Breadth or Depth in Writing Sample?

[Simple Twist of Fate]

This may seem like a strange question, but bear with me please.

I'm interested in a particular topic in American history which hasn't been well-explored by previous historians. When I started on this topic for my undergraduate thesis, I had expected to find a well-developed body of work on this subject, but I was shocked to find that it had been rarely studied in a concentrated manner. My thesis adviser wants me to find a niche, or a more narrow focus.

Given that I'm hoping to use my thesis as my writing sample, I'm wondering if there's any general rule here. Are graduate programs looking for very specialized, narrowly focused research projects? Or would they prefer a more broadly focused work?

I realize that every program is different, but if anyone has any experience here or ideas, I would really appreciate them. Thanks.

[lyonessrampant]

Generally, narrow and focused is stronger.

[Henry Hudson]

agreed. anyone can be broad; specific is good. not just in description/evidence, but show your analysis, too.

[Simple Twist of Fate]

Just to be clear, I'm referring to breadth or depth in terms of topics or focus, rather than methodology. Will a grad program hold it against me if my writing sample, for example, attempts to make a statement about an 11 year period in American history?

[TMP]

Listen to your adviser, especially if s/he knows about your graduate school plans. They're more interested in your ability to handle primary/secondary sources, develop strong analyses and write very well. Your breath/depth of knowledge would certainly appear in your writing sample but you would be able to show it through your SOP.

[maeisenb]

Just to be clear, I'm referring to breadth or depth in terms of topics or focus, rather than methodology. Will a grad program hold it against me if my writing sample, for example, attempts to make a statement about an 11 year period in American history?

I would think that this depends on what period of American history...

[Safferz]

All adcomms are interested in is seeing that you're capable of graduate level research. A well-written, well-researched paper with good analysis and use of primary sources will do just that. As lyonessrampant and others have said, a narrow and focused paper is probably best for this reason.

[goldielocks]

It's great to demonstrate that you have already developed a strong, focused research interest. It sounds like your thesis is on the right track here. So I wouldn't worry about being too focused in your sample; this is your opportunity to show off this specialization.

However, don't forget that you'll want to be able to find a job in academia (right?), and you'll likely never get to teach that really specific niche topic. So consider looking for programs that can help you to develop a strong, foundational, working knowledge of a broader field, too.

[PastHistory]

It's not so much what you write, but how you write. A broad topic can be good, but if you have a narrowly defined topic, you can better highlight your ability to analyze and synthesize information, making your own historical arguments. Many of the people who apply to grad school send in generalized work...while there is nothing wrong with that, the fifteenth paper on the Civil War doesn't stand out from the fourteenth or the thirteenth one on the same topic. It's better to send in something that the ad comm will remember than submit a writing sample that will get lost in the shuffle.

In my case, my writing sample was about a very specific group during a very specific time period in American history. The time period I focused on was only about 3 years.

[Sigaba]

This may seem like a strange question, but bear with me please.

I'm interested in a particular topic in American history which hasn't been well-explored by previous historians. When I started on this topic for my undergraduate thesis, I had expected to find a well-developed body of work on this subject, but I was shocked to find that it had been rarely studied in a concentrated manner. My thesis adviser wants me to find a niche, or a more narrow focus.

Given that I'm hoping to use my thesis as my writing sample, I'm wondering if there's any general rule here. Are graduate programs looking for very specialized, narrowly focused research projects? Or would they prefer a more broadly focused work?

I realize that every program is different, but if anyone has any experience here or ideas, I would really appreciate them. Thanks.

Morgan18--

Is there any possibility that you can disclose the topic of your thesis? Or at least the broader field (social history, religious history) and time period (century if not decade)?

As written, my answer to your question is "It depends."

The debate over the extent to which American history is over specialized has been going on for decades. If members of the admissions committee believe that there is too much specialization, it may behoove you to find ways to reposition and/or 'tweak' your writing sample. That is, consider finding ways that your topic addresses broader questions of interest to those (hypothetically speaking) studying nineteenth century America rather than just those studying the formation of working class culture in the industrialized north east during the 1870s).

If committee members are not worried about overspecialization, then being focused may not be an issue. You can find out the answers by calling--anonymously if you prefer--the programs you want to attend. You could ask if you may know who is on the admissions committees, and then doing some research on JSTOR.

In any regard, you may profit from taking another, much broader look at how your topic fits into the existing historiography. It may be that the specific topic, narrowly defined, has not received much discussion yet. (In which case, you might profit from knowing why your topic has been neglected thus far.) It may also be that your topic may touch on broader background issues that have escaped your attention because of your narrow focus. MOO, your ability to place your tree into a bigger, established forest will strengthen your candidacy.

[Simple Twist of Fate]

I appreciate all of your replies. This is actually a pretty interesting discussion, even independent of the application process.

Speaking with my thesis adviser, I think we've pretty much come to an agreement about my scope. We agreed it was okay to keep a broad chronological scope, as long as I'm disciplined and focused analytically.

Sigaba, I think you're right that there are always going to be profs who favor deep specialization, as well as profs who think we've become over-specialized. But there's not much I can do about that, so I guess I'll just hope for the best. At this point in my intellectual life, I think I fall more into the latter camp, but who knows where I'll be in ten years?

If you don't mind, I'll keep the specific topic of my thesis to myself (who knows if adcomms stalk these fora?). But it's 18th century American (covering 12 years in American history), and it's social/intellectual, with a lot of religious subject matter. I can only scratch the surface with my thesis, but my research has done exactly what I was hoping for - it's given me a subfield that I can hopefully shape in the future.

[Sigaba]

But there's not much I can do about that, so I guess I'll just hope for the best. At this point in my intellectual life, I think I fall more into the latter camp, but who knows where I'll be in ten years?

I respectfully disagree with you here, Morgan18. One thing you can do is demonstrate that you're aware of the ongoing debate, that you have a point of view, and that your POV is provisional. IMO, this step would send a message that you're engaged with this sprawling debate and dedicated to figuring out how you can contribute to it.

If you don't mind, I'll keep the specific topic of my thesis to myself (who knows if adcomms stalk these fora?). But it's 18th century American (covering 12 years in American history), and it's social/intellectual, with a lot of religious subject matter. I can only scratch the surface with my thesis, but my research has done exactly what I was hoping for - it's given me a subfield that I can hopefully shape in the future.

Understood. I think your assumption is a sound one.