had applied to both Aberystwyth (Wales) and St Andrews for two different programs but ended up staying in the U.S. It's a 3 year program but afterwards... my plan is a PhD in Political Science focusing on Transitional Justice. Post that, I'm debating. I want to work in an NGO archive but since I'm also planning on immigrating to the UK for my PhD, there's a question of how many places I can work. Ultimately I'll be happy just about anywhere where I can combine human rights, history, research and maybe archives. So far my PhD searching has been very limited. (I'm only in my first year of my program!) But I have been looking at Newcastle and Sheffield.

Ah yeah, I understand the language awful-ness. I do modern (really postmodern) Eastern Europe, specifically Czechoslovakia and I'm starting to do Romania. When I met with my advisor he said, "So, you're learning Romanian this summer." Yep, no idea where that money is coming from but apparently, I'm learning Romanian this summer! Russian is not the easiest language to learn but there are some great summer institutes for it - Middlebury in Vermont is one of the best, as is SWSEEL at Indiana University. With both of those I believe you can get a year's worth of Russian done in six-nine weeks. The problem with languages and working in a region you don't know the language is the limits in research. Foreign policy is definitely one you're probably going to need Russian for. And not just what we historians call "knowing a language" which is just for reading. That being said, UK degrees are only 1 year long (most are 1 calendar year as opposed to one academic year) so it's entirely possible that you could write your thesis without knowledge of Russian. Do you want to stay in the UK/Ireland for a job or move back to the US? If you want to go back to the US I would highly advise sticking with only the three you mentioned. Newcastle, for example, has some great researchers on Eastern Europe but nobody in the US is going to recognize Newcastle. I don't know about the programs themselves, but yes, UCL is incredibly expensive. I read an article the other day that said it's actually cheaper to live in Barcelona and commute from Barcelona to London than to live in London. I wish you luck!

Fair enough. At Maryland your comps are oral and, come to think of it, your quals are exams but they aren't anything like the GRE writing exam because you're going to know your area and not given some random prompt. I always stand to be corrected - there are so many universities in the US and the world and they all seem to do something differently that I can't say with certainty that all schools do it one way or another.

I can't offer much advice on specifics on any of the programs. However, I can offer a few ideas on the different types of degrees. An MA is very similar to what you are going to get as an MA in the US - it's less scientific driven. A MSc is more scientific-based but that doesn't particularly mean anything for Master's, as far as I know. So here's the big difference - a MPhil is more research based (as opposed to class based) and you might take doctoral classes in addition to your master's classes. I hope that helps! What are you looking at studying within Russia/Eastern Europe? I can recommend a few more programs if you're interested in Czechoslovakia, the Russian Revolution (the first one), or transitional justice within Eastern Europe.

My two cents about the writing score on the GRE - first off, I agree that sometimes it is used as a cut off. Chapel Hill does this with their Library Science school. But, I also agree that it is no indicator of your writing ability as a graduate student. As a graduate student you will be writing a million and one papers - and long ones at that. At my program, minus the theory class everyone takes, you write a 20-25 page paper each class, each semester. Unless you are taking a few 400-level undergraduate courses, you will almost never (I say almost because there always seems to be that one school that does) take another blue book exam. That's the kind of writing the GRE is asking you to do. And I fully think graduate schools recognize this. For what it's worth, I got a 4 on the writing section (54th percentile) and the only schools that seemed to care were Chapel Hill and Brown, possibly South Carolina (though I firmly belief I was rejected there for reasons other than an abysmal writing score).

At Maryland (and a few other schools) they specifically have dual-degree programs. They're super popular in the Library Science field because of the need for specialized knowledge - MS in some science-y thing, JD, etc. and a Library science degree. For my program (History and Library Science) that means I get out of 6 credits and they lessen both requirements. Normally a master's is 30 credits. Instead, I have to take 54 (24 in History, 24 in Library Science and 6 in either). I would talk with the department secretaries - they are the gods of the departments and they can usually help you out.

I'm having major regret. I miss my "family" in Wales and I feel like while I chose my school for mostly the right reasons, one of the biggest was not thr right reason to decide on a grad school. That being said, I love one of my programs. The second one... I hate a good portion of it. But it is what it is. I love my cohort and my program buddies from Years 2 and 3 and we have a little group. I love having my own desk on a floor that is grad-student-only. I am super excited to be starting a new job tomorrow for the opportunities and the paychecks. Still... I regret not choosing the UK everyday. To combat this, I've decided I'm doing my PhD in the UK and I'm going to become a British citizen at some point. Once I graduate in (gulp!) 2016 I only plan on visiting the US and not living here again.

Headed to the National Cathedral gardens to do some reading. I've found outside to be incredibly relaxing for reading, especially in a non-campus setting. So I took my theory readings and drove down. Also was the History Grad Student Association's Fall barbeque so I went to that. And you know... read my brains out and prepared for my new job I start tomorrow!

It's okay to be unfunded your first year. Choose the best school for you and ultimately, it will pay off. Also, don't be offended if POIs don't respond. Professors are some of the busiest people on the planet and often these things are not even close to being on the top of their lists.