jamc8383

Have you tried reducing the font size to 11.5 instead of twelve? That would probably be my first instinct. As long as the directions don't specify 12 point font (and provided you don't go crazy and reduce further in order to cram in more material), that should be perfectly acceptable to adcomms. Visually, the difference is imperceptible.

Fair point; I've likewise heard from several departments that there is a "grace period" for LORs which is comforting in some measure, but there's just something about seeing your application marked as "incomplete" that provokes a visceral panic response.

I am in the process of sending out polite, "one-week-left" reminders to those doing my LORs and am attaching the final version of my SOP for reference. Though, to your point, I am tempted to include a polite, humorous-but-totally-serious request that if they notice any minor errors in the document to please NOT let me know, since it has already been submitted. To be fair, they've already seen and proofed previous versions, but I am determined to avoid the painful, after-the-fact "NOOOOOOOOO!" moment. I've also resolved not to reference any of my submission materials in the interim period between applications and admission decisions, but I have so little willpower with these types of things.

I just finished the last of six applications and am feeling relieved and sick in equal measure. There is no way this feeling is sustainable for the next two-three months, is there? How is everyone else doing?

Michigan, Ohio State and Wisconsin give 2-3 page limits (which shakes out to be a little less than 1000 words double-spaced). Yale, like Princeton, is 1000 words, which seems to be a good limit to stick to in order to accommodate most programs. Chicago's 2500 limit is definitely an outlier; I ended up doing about 1000 words for the SOP. Hoping the Chicago adcomm looks on this favorably; going for "concise but thorough." Crossing my fingers.

Na-scent. Naaaa-ssscccent. It is fun to say.

Short answer: nope. CSUs are broke. That being said, if you do well and get reasonably involved, you're primed to take advantage of many scholarship opportunities sponsored by the CSUs, the university, the College of Creative and Liberal Arts, the History Dept, etc, etc. Travel grants are also pretty accessible, though not widely publicized. Additionally, I believe that if you get resident status (and you make a pittance) you are eligible for Cal Grant which would cover tuition but not much else.

I'm inclined to agree that applying to different schools for totally different programs can be problematic--from the standpoint of clarity--both for you and those writing your LORs. (For your sake, make it easy on them: I once had a referent write an effusive LOR on my behalf for a scholarship, only to identify me as an Americanist-yikes, not even close). That being said, colonial and environmental history can be combined effectively through the nascent field of "Atlantic history." If you haven't read it, J.R. McNeill's Mosquito Empires is a great example of how these seemingly disparate subfields can be merged seamlessly. Situating yourself as an Atlantic historian may be the way to go; it would certainly make your interests seem more coherent and focused to adcomms. Just a thought.

Funding won't hinge on GRE scores. Much like a high GPA, great numbers are unlikely to provide much of an advantage, though particularly low ones certainly could hurt you. That being said, your scores look fine, I think the overall affect of these stats on your chances for admission and funding are relatively neutral. The quality and clarity of your LORs, writing sample and SOP are most definitely the keys to getting admissions/funding decisions to swing in your favor. Additionally, if it eases your mind, I know several people with GRE scores below yours who have received admission/funding offers from top twenty-five programs.

Babeuf, I would also suggest that you consider San Francisco State University's MA program. Getting in is not terribly competitive, but the program is rigorous and the track record for placement of its MA students into top phD programs is impressive. Just in the last three cycles, my colleagues have gone on to Berkeley, Stanford, UChicago, Wisconsin-Madison and Brandeis (at least two of these students came in with undergrad GPAs under 3.00). There are a ton of opportunities to expand your CV, and differentiate yourself as a scholar. Moreover, the program is strong in modern European history; importantly for you, there are two historians (Sarah Curtis and Catherine Kudlick) who specialize in French history. The downside, of course, is that the CSU's are broke; so you can't get the program funded. There are many opportunities for scholarships within the department, the college, and the university, but you would definitely need to plan on working for the two-year duration of the program. Just a thought. Feel free to PM me if you have any questions. Good luck on your search!

I agree with LadyRara. Decide on a career goal and then work backward. Grad school is not where you go to figure out what you want to do.

Novick is great as a broad historiographical survey. I would also suggest that you check out volume 117, issue 3 of the AHR (http://ahr.oxfordjournals.org/content/117/3.toc). The bulk of the issue is dedicated to a forum on more recent "turns" in historiography that go beyond Novick's chronology. It would be a good companion read.

This is a personal decision. If you feel both that you can handle the workload and that taking the course would be a rewarding, enriching experience for you as an historian then you should do it. I will likewise be taking a fourth course in the fall that I don't, strictly speaking, need. However, in my case, it's directly related to the type of work I want to do in a phD program and I think its important that I develop, and can demonstrate, a thorough understanding of the historiography of the period (additionally it will help prepare me for reading exams in the spring). Ultimately, it's up to you to decide if the benefit outweighs the cost. I would be cautious taking it as credit/no credit, as some programs will average this as a "C." Though, like Professor Plum, I would encourage you to contact the professor and see if you can get an early jump on the reading. I'm already well into the reading list for my fall auxiliary course, which will significantly decrease the workload burden next semester.

I would strongly caution you against applying to MA programs right after your BA if you don't "really know what you want to do." The reasons are twofold. One: MAs are expensive; and while you can get some scholarship money, there is rarely major funding available. You could easily go $40,000 in debt for a two-year program. That's a lot of money to sink into something that you may decide down the road is not for you. Additionally, the MA on its own is rather limiting professionally (you can only teach at the community college level, where there is arguably NO funding for research). For this reason, many people do the MA as a step toward the Phd. If you are, at this point, unable or unwilling to consider spending the next seven years in school, you may want to reconsider applying so soon. Two: This is anecdotal but, I hope, will be helpful. I graduated with a business degree in 2005. If I had gone on to an MBA program or applied to law school directly after undergrad, as I had planned, it would have been a huge mistake. I think it's helpful to take some time away from academia, rather than just plowing through to reach some ill-defined point of "achievement", to find your passion. I discovered history years after graduating and am now completing an MA program and applying to phD programs with the certainty and conviction that I am pursuing the course that is right for me. There's no reason to commit yourself, financially and temporally, if you're not sure that it's the right course for you. It's not a race. Take some time and decide what you really want to do. Graduate work is both expensive and rigorous--you will need passion for your work and the courage of your convictions to sustain you.

Thumbelina, I will be applying to Yale in the fall to study late-nineteenth, early-twentieth-century French history with a focus on interwar urban culture. I was just curious if you would be working with (and might have some insight regarding) either of my POIs--John Merriman and Bruno Cabanes. Congratulations on your acceptance! Maybe I'll see you in 2014

Thumbelina, Out of curiosity--and based on your leisure reading--will you be doing modern French history at Yale?

I think your experience teaching could help to differentiate you from other candidates that may have otherwise similar qualifications, though the deciding factors in getting an admission offer will almost certainly be your writing sample, LORs and SOP. Admissions boards will want to know more about your research background, interests and proficiency than about your teaching. I confess, I know very little about York, though I have researched UToronto extensively (I am applying in the fall as well). It is in the top 25 universities in the world for graduate study of history; so it is certainly competitive. What is your focus?

Oops, sorry. It might be best to contact a current student to get some insight. Most departments will profile grad students on their sites (field of study, email address, etc) and I've had great success with contacting them and getting candid, thoughful feedback. Maybe give that a try? Here is the link to the graduate student directory for OSU:http://history.osu.edu/directory/graduate. Hope that is helpful.

Greenwintermints- I can't really speak to the history program at OSU, though I did attend the university as an undergrad (graduated in 2005) and I can tell you that the campus, the community and the access to amenities are top rate. I do know that they have been elevating admissions standards over the last few years and would also encourage you to note that they are rated in the top 25 for graduate study of history in the US. So I think the assumption that admissions would not be competitive is a dangerous one.

CrazyCatLady, I'm also coming from a CSU MA program with a relatively similar CV and will be applying to all top-tier programs for urban, cultural history (though my focus is European). Interestingly, we have no overlap in our program selections (I'm applying to: Yale, Princeton, UChicago, UW-Madison, UToronto, UBritish Columbia). That being said, I have similar feelings in terms of the ultimate utility of a degree from a lower-ranked university and professionals in the field seem to agree, though there are also more reasons to aim high. I was told by one professor to apply to MORE "reach schools" because, not only was she admitted to the ivies and rejected from the mid-tier state schools, but she knows that that is where the funding is. I have had multiple professors echo such sentiments, adding to that comments on the state of the job market for humanities phDs, etc, etc. Moreover, colleagues of mine that applied in the last two cycles were admitted to top 25ers like UChicago and UW-Madison and rejected by their "safety schools." This is all anecdotal, of course. But, as long as you've chosen schools that are a good research fit, that will help you grow as a scholar, I say go for it!

ronwill06- I would say it depends on the caliber of LORs you can get and how compelling your writing sample and SOP are. That being said--and this is only anecdotal--a colleague of mine (MA program) was unable to get into any of the phD programs to which he applied (despite good LORs and a strong writing sample) due to a lackluster GPA and a pretty sparse CV (ie: no conference presentations, no published articles, no officer positions held, etc). I would talk to some of the professors in your department to get their advice, but its likely that you would benefit from an MA program first. Two of my colleagues in the MA program had undergrad GPAs below 3.00 and they got into top 25 phD programs (UW-Madison and UChicago). Without any other background info from you (ie: GRE scores, likely quality of your LORs, CV), it's difficult to say, but if you want to get into a top-tier phD program, its likely that an MA would make you a far more desirable candidate. I think, as it stands, you may be limited in terms of the phD programs (and funding!) that you would be eligible for at this time. Hope that helps.

TMP, Super-helpful article. Definitely the type of advice I was aiming to get. m.o., I will make a point to check out the linked forum, as well. Thanks for your help, all!

I looked through old forums to see if I could come across an answer for this but came up a bit empty-handed and could use some input. I will be preparing phD applications this fall and have already chosen the programs I'd like to attend, and the professors that I feel would be ideal research matches for me but am unsure about when and how to go about contacting them. I am curious about others' experiences. When do you feel is the best time to contact POIs/when might they be most receptive? Is there any language that you have used in your emails that you found to be effective, in terms of getting a response from your POIs? Is it enough to introduce yourself and your interests and simply ask if they'll be available/willing to work with students beginning Fall 2014? If it helps (and in the event that anyone else has experience applying to these programs), I will be applying to: Princeton, Yale, UChicago, UW-Madison, U Toronto, U British Columbia. My research interest is in late-nineteenth-, early-twentieth-century French history with a focus on urban culture in the interwar period.

Hey! I read the other replies and don't disagree but thought I'd step in here. I did an undergraduate degree at OSU in International Business with a minor in Italian (graduated in 2005). I also, belatedly, discovered a love of history and research. Though I read extensively on my own I have to confess that I was not an ideal candidate for a phD program directly from undergrad (I say directly, though I took about six years off to work in the private sector). That being said, I took some history courses through an extended learning program at an area university, proved proficiency in the field and used those professors as my LORs to get into the MA program. It is not simply that I have gained a greater understanding of the discipline and my place within the historiography of my specialization--which is huge--but I have also had the opportunity to pad my CV--President of PAT history honors society, President and international conference planner for the History Students Association, Managing Editor of the university's history journal, etc. Entering the field through an MA program has made me a far stronger candidate for phD programs (and funding!) than I would have been otherwise. Coming from outside of the field, I would recommend that you investigate pursuing a similar point of entry.

Yeah, Fall 2014 Applicants! So glad someone got this started. I have one year left in my (three year) MA program and am already fantasizing about where I'll be moving a year from now. I'm applying to phD programs at: Yale, Princeton, UW-Madison, U Toronto, U British Columbia and U Chicago. My research field is late-nineteenth-, early-twentieth-century French history with a focus on urban culture in the interwar period. Looking forward to sharing this nerve-wracking process with all of you!