What do you think my chances are?

[ToomuchLes]

Simply summarized, this is yet another thread asking, for your own opinions, what my chances are in admission to select programs (as dictated in my title =D).

 

Presently, I am a senior at UC Davis majoring in History and Linguistics. This will be my second year at this institution, as I am a CC transfer student. In my time here, Ive become the Treasurer of PAT (honors history club), treasurer of the Fencing Club, and officer of the Latin Honor Club. I hold two awesome letters of rec from one Pulitzer Prize professor, and another from a distinguished professor (he may hold other awards, but Im a tad tired to check his CV atm, but you get the point). My last letter of rec will still be positive but its from a relatively young professor, whom has achieved success, but cannot match to my other letters. 

 

GPA : Presently 3.45 (since I still have summer classes + Fall quarter before I send my application, my GPA will vary; however it will between 3.4- 3.6)  

 

GRE: Q - 160 ; V - 163 ; AWA - 5.0

 

SoP : Currently being written.

 

Writing Sample : As of now, only one professor has read my paper and he approved using it in my application, plus he's the distinguished prof who is also writing my letter of rec. 

 

I also have alot of work experiences at museums, tutoring at UCD, and one internship (not related to my disciplinary tho). 

Oh and lastly, there is an upcoming History Convention (only for PAT officers) that i'll participate in. It will occur after application season, but I'll still participate in it and include it in my CV. 

 

Finally, here are the schools Im applying to : 

UC Los Angeles 

UC Santa Barbara

UC Irvine

UC San Diego

UC Berkeley

UC Santa Cruz

 

I would like to say beforehand, I am favoring UCSB over all of them - including UCLA. Not to make this into a long, sorrowful story, but I was raised by a single parent mother, and she was diagnosed with cancer - hence why Im applying ONLY in California. 

 

When reviewing this thread, simply state my chances by each school. Also if you have any last minute advice, Id love to hear it! 

[dr. t]

As much as I think the fencing club bit is awesome, this isn't about extracurricular activities. This is not at all like your undergraduate application. It's about what you want to study.

 

Uh... what do you want to study?

Edited September 9, 2013 by telkanuru

[ToomuchLes]

Oh Ha. Cant believe I didnt write that .. I want to study American History with emphasis on the Antebellum Era. Preferably. I dont want to be more specific since I know grad committee dont like that in apps =P

[dr. t]

Oh Ha. Cant believe I didnt write that .. I want to study American History with emphasis on the Antebellum Era. Preferably. I dont want to be more specific since I know grad committee dont like that in apps =P

 

Eeeh. I mean it's certainly not my field, but it seems like you could get a whole lot more specific before going too far.

 

Are the schools you listed actually strong in the field you want to study? My initial impression was that they were simply chosen based on geography, which is not wise. Might it be possible to wait a few years until life resolves itself and apply with a broader geographic scope then?

[ToomuchLes]

Ive already talked to professors about this. Originally I wanted to look how federal laws decimated Southern economy (primarily focusing on Virginia) during the Antebellum, and in what ways they were forced to change their southern way of life. Both professor, whom I talked to, advised highly against putting this on my app cause admission committees want an open minded candidate. Not to say Im NOT open minded, but people reviewing my application wont know that if I write what I was to primarily focus on. Therefore, in my application, I will put a general broad topic of interest; however it wont be too broad like ... "I want to study the causes of the Civil War." Thats just silly.

 

Also, in terms of rankings, most UCs are in the top 20 in my disciplinary. If you just take a look at .. http://graduate-school.phds.org .. you'll realize, every school Ive picked is respectable, wielding a high graduation rate/employment, available funds, and most importantly, commands prestigious, well educated/known professors.  

 

Focusing on UCSB, there are 3 professors, whom Im willing to study under. I already picked one out of those three, but in case, he, for whatever reason, decides not to accept me as his grad student, there are still two others. Moreover, all three of these professors will be accepting students (I emailed them), so this fictitious arbitrary scenario, most likely, wont happen. 

 

I do realize, merely from my thread intro, that it seems Im picking these schools due to geography; however Ive done excessive amount of research on each institution, as well as available professors whom I can work/study under. Preferably, I do NOT want to wait. Life will always have its ups and downs. 

[dr. t]

Ive already talked to professors about this. Originally I wanted to look how federal laws decimated Southern economy (primarily focusing on Virginia) during the Antebellum, and in what ways they were forced to change their southern way of life. Both professor, whom I talked to, advised highly against putting this on my app cause admission committees want an open minded candidate. Not to say Im NOT open minded, but people reviewing my application wont know that if I write what I was to primarily focus on. Therefore, in my application, I will put a general broad topic of interest; however it wont be too broad like ... "I want to study the causes of the Civil War." Thats just silly.

 

Also, in terms of rankings, most UCs are in the top 20 in my disciplinary. If you just take a look at .. http://graduate-school.phds.org .. you'll realize, every school Ive picked is respectable, wielding a high graduation rate/employment, available funds, and most importantly, commands prestigious, well educated/known professors.  

 

Focusing on UCSB, there are 3 professors, whom Im willing to study under. I already picked one out of those three, but in case, he, for whatever reason, decides not to accept me as his grad student, there are still two others. Moreover, all three of these professors will be accepting students (I emailed them), so this fictitious arbitrary scenario, most likely, wont happen. 

 

I do realize, merely from my thread intro, that it seems Im picking these schools due to geography; however Ive done excessive amount of research on each institution, as well as available professors whom I can work/study under. Preferably, I do NOT want to wait. Life will always have its ups and downs. 

 

I don't really mean to keep coming back at you, but I from what you've given here it still seems to me that you're laboring under the fundamental misapprehension that the graduate application process is a lot like the undergraduate one. Your original request to "simply state your chances at each school" is so divested from the reality of the graduate application process as to be pretty funny.

 

Honestly, I never looked at a ranking chart when I applied. I read books, found the professors I wanted to work with, and applied to their schools. This could again be a difference of area, which others on this forum could talk to, but the number of schools nation-wide I found with departments that interested me is about the number you've found in California. That doesn't seem to be right.

 

I would read more, research more, figure out some of these differences, build your CV, get a little real world experience, and come back at this next fall. YMMV. 

Edited September 9, 2013 by telkanuru

[sacklunch]

Speak with your professors after you write your (first) SOP and see what they say. I sympathize with the above response, but in the end your professors, if they are indeed great as you say, will provide more valuable information than anyone else. It is expected, if not required, in 'our field' (religion) to obtain one, sometimes two or three masters before proceeding to the PhD. Without rambling too much about this shitty reality (heh), many of us have a tendency to cry out FAKE! when we encounter undergraduates who don't have very specific interests (you may indeed have them, of course). In short, talk to your professors and apply. You may also apply to some good MA programs. If it doesn't work out you can always try again. Du was du willst! 

[hdunlop]

LeventeL, I had a 3.9 UG GPA, a 170/161/5.5 GRE, a Master's in a related field, and six years of professional experience in a field related to my field of study. Yet I went 0 for 3 last cycle. According to the professors I'd been in contact with, my biggest problem was that I hadn't fully thought through and researched what I wanted to do as a graduate student. I haven't applied successfully yet so take it with a grain of salt, but I don't think you have much to lose being a bit more specific.

Edited September 9, 2013 by hdunlop

[gsc]

Perhaps I've not thought this through enough, but your letters of rec have to speak to your potential as a historian and a researcher; I'd caution against leaning too strongly on what you have simply because the professors writing them are distinguished. Just because the writer has a Pulitzer Prize doesn't mean that they are "better" letters than those written by somebody without one.

[TMP]

I agree with all of the feedback.  No need for all the negative points.

 

OP, what do you plan to do with the PhD?

[dr. t]

I agree with all of the feedback.  No need for all the negative points.

 

OP, what do you plan to do with the PhD?

I keep forgetting that people come to the internet for validation and not for opinion. That's my fault.

[ToomuchLes]

I disagree with a many of telkanuru's points. First and foremost, rank and geography has some importance when picking a university. You wouldn't want to attend an institution if you're going to be miserable, nor would you waste time and money on a lower echelon ranked school.

Second, I've heard, from quite a few creditable people that, E.Cs give some weight to your application. Obviously it will not determine a decision between an acceptance and rejection, but it gives more points to the applicant. Furthermore I know for a fact (since I talked to the admission director at UCD about this) that holding a leadership position, participating in a sport, or merely involving oneself in a club, or community organization is favored by professors. Also, guess who's part of the admission committee? The professor whom you're seeking to work with. Obviously professors dont only want a mechanical studious grad student. Therefore concluding that ECs hold some weight.

I would also like to add that I am well aware that meaningful letters of rec are more helpful than a simple letter from a prestigious prof; however I didn't see the point in explaining this, when I was merely trying to keep this thread relatively short. I know both professors very well and I'm more than positive their letters will be highly beneficial and I won't say anymore on this topic. Nevertheless, when deciding whom to contact for a letter of rec, it is important to ask someone who is somewhat well known in their field, otherwise the admission committee will treat it as an atypical letter from a nobody - hence why I mentioned their achievements.

In response to hdunlop, no one, besides the admission committee, understands fully what holds weight and what doesn't in applications. You can ask, but obviously they will not highlight all the key aspects; however I possess an anecdote from the director of the committee atUCD, whom specifically stated "they're not looking for close boxed applicants." This obviously makes sense. As a graduating undergrad, and grad school applicant, you do not know what you want to study, specifically. You can have a general broad idea, but if you decided to study, say Zoot Suit Riot in La primarily, you'll miss the bigger picture and most likely, you'll close mind yourself to ONLY focus on such a historical event. Conversely, when you've been a grad student for X amount of years, you can decide how specific you want to be when you decide to write your dissertation or for a journal.

I would also like to mention to telkanuru, that your posts have been nothing but condescending. You've neither gave advice, nor critiqued my applications. My decision to remain in CA is not detrimental to my future achievements as a historian, nor finding employment afterward. Moreover, I know quite a few grad students whom decided to remain in CA during their graduate yrs and there is absolutely nothing wrong with such a decision. Furthermore, if you are in fact a grad student and not some wannabe who gets a kick from pretending to be one, you do a fairly poor job of reading a threads propose and reflecting on what it's asking. Similarly to the propose of this website, in academia, individuals with more experience/education should assist people below them, rather than .. Find it to be pretty funny.

Sent by iPad.

[hdunlop]

Unlike some, I'm here because I don't have all the answers already, so I appreciate your response to me. But I did want to clarify something.

 

Me: "According to the professors I'd been in contact with,"

You: "Also, guess who's part of the admission committee? The professor whom you're seeking to work with. [...] In response to hdunlop, no one, besides the admission committee, understands fully what holds weight and what doesn't in applications."

 

Perhaps I should have made more clear that the professors I've been in contact with were the professors with whom I seek to work.

[Professor Plum]

I'm on the admissions committee at a middling PhD program, and I can say quite definitively that we don't take extracurriculars into account when weighing applications. In the three years I've been on the committee, I don't think an applicant's extracurriculars have even come up in our discussions, much less affected an admissions decision. My second PhD student is getting ready to defend in a few months, and I have four or five more in the pipeline--and now that I have some experience working with doctoral candidates, a "mechanical studious graduate student" is pretty much exactly what I'm looking for in an applicant. So obviously, it varies.

 

LeventeL, I'm very sorry to hear about your mom. Having gone through the same thing when I was a grad student, I know how difficult it can be. Please consider the possibility of taking a year between undergrad and grad school. It was one of the smartest things I've done, and set me up for a lot more success professionally than if I'd tried to go directly from undergrad. Grad school will still be there in a year's time.

[dr. t]

I disagree with a many of telkanuru's points. First and foremost, rank and geography has some importance when picking a university. You wouldn't want to attend an institution if you're going to be miserable, nor would you waste time and money on a lower echelon ranked school.

 

If you're wasting money, you're not doing it right. Do not pay for a humanities PhD. Geography, certainly, is a factor to be considered. Professors are the important factor, not some third party rank.

Second, I've heard, from quite a few creditable people that, E.Cs give some weight to your application. Obviously it will not determine a decision between an acceptance and rejection, but it gives more points to the applicant. Furthermore I know for a fact (since I talked to the admission director at UCD about this) that holding a leadership position, participating in a sport, or merely involving oneself in a club, or community organization is favored by professors. Also, guess who's part of the admission committee? The professor whom you're seeking to work with. Obviously professors dont only want a mechanical studious grad student. Therefore concluding that ECs hold some weight.

 

Others with more authority than I have already commented on this, so I'll leave it.

I would also like to add that I am well aware that meaningful letters of rec are more helpful than a simple letter from a prestigious prof; however I didn't see the point in explaining this, when I was merely trying to keep this thread relatively short. I know both professors very well and I'm more than positive their letters will be highly beneficial and I won't say anymore on this topic. Nevertheless, when deciding whom to contact for a letter of rec, it is important to ask someone who is somewhat well known in their field, otherwise the admission committee will treat it as an atypical letter from a nobody - hence why I mentioned their achievements.

 

This is not a point I have made.

I would also like to mention to telkanuru, that your posts have been nothing but condescending. You've neither gave advice, nor critiqued my applications. My decision to remain in CA is not detrimental to my future achievements as a historian, nor finding employment afterward. Moreover, I know quite a few grad students whom decided to remain in CA during their graduate yrs and there is absolutely nothing wrong with such a decision. Furthermore, if you are in fact a grad student and not some wannabe who gets a kick from pretending to be one, you do a fairly poor job of reading a threads propose and reflecting on what it's asking. Similarly to the propose of this website, in academia, individuals with more experience/education should assist people below them, rather than .. Find it to be pretty funny.

 

I gave advice. My advice was this: wait and think. I critiqued your application. My critique was this: what you seem to think is important is not what is, in my experience, actually important. I should also mention that I see nothing wrong in remaining in California. I don't, however, see using location as the primary determining factor as a wise move.

 

It could be we're actually on the same page and it's just not coming across to me in your posts. In that case, I apologize, but I don't think that's the case. 

 

Look, from my perspective, you asked some questions and made some statements that were not particularly well informed. When I attempted to point these out, you asserted confidence in your position, at that point, I'm going to start pointing out why it seems to me that you need to do more research. Take offense at my tone if you want (none was meant), but understand that the way academic discourse usually works is that I respond based on what I think, not based on what you want me to say.

 

Sent by iPad.

 

And really, if you're going to critique my reading skills, learn to spell "purpose".

Edited September 10, 2013 by telkanuru