Preparation of History Ph.D applications

[white_rabbit]

I'm sorry if this has been posted before, but if so I can't find it by search. I'm a freshman at a top 5 University, and I've long had an interest in becoming a Professor. I am hoping to go to lunch with my advisor later in the semester to discuss how to work towards such a goal, but I thought I'd ask here for advise about graduate school admissions more specifically. I know that History is an unfortunately competitive field at this point in time, so obviously an important step towards academia is a top graduate program in one's area of study. But are there specific things I should look at accomplishing during my undergraduate career? I have an amazing array of resources here, and I have already spent a decent amount of time interacting with top scholars in class and at office hours. I'm taking French at the moment, and I hope to start German at some point in the near future. My interests in history tend to fall around intellectual history, international relations, economic history, and general modern european history. I am hoping to start working as a Professor's research assistant starting next fall. Besides doing well in classes and writing a senior thesis, what other types of things should I focus on? Thank you for your help!

[misterpat]

I'm sorry if this has been posted before, but if so I can't find it by search. I'm a freshman at a top 5 University, and I've long had an interest in becoming a Professor. I am hoping to go to lunch with my advisor later in the semester to discuss how to work towards such a goal, but I thought I'd ask here for advise about graduate school admissions more specifically. I know that History is an unfortunately competitive field at this point in time, so obviously an important step towards academia is a top graduate program in one's area of study. But are there specific things I should look at accomplishing during my undergraduate career? I have an amazing array of resources here, and I have already spent a decent amount of time interacting with top scholars in class and at office hours. I'm taking French at the moment, and I hope to start German at some point in the near future. My interests in history tend to fall around intellectual history, international relations, economic history, and general modern european history. I am hoping to start working as a Professor's research assistant starting next fall. Besides doing well in classes and writing a senior thesis, what other types of things should I focus on? Thank you for your help!

Take as much language training as possible for Euro. French and German should be good.

Just so you know, Intellectual History is the hardest sub-field to get a job in, supposedly. I suggest reading this article: http://people.virginia.edu/~adm9e/grad/grad.htm

I would also recommend reading this article: http://www.historians.org/perspectives/issues/1998/9809/9809PRO.CFM

You seem to have a decent idea of what to do already. Take multiple, small classes with a professor who is well-known in your field so that he/she knows you well enough to write a good letter. Try not to kiss their ass too much so that they geniunely like you (my personal opinion).

[Kakirsten]

I agree with misterpat, and I'll add the two P's: present and publish. If you have the opportunity to conduct original, primary-source based research and either present it at a research conference or publish it somewhere, it will make you stand out. Even a top 5 degree, if you stick only to the curriculum, won't necessarily write your ticket.

[slawkenbergius]

When I was a wee lad, oh, two or three years ago, I asked this same question at AskMetafilter, and got a lot of fantastic advice: http://ask.metafilter.com/52162/God-save-historyGod-save-your-mad-parade. Since then, I've followed through on my research plans--I have one article published and another one forthcoming, and I've presented at several conferences. (I bumped up my GPA and got more or less what I had planned to get on the GRE). Although I can't say yet whether this was successful, my professors seem to think my application was pretty competitive, and I've gotten one acceptance already.

Basically, follow the three Rs: research, research, research. A summer's worth of work was more than enough to do an in-depth study, both historiographic reading and primary source research. Another summer gave me an even deeper grounding. I can honestly say that this summer research changed my life, and I'd recommend you get cracking on something like this--there's no better way to learn how to be a historian than to actually be a historian. Keep in mind that it will take at least a year for an article to be published after you submit it. The forthcoming piece I have, which will be published this summer, was written in August 2007--and subsequently needed a lot of reworking and revision.

So, sorry about tooting my own horn here, but this is the kind of thing that will really help. You have a leg up on me, since your university is a lot more highly ranked than mine.

[EDIT]: On reread, this looks like I'm saying the stuff I did is the only way to go. It's not, it's just what seemed to work for me. I'm by no means unique or exceptional, and I'm not any more likely to get into my programs than any of the people on this board.

[synthla]

Definitely take the research and publishing opportunities if you're still in school and have the opportunity to pursue them; on the other hand, if those opportunities have passed you by, as they had me, don't think that they'll necessarily sink your application. I went to a small liberal arts college... half the faculty weren't even publishing anymore, so there weren't a lot of opportunities to do so as an undergrad.

[slawkenbergius]

Incidentally, OP, I saw the thread you started at the Chronicle forums. I sympathize; not only were they fairly unhelpful, they also took the opportunity to organize a vicariously-reliving-wasted-youth party. Reading that thread is like being surrounded by a dozen senile uncles in rocking chairs wagging their fingers in unison. Ugh.

[older and wiser]

Hah! What could those old fuddy-duddy professors POSSIBLY know about Academia? The nerve of those people to tell you what's up...

[slawkenbergius]

Hah! What could those old fuddy-duddy professors POSSIBLY know about Academia? The nerve of those people to tell you what's up...

I'm not saying they were wrong. I'm not saying they were bad or ill-informed people. My family's all academics, I know how it is. And the posters were, of course, well within their rights to say whatever they wanted.

But the question that was asked was a simple, concrete one. If I ask someone at the supermarket where the cereal is, I don't expect them to lecture me on my food choices. It's condescending and patronizing to give someone advice they never asked for, no matter how much you believe your hard-won battlefield experience gives you the right to do so. I'm sure the poster already knows, and has been told again and again, how hard the job market is and all the rest of that stuff. There's a point at which such well-intentioned advice becomes more irritating than useful.

[thepoorstockinger]

You have only been in university for one semester? My advice is this: go hang out with your friends, take courses in a bunch of different types of history and other totally unrelated disciplines and enjoy getting an undergraduate, liberal education. I could be totally wrong, but I feel like deciding to concentrate on one thing too much after one semester of school is a big excessive. A lot (I mean like one in every four people in my first year program) were convinced that they wanted to go get the PhD after first year and as far as I know almost none of those people are planning on going any further into academia. Just keep your options open and don't limit yourself - certainly take advantage of the advice other people have offered, but don't go over board with it. You might not get the chance to take a wide breadth of courses again. I will say this though: read the historiography early on. I really only felt like I turned the corner as a history student when I started being able to understand that first chapter of books I was assigned. Go out and read the canonical, must read secondary literature in the fields you're interested in so that you understand the positions people are taking.

My advice on taking a wide variety of courses (and reading widely) is likely doubly important if you're interested in intellectual history since history may not actually be the best place for you - theory and crit/comp lit programs, philosophy, and others may in fact be a better place to explore your interests.

Other than that - the advice listed about is all great, particularly working on languages if you're doing European history.

[ohheygradschool]

While it's great that you're asking these sort of questions (you'll be super prepared!) so early, I am also going to chime in and say to wait a bit longer before deciding on PhD apps. Take some upper level history courses, then decide if it's right for you. You never know when/if your interests will change. I started off in my first year convinced I would be in evolutionary biology for the rest of my life. Then I took my first history course in junior year and that changed my mind pretty quickly. I guess what I'm saying is don't close yourself off to new interests so early on.

[John_E]

My advice to be the top draft pick

1. High GPA

2. High GRE

3. Writing sample grounded in primary sources, that is good enough to be published in a top journal in your field

4. Recommendations from profs who say you're great (a bad/lukewarm rec will hurt you more than a good rec will help you)

5. One or two peer-reviewed publications. Conferences are nice too, but I've heard publications carry more weight.

A good SOP is nice too. But I agree with the above responders, you have a lot of time to decide what you want to do. Academia isn't for everyone, but if you go for it, good luck!

[misterpat]

You have only been in university for one semester? My advice is this: go hang out with your friends, take courses in a bunch of different types of history and other totally unrelated disciplines and enjoy getting an undergraduate, liberal education. I could be totally wrong, but I feel like deciding to concentrate on one thing too much after one semester of school is a big excessive. A lot (I mean like one in every four people in my first year program) were convinced that they wanted to go get the PhD after first year and as far as I know almost none of those people are planning on going any further into academia. Just keep your options open and don't limit yourself - certainly take advantage of the advice other people have offered, but don't go over board with it. You might not get the chance to take a wide breadth of courses again. I will say this though: read the historiography early on. I really only felt like I turned the corner as a history student when I started being able to understand that first chapter of books I was assigned. Go out and read the canonical, must read secondary literature in the fields you're interested in so that you understand the positions people are taking.

My advice on taking a wide variety of courses (and reading widely) is likely doubly important if you're interested in intellectual history since history may not actually be the best place for you - theory and crit/comp lit programs, philosophy, and others may in fact be a better place to explore your interests.

Other than that - the advice listed about is all great, particularly working on languages if you're doing European history.

+1

I would suggest drinking no fewer than 5 times a week.

[earlyamerican]

High school history is not the same as academic history.

Survey course history is not the same as academic history.

Dude, don't be such a careerist: it kills your imagination. Imagination and a sense of narrative are important if you want to spend your life writing books about history! Type-A perfectionism does not make for good writing, just clean citation and correct grammar. Important stuff, of course, but not compelling in and of itself.

See if you can get a work study job in your library's archives/special collections. If you don't have a heart attack from giddy bliss at being surrounded with primary sources - every single time you're there - rethink the PhD. Or, unless you can be totally engrossed by scanning horrible-quality microfilm for so many hours that your butt falls asleep and doesn't wake up until the next morning, rethink it. You get what I'm saying.

My favorite prof of all time told me "there's no such thing as a child prodigy in the humanities." You're what, 19 at most? Live a little. Date early, date often, get your heart broken, get over it. Go volunteer in an emergency room and watch some human drama. Read some mystical stuff and have a spiritual crisis. Have multiple identity crises. An academic career is one long set of insecurity-inducing trials, so the more firm a grasp you have on your own self and what counts for you, the more stable a grad student you'll be. After all, it's just another kind of job, and no civilian cares how prestigious you are.

Sorry to get all preachy, but I do honestly worry about the straight-from-undergrad people. Every year, at universities everywhere, there are an awful lot of suicides by students and even faculty, and I have to believe that the one-dimensionality of the "X-TREME ACHIEVEMENT" cultures at so many schools is at least a contributing factor.

[Kakirsten]

If you don't have a heart attack from giddy bliss at being surrounded with primary sources - every single time you're there - rethink the PhD. Or, unless you can be totally engrossed by scanning horrible-quality microfilm for so many hours that your butt falls asleep and doesn't wake up until the next morning, rethink it. You get what I'm saying.

Aaaaahhh, how I love microfilm spins, and then trying to drive afterwards. :shock:

[TMP]

I've seen you around and given you advice on another board.

But someone mentioned what else you could do for your summers. Aside from intensive language training, you could MOST certainly apply for internships to museums (with strong preference to work with the historians or collections or archives, stay away from visitor services and muesum administration) like Museum of American History, some places in NYC, and smaller museums scattered around the coutnry like Hyde Park (FDR Library). Often these internships are not paid although if you return for a second summer, they just might pay you. Anything that gets you hands-on research is great for your CV. I had 3 research/msueum internships and my experience was the biggest compliment that I received from PhD programs last year when I asked for feedback. They were very impressed with my CV but just disappointed at the lack of focus on my SOP and language preparation. (Oh those will be remedied!). I didn't know that I actually wanted to get my PhD until I worked with a senior historian in my second summer at a certain museum (first summer was in a different department) prior to entering my junior year.

These places will give you an eye opening experience to see the world beyond the academia that you can use your PhD for. History is just as flexible as the hard sciences- can be used in the industry or government. Unfortunately, most history professors are rather old-schooled and don't really see the opportunities beyond the academia for PhDs. AHA had to blast programs back in early January for not preparing their doctoral students enough to be "broad" historians. I imagine that the top 5 history programs are some of them.

Personally, I am not too concerned about trying to find a job- I loved my internship experiences and would not trade them for anything. So I'm pretty open about job opportunities and just want to focus on my own research while I'm in PhD.

[misterpat]

See if you can get a work study job in your library's archives/special collections. If you don't have a heart attack from giddy bliss at being surrounded with primary sources - every single time you're there - rethink the PhD. Or, unless you can be totally engrossed by scanning horrible-quality microfilm for so many hours that your butt falls asleep and doesn't wake up until the next morning, rethink it. You get what I'm saying.

Every year, at universities everywhere, there are an awful lot of suicides by students and even faculty, and I have to believe that the one-dimensionality of the "X-TREME ACHIEVEMENT" cultures at so many schools is at least a contributing factor.

Your advice reminds me of a Bukowski poem from sifting through the madness for the word, the line, the way:

so you want to be a writer?

if it doesn't come bursting out of you

in spite of everything,

don't do it.

unless it comes unasked out of your

heart and your mind and your mouth

and your gut,

don't do it.

if you have to sit for hours

staring at your computer screen

or hunched over your

typewriter

searching for words,

don't do it.

if you're doing it for money or

fame,

don't do it.

if you're doing it because you want

women in your bed,

don't do it.

if you have to sit there and

rewrite it again and again,

don't do it.

if it's hard work just thinking about doing it,

don't do it.

if you're trying to write like somebody

else,

forget about it.

if you have to wait for it to roar out of

you,

then wait patiently.

if it never does roar out of you,

do something else.

if you first have to read it to your wife

or your girlfriend or your boyfriend

or your parents or to anybody at all,

you're not ready.

don't be like so many writers,

don't be like so many thousands of

people who call themselves writers,

don't be dull and boring and

pretentious, don't be consumed with self-

love.

the libraries of the world have

yawned themselves to

sleep

over your kind.

don't add to that.

don't do it.

unless it comes out of

your soul like a rocket,

unless being still would

drive you to madness or

suicide or murder,

don't do it.

unless the sun inside you is

burning your gut,

don't do it.

when it is truly time,

and if you have been chosen,

it will do it by

itself and it will keep on doing it

until you die or it dies in you.

there is no other way.

and there never was.

[slawkenbergius]

Bukowski would have done well to heed his own advice. Along with everyone else who thinks that true art is being a live-fast-die-young bohemian poet.

[slawkenbergius]

Also:

if you have to sit for hours

staring at your computer screen

or hunched over your

typewriter

searching for words,

don't do it.

Really? No wonder his poetry sucks.

[misterpat]

Bukowski would have done well to heed his own advice. Along with everyone else who thinks that true art is being a live-fast-die-young bohemian poet.

So you don't have any Bukowski I can borrow?

[curious]

There is no formula. Most of it is about luck. But I think two things can help you.

First, learn languages. The more the better. I don't want to blow my cover, but I been incredibly lucky in my undergraduate and masters, and got to do them at two very good universities filled with brilliant students. In both cases, the stand out kids were those who could do things not only in French, German, Spanish, Italian, etc., but also Russian, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, Polish, Norwegian, etc. The broader the range, the better- irrespective of what period/nation one is working on. We do a very poor job of teaching foreign language skills to kids in the US, so you will stand out if you have a wide range under your belt. If I could redo undergrad, I would devote more of my time to studying languages than to taking history courses. Wide-ranging linguistic ability can enable you to think about a whole set of projects that are otherwise unfeasible. The best thing you can do for your prospects over the summer is study languages.

Second, come up with an innovative writing sample. I don't think it necessarily has to be about history. Rather, choose work that displays your ability to think creatively about a problem (especially if it is one people thing has been "done to death"), and write about it in a clear, precise, and concise manner. I think it can really help if you can demonstrate what's innovative or new about your approach or insight. Sorry if this seems abstract, but am trying to avoid revealing myself.

Hoping to get lucky again for the Ph.D! I am pleased to have some very good options so far, for which I am exceptionally thankful, but am increasingly pessimistic that I will get into the exact places I want. Such a crap-shoot.