Grad Level Courses

[ReallyNiceGuy]

How often should one expect to take classes completely out of their area of interest? How many of you who have been in grad programs for some period have taken a class that you did not want to be in?

Thanks!

[Sigaba]

In my experience, one can pretty much stay within one's comfort zones when it comes to departmental coursework. However, one may find one's emerging sensibilities challenged by the methodological and theoretical approaches of a class. For example, you have an interest in nineteenth century American political history and take a class on nineteenth century America and the professor is a social historian who stressed race, class, and gender throughout the semester.

When it comes to coursework in one's field outside of history, there can be less flexibility.

[ReallyNiceGuy]

Thanks for that reply! I'd actually be really excited to see other methodological AND interpretations of my area of interest; but I don't want to deviate too far from that area of interest. Is it considered rude or unacceptable for a first year graduate student to basically say "I do not want to take this course and I'll do anything to avoid it?" Because I essentially would.

[Sigaba]

Thanks for that reply! I'd actually be really excited to see other methodological AND interpretations of my area of interest; but I don't want to deviate too far from that area of interest. Is it considered rude or unacceptable for a first year graduate student to basically say "I do not want to take this course and I'll do anything to avoid it?" Because I essentially would.

RNG--

Such a stance is likely to be considered rude, unacceptable, and maybe even self-destructive. As a first year graduate student, you may have a good idea of what you want to study, but you probably don't have a clear notion of what you need to study for you to be a competent historian who can compete in the marketplace of ideas in an era of continuing debate over the relevance of history in the contemporary world.

So, I recommend that you find a sustainable balance between taking courses that develop your interests in accordance with your vision of who you want to be as a historian while also doing work that might help you expand, refine, and sharpen that vision. If you find yourself in a class that is not your cup of tea, do more than just "embrace the suck" and mark time. Instead, do what you can to use your historian's imagination to immerse yourself in the materials. Figure out how you can use the course to develop a different perspective on your own preferred area of interest. This type of approach may help you discover broader themes that link together trajectories of historiography that, at first blush, seem completely incompatible and unconnected.

Here's an example that (I hope) illustrates my point. I've been to a number of "job talks" in which a newly minted Ph.D., after spending some time talking about his thesis, would get destroyed by a senior historian asking a straightforward question: Where are the women? To some, such a question may seem unfair, if not irrelevant. However, as aspiring professional academic historians, one could (and should) make the case that it is our individual responsibility to know what is going on in key fields, and how one's own work does or does not fit into those trajectories of historiography.

HTH.

[ReallyNiceGuy]

Thank you so very much for the thoughtful replies. More than anything, I certainly want to ensure I do not destroy myself or offend anyone.

And you're of course right that I have plenty to learn.

Thanks again!

[Sigaba]

Thank you so very much for the thoughtful replies. More than anything, I certainly want to ensure I do not destroy myself or offend anyone.

And you're of course right that I have plenty to learn.

Thanks again!

RNG--

The issue is not so much about not offending anyone. Often, you know you're doing something right because you offend certain people.

The issue is about not offending unnecessarily people who might otherwise help you.

[iamincontrolhere-haig]

What are people's thoughts on taking courses in a discipline outside of history? As somebody who wants to study US foreign relations, I figure I would benefit from learning to speak the language of political scientists and international relations specialists. I only worry that I may get too hung up on methodological quibbles (to my mind, there's no such thing as an independent variable in the real world) to derive a huge benefit from courses that focus on the "science" part of "social science."

[Sigaba]

What are people's thoughts on taking courses in a discipline outside of history? As somebody who wants to study US foreign relations, I figure I would benefit from learning to speak the language of political scientists and international relations specialists. I only worry that I may get too hung up on methodological quibbles (to my mind, there's no such thing as an independent variable in the real world) to derive a huge benefit from courses that focus on the "science" part of "social science."

iamincontrolhere-haig:

You might be interested in the following article: John Lewis Gaddis, “Expanding the Data Base: Historians, Political Scientists, and the Enrichment of Security Studies” International Security 12:1 (Summer 1987): 3-21. The article is part of a symposium published in the above-captioned issue of International Security on the relationships between IR/PS and history. Also, you could take a look at some of the entries in the Cornell Studies in Security Affairs series--especially those published during the 1980s--to see if you can read these types of works without feeling too out of sorts as a historian. You might also take a look at a recently published collection of essays, History and Neorealism (2010) [iSBN-13: 9780521132244].

MOO, in addition to the notion of the "independent variable" in relation to the historian's sensibilities, I think one would also have to grapple with the notion of the "case study" and the implication that the study of case studies can lead to using the "lessons of history" to project future developments and provide policy recommendations.

As I myself am an antiquarian who thinks that historians need to be somewhat more zealous in protecting the boundaries of the craft from the sensibilities of other disciplines--especially political science--I think that there's plenty of opportunities for getting entangled in the "quibbles" you mention.

However, given the direction that many scholars of the Cold War want to take (as evidenced by The Cambridge History of the Cold War) I think there are plenty of opportunities for cross pollination between IR/PS and history if one can resolve those quibbles to one's own satisfaction. Moreover, given the profound influence that political scientists exerted on policy discourse during the Cold War, knowing how they approach issues related to diplomacy, peace, and war may prove useful down the line.

(FWIW, if I were in your shoes, I'd consider the utility of following three-step path. First, I'd see if I could substitute statistics for one of my languages. Second, I'd look into taking relatively intense classes in statistics--rather than the "statistics for poets" classes many graduate students can get away with taking [guilty as charged]. Third, I'd look into doing an outside field in political science/IR that was heavy on quantitative methods. This way, you'd not only have the opportunity to broaden your approach to history from an intellectual perspective, you would also have a skill set that would have applications outside the craft of history.

That is, you'd know how to count beans and to crunch numbers. Such a skill set could potentially make you a valuable asset to a history department down the line when it comes time for you and your colleagues to fight against the Powers That Be when they, for example, want to shift resources to another program.)

My $0.02/YMMV/HTH.

[Riotbeard]

Whether you can take classes outside your discipline will really be up to the program/ your adviser. I have not, but a lot of people in my program do (particularly anthropology and sociology, you will find that there is a lot of cross pollination between these disciplines and history than say poli sci).

To the original poster: As far as how many classes you will be expected to take outside of your regional/temporal field, it will really depend on the size of your department. For my atlantic world minor field, I have taken some less typical classes (for a 19th cent. U.S. historian) including the cuban revolution and Latin American Urban history, but it depends on what you want. I like being able to pull from a lot of different places, and thinking about my work in a more international context, so I went for a program that emphasized atlantic world, Latin America, and slavery than places with a larger U.S. cohort but less diversity. Nearly everybody takes a lot of courses outside of their location and period. These are things to think about when picking your program, because it might not be what you are "expected" to do, so much as your options in your program. I would also try and keep and open mind, because I get a lot of different ideas from latin americanists, who approach similar themes but in different ways.

[StrangeLight]

it definitely depends on the size of your program. i go to small program (they like to call it "boutique grad training"). we have just under 30 professors (only about half of whom care about the grad program) and just over 40 students. while students can do many independent studies with profs and one or two other students (and do), they also have to take a certain number of seminars, and as a rule, there is only one seminar per field offered each year. so inevitably, people are in classes outside of their field. this isn't necessarily a bad thing.

what's the course you'd do anything to stay out of? and why do you feel that way about it? does the professor have a reputation for being awful (in which case, maybe you should stay away)? is it a required/core course like historiography or methodology (in which case, even mentioning you don't want to do it is gonna hurt you)?

another thing to consider... world history is BIG right now. even though not that many schools are hiring "world historians" yet, at least 75% of the job ads i see in my field (latin america) ask for someone that can teach a world history survey (in addition to latin american courses). by taking classes outside your regional field, you'll begin to see connections and patterns that are global and you will be better equipped to create and teach a world history class. so even if you have to take this course because there just aren't any other options, try to actually get something out of it.

i know this is nosy, but i really want to know what this evil class is...