Is study abroad as an undergrad vital?

[bguis]

I'm considering applying for PhD <and possibly MA programs> next Fall.  Unfortunately, as a non-traditional student I was unable to spend any time abroad during undergrad.  I'm looking at focusing on Early Modern Germany, but am reading articles saying that grad schools often won't even consider students who haven't had their "feet on the soil" in the country they want to research.  In your experience, is this accurate?

[Neist]

1 hour ago, bguis said:

I'm considering applying for PhD <and possibly MA programs> next Fall.  Unfortunately, as a non-traditional student I was unable to spend any time abroad during undergrad.  I'm looking at focusing on Early Modern Germany, but am reading articles saying that grad schools often won't even consider students who haven't had their "feet on the soil" in the country they want to research.  In your experience, is this accurate?

 

That sounds pretty odd to me...

I'm not sure if many, let alone a majority, of the students in the program I'm in have ever studied abroad pre-graduate school, and we're arguably one of the strongest early modern science programs in the US.

Granted, this is within a history of science department, and my experience is only anecdotal, but requiring experience studying abroad still seems odd.

[TMP]

Not at all.  it is helpful to have spent time in the country for the sake of immersing in the local culture, history, and language. For Europeanists, as far as I'm aware, it's not vital since Europe is relatively easy to integrate and assimilate in the languages.  If your POI gives a shit about the length of time you spent in Germany, s/he is ridiculous and classist.

(Asia... it's a different story because studying the languages requires so much more effort that it's helpful to spend time in China/Japan/Korea.)

I'm a German historian.  I spent some time in Germany between my MA and PhD program to brush up my German and explore the country a bit to be sure that I wanted to do German history instead of US history.  I know that my adviser's advisees following me have barely spent any time in Germany (one definitely not and the other on a European study trip).  Fulbright will likely care a lot only because the competition is so intense but the DAAD has opportunities that you can take advantage of early in your graduate studies (since its goal is to get more non-Germans in Germany).  PM me with any questions because obviously I can go on forever!  Alles über Deutschland!

[Glasperlenspieler]

I would agree that it's hard to believe how much time you've spent abroad would be make or break for graduate admissions. That being said, time abroad is certainly valuable both for personal and academic growth. So it may be worth looking into applying for a Fulbright ETA in Germany, the USTA program in Austria, or a DAAD grant just to get the opportunity. I mean if you can get paid to live abroad for a year or two, why not take advantage of it? I can say personally that spending a some time abroad teaching English, has not only given me the chance to improve my language skills, it's also given my some much needed distance from my undergrad, which I think had made me a stronger applicant.

EDIT: Just realized you're applying for this fall, which means you would have missed the application window for Fulbright and not sure about DAAD. You can definitely still apply to the USTA program though: https://www.usta-austria.at/  PM me if you want more info on the program.

Edited October 28, 2016 by Glasperlenspieler

[ManifestMidwest]

I did not study abroad at all before coming to graduate school.  I would just make sure you have language skills necessary.  However, some fields (e.g. the Atlantic World) may require you to have experience in multiple countries due to the trans-nationality of the required projects.  As an early modern Germanist, you should be just fine staying in the United States.  The only key stipulation would be to get good at German while you're in undergrad.  This skill can make or break your application.

[RevolutionBlues]

On 10/27/2016 at 5:12 PM, TMP said:

 Fulbright will likely care a lot only because the competition is so intense...

My understanding of the Fulbright is that they are less likely to fund your project if you have spent extensive (i.e. more than a year) in the host country.

I would echo the above statements that the most important element to work on as an undergrad is your foreign language skills. While studying abroad is generally the quickest way to pick them up, it is absolutely not necessary provided you can demonstrate some degree of fluency in other ways.

[MastersHoping]

I have never heard such a claim before, and to be honest wouldn't believe anyone who said so. 

There are definitely benefits to studying abroad, and studying abroad can possibly help you in terms of admissions. Not the studying abroad itself, but what you got out of it. But I highly doubt you'd be at a disadvantage in any way if you didn't study abroad. 

[pudewen]

I'd trust what everyone else is saying about Europe, I guess, since they presumably know the field better than I do. As an Asianist, though, TMP is right that it is extremely unlikely that someone would be admitted to a good PhD program in East Asian history without having spent substantial time in the country they want to work on. I had only spent about 7-8 months in China prior to beginning my PhD, and that was less than almost anyone else in my program (and I felt pretty sheepish about it until I finally spent a full year in China last academic year). This is in large part because nobody really believes that you can have adequate language skills without time in an immersive environment. And this isn't just "study abroad" - a number of the (non-Chinese by nationality) people studying China in my program have done Master's degrees in China or Taiwan or have done Fulbrights (so at least a full year at a Chinese university, taking some regular classes) before they enter.

As for the notion that this sort of expectation is classist, for many people their experience in China began as work experience (often as an English teacher, a job that anyone with a college degree who is a native English speaker can get, often including the plane fare to get there), and there are tons of sources of money to spend time studying/doing research abroad, at least in China and Taiwan (even as a grad student, now that I'm past my guaranteed fellowship years, it's easier to find funding to spend time in China than to stay in the US and write).

 

(Felt the need to chime in after all the comments that this is a ridiculous expectation that nobody could possibly have. In fields where the languages are seriously difficult and the cultural gap with the US somewhat larger, people think very differently about these things).

Edited November 2, 2016 by pudewen

[s3raph1m]

I've never heard of this before. Study abroad is a requirement for graduation at my undergrad institution, but I think it's the only college in the US that does that. From my understanding, most students do not study abroad during undergrad. I wouldn't listen to any of those articles.

[AfricanusCrowther]

It doesn't have to be study abroad. In my field, exposure on the ground is very important, even if that means taking time off to work for an NGO. It's not like Europe, and it's not just about languages. They don't want to recruit a student who realizes they hate doing field work in their fourth year.

Edited November 7, 2016 by AfricanusCrowther