Fall 2016 Applicants

[OldIronsides]

I'm looking at:

Northwestern
Vanderbilt
Notre Dame
University of California-Santa Barbara
University of Illinois at Chicago
Pennsylvania State University-University Park
Boston University

I'm casting a wide net insofar as what the programs focus on and can do because I am still somewhat undecided as to what specific geographic and thematic area that I want to focus on; all of those schools have someone who deal with a field that I am interested in pursuing. 
 

[OldIronsides]

I'm looking at:

Northwestern
Vanderbilt
Notre Dame
University of California-Santa Barbara
University of Illinois at Chicago
Pennsylvania State University-University Park
Boston University

I'm casting a wide net insofar as what the programs focus on and can do because I am still somewhat undecided as to what specific geographic and thematic area that I want to focus on; all of those schools have someone who deal with a field that I am interested in pursuing. 

Edit: On a total sidenote, is there anyone who would be willing to take a gander at two different SoI and let me know if one is a better approach/if there is anything fundamental I am missing?
 

[knp]

I'm no expert, but I'd be willing: I think I'm going to end up with two SoPs, too, so I'm sympathetic!

[Chiqui74]

Hello! 

I have my Master's in American History with a focus on late 19th-early 20th century women's history, and plan to apply to PhD programs this year. My (tentative) short list looks like: 

 

- NYU (I have a background in museum work, so am particularly interested in their public history program.)

- Rutgers (Virginia Yans)

- Columbia (Stephanie McCurry, AKS)

- UPenn (Kathy Peiss)

- CUNY (Harriet Alonso)

 

I'm specifically interested in social and cultural history, and did my MA on issues of female identity surrounding adulthood and marriage. Any other programs people know of that fit the bill? Also would love to hear perspectives on Public History vs. History PhDs... 

 

Happy to be here to commiserate and get some good advice.

The Public History program at NYU is an MA only program (or certificate).  You may do PH as your secondary field in the PhD, but not as primary.

Edited September 8, 2015 by Chiqui74

[MrMomo]

Thank you very much for your responses! 

I wouldn't worry about the quant score unless it's so abysmal they think you can't do basic math or you plan on using quantitative methods in your research. 150s should be perfectly fine.

Dont spend too much time talking about grades or peccadilloes in your statement. Make it focused almost entirely on research interests and experience and fit with the program. I would consider using your undergrad and MA experiences to create a narrative that demonstrates how being an international applicant lends you a unique perspective that'll strengthen your doctoral career. The narrative shouldn't be the whole SOP, but I find statements with a unifying thread that makes an applicant stand apart from the rest particularly strong and memorable, which is what you want.

Submit the best primary source-based research paper you have as a writing sample. You may want to do intellectual history, but that doesn't mean diplomatic can't be connected (and you said that it helped refine your interests, something you should definitely mention in the statement when describing your research experience).

Regarding the Quant score, what would you consider an "abysmal" score? Would scoring 140s in the Quant section preclude one from getting into, say, the Ivies or any other top 10 programme? I ask as I think quite possibly the weakest part of my application would be the GRE, and it would be a shame to miss out on a place simply because I did not study it hard enough, since I have been getting mixed signals as to how important the GRE actually is.

[ashiepoo72]

I'd say anything below like 40th percentile is worth a retest, but that's my personal threshold. I luckily got slightly above 50th percentile so I didn't have to test if I'd actually retake the exam. I pretty much went in with a mentality that if I got above 90th in verbal, I didn't care about my other scores. Obviously 40th percentile isn't ideal, but I wouldn't spend $200 extra dollars hoping to score a teeny bit higher, especially with a strong verbal score. If you have that cash to spend and are set on doing it, by all means, but I don't think it's necessary.

In my year+ on this forum, I've found people worry way too much about the GRE when the most important parts of the application, in my humble and not expert opinion, are the statement and writing sample. You can control those and have time to make them beautiful works of art--why waste time trying to get a bit better at math when you should be polishing your statement into an admissions weapon and perfecting your thesis, historiography, primary sources and footnotes in the writing sample?

[stillalivetui]

I got a 145 on the quantitative section (no shame) when I took the test 3 years ago, with a decent showing in the analytical and verbal sections. It managed to get me into three out of five MA programs, one funded. 

I refuse to give the GRE more money than I have to because standardized testing is so subjective and it doesn't prove anything. With that being said, I'll update this post next spring when I receive notifications from my PhD programs. 

Edited September 8, 2015 by stillalivetui

[navyblackmaroon]

I agree with ashiepoo, I wouldn't be terribly concerned about the quant section (unless you are going into economic history). I had a 21% percentile in quant, 94% in verbal, and managed to get into a top 5 PhD program. At the end of the day, the SOP and the writing sample are key. Unlike undergraduate admissions, graduate admission committees are more concerned about the issue of "fit." Is your potential POI interested in your proposed topic? Is the department looking for more graduate students in your field of study? A good GRE score (or a high GPA) will never make up for a POI's relative lack of interest in your topic.

[cmt11]

 

When I think recent studies of the Black Power movement I think Peniel Joseph (at Tuffs). Tuffs PhD program wouldn't be of interest (since its basically Global History), but they actually offer a History MA. I met Joseph in the past and I found him to be a very nice person.

Thank you both! I looked into Joseph and his work is exactly what I'm looking for. 

[ashiepoo72]

Pero Dagbovie at MSU might be of interest, too. He's also just a really cool person. I know they offer an MA and PhD.

[fencergirl]

Hello everyone! Hope your applications are going well! I'm two years out of school (teaching English in Japan on the JET program) and applying for graduate school for the first time. My B.A. was in Asian Studies but I'm applying to mostly history programs for modern Japanese history (particularly the Asia Pacific War/WWII, historiography, and museums). Very interested in hearing from anyone who knows about this area. I'm looking at Boston College, Columbia, UCLA, Northwestern, Vanderbilt, and maybe Princeton. (As well as few MA programs in East Asian Studies and University of Toronto for the East Asian Studies Ph.D).

I have a good GPA (3.97) and decent GRE (167V, 155Q, 5AW). But I am a little worried about my writing sample as I don't have any undegrad papers that are strictly history papers. I did take some history classes but not a ton, so I'm not sure how to address this potential weakness in my SOP as well (or if I should?). 

Would appreciate any advice!

[ashiepoo72]

Do you have any primary source-based papers? Or ones that could be expanded with primary sources? I don't know that this is something you can explain in an SOP, but maybe others have advice on that. Personally, I'd try to take an existing paper and make it more historical. If you spend the next 2-3 months working on it, I think you could have something good (if you already have something written that you could use, although I know people who bang out 20-30 page research papers from scratch in that amount of time)

You might want to check out UCSC. Profs Christy and Yang are there and they're awesome.

[fencergirl]

Thank you! Well the paper I was thinking of using (my undergraduate thesis) doesn't use that many primary sources except artworks/photographs. I wonder i I should try writing something from scratch. I am a fairly fast writer, and living in Japan now, so perhaps I should try writing something new using the resources here? But the research would definitely take me a long time (to be honest my Japanese reading skills are not that strong), and I do have a full time job.

I have looked at UCSC and considered applying but am worried a bit about the strength/reputation of the department and how that might affect job opportunities further down the line. But perhaps it's still an option worth considering.

[mvlchicago]

I wouldn't stress writing something from scratch; a thesis is usually written in the context of advisors and peers who are invested in seeing your project become a substantial piece of research. You totally could write something using the resources available to you on your own, but if your plan is to come up with a quality writing sample for grad school, I think it'd be more plausible to think about the ways your thesis uses its primary sources and how you might incorporate a couple more into that piece of writing. Emailing your advisors is super kosher here.

In any case, don't knock artwork/photographs; we've entered the visual turn and being able to write interesting and compelling contributions on the basis of visual sources is a very useful skill, even if the historical discipline would have you think the only thing that matters is the written source. What's more, the historical discipline is really knocking down all sorts of walls and "interdisciplinarity" is one of those key words floating around right now. So if you're truly committed to being a historian, I'd think you could flip the non-historical elements of your training into an advantage if you think and work on your SOP a lot over the next few months. 

[fencergirl]

Thank you! That's really good advice. I emailed both of my advisors and they both recommended not writing something from scratch but perhaps just making some relatively minor changes based on the requirements for specific schools. That reassures me a little that I don't need to write something from scratch. I think focusing on the SOP is going to be really important for me. I like the idea of turning my interdisciplinary background into an advantage as well!

[jhsting32]

Hey all. Any recommendations if I'm looking to study Black History, specifically the Black Power movement?

Background might not help but here is a little: I went to Pitt originally for anthropology, and ended up switching majors. So, unfortunately, I only had 1 solid professor in that area. My capstone seminar was in U.S. Civil War history and I wrote about Price's raid through Missouri. My research seminar was on the Renaissance.

I'm really stressing because I only have one great option and just a few OK options for letters of recommendation, and my writing sample will be so far from my area of interest. I also only have around a 3.5 for my GPA (freshman year was a shock). Programs also ask for a resume and I have spent my 2 years out of college doing social work. I'm truly just a ball of nerves during this whole process. Any help would be fantastic.

You might want to look into my current school, Ohio State. You would have Dr. Hasan Jeffries ("Bloody Lowndes") in History and Curtis Austin ("Up Against the Wall") and Judson Jeffries ("On the Ground" and "Comrades") in African American and African Studies.

[ellebe]

Hi all!

Having stalked read through the thread so far, it's nice to see some familiar faces and be in such stellar company on this board again

After an unsuccessful round last year, I'm giving it another try. It feels like a late start to things, but work has been a horror show lately. On the upside, I'm hoping to work the "more years of professional experience = beneficial" angle in my SOPs. 

Broadly, I'm interested in war cultures and cultures of violence. I'm proposing an American history (post-Vietnam) project with the potential for transnational scope, partly because I jumped around a lot in undergrad (Russian, British, Modern European) and ended up in an international history MA, so it would be nice to find a program that welcomes that instead of considering it dangerously flighty. That said, I'm mostly looking at American history programs. 

My undergrad GPA is okay (the last two years are great, the first two... just okay), my GRE scores are okay (verbal is great, quant and essay... just okay) and my MA grades are okay (non-credit essays throughout the year were great, exam scores and crisis-rushed dissertation... just okay). So I'm not in the greatest position to get into a top school, but I'm counting on the hope that a carefully worded SOP and a highly polished writing sample will pull it out of the bag. 

For now, I'm working through emails to POIs. It's slow going, but it was such a worthwhile process last year. I think I was able to eliminate half of my long list based on POIs kindly explaining why they or the school would not be the best possible fit, and a couple even made alternate suggestions. 

Hope everyone is having a great weekend!

[stillalivetui]

It's strange, I'm finally relieved and excited to get the ball rolling on my applications. I don't feel at all lost compared to when I applied for MA programs three years ago.

[ashiepoo72]

Grad applications were, for all intents and purposes, written in a dead language when I applied to MAs. It's amazing how much you learn by getting an MA that goes beyond your field.

Its almost October! This is getting exciting for you 2016 applicants!

[stillalivetui]

Grad applications were, for all intents and purposes, written in a dead language when I applied to MAs. It's amazing how much you learn by getting an MA that goes beyond your field.

Its almost October! This is getting exciting for you 2016 applicants!

Indeed! Here's to hoping my MA pays off like yours did! If I recall you killed it last cycle. 

[red7tribe]

Does anyone have any advice regarding working with non-tenured professors? I've found a couple of assistant professors who I think my research interests match up very well with, but I'm hesitant to commit to someone who doesn't have tenure. I've received mixed advice so far. 

[dr. t]

You should first check with the school. In some places untenured profs can't be primary advisers. Also, are we talking about NTT or just TT in the tenure process?

Edited September 24, 2015 by telkanuru

[ashiepoo72]

Remember, it only takes one acceptance...then the question changes from "if" you will get a PhD to "where"

I would make sure each program has other (tenured) professors you can work with just in case the non-tenured professor doesn't end up getting tenure/leaves for another job/etc. This is good practice for everyone, including those applying to work with tenured professors. You don't want to hinge your entire grad career on a single professor. Make sure you have good coverage and support from multiple people in the department/university.

[MrMomo]

Hey all.

Just took my GRE today, with a 163V and 147Q, and AW pending. 

I'm pretty worried that my quant scores will let me down; since I am applying for some top schools (Berkeley, Harvard, Princeton, Stanford etc.) do you think a Quant of 147 will let me down? 

Thanks!

[stillalivetui]

Hey all.

Just took my GRE today, with a 163V and 147Q, and AW pending. 

I'm pretty worried that my quant scores will let me down; since I am applying for some top schools (Berkeley, Harvard, Princeton, Stanford etc.) do you think a Quant of 147 will let me down? 

Thanks!

Well it sure trumps my 145Q!

But in all seriousness, I am inclined to say it most likely won't. As most everyone will tell you, the whole package (academic record, LOR, SOP, and writing sample) really care much of the weight in the process. The verbal is what really matters, and it looks like you've done a good job on that section.