3rd year undergrad interested in applying for Ph.D

[Junebugman]

I'm currently in my third year at Cal State Northridge(Not a top tier school). I'm majoring in History and minoring in Russian. My interest has been in Russian/Soviet history(From the start of Nicholas to the death of Stalin). I'm interested in going to grad school to study this field and hopefully be able to teach and research the subject. I am already fluent in Russian and know a little Ukrainian. My GPA right now is about 3.7 and my history GPA is probably about the same, I think. I just from a school program sponsored by the US government where you get a certificate studying Russian at a university in Moscow.

I'm curious as to what I path I should pursue. A friend of mine, who actually was just admitted for the PhD program at UIUC to study Russian history, told me I could either directly apply for a PhD, or apply for an MA and then a PhD. My school, CSUN, offers an MA program w/ thesis option, but the department is pretty much focused on US history. Also, while I was abroad, I met with someone at a university in Kiev where international students can study Ukrainian for an academic year. I have almost no work experience, and I saw this as a possible way to take a year off after my BA and learn a second foreign language. I'm not sure how helpful this might be since most Russian programs I see require Russian and either French or German. I was hoping some either people who might have been in the same situation could give me some advise about all of this.

Thank you in advance!

[TMP]

Take time off. That program sounds pretty interesting- it'd be just good as having work experience. The time away from academia is really meant to broaden your view and give you an opportunity to understand who you really are as a person. It wasn't really until almost a year after my MA graduation until I realized that the path I thought I wanted to take was not what I really wanted. Now I am very happy pursuing my PhD on this path that I really wanted. Sometimes our professors and peers influence us so much that it's hard to take an objective look at your interests and personality unless you step far away from that realm. When I made this epiphany, I was actually in Germany and not in contact with anyone in the US.

The "work" experience is really designed to help you get out of that "student" mode and into a "colleague" mode. Many, many graduate students find this mental transition extremely difficult and it takes them years. I treat all of my professors in my PhD program and subfield as colleagues who can serve as mentors, not authority figures as most graduate students perceive them to be and treat them as so. It's just a carry over from my work experience where I dealt with former and current academics all the time and thus, called everyone by their first names. Also, it's amazing how much after working 10-6 for a year can carry over to your graduate school experiences- I actually prefer to get up and get work done so I can relax in the evening rather than sleeping in and working late as I did in my MA program. I feel much saner!

As for Russian history programs and languages, you'd be surprised how shoddy people's language skills are unless they're native speakers. A couple of our PhD students came in with only 3-4 years of Russian and have had to continue their Russian during the PhD. And find time to take a reading course in French or German. The Ukrainian would be a bonus, especially if you have any interest in involving Ukraine in your dissertation project.

But be careful about choosing that particular period. It's been perceived as "done to death." So take a moment and read up the literature more in a variety of themes and perspectives- religion, race/ethnicity, nationalism, gender, immigration, etc. I'd do more of your reading in any works published after 2000 when historians started publishing works using recently opened Soviet archives that they examined since the fall of the Soviet Union. In doing so, you should be able to get a sense of Russian historiography prior to 1990 and figure out what still needs to be "corrected" using the recently opened archives.

[lafayette]

The "work" experience is really designed to help you get out of that "student" mode and into a "colleague" mode. Many, many graduate students find this mental transition extremely difficult and it takes them years. I treat all of my professors in my PhD program and subfield as colleagues who can serve as mentors, not authority figures as most graduate students perceive them to be and treat them as so. It's just a carry over from my work experience where I dealt with former and current academics all the time and thus, called everyone by their first names. Also, it's amazing how much after working 10-6 for a year can carry over to your graduate school experiences- I actually prefer to get up and get work done so I can relax in the evening rather than sleeping in and working late as I did in my MA program. I feel much saner!

Completely agree! Working is not necessarily ideal (depends on the job -- but all jobs have their ups and downs, something to consider for your 'career' as a grad student too) but it does help you learn schedules, work with a diverse set of people, do things you REALLY don't feeling like doing but must, be humble and continue on even without praise or an encouraging 'A', and become disciplined when it comes to all manner of tasks. I, however, am personally looking forward to being a student again. I really do think my work in other fields has only enforced my knowledge of how badly I want to get that PhD in history, and how hard I'd work for it, even through the low points.

That said, I don't think someone who goes straight from undergrad to grad is lacking, but it never hurts to pursue a whole range of experience.

Edited October 19, 2012 by lafayette

[Junebugman]

I just feel a little overwhelmed about what steps I should be taking, or really, what I should be thinking. I know people at my school discussing how getting published while a UG is an amazing way to gain admission...something I currently have no idea how to do. Right now, I'm working on second research peper. It's going to be around 23-25 pages and about the identity of the Soviet Partisans and how the nature of that identity is a major factor in their creation and vast growth during WW2. This is pretty much the extent of my abilities at least at this stage. Next to this, I seem to hear other people describe the "way too overdone" fields(Most history majors at my school study US history). But it seems European history isn't far off from this either. Does that mean even if I have an interest in Russian and Soviet history, it's an overdone interest?

I don't mean to complain. This is a major life choice after all and the steps needed to be taken just seem confusing, if not daunting.

[annieca]

Personally, I think to hell with what is "overdone." You find what speaks to you. For some people that means a topic that a lot of people have covered before. And yes, it's kind of naive to think that you might ever produce something groundbreaking and new on something written so much on, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth studying. It depends, I think, on your "type" of history. Maybe political Alexander to Stalin history is incredibly overdone. What about economic? Social? Cultural?

I think though that one of the BENEFITS of doing a super well-researched topic is the ability to find a professor that truly meets your interests as a supervisor. There aren't a huge amount of historians in my area so finding one professor who fits what I study is incredibly difficult. Consider yourself lucky that you have a whole crop of people to choose from.

As for complaining, I don't think you are. Grad school is a *huge* decision and it's also a long process. There's advice coming at you from all sides of the issue and there will be people who don't see the point. You truly have to believe in yourself and have someone at your university that believes in you too. Talk to your advisor - see what he/she thinks. Where do they recommend? What steps do they think you should take? Take all the advice with a grain of salt, as with this site.

As a third year undergrad, I would focus on your classes and getting a great writing sample. No, it doesn't HAVE to be published. In fact, I know of very few published undergraduates. There's a blog of one of the frequent contributors here (I think it's TMP) that says you should write your statement of purpose before you look at schools. You might try that. Really narrow your focus and know what you want. Maybe your SOP writing will help you determine, "Hell no, I can't do this right now." Or maybe it will make you want to dive into the research of schools headfirst.

Lastly, about taking a year or two (or several) off. I think it is beneficial for some. For others, they need to go straight in for a multitude of reasons. You know yourself better than anyone. Could you take a few years off and be happy during those years?

I hope that helps!

[New England Nat]

If the professors at your undergrad aren't very helpful for you, i would suggest that you pick a couple of books in the area you like and look up their authors. Make sure they are still working in the field and write them an email. Ask for advise about the field and tell them about your concerns.

Often an honest confession of confusion and request for help can get you a lot of good advise.

I don't know about Soviet political history, but I know a lot of interesting work is being done in History of Science. Soviet environmental history is nearly an open area. I second the suggestion that cultural history might be interesting to you. You can tell I am around Michael Gordin too much...

I would advise against military history as that can be a handicap in academia these days. Having military topics is fine, but "military history" can be greeted with hostility or confusion in many good history departments.

I wouldn't try to get published as an undergrad. The last thing you want out there later in your career is something with your name on it that you are going to be embarrassed about later. And believe me no matter how much work you put into it now, you will be embarrassed about it later. I know someone who wrote a book near her field before going to grad school, published by a good commercial press, and she is very embarrassed by how naive she percieves it to be now. I think she's got no reason to be embarassed, but I can also tell you she didn't get in based on the book.

Write the best research papers you can. Do solid work and have a polished writing sample using primary sources by the fall of your senior year.

Select 3 professors who you want to write letters of recommendation for you and build a relationship with them. If you have a big fish locally that would be nationally known, consider them. Don't use non-tenure track faculty, and avoid very junior assisstant professors. The letters are going to have to talk about your potential for success in grad school and many places will disregard the too junior.

Consider taking the GRE this summer.

Between now and next september try and figure out where the best places to do Russian history are going to be for you. 8 places are around where you want to come up with. Be warry of places with only one person that can work with you, and don't think you can go somewhere to work with an assistant professor. Many places wont let them take students.

[bkohn4]

Seriously, take a year or two off. I graduated in 2011 and was heading straight for grad school, but was dissuaded by a professor at my undergrad school. She's one of the few honest professors I've met. She was realistic about the job market and told me straight up about it. I'm thankful for her guidance. I've taken time to tutor in writing at a local university and have since started a program getting my teaching license here in Ohio. I plan on reapplying after I get my licensure (it was my back-up for any problems getting a job following the Phd. Seems silly now, but I'm happy to be taking some kind of class, even if it's not History. I missed school after not being in it for a semester). Regardless, take a breather. Work for a while, even if it's in something basic. Get a feel for life away from school and if you're anything like me, you'll miss it and be eager to learn again.

 

Good luck with everything!

[Katzenmusik]

I agree with everyone who says to take at least a year or two off between undergrad and grad school -- whether you're living and traveling abroad or out working a regular job.  Otherwise you risk spending your entire life either as a student or as a professor, without any other perspective.  As great as university life is, it's good to get out of the system for a while and experience other things.

[LadyRara]

A year off has been great for me too. It is good to be thrown into the real world for a while. You get the chance to be disappointed and like me, occasionally hungry. But with everything comes a great snese of pride when you find something and begin to make money. I would hate to say it but making money is great. It really changes your perspective on what things are woth and what you are willing to finance for graduate school. Plus you really get the chance to witness why it is such a powerful factor in the world and gain an appreciation for people who striked and fought for better wages.

I say pursue your interest. It is absolutely the only way you will ever be successful professionally and personally.

[This is my Screen Name]

I think all that's been about taking a year off has been solid advice.  On the other hand, a year off for me was terrible.  Everybody is different.  If you don't have a topic ready, though, it's probably best to wait, or do an MA program first.  It’s a shorter commitment, and you can discover if you are truly interested in your topic.  Don't worry if what you are interested in is “overdone,” especially when you have a broad interest in a period of history that spans 100 years.  There are always new ways and angles to approach a topic.

Edited February 13, 2013 by This is my Screen Name