Lack research experience

[joselito]

I attended a top undergrad, earned a GPA over 4.0 in my history coursework and overall, strong reading proficiency in 2 fundamental foreign languages for my region of study, and received recommendations from professors with very good reputations in their fields, but I feel like all of that might be negated by the fact that I didn't do a thesis or any substantive research work outside of my courses.

At the time, I thought I would go into law as a career. Despite having a passion for history, I didn't go the extra mile to gain research experience because I didn't think it would be relevant to my future career.

Working in legal services since graduating, I realize what little sense law makes for me career-wise, and would love to pursue the one academic area that ever fascinated me. Right now, however, I'm feeling like my goal of entering into a decent PhD program might be unattainable. I haven't applied to the Stanfords, Princetons, and Yales of the world, but still, my goal is getting admitted to programs in the top 20-25. With my lack of of research experience (basically a big blank) what should I do? Do I have any real shot at making this work?

Edited December 20, 2011 by joselito

[remenis]

Given that the rest of your application is strong, it wouldn't put you completely out of the running but it would certainly be noticed on an application. Have you considered doing a masters degree before a PhD in order to write a thesis/complete independent research?

[joselito]

Given that the rest of your application is strong, it wouldn't put you completely out of the running but it would certainly be noticed on an application. Have you considered doing a masters degree before a PhD in order to write a thesis/complete independent research?

I would rather not, just because I know it can be an often circuitous path from a Masters to a PhD. Also, I'm not really thrilled with the idea of paying for 2 years of schooling and I know that funding for Masters are virtually nonexistent.

[maeisenb]

I would think a strong writing sample might show that you have the necessary skills to do in depth research, so that could somewhat offset not having done a thesis, especially if it was from one of your classes that's in your field. That combined with a strong SOP showing you know your field really well couldn't hurt. As remenis said, you might want to look at some MA programs (abroad maybe as well?) if you don't do as well as you would like this round, since it would probably help your chances should you choose to apply again.

[pudewen]

To further add to what remensis said, I really do think a Master's may be a good bet for you. Even aside from whether you can get in to a good PhD program, there is the question of whether you really know that you want to do a PhD. One of the reason that grad schools are reluctant to admit candidates with no research experience to PhD programs is that those students have no way of knowing whether they actually like doing research and want to do the things one must do for 5 or 6 or 7+ years as a PhD student (not to mention your career following it). How do you know that you will like doing historical research if you've never done it? A Master's is a good way to try out being a grad student and while funding is tough, there are ways to find it.

[remenis]

I can see your concerns about getting a masters - but it would certainly be the best way to prove your research abilities and pudewen makes a very good point about whether or not you will know that research is for you.

Maeisenb also makes a really good point - perhaps you can complete some independent research with primary sources (possibly through a local historical society? - how easy this is would depend heavily on your field of interest) and use that work as a writing sample to prove to grad schools that you can handle the work.

You could also consider emailing professors near you whose work you admire and asking if they need any unpaid research assistance - it wouldn't beat completing your own project, but might help.

In the end though, a masters is still honestly going to be your best bet. There are some funded and some one year programs out there. There are especially a lot of shorter, one year programs abroad which might cut down the cost and limit the circuitous time.

You might want to throw in at least one masters application (many of the deadlines - especially in the UK have not passed) as a back up option. Because none of us can really tell you whether or not you'll be able to get in based on your currently lack of research experience, you just have to try and see. But if you can't, having applied to the masters now will save you from waiting another year if that does end up being the best option.

[Hopin'-n-Prayin']

There are alot of pretty strong M.A. programs that offer funding and tuition reductions. I just finished an M.A. program at a cash-strapped state school that gave me an 80% waiver and 4k/ semester stipend...and the faculty is loaded with published scholars that went to top 25 programs.

Bottom line, if you do not get into a Ph.D. program, do not summarily disregard the M.A. track- though it may take some effort to find the right one(s) to apply to, it could get defintely put you in a good position for the future.

[kotov]

I certainly wouldn't do it unfunded. If you by chance got into a funded MA, that may be a good idea. Maybe apply to some of both, and if you don't get accepted and you feel it was your lack of research experience, take the funded MA and try again? I guess yours is kind of a unique situation...if funded MAs weren't so hard to come by, I'd say do it. Do you know of places where you could potentially receive funding for an MA in your field?

[SapperDaddy]

A lot of schools that only offer a Master's do fund their students. Maybe look into a place like that to get some experience.