Decisions 2015

[dr. t]

FTofHistory: I would accept the MAPSS offer, provided you can swing it financially. I know a number of people who completed the MAPSS degree and now attend top ten doctoral programs. They would all say that Chicago got them there (indeed I've heard it said by more than one person that their year there was the most intellectually stimulating of their career).

 

(to clarify: by "swing it financially" I meant not taking on any debt whatsoever).

 

If you have no PhD options, I would take the MAPSS if they've offered you half tuition or better. AFAIK, they only make like 4 full tuition offers a year, so that is a *very* good result whichever way you cut it. 

[FTofHistory]

If you have no PhD options, I would take the MAPSS if they've offered you half tuition or better. AFAIK, they only make like 4 full tuition offers a year, so that is a *very* good result whichever way you cut it. 

 

I have 3 fully-funded PhD offers from Indiana (Bloomington), Illinois (Urbana-Champaign), and Minnesota (Twin-Cities). I had asked earlier, wondering if an offer like this would significantly increase my chances of getting into a top 10-top 15 school in a later admission cycles.

[Chiqui74]

I have to respectfully disagree. The only reason I got an MA--and the debt that came with it--was because I couldn't get into a well-ranked PhD without it. I would never, ever, ever recommend an MA--even if tuition is covered, because you will go into debt for the rest of your costs--to someone who was accepted at a place like Brown, which is ranked 18! Unless you have a ton of money saved to pay your way through an MA, I wouldn't do it. I would not wish the level of unsubsidized debt that I have on anyone, even my own worst enemy. Grad students only get unsubsidized loans, which means interest starts racking up immediately, and then is added to the principal loan when you graduate, so you'll start getting interest fees that include your past interest and principal. In math terms, this equals shitshow.

 

You have your own decision to make, but I honestly would not recommend an MA to someone who got into a top 20 program. You're in the sweet spot rank-wise, and Brown is a well known, excellent program that applicants with MAs would love to get accepted by.

 Agreed.

[ashiepoo72]

You've been accepted and fully funded by my top choice program and are considering turning it down for MAPSS. I dunno if I should laugh or cry...haha (I chose laugh for self-preservation)

 

I don't think anyone can predict how much your chances will improve with an MA. Despite people saying MAPSS has an uber-amazing placement rate, I'd be skeptical based on the fact that many people with MAs and perfect scores, awesome theses and loads of experience don't get accepted anywhere.

[Bellerophon]

So is MAPSS worth it with Half-funding? And are there oppurtunities for some kind of employment to defray the costs, or are we talking barista while I'm doing this? Basically it's this or Penn's Post-Bacc where I'll be paying full price.

[dr. t]

I have 3 fully-funded PhD offers from Indiana (Bloomington), Illinois (Urbana-Champaign), and Minnesota (Twin-Cities). I had asked earlier, wondering if an offer like this would significantly increase my chances of getting into a top 10-top 15 school in a later admission cycles.

 

The details of the offer would have some impact (a 4 year TA-ship isn't great), but that seems like a good catch that I wouldn't throw back.

[FTofHistory]

The details of the offer would have some impact (a 4 year TA-ship isn't great), but that seems like a good catch that I wouldn't throw back.

 

This is what I figured. I just wanted to ask. Thanks for the advice!

 

Haha, and I hope I haven't offended you ashie. I'm just trying to understand my options. 

[dr. t]

So is MAPSS worth it with Half-funding? And are there oppurtunities for some kind of employment to defray the costs, or are we talking barista while I'm doing this? Basically it's this or Penn's Post-Bacc where I'll be paying full price.

 

I suppose it depends on how much debt you have coming into it to really be sure. I know some people take library jobs and stuff, but nothing's guaranteed and you won't be able to barista AND do well, according to the students I had talked to. 

 

For my own experience, I was willing to push my debt up to $50k. Fortunately, I didn't have to.

[mvlchicago]

So is MAPSS worth it with Half-funding? And are there oppurtunities for some kind of employment to defray the costs, or are we talking barista while I'm doing this? Basically it's this or Penn's Post-Bacc where I'll be paying full price.

So there's always barista-esque forms of employment available on campus: while an undergrad I worked about 10-15 hours a week in the library system which pays suprisingly well (I started at 12/hour iirc?) The schedule at the library was also amazingly flexible in terms of what you're doing and how often one needs to come in. But there may be better opportunities on campus for masters students that are not given to undergrads.

I think MAPSS is fine, MAPH is the program that sort of has a reputation for being a cashcow for the PhD programs. I know a couple of people who successfully moved from MAPSS to Chicago's PhD program, for example.  

[ashiepoo72]

I don't know about the others, but Minnesota's general funding offer given to all incoming students is a guaranteed 5 year package, and the numbers are more than enough for that area of the country. They also upfront give a pool of money for travel and other expenses to each student.

[maelia8]

You can also get on-campus jobs that pay significantly better than $12/hour. I am a Ph.D. student and have a part-time, extremely flexible (10-12 hours per week) job in the Research IT department, where I help them with website debugging on our university website platform, and they pay me $28/hour. It's a nice little pad of extra money for travel and buying new tech when the time comes.

[Fianna]

I've never posted here, but after receiving the majority of my decisions I have a question.

 

I've been accepted into several history PhD programs with full funding. My top two choices of the programs I've been accepted to are University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign) and Minnesota-Twin Cities. 

 

 

I'm also accepted to UIUC. Are you going to be there the 16th?

 

Congrats on two really awesome admissions offers. I haven't read down, so apologies if you've already answered, but what's your area?

[L13]

FTofHistory, I also got a full tuition discount at Chicago and I don't intend to take up their offer for financial reasons. I'm sure it's a great program, but I don't want to take on debt for an MA. I'm pretty confident that next year I'll fare better in the admission cycle, MAPSS or no MAPSS, which is why I'm not too broken up about it.

 

But what I wanted to say is something one of my professors told me when I said I wasn't sure if I wanted to go to grad school in the US at all: You can always switch! She reminded me that PhD students transfer out of/between programs all the time for a variety of reasons, and starting at a certain program is not the same as signing away your soul forever. If you start a funded doctorate and find out your advisor/committee is not the best fit for you personally or academically, it would be reasonable and relatively easy to apply to other programs as a transfer student. That way you would end up spending less of your own money than if you did the MAPSS, and would most likely save yourself a year or two.

 

Now, I confess, that doesn't sound entirely convincing (ethical?) to me, but that's what a young (and pretty successful) historian told me, so it may well be a widely held view. Something to think about, perhaps.

 

On the other hand, if you have the financial means to do the MAPSS program and aren't too worried about the money, I don't know. To be honest, if your aim is, like, the "top ten," the MAPSS would set you up nicely.

 

Only you know enough about your situation to make this decision, basically. Good luck! For what it's worth, I'd accept one of my PhD offers if I were you, unless I was very unhappy with my choices.

Edited March 7, 2015 by L13

[FTofHistory]

I'm also accepted to UIUC. Are you going to be there the 16th?

 

Congrats on two really awesome admissions offers. I haven't read down, so apologies if you've already answered, but what's your area?

 

I will be there on the 16th! I'm excited to visit!

 

I'm 20th Century US cultural/social/gender history. How about you?

[TMP]

I have 3 fully-funded PhD offers from Indiana (Bloomington), Illinois (Urbana-Champaign), and Minnesota (Twin-Cities). I had asked earlier, wondering if an offer like this would significantly increase my chances of getting into a top 10-top 15 school in a later admission cycles.

No.  Admissions are highly unpredictable.  You got into respectable PhD programs who do place their students and are known nationally.  You want to avoid debt as much as you can, especially that the PhD itself is a long road (and who knows what kind of job you will land after).

 

Like ashiepoo, I took out loans for my MA.  The MA was worth it because I wanted to get a PhD in this tiny field and needed more coursework and to boost my undergraduate GPA (and acquire a language).  I am definitely grateful that I took the chance.  But it was tough to be paying student loans afterward, though my debt wasn't as heavy as some of my friends'.

 

Prestige matters but so do your committee members who will be writing letters on your behalf.

[dr. t]

Prestige matters but so do your committee members who will be writing letters on your behalf.

 

I've been turning this idea over in my head a bunch over the past week, since this thread of our discussions began, and I wonder about it. This is not meant to be a pronouncement from on high, and I'd be really interested in responses.

 

Of course a strong department in your subfield is better than a weak one, because a strong department will have the connections to provide you with good opportunities for research and publication within your specialty. Your work will be more polished and of higher quality.

 

When it comes to job letters, however, I'm not sure how much that sort of prestige matters. After all, no matter where you're applying to work, odds are that maybe one person on the search committee is vaguely familiar with your field. You could have been advised by the top person in the study of late Antique Gaul, but that's not going to mean much to the Americanists. Moreover, this would explain why prestige is such an important factor in job placement - in the absence of a deep knowledge of a candidates subfield, a search committee will form impressions based on what it does know: the reputation of the program as a whole. Although the Americanists don't know late Antique Gaul, they know the program is strong and are therefore more well-disposed towards the candidate. Conversely, if a relatively weak program is very strong in one subfield, this would not have much impact on search committee members outside of that subfield. 

 

This dynamic would seem to "level" programs and allow for the fairly tight centrality gradient we observe in the network analysis. 

[spellbanisher]

Not to derail the conversation here, but is anyone else visiting Davis this weekend? And, if so, who will join me in partaking in beer?

I went to the recruitment dinner, although I was very bad and didn't talk to any of the prospects. I was just there for the free food. But I did get to talk to some of the professors and older grad students that I hadn't met yet, so good dinner. 

Edited March 8, 2015 by spellbanisher

[Jezzlin]

I am a former MAPSS student and would heartily recommend the program, but completely agree with others on here that you should only go for it if you actually cannot get into a PhD program without an MA. I required an MA since my BA was a three-year degree from the UK, so I directly applied to the program. Fortunately, in addition to half-tuition, I also had external sources of funding that helped me cover my living costs in Hyde Park.

 

Having said that, if you are shooting for a top-10 program and would be happy to sit out an extra year, then MAPSS will enormously improve your chances. They tailor everything about the program to gear you toward a successful application cycle and their placements in history are quite impressive. So, provided that you have the financial leisure to do so, and many don't, but to those that do, you should by all means go for it. In terms of the faculty, the incredible resources and intellectual culture, Chicago is definitely worth it.

[ashiepoo72]

I went to the recruitment dinner, although I was very bad and didn't talk to any of the prospects. I was just there for the free food. But I did get to talk to some of the professors and older grad students that I hadn't met yet, so good dinner.

Haha I don't blame you. Free food is the grad student priority.

[ashiepoo72]

So Davis is wonderful. I keep hoping someone will be super mean to me and make my decision easier haha

[Bactrian]

<snip>

 

When it comes to job letters, however, I'm not sure how much that sort of prestige matters. After all, no matter where you're applying to work, odds are that maybe one person on the search committee is vaguely familiar with your field. You could have been advised by the top person in the study of late Antique Gaul, but that's not going to mean much to the Americanists. Moreover, this would explain why prestige is such an important factor in job placement - in the absence of a deep knowledge of a candidates subfield, a search committee will form impressions based on what it does know: the reputation of the program as a whole. Although the Americanists don't know late Antique Gaul, they know the program is strong and are therefore more well-disposed towards the candidate. Conversely, if a relatively weak program is very strong in one subfield, this would not have much impact on search committee members outside of that subfield. 

 

I'm sorry to say, but this is my exact sense too. Unless your adviser is one of the very, very few to have real cross-field fame, for many members of search committees the prestige of your department as a whole will mean far more than the prestige of your subfield.

[TMP]

I've been turning this idea over in my head a bunch over the past week, since this thread of our discussions began, and I wonder about it. This is not meant to be a pronouncement from on high, and I'd be really interested in responses.

 

Of course a strong department in your subfield is better than a weak one, because a strong department will have the connections to provide you with good opportunities for research and publication within your specialty. Your work will be more polished and of higher quality.

 

When it comes to job letters, however, I'm not sure how much that sort of prestige matters. After all, no matter where you're applying to work, odds are that maybe one person on the search committee is vaguely familiar with your field. You could have been advised by the top person in the study of late Antique Gaul, but that's not going to mean much to the Americanists. Moreover, this would explain why prestige is such an important factor in job placement - in the absence of a deep knowledge of a candidates subfield, a search committee will form impressions based on what it does know: the reputation of the program as a whole. Although the Americanists don't know late Antique Gaul, they know the program is strong and are therefore more well-disposed towards the candidate. Conversely, if a relatively weak program is very strong in one subfield, this would not have much impact on search committee members outside of that subfield. 

 

This dynamic would seem to "level" programs and allow for the fairly tight centrality gradient we observe in the network analysis. 

Exactly.  While the SC may comprise of a small number of folks, they do rely on their external contacts to make sure that the applicant and his/her letter writers are actually legit.  When presenting choices in front of the faculty, they do get further feedback.

 

Also, PhD students are encouraged to develop at least one relationship with a scholar outside of the university for letters.  That's when you want to gun for the "Big" names/very influential people.

[ashiepoo72]

I'm always surprised by how much my professors know about different subfields. Like they're very aware of what departments (even outside the top 10 or 20 or whatever) are strong in certain areas. Maybe they're just well connected and make the effort to know this stuff, but I wouldn't assume profs don't realize that lower-ranked programs can be stellar in certain subfields. Also, profs often have friends and connections outside of their own research area. And in my current department, when a job opens up, at the very least the search committee members look into where the heavy-hitter departments are in that field if they aren't already familiar with it.

[L13]

I'm always surprised by how much my professors know about different subfields. Like they're very aware of what departments (even outside the top 10 or 20 or whatever) are strong in certain areas. Maybe they're just well connected and make the effort to know this stuff, but I wouldn't assume profs don't realize that lower-ranked programs can be stellar in certain subfields. Also, profs often have friends and connections outside of their own research area. And in my current department, when a job opens up, at the very least the search committee members look into where the heavy-hitter departments are in that field if they aren't already familiar with it.

 

This has been my experience too, though not with every professor I know. But there are certainly a few who seem to know everyone in the profession and/or read very widely outside of their subfield.

[Heimat Historian]

Hi all.  I just got back from a recruitment weekend at Colorado and was quite impressed with the program.  I wanted your opinion on how much the collegiality of the current graduate students themselves should impact your decision?  I met a cohort of really excellent, driven scholars while there that would be very nice to work with as well as had wonderful encounters with faculty.