soleprovider14

Like others have said, I'm not sure it is necessary to gain admission into a PhD/MA program. Depending on what the senior thesis (undergrad thesis) process is like at your undergrad, I would recommend you jump on the opportunity to do one. I ended up doing a senior thesis rather than the usual capstone course (which involves a 30 page research paper) that spanned my senior year and ended up being around 120 pages. I can't stress enough how important this experience was, and how much it helped me transition to my MA and write a thesis. Since my undergrad thesis process was basically the same as an MA thesis (year-long work with an adviser on a topic of my choice, with extensive historiography and primary source research) I was very well prepared, and not as overwhelmed as some of my peers when it came to the MA thesis process. If your undergrad offers such a thesis process I would definitely recommend it. Also, if you are planning on writing your undergrad thesis on a similar topic to what you plan to study in grad school, you will undoubtedly benefit from having a good background in the historiography and research of your field/specialty.

It will definitely add to your overall application. It will show the admissions committee that you are taking advantage of non-academic avenues to further the study/practice of history. Regarding the presentation, I would say any presentation at the undergraduate level would only be a plus on an application. I can say from experience that if you are involved with PAT, you will have great opportunities for conference attendance/participation, and potentially funding/awards as a grad student.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that funded MA's are "unicorns". I was applying back in 2010 for MA/PhD and found many funded MA's across the country. Like some posters said, it seems like many of them are concentrated in the Midwest, however, there are some on the East Coast. I ended up going to Kent State University for a fully funded MA and can say that most schools in Ohio fund MA students. I know that University of Vermont offers funding, and some schools in Wisconsin. From what I've seen through research, many state schools offer funded MA's. One piece of advice, try your best to avoid paying for your MA, especially since you aren't interested in pursuing a PhD.

There are many funded MA programs in history. Just a few from personal experience, UW-Milwaukee, BGSU (Ohio), U of Akron (Ohio), Kent State (Ohio), Vermont. And most of these schools provide tuition waivers, a stipend, and allow you to gain valuable teaching experience (discussion sections, lecturing, grading, designing assignments).

I also was rejected from all of the PhD programs I applied to, however, as I anticipated this, I applied to three MA programs and was accepted at all (two with full funding). I don't know about well-regarded but I was accepted and received full funding at both Bowling Green State University and Kent State, and was given a vague promise for potential funding later on in the program by the University of Vermont. I only applied to the above schools due to the presence of a potential adviser, not the prestige of the program. With both Kent and BGSU, I would be able to work with a very highly regarded professor in the field I am pursuing.

I was admitted at both Kent State and Bowling Green for a master's in history (European) for the upcoming fall with full funding and am faced with a dilemma. Both schools seem to have the same reputation (although it seems Kent has a more well known history department), both universities/cities are eerily similar (from what I can tell without visiting) and the differences between both are very subtle making this decision a tough one. As I know the most important thing is fit, both schools have a potential adviser who is tenured, young, and has contributed great research to the topic which I am interested in pursuing (and are quite famous in the field). While Kent would provide a higher (slightly) stipend, and a more well known adviser, said adviser's current research is not focused on my proposed research. At Bowling Green, while I would have to manage under a slightly lower stipend, I would be able to work with a well-known adviser who would actually be conducting relevant (to my interests) research concurrent to my studies/work. My questions are: Between the two schools, which has a better reputation for their history program/department? How much does your potential adviser's current research matter while you study under them? Since both of my potential future advisers are well known in their field, how much does their reputability/fame matter in a situation like this? Thanks for any insight.

This week brought with it a rejection at UC-Davis for a PhD and an acceptance at the University of Vermont for a MA (no word on funding yet). Still waiting on my last school, Boston College (PhD), which has not made contact with me at all during this process.

The letter was dated March 5th and I live in Wisconsin. Good luck with your application to USC!

Received a rejection from USC yesterday through the mail. I applied with a Modern Germany history concentration, and although I spoke with my potential adviser regarding his undertaking of this project prior to applying, it seems that the fit just wasn't there. Having a fully funded acceptance, however, does help when coping with a rejection.

I got one of those fin aid cards too...Nothing else from USC.

I applied to BC for a phd and have not heard anything since all of my materials were submitted.

I think it's safe to say that UC-Davis and USC will both be rejections for me... Otherwise, still waiting on UVM and BC and on Kent State's funding package.

Double post.

Thanks for the update on BC, I'm still hoping that out of the three PhD programs I applied to (two of which I am positive will reject me since others were already informed of admission) BC will be the one to offer admission.

Yup, I'm almost 75% done with my thesis. Last semester was the hardest attempting to write the thesis, studying for GRE, doing all app stuff, working, internship, and last but not least 15 credits at school. This semester, now the wait has set in, writing it has become a bit easier but still I find myself losing focus quite a bit due to being nervous/paranoid about schools.

Still waiting on: UC-Davis, although I have seen some have already been accepted/rejected and Davis' use of their status tracking website is horrendous. USC, although saw one Modern European acceptance there which is my prospective field so not too optimistic about that. Boston College, have not heard anything from them throughout this entire app process. University of Vermont, master's program and I have not heard anything from them this entire process so it could go either way.

I believe my strengths are the following: I am fluent in two foreign languages, have had 6 years of a pertinent language, and will have about 2 years of the main research language (including a summer intensive program in the actual country) upon graduation. GPA is not outstanding but is above a 3.5 in both cumulative and major, as well as minor GPA is a 3.95. Recommendations are coming from professors who know me outside of the classroom and should (I don't see why not) be good. As I am aware that I am not a highly competitive applicant (and I knew so since I began this process) I am not discouraged mainly due to the fact that I am not applying to many top programs (top being the top 25), also, I have a great fit at all of the schools I am applying to which I think is largely overlooked by some who worry about their 3.8 GPA or above 1300 GRE score and publications not being good enough. I have learned from this process that if all of your credentials are above a certain level (however do not have to be perfect), fit is a much more important aspect of an applicant than anything else. Good luck everyone.

I'm doing Third Reich history however looking at the role of religion within the Nazi movement and state.

Two of the three MA programs which I am applying to have rolling admissions, Bowling Green State University and Kent State University.

If I'm accepted for Fall I'll be 22.

I can provide some advice as I am a three time veteran of the GRE (sad, I know). For verbal: Study prefixes,suffixes, roots rather than simply memorizing words for the analogy and antonym parts(however you still need to memorize some) Focus your studies on the approaches and techniques for questions such as sentence completions and reading comprehension. Most books (Kaplan, Princeton, Barron's) provide you with such strategies. For math: What worked for me was simply practicing as many types of questions as I could find. Doing so for about a month gave me the good base which I lost after not taking math for a long period of time. Good luck.

I just took the GRE for the third time so I can provide you with some advice. I am not in your field but after taking the exam twice I contacted all departments which I am applying to and asked if taking it a third time will prove to be problematic. Furthermore, I asked if the schools will take my highest scores from each section (i.e the Verbal from the first time, and the quant from the third time). I was assured by all schools that taking the GRE multiple times is not "frowned upon" and that they do consider the highest scores for each section. My advice to you is only to retake if you feel like you did substantially worse than what you were scoring on during your practice tests. In my case, I panicked the first time, and was not as prepared as I should have been the second time. The third time however, proved necessary as I achieved the highest scores for each section out of all of my tries. In summation, contact the departments you are applying to and ask how they consider the scores, ask yourself if retaking is worth it, especially with scores already in the 600s. Good luck.

Just wanted to include an update. I took the GRE for the third time yesterday and got a 580V and a 680Q. I'm very happy with my scores, and tremendously happy to be finally done with the GRE. I know the Verbal score isn't great by any means, but it is above all of the averages of the schools I am applying to, and from what I had professors tell me, I should not be too worried about it. Thanks for all the help.

Since beginning my applications for Fall 2010 I've discovered that a lot of them ask what one's native language is. I am bringing this up as I am becoming a bit worried that if one answers anything other than English for such a question, they will be required to take the TOEFL. I have lived in the United States for 9 years, spoken English for about 12 years, am fluent (and consider myself more knowledgeable of the language and vocabulary than some native speakers ) in it and have attended middle school, high school, and college in the US. I think I may just be overthinking this a bit but I would hope that no school will require me to take the TOEFUL just because my "first" language was not English.

misterpat: Thanks for the research and breakdown. I was basing my knowledge from the responses I received from specific departments (which at times were a bit vague). However, most responses fall into the 2nd category of schools which you posted. In that case, I believe I will take the GRE for the third time and focus on achieving at least a 600V since I already have a 4.5AWA (and perhaps a 5 on the most recent one) and a 660Q. Thanks for all the help.