How to narrow field of interest?

[Michael Scarn]

New to this site, but have seen a lot of helpful posts so far. So I'm in the process of deciding whether or not to apply for a History MA for next year (Fall 2018). (Not super interested in PhD at this moment in time, but I love learning and want to further my education) 

 Educational History: Will graduate in like 2 weeks with a BA in History and International Studies with a minor in French, with a 3.96 GPA from a pretty well known top 100 nation school) and will be taking the GRE soon.

The problem of looking into Grad Schools is of course finding one that matches with your interest. I've pretty much narrowed it down to either French or US History, but I'm just wondering how to really pick a path. At my school, my history classes were all over the place so I didn't get a concentrated dose of education in any one particular field. I know obviously its a person choice, but I'm having a hard time thinking about an era and which region I would be most interested in pursuing. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!! 

[RageoftheMonkey]

Serious question: if you don't know what kind of history you're interested in studying, why are you applying to grad school to study history? Sounds to me like it might be useful to take some time off, have some other experiences outside school, and apply to grad school when you have a clearer sense of what you want to do.

[laleph]

1 hour ago, RageoftheMonkey said:

Serious question: if you don't know what kind of history you're interested in studying, why are you applying to grad school to study history? Sounds to me like it might be useful to take some time off, have some other experiences outside school, and apply to grad school when you have a clearer sense of what you want to do.

I second @RageoftheMonkey's comment. The best advice I got when I was in your spot a couple years back was from a prof who said: sure you can write history papers for whatever class you're taking at the moment, ok, but that's not enough. You won't be happy or successful in grad school unless you have a reason to get up in the morning for 5+ years. It took me a few years of away-time, teaching history and geography at the high school level and pursuing other interests, for me to get there. I'm ready to go back to grad school this fall because I know (at least for now) what'll get me up in the morning. Dissertation topics always change, of course, but I'd encourage you to wait to apply till you find a knot you can't wait to untie -- then identify schools that will support you as you attempt to untie it.

Edit: If you're trying to figure out which field you want to work in, reeaaaaddd a whole lot, monographs, textbooks, historiographical essays... That's how I started finding my own path back to history after undergrad. I now plan to work in US history, but like you was tempted by French history during undergrad... I still love reading about French historiography (if you read in French, check out Les courants historiques en France, and the two volumes of Historiographies directed by Christian Delacroix et al., to get a sense of current debates in Frenah history), but I know I want to start my work in US history. 

Edited April 26, 2017 by laleph

[nhhistorynut]

I'll play devil's advocate here to the first two responders and say an MA might be a place to sort of figure that out. I went into my MA thinking I'd want to focus on German military history and am coming out of it focusing on US race relations for my PhD. An MA program can be a good place to solidify your interests because BAs tend to be so general.

I'll also say that if you aren't interested in a PhD and plan to just do a terminal MA, then you probably don't need to go into it with some specific focus. At the same time, though, why bother? A terminal MA isn't worth a whole lot. If you plan to do a thesis MA then that's different because it leaves you open to PhD programs in the future if you want.

All that said, here is what I, personally, suggest:

Look at the schools you might want to go to. Identify some potential advisors from both fields at those schools . Make contact with them if you can. When you apply to a school, tailor your app to specialize in the field related to the advisor you want you work with there, be it US or French. Then you can see where you get accepted to and decide from there. During this process, read more in both fields to help you make your decision when the time comes.

That's my 2 cents, anyways.

[Michael Scarn]

4 hours ago, laleph said:

I second @RageoftheMonkey's comment. The best advice I got when I was in your spot a couple years back was from a prof who said: sure you can write history papers for whatever class you're taking at the moment, ok, but that's not enough. You won't be happy or successful in grad school unless you have a reason to get up in the morning for 5+ years. It took me a few years of away-time, teaching history and geography at the high school level and pursuing other interests, for me to get there. I'm ready to go back to grad school this fall because I know (at least for now) what'll get me up in the morning. Dissertation topics always change, of course, but I'd encourage you to wait to apply till you find a knot you can't wait to untie -- then identify schools that will support you as you attempt to untie it.

Edit: If you're trying to figure out which field you want to work in, reeaaaaddd a whole lot, monographs, textbooks, historiographical essays... That's how I started finding my own path back to history after undergrad. I now plan to work in US history, but like you was tempted by French history during undergrad... I still love reading about French historiography (if you read in French, check out Les courants historiques en France, and the two volumes of Historiographies directed by Christian Delacroix et al., to get a sense of current debates in Frenah history), but I know I want to start my work in US history. 

I certainly appreciate both views and this is why I am taking a year off (or more) after undergrad. I think reading is a great suggestion, and definitely something I'll  strive to undertake this summer and upcoming year as I work! 

[NoirFemme]

The other question to ask is what do you want to do with a History MA? It's an awkward degree to have these days, IMO, because of the number of Ph.D holders now applying for the same jobs as MA holders--even in the "alt-ac" field (my museum director [BA+15 yrs of experience] told me flat out that she's been overlooked for positions because boards of directors are attracted by the prestige of a Ph.D).

Also, my undergrad experience was scattered as well, and I tried to do everything in which I was interested. Then I got dinged hard by a top program I wanted to attend because they said appeared unfocused. I didn't listen then, lol, but my adviser tried to drum it into my head that you are allowed to teach or research or publish outside of your home field. She has no background in film studies, but once taught a course on US cinema history when the chair added it to the semester schedule at the last minute. 

If a graduate degree is something you want to, apply and see what happens. And based on nhhistorynut's experiences, you might find a new research question you never expected to find fascinating. 

[qkhitai]

When narrowing your field, I think the best thing you can do is just keep reading and writing, as others have said. I started my BA broadly interested in early medieval China (c.200-c.600 AD). As I read more, I began to discover that I really enjoyed tackling themes such as ethnicity and identity, which led me down a path towards a specific dynasty that had a proliferation of related issues. I could probably give a breadcrumb trail list of different books and articles that helped to get me where I am now, research interest wise - in terms of what inspired me or grabbed me and made me go 'yeah, I want to do this kind of stuff'. Everything you read, good or bad, helpful or useless, contributes to shaping your interests; you can cross things off the list, focus in on specific themes, discover things you'd never thought about before. Unless you go and make that effort, you'll never find out what you're truly passionate about.

Edited April 27, 2017 by qkhitai

[laleph]

10 hours ago, laleph said:

(if you read in French, check out Les courants historiques en France, and the two volumes of Historiographies directed by Christian Delacroix et al., to get a sense of current debates in Frenah history)

Just looked at my bookshelf again and realized there's a third volume in the Historiographies series that I haven't read! It contains chapters on "enjeux et débats" in sub-subfields of French (not Frenah, heh) history -- history of the French revolution, la Grande Guerre, French communism, Vichy, etc. 

3 hours ago, NoirFemme said:

The other question to ask is what do you want to do with a History MA? It's an awkward degree to have these days, IMO, because of the number of Ph.D holders now applying for the same jobs as MA holders.

[...]

If a graduate degree is something you want to, apply and see what happens. And based on nhhistorynut's experiences, you might find a new research question you never expected to find fascinating. 

A related comment: unless you're independently wealthy, going into debt for a terminal masters in history doesn't make the most financial sense. Of course there are people who make it work... But it just seems like too much of a risk to take on debt without the guarantee of a job afterward. 

If you find yourself leaning toward France, you might want to consider getting a master's degree there. It's sooooo much cheaper than the US (about 500 euros/year at Paris 1 La Sorbonne, for example, which includes health insurance!) -- and if you get into the SAT/ACT/TOEFL/IELTS tutoring racket on the side, you can make it work without going into debt. 

@nhhistorynut is right that the first two years of grad school can help you explore and narrow your interests, but you don't necessarily have to get a terminal master's to do that. Different PhD programs are structured in different ways, and you could tailor your apps to those that work best for your interests. You just have to get in, then you can take a little time to explore! Many programs, for example, require two years of coursework before preparing for orals, and sometimes your topic radically changes over that time. A friend of mine went into grad school planning to study late 19th-c. US literary cultures and wound up working on translations of Haitian literature in the 19th-c. Atlantic world -- not wildly different, but different enough that her subfield label changed. In contrast, programs like Johns Hopkins require incoming students to jump into primary source research right away (in preparation for the famous "first-year paper"), and there is no (officially) required coursework. Such programs work better for people who have an idea of what they want to do going in. Read a lot of grad school handbooks to find out how the programs you're interested in are structured. 

 

[angesradieux]

How much have you looked at primary sources? Getting a sense of the historiography is definitely a good idea, but you might also want to look through some online databases, see what sources are available, and see what questions come up as you poke around. If you find yourself drawn to certain sources, that may help answer your question.

Hope this helps. Personally, I'm an incurable Francophile, so I didn't struggle to pick a geographical area. But if you want to have a conversation about France feel free to send me a PM.

[Lily9]

One idea might be to figure out a way your potential thesis could combine a bit of both; ie something to do with French-US relations.

[Concordia]

I'm a late arrival to the post-grad scene, but one thing that helped me on my particular path (which could change, I suppose!) is a bit of happenstance.   I didn't so much find an area that I knew would be fantastic, but stumbled on a primary source and context that demanded to be written up.  That was the master's-- and there's no way I would have done that had I made a top-down decision on area and then looked for a topic.   (Of course, I was using a somewhat micro-historical framework, so maybe that explains everything.)  :-)

I couldn't develop a pure, unadulterated sequel for the doctorate, but I have taken a tangent off my last paper and seem to have discovered something not normally considered in this detail or from my perspective.   Some day, I'll discover why that was the logical thing for me to do-- in the meantime, I'm just glad I didn't completely bore an admissions committee with it.

[Michael Scarn]

On 4/26/2017 at 4:13 PM, laleph said:

I second @RageoftheMonkey's comment. The best advice I got when I was in your spot a couple years back was from a prof who said: sure you can write history papers for whatever class you're taking at the moment, ok, but that's not enough. You won't be happy or successful in grad school unless you have a reason to get up in the morning for 5+ years. It took me a few years of away-time, teaching history and geography at the high school level and pursuing other interests, for me to get there. I'm ready to go back to grad school this fall because I know (at least for now) what'll get me up in the morning. Dissertation topics always change, of course, but I'd encourage you to wait to apply till you find a knot you can't wait to untie -- then identify schools that will support you as you attempt to untie it.

 

All of your responses have been super duper helpful and I really appreciate it! Just a quick side bar though, you mentioned you laugh history and geography- teaching is actually the other route I'm trying to go through. I'm not sure where you're from, but was that a part of your undergrad degree or did you go through some sort of alternative certification?

[laleph]

23 hours ago, Michael Scarn said:

 I'm not sure where you're from, but was that a part of your undergrad degree or did you go through some sort of alternative certification?

PMed you! 

[thedig13]

On 4/26/2017 at 0:02 PM, Michael Scarn said:

New to this site, but have seen a lot of helpful posts so far. So I'm in the process of deciding whether or not to apply for a History MA for next year (Fall 2018). (Not super interested in PhD at this moment in time, but I love learning and want to further my education) 

 Educational History: Will graduate in like 2 weeks with a BA in History and International Studies with a minor in French, with a 3.96 GPA from a pretty well known top 100 nation school) and will be taking the GRE soon.

The problem of looking into Grad Schools is of course finding one that matches with your interest. I've pretty much narrowed it down to either French or US History, but I'm just wondering how to really pick a path. At my school, my history classes were all over the place so I didn't get a concentrated dose of education in any one particular field. I know obviously its a person choice, but I'm having a hard time thinking about an era and which region I would be most interested in pursuing. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!! 

My two cents: Take some time off, which is always a good idea between undergrad and grad school. In the meantime, try reading a few seminal books in your two fields of interest. If one set of books excites you more than the other, it might be a sign. This may also give you a few ideas regarding where to apply to pursue your interests.

[ctg7w6]

I would also recommend taking some time off. On the other hand, I did get an MA first. Going into I did not know what specific interest I wanted to pursue besides German history (which is not narrow enough). I found my interest during the MA and writing a thesis. I also was not entirely certain I wanted to do a PhD when I started the MA. The thesis experience solved that issue for me. 

But, you shouldn't pay for an MA to meet these goals. And also the MA by itself isn't particularly helpful over a BA. Therefore, I would only do an MA if you know it can help you for something very specific career-wise or you have a decent idea that you probably want to go for the PhD.

for me, I was pretty certain I wanted to do a PhD, and the MA was something of a practice run (also I didn't do so hot in undergrad so I needed an extra boost).

but I also paid very very little out of pocket for it and worked full time. That also helped, because I figured if I could work 50 hours a week at a job and also do an MA with a thesis, I could handle the time commitment of a PhD. 

But if you aren't in a similar situation, I would take some time off, even a year. For me, I am starting my PhD at age 30. Sometimes I feel bad about the "wasted time," but it actually wasn't wasted. I grew up as a person and as a scholar. I was able to make the decision to do the PhD because it is a passion that outweighs the better financial prospects of continuing my current career. It also gave me a chance to make money and also experience life as an adult with a comfortable lifestyle. This was important to me because I was weighing passion vs money. Passion won (hands down actually). It made me want the PhD even more because there is almost nothing worse than dreading going to sleep at night because when you wake up you will have 10 hours straight of something you hate. 

Even though I wanted to follow my passion, it was the desire to wake up excited for the day that truly solidified my desire for the PhD. I would have done it regardless, so maybe what I mean is, it made me very very appreciative that someone was willing to PAY me to do something that I would wake up in the morning and do for free (in a world without money). 

So, at the very least, I recommend you take a year or two (or more) to experience "the real world" if you aren't sure that history is your passion. Not everyone needs this wake up call, but I truly did, and I am thankful for it even if i disliked ten hours of my days for four years. I wouldn't even go back and change it, knowing i didn't enjoy it because the experience was worth it. That may sound foolish, or a glutton for punishment, but it really does cure indecisiveness and instills a sense of appreciation.

[hats]

On the other hand, OP is someone who's still narrowing down what they want to do at a pretty broad level—the "which country? which era?" level of narrowing, rather than, "the suffrage movement in either northern or southern Ireland"—and that's the kind of student master's programs may help the most. If they can find a funded master's degree, it might make sense for them to do the master's right out of school...and then if a PhD seems like a possibility, to take a year off at that point. The master's-break-PhD trajectory seems to have been successful for several of my friends. There should be several threads on this forum on how to find funded history MAs!

[lkjpoi]

I also followed the break and MA trajectory before beginning my PhD. I have met many students who have done this as well. Most, if not all, of my classmates in my PhD program have a MA.

From the break I gained just what ctg7w6 said, perspective and a deep appreciation for academic work. I realized that the 9-5 was not for me and that I really liked school and I felt highly motivated to devote myself to study. From the MA I figured out my research interests. I got a fair bit of experience delving into various related historical problems which together formed my current academic subfield and proposed doctoral dissertation topic. And, equally important for one's success, from the MA I learned how the academic field works: who are the big current scholars, who works on what topics, how do PhD programs vary and how do people get into them. And I also got letters of recommendations. I highly recommend doing a MA if you can.

It seems to me that the competition in the field of history has increased so much in the past decade (or more, I don't know), that the skill requirements and the necessity of networking to enter the field have sky rocketed in tandem with that increase. The need for the MA is symptomatic of the increased competition, I think. I suppose you can circumvent the MA by having a good undergrad record, being impressive and lucky, and having good professional connections.

To find an appropriate MA program I suggest asking professors for advice as well as researching the possibilities online. 

[lkjpoi]

Also, to address the more particular concern of this thread, I would say that the best way to pick a field is to just go for it. I know different people make decisions using different methods, but I have always believed in the shoot first, aim later way. Deciding on grad school, and more generally choosing a life path, is never going to be wholly rational. It's an illusion to think it can be. So choose what your intuition points towards, what seems interesting and follow it until you can't anymore. For one thing, your intuition, whatever vague preferences you have, likely have deep roots, and, for another, decisions can change. You can shift interests in grad school and after. But the important thing is to be dedicated to the topic for a while first. Acquire some definite experience and proceed from there.