Advice on Realistic Schools

[thekdiggs]

Hi everyone! I've seen a few others post things similar to here, and I'm just wondering if any of you are able to give me some similar advice. I'm about to be a senior at a small liberal arts school in the Northeast. It isn't well known by any means, and it isn't a top schools in the country, either, if you understand what I mean. Just a pretty decent school. I'm looking at applying to graduate schools for a PhD in history - right now, I'm probably going to look at studying American History (or some type of similar major/concentration/whatever its called at that particular school).

I have roughly a 3.91 overall GPA; my history GPA is a little higher, probably close to 3.96.

I just took my GRE and got a 160 Verb and 158 Quant; not sure on writing as I haven't gotten 'official' scores, but I expect that to be somewhere between 5-6 for the average of the two.

I'm in the honors program, have done some teaching assistanships, and run a voluntary tutoring program as part of the Honors program, which I originally created. I've done a law internship over the summer, as well. Other than that, I really don't have any type of extra-curriculars.

I have a pretty well-written paper to use as a writing sample (around 18 pages or so) that uses secondary and primary resources, which was written in the previous semester. We have to write a thesis senior year but it won't be nearly completed by application time.

I'm can read some Spanish, but I would not say I'm even close to fluent. Other than that, I have no languages under my belt. This was something I was told 'not to worry about' by my academic advisor, who got his PhD in history (obviously). Yet it seems pretty important from reading around here/elsewhere.

I'm applying to schools based primarily upon location: I want to either remain local (Boston-ish area), or move to the West Coast (really California). My top choice is Stanford or Berkelely. Is this unrealistic? I was told by my academic advisor that it was entirely possible, but from reading here, it seems like I'm under the bar, despite the fact that I'm easily academically the 'smartest' person in my history graduating class, and ranked 3 or 4 in my entire graduating class.

Also thinking of applying to Brandeis Uni, which is local, Boston Uni, and possibly BC. Are these possible?

Thanks for any and all help.

[natsteel]

As to your first question about how not having attended a "top school" will affect your chances, I worried about the same thing. I started at a community college and finished my BA at a VERY large urban public university system. My advisors told me it definitely wouldn't hurt me when applying. I was skeptical, but they turned out to be right. Of our history department's graduating class that year, 3 accepted offers from top Ivies (including myself), another got into UMichigan, and another went to UKansas.

Over a three-year period, that department had students accept offers from:

5 Ivies (3 at Yale alone in 18th c., 20th-eastern Europe, HistofScience, 1 at Harvard in Af-Am Studies, 1 at Princeton for Latin America)

1 each at Northwestern (Brazil), Michigan (Latin America), Duke (Haiti), and Kansas (19th c.).

And that's all in the last 3 years from a college that's part of a huge university system, neither of which are even ranked regionally. Moral of the story: Your work and what others think of it and your potential is what gets you in to graduate programs, not the name of your undergrad institution.

EDIT: I just saw that my school was ranked #369 in the country in Forbes' 2012 list. So I guess "unranked" is now inaccurate.

Edited August 14, 2012 by natsteel

[TMP]

This is the wrong way to go about going for graduate school. I think it's time for you to sit down and reflect why you want the PhD and what will mean to you professionally and personally.

Your adviser sounds like someone you shouldn't be listening to- there is plenty of very valuable information here. I've been on here since 2008 and it's quite amazing. Scary and unnverving, yes, but it's the truth. Your adviser sounds out of touch, which is fairly common at these kind of places where students don't really go off to graduate school for a degree in humanities. My undergraduate adviser was also a bit out of touch and over the years she worked hard at networking and conferencing to better understand the current landscape. Her advice has been sounder but only when she's sure.

I think you might benefit from waiting until Fall 2014 to apply as this process, particularly given the situation you're in, can take a while to learn and understand, unless you simply want to go for the MA.

[HistThrift]

I haven't logged in in forever, but I felt compelled to give some input here since your record sounds exactly like mine (virtually the same grades, small northeastern school, some Spanish, Early American history). Just for starters, I majored in history, anthro, and archaeology and perhaps had more extra-curriculars, but you seem to have had a more robust internship, you have better GRE scores and it sounds like you went to a private school (which always seems to mean a leg up to me...).

I disagree with others that location can't be a significant factor in a grad school decision. You want to go to a place where you feel comfortable. The northeast has a wealth of resources, and a degree from Stanford, UCLA, or Berkeley is nothing to scoff at, regardless of discipline. I think those are fine locations to look for if those are the places you see yourself succeeding.

All the schools you suggested seem possible. Work on the languages a bit and make sure you get excellent LORs and write a strong SOP for each school. I would also expand your horizons and look at some state schools. UMass & UConn are both strong. If you are going to focus on location I have one major caveat -- research EVERY graduate program in those areas to determine which are the best fit. In New England alone there are over a dozen history-PhD-granting schools to thoroughly research before applying anywhere. I also think there's some merit to what TMP said about your advisor. It seems as though he is maybe too optimistic or, as TMP says, out-of-touch. All of TMP's advice is good and I would suggest you consider it, but I thought I'd throw in my two cents as well.

[Simple Twist of Fate]

While I would urge you to heed TMP's advice about really thinking about what you want to get out of grad school, and whether a year off or MA might be the best route, I'm not sure we have enough information to declare your advisor "out of touch". The fact is that in some sub-fields of American history, there is a fairly low standard for languages (at least one of the schools you're thinking of applying to told me similarly not to worry about my language skills - although that was after I was admitted). I would also agree that getting into Stanford of Berkeley is "entirely possible" given the right circumstances and a strong overall package. However, we simply don't know much about how you will look as a candidate, so it is very difficult to determine how realistic those hopes are.

However, I would say this. If you're committed to going to grad school, you should be committed enough to go to any institution that's the right fit for you. I know that isn't what you want to hear, but I think it's true. I suggest that if you're determined to apply this year, you compile a list of schools based on your research interests' fits compatibility with the faculty. Apply to the New England/West Coast schools if you're a fit there, but don't force it if you're not (you'll just be wasting the application fee and your LoR writers' time). Also apply to some other schools that you're a good fit with outside of those regions. The best approach, I think, is to cast a wide net, and to worry about your location among other factors when deciding among the institutions that (hopefully) accept you. jorcutt is right that it's important to be comfortable in your environment, but that's only one factor - including funding package, advisor fit, prestige, etc - to consider. If you're not willing to at least consider an institution in between the coasts (and the likelihood is that your "perfect" advisor probably might not be at one of the schools you named, because things always work out like that) then I would suggest that you rethink your priorities.

PS- I also see a lot of the attributes I had from undergrad in your description of yourself. Same GPA, similar GRE, small middling college, American history, hell, I even started a tutoring service at my college too. So best of luck to you.

[thekdiggs]

Hey guys, thanks for all the really helpful responses. I want to reply to some of the cocerns, but first of all, I really wanted to say thank you!

I really need to back up my advisor because he has been the most helpful person to me during my undergraduate experience. He's a young guy (I'm not EXACTLY sure, but no older than 35), so he isn't very far removed from the whole process. I don't think he's out of touch. I simply think that I'm the most promising student he's had in recent years (that is looking to go for a PhD, I would never assume to say I'm the most promising out of everyone, considering I know very smart individuals who have recently graduated or are about to), and he really wants me to succeed. I also think that the program he went to wasn't very strong on languages (he did have to know one foreign language, but like some have mentioned, it wasn't a huge deal), so he may not be as familar with the requirements as I'd like.

I'm very wary about taking a year off for a bounty of reasons. One of them is financial, and that I really can't afford to take a year off. I do not have a full-time job, and my loans will kick in in 6 months unless I go to graduate school. I don't have the money right now to pay them out of pocket, and I'd hardly make enough money at my current job to pay them monthly and be able to save. The other reason if I'm afraid I'll get caught up in something (a relationship, some type of job offer, etc) and won't be willing to go back to school OR move to pursue my interests.

I definitely want to fit in at the school I go to, that is obviously a priority. However, to me, graduate school is another adventure. I want to go somewhere to start fresh, but I want to enjoy that place. Hence looking at Californian schools, which I think matches up well with my personality and where I see myself in the next few years. I know this may seem superficial to some, but I really want to enjoy my life, and whatever school I choose, I need to be sure that is a place I can live for an extended period of time (considering the length of obtaining this degree). However, I am looking at other places on the East Coast per recommendations, but shying away from Midwestern/Southern schools, mainly because I dislike the political views of what seems to be the majority of the folks in those areas (apologies to any I may offend with this stereotypical view, but it's my personal opinion).

The problem with language is that my school doesn't have language classes - or really, not serious ones. I suppose to someone glancing at a class list might THINK I learned something in Beginner Spanish, but it wasn't much. My school is trying an intermediate class this semester, and so since language seems to be important, I might have to go ahead and sign up for it. Or would it be okay to try and give it a go on my own, studying with books/online materials/Rosetta Stone, that type of thing?

And as a reply to TMP - I think I know why I want a PhD. First of all, I love to learn. I couldn't stand not going back to school. Secondly, I really want to teach, and I want that to matter, and teaching highschoolers isn't what I crave. I really would like to teach (and learn from) students who are interested in things that I'm interested in. So, the college level. And third, I enjoy researching and writing is perhaps the strongest skill I have in my arsenal. I'd like to develop that further. I'm not sure if these are the 'right' reasons for you, but they are for me.

[thedig13]

While I don't want to say anything about your advisor, I will say that you seem to underestimate the importance of foreign language mastery. It's certainly true that Americanists tend to have more lax language-expectations than those in other fields, but I'd urge you to approach languages as an integral part of professional history rather than some droll, boring chore that needs to be completed before you're allowed to go outside and play. Even for an Americanist, knowing languages opens a vast multitude of doors and puts you at a massive advantage in terms of where you'll be able to take your research. For instance, if you become interested in the LA Riots of 1992, you might need to pick up some Korean. Californian immigrant history? Probably Spanish, Chinese, and Japanese, for starters. This is why there is a language requirement at all -- while you may not be interested in this material now, if there may be some unforeseen time in the future where not knowing a certain language puts a promising research project to a grinding halt.

Also, I'd urge you to really start thinking about what, specifically, you're interested in studying. The fact that you're "probably going to look at studying American History (or some type of similar major)" is a bit worrying. You need to really, really start refining your fields. Most people who are admitted into history programs have a fairly specific, well-refined idea of what really fascinates them. Obviously, you shouldn't be so hard-and-set on a particular topic that you become narrow-minded and stubborn about expanding/developing your interests, but, at the same time, a prospect who can say "I'm interested in the health and sanitation problems which developed from 19th-century urbanization in the Northern US" has a massive advantage over somebody who can only define their interests as "19th-century American history." Additionally, if you really start to refine your interests, you can start narrowing down potential advisors (and, by extension, potential schools), and you'll also be able to write a far more impressive and convincing SOP.

And, of course, these two factors (languages and specific interests) can go hand-in-hand, which is another reason why you should really start thinking about your interests in more specific terms. An Americanist who wants to write a dissertation on 1890s imperialism and another who's interested in the 1920s Red Scare probably shouldn't have identical linguistic repertoires. If you master Spanish but eventually become enamored with a dissertation-topic that requires Russian, you'll need to start from square one with Russian; but, if you have a more specific idea of what you want to study, you'll have a more specific idea of what foreign languages would be best for you, and a better chance of avoiding these sorts of situations.

Edited August 15, 2012 by thedig13

[Simple Twist of Fate]

I definitely want to fit in at the school I go to, that is obviously a priority. However, to me, graduate school is another adventure. I want to go somewhere to start fresh, but I want to enjoy that place. Hence looking at Californian schools, which I think matches up well with my personality and where I see myself in the next few years. I know this may seem superficial to some, but I really want to enjoy my life, and whatever school I choose, I need to be sure that is a place I can live for an extended period of time (considering the length of obtaining this degree). However, I am looking at other places on the East Coast per recommendations, but shying away from Midwestern/Southern schools, mainly because I dislike the political views of what seems to be the majority of the folks in those areas (apologies to any I may offend with this stereotypical view, but it's my personal opinion).

I don't mean to harp, but I wonder how much time you've spent in midwestern college towns? I can't speak for the south, as I've never lived there myself, but there are many very liberal (I'm guessing you're not avoiding the south because it is too liberal, hence my inference) colleges and towns in the midwest. Bloomington, Champaign, Evanston, Ann Arbor, Chicago, Madison, Louisville, etc are all known to be very liberal and accepting places, for example. I would also suggest that if you're serious about working in academia, then you may ultimately end up living and working in a place you're less than thrilled about (at least initially). Again, I would suggest you apply to all programs you fit well with, and if a midwestern/southern university accepts you, go visit! Maybe you'll find that life in between the coasts really isn't so horrible (it's not).

Additionally, consider the possibility that in grad school, you probably won't have either the time or money to really enjoy an exciting locale. In fact, living in a great city like Boston has its disadvantages for a grad student - namely cost of living and numerous distractions.

Edited August 15, 2012 by Simple Twist of Fate

[thedig13]

I don't mean to harp, but I wonder how much time you've spent in midwestern college towns? I can't speak for the south, as I've never lived there myself, but there are many very liberal (I'm guessing you're not avoiding the south because it is too liberal, hence my inference) colleges and towns in the midwest. Bloomington, Champaign, Evanston, Ann Arbor, Chicago, Madison, Louisville, etc are all known to be very liberal and accepting places, for example. I would also suggest that if you're serious about working in academia, then you may ultimately end up living and working in a place you're less than thrilled about (at least initially). Again, I would suggest you apply to all programs you fit well with, and if a midwestern/southern university accepts you, go visit! Maybe you'll find that life in between the coasts really isn't so horrible (it's not).

Additionally, consider the possibility that in grad school, you probably won't have either the time or money to really enjoy an exciting locale. In fact, living in a great city like Boston has its disadvantages for a grad student - namely cost of living and numerous distractions.

I second this. Additionally, keep in mind that many universities and colleges in the American South are outrageously liberal. For instance, I've been told that "UT Austin and Rice hate the rest of Texas, and the rest of Texas hates them back." A lot of good academic work comes out of those two schools.

Also, consider the consequences in terms of your opportunities. If you want to study a subject, then, ideally, you want to work with somebody who's an expert in a relevant field. By automatically refusing to look at any schools that aren't either on the West Coast or the East Coast, you're probably missing out on a lot of great opportunities because of a bias against a college that may not share the same socio-political views as others in the same geographic area.

Edited August 15, 2012 by thedig13

[Professor Plum]

Do yourself a favor and think very, very carefully about applying to PhD programs right now. From my vantage point on the other side of the desk, these are not very good reasons to pursue doctoral study straight out of college.

You say your student loans will kick in if you're not enrolled in a program within six months of graduation, and that you don't have a full-time job to pay them off. Presumably you could get a full-time job of you didn't enroll in graduate school, but leave that aside for a moment. Assuming more debt at this point, in pursuit of an extremely time-consuming degree that does not offer much likelihood of full-time employment does not seem all that wise, especially when you consider that even those who find full-time jobs pull down very modest salaries with which to pay down their accumulated debt.

You say you're worried that you might get caught up in something else--a relationship, a job offer--and become distracted. That's terrific. (In some ways, you should hope that this happens. This is a good description of many of the happiest people I know, some of whom dropped out of grad school.) If there are other interests that might tempt you if you took a year away from school, what makes you think that they won't be equally or more tempting once you begin a grad program, which will be an isolating grind for long stretches? Why not explore other options now before accepting the financial and opportunity costs of a PhD in the humanities?

You say that you only want to attend school in certain areas so that you can embrace the adventure of grad school. Leave aside the fact that, done properly, a PhD in the humanities is almost exactly as romantic as dental school. Leave aside the fact that the time commitment is probably much, much higher than you imagine right now--I averaged about 70 hours/week during my doctoral work, and I was hardly the hardest-working member of my cohort--so that no matter where you wind up, your time to "enjoy life" there is going to be more limited than you imagine. Instead, project yourself eight years into the future, and imagine that you're nearing the end of your PhD. You should already be aware that the chances of finding tenure-track employment of any sort are fairly slim given the trends in the market. Those odds drop to around zero if you rule out large parts of the country, like the midwest or the south, because you dislike the political views of the residents. Many newly-minted history PhDs consider themselves extremely lucky to head off to a one-stoplight town with a Taco Bell and a Wal-Mart at a university they'd never heard of before in a part of the country they'd never visited and may have actively avoided. If you've ruled out half the country because you don't want to spend eight years in graduate school there (a completely reasonable sentiment, I might add), you should seriously reconsider whether you want to pursue a degree that could land you in those regions for decades, or leave you unemployable.

You say you love learning. This is a wonderful quality--but you do not need to go to grad school to keep learning.

You say you really want to teach, but not high-school students. I'll lay aside the reality of much of college teaching, where you may find yourself teaching large groups of disaffected students in gen ed survey classes, covering material that interests neither you or them to fulfill department or university curriculum requirements. I won't point out that the difference between a high-school senior in an AP class and a first-year in an entry-level college survey is about 11 weeks, during which surprisingly little maturation occurs. Instead, I will point out that the world is desperately short of people who can engage and excite students, even (especially) apathetic high-schoolers, and get them passionate about learning and developing the ability to think. Teaching high school well strikes me as every bit, if not more, valuable as teaching at the college level. Someone who really wants to teach, but only at the college level is a little like someone who really wants to coach basketball, but only for the Lakers. If you really want to teach, you'll find a place to do it without worrying too much about the level because... well, because you really want to teach.

This isn't meant to be as discouraging as it probably reads. But, really--think very, very carefully about this big decision. The reasons you've listed are not the strongest predictors of success, in my experience.

[TMP]

Professor Plum took the words out of my mouth. Additional advice about entering graduate school with loans as a PhD student still paying off her loans from her MA:

While job hunting and trying to figure out my salary requirements, I heard that, in order to be able to pay off your loans in a timely manner, your salary should be pretty close to how much you owe in principal. So if you've got $80K in loans, that's a tall order, and extremely few tenure track positions start that high.

So take time off to pay off those loans until it can come down to less than $30K. That is reasonable to have while in graduate school- assuming that you've got a decent stipend and living in a low cost city (and most schools in the Midwest fit the bill).

Not to mention that while your loans are in deferment, it only allows you not to pay anything but your interest still accrues. Better to keep paying loans as much as you can as a graduate student. It was actually kind of one of the smaller reasons why I chose my current program over another offer- so I could afford to keep paying off my loans while living decently. The other program would've put me in financial squeeze if i chose to keep paying.

[Riotbeard]

I would also like to stick up for the South. I think New Orleans in many respects makes the rest of the country look like a bunch of prudes. Most universities in my experience are a bastion of liberalism (that is both a compliment and insult), and the rare conservatives is going to tend to have an intelligent reasoning for this stance, so unless you just don't like being around people with different views (which I would guess will be rare since my experiences in undergrad and grad school are that most faculty are liberal), that is not a good reason. I mean you might want to avoid applying to schools in the rural areas (although that tends to be true of all regions, not just the south or midwest), most major cities in the south are politically diverse. Emory, Vanderbilt, Duke, WashU, UT Austin, Rice, Tulane, and some other schools that are not coming to mind at the moment are in cities with tons of liberals and schools with many famous liberal historians. I am not offended, but your view of the South and Midwest is at least not the whole story and frankly inaccurate when applied to the contemporary urban south. Not to mention this whole country's political s**t stinks (I don't think it was only ohio and alabama [where I grew up], that is always pushing us to bomb people who look different than us), not just the places in between new york and L.A. Once again not offended, but I can't avoid a good anti-northeast rant. I guess it is just in my blood.

[runaway]

I think everyone's given some good advice so far for kdiggs, but I want to stick up for their desire to stay in the Northeast or PNW, since it's one I share. I spent the first two years of my undergraduate career in Texas after growing up in Boston, and it was a huge mistake. Granted, the college happened to have a more conservative student body, but it took me a long time to make friends and the culture shock was pretty severe. There are parts of that experience I loved and still value, but having done it once, I know I won't do it again.

Further, there are state laws that aren't nullified by an open minded, liberal campus. As an LGBT person in a long-term relationship, I can't imagine forcing my girlfriend to move with me to a state where we couldn't contemplate getting married or, perhaps more importantly, where it's legal to discriminate based on sexual orientation.

Obviously these criteria are a matter of personal fit, and I know there are many people who would never want to step foot on a campus in New England. Much as I'll jump to defend my part of the country, I think it's unfair to assume a preference for a certain region is made out of ignorance or assumptions.

[Kelkel]

I just want to add to the ruling out large parts of the country convo:

The first year I applied, I only applied to schools below the Mason Dixon line (pretty much anyways). The South is where I am comfortable and I much prefer behind unhumanly hot to freezing cold. I barely had any luck. I also want to add that I am very liberal. While yes, you will encounter people with whom you do not agree, you shouldn't let politics get in the way. Knowing people that you don't agree with can broaden your horizons so much. It will up your level of discourse.

Don't forget where ever you end up teaching, you might have to deal with students who have different views than you, political or otherwise. And the outspoken ones will want to debate you. I saw it all the time at my school. But we all got along.

Anyways, back to my original point. The second around of apps, I applied all over the country. Now I'm living in New York state. I'm terrified of winter and I miss the South dearly, but I'm starting school in a couple of weeks, and couldn't be more excited.

Edit: BTW, I don't want it to seem that I got into a school because I expanded my area of application. I think that was part of it, but I also had a stronger application this time too.

Edited August 16, 2012 by Kelkel

[thekdiggs]

Sorry for the late reply. I've been mulling over everything you guys have said, as well as talked to my parents/sent emails to Professors/advisor to see what they thought. Once I head back to school, I'm going to have a meeting with my academic advisor to discuss options. I've really taken everything stated here in this thread to heart, and I'm starting to think a year off could be beneficial for me. I want to make sure I have the best chance possible to get into the programs I choose to apply to, and I want to be able to carefully decide my concentration area. To me, senior year and writing my senior thesis paper (40-50 pages) should be my priority this year, and I fear that the application process will force me to direct my attention elsewhere, which isn't a great idea, in my opinion.

Your comments regarding location were insightful; however, I would like to mention that I'm not an ignorant Northerner who thinks the Midwest/South are horrible places. I do not think that. I have friends who have gone to Southern/Midwestern universities and colleges and enjoy them. I understand that cities tend to be liberal (or at least more liberal than rural areas), and after going to college, I'm aware that colleges/universities tend to be pretty liberal establishments. That's not my concern. Runaway hit that on the head - I'm a homosexual woman. I feel uncomfortable being in an area which does not seem very 'gay-friendly,' and where the state laws expressly prohibit gay marriage/civil unions. Everyone is different and handles this differently, and some gay individuals may be able to handle living in that type of environment, but if I don't have to, I won't.

And as a sidenote, Kelkel, I dislike the heat, so I understand your aversion to the cold (the opposite of what you're accustomed to). So this is another reason why I don't think I would agree with the South. Humidity and excessive heat give me headaches and stomach problems, and even summers up in the north bother me, where the weather tends to be a bit more mild (but not always of course).

Anyway, the conclusion of this is that I appreciate all the help and guidance. I'm goin g to keep my options open for now, but it is possible that I'll be giving myself some time to really think about what I want to pursue for graduate work, whether that be a year or two. Thank you everyone.

[futurePhD]

OP,

Your situation is very similar to mine four years ago when I applied. I sent you a PM that I hope you will find useful.

[Professor Plum]

Just to clarify my earlier post: there is absolutely nothing wrong with having a strong preference regarding where you want to live. But if you know that you will only be happy living in the South (or in New England, or near the mountains, or on the water, or in a small town, or in a big city), then a PhD in the humanities is not for you, because that kind of geographic flexibility does not exist in this profession. There are many, many wonderful things about academe, but the freedom to decide where you will live is not among them. There is a term to describe history PhDs who have determined that they are only willing to work in a specific region, or a specific kind of city, or at a small liberal-arts college, or at a large research university. That term is "unemployed." It is a lucky few who land tenure-track jobs after completing the degree; trying to decide whether you are better-suited to living in, say, Ithaca or San Francisco is not a problem you will have. (I suggest anyone who is contemplating pursuing a PhD spend a little time each week reading the Chronicle of Higher Education's forums, since they give you a little glimpse into your future self. The recent article "Embracing Your Inner North Dakotan" contains a telling discussion of some of these issues, which are well worht thinking about before you begin the program.)

Anyway, OP, congratulations on what sounds like a very smart decision to delay your applications. I have no doubt that you will be both a stronger applicant and (should you ultimately decide to enroll in a program) a more successful grad student with the extra experience. Good luck with your thesis this year.

[lafayette]

Ahh! apologies to Professor Plum for voting down your apt reply, above. A stray click on my screen, and then -- that unintended red negative. Is there really no way with this silly up/down feature to undo one's vote? Argh, well, I hope someone neutralizes it, as Prof Plum is right on.