History Admissions 2008

[AMC]

Wow Yhinferno~

I know that this is probably unbearably frustrating but I would recommend two courses of action:

1- E-mail the technical help directly from the application website and

2- E-mail the Graduate Admissions go-to person in the department letting them know what happened and request your admission decisions from them directly.

Granted you might not hear until Monday, but at least you will get a response.

FYI. When I did ALL my work online for Univ of Chicago's website, after I clicked submit ALL of my info disappeared. Luckily I was submitting my application in weeks ahead of the deadline, but the thought of losing all that work worried me. Even though it was over the weekend, I e-mailed technical support and got a response & phone call within the hour. So, try it. You have your documentation, so you're all set!

[yhinferno]

Did anybody get into Penn today? Or was it a whole day full of rejections?

I will call them tomorrow (probably no one there) and then on Monday.

[canadiana]

I think they only rejected in this round. Since UPenn receives so many applications each year, the first weeding out was probably to remove applicants who they felt were not at all competitive. I think their next step is probably deliberating on whom to accept/waitlist/reject among those applicants they found at least a bit promising.

[yhinferno]

wow....

I have a 3.89 cumulative GPA and 1590, 5.0 GRE... and failed first round??.... craps!!!

[canadiana]

It's more than that, though, isn't it? I mean, your application was read in its entirety. It may just be that certain professors fought harder for their potential students than others, or that they decided to focus on building certain subdisciplines more than others this year. I'm just speculating, and in fact, I don't think any university will weed people out on a quantitative basis. If your statement and LORs explain why scores or marks may be low, or if it blows a reader away, then they won't automatically disqualify that student. As the rejection letter stated, the applications were read. They just decided it wasn't what they were looking for.

Also, you may want to call/email and ask for feedback to improve your application for next year.

[Cornell07]

I am strangely resigned to my fate of not getting into a PhD program this year, except for maybe BU as it is a less competitive program. On the upside, I am sure, as my profs agree, to almost certainly get into a great MA program if I reapply next year, which will be a good stepping stone to a top-notch PhD program. I, too, don't want to spend all this money again for apps or pay out of pocket for an MA, but c'e la vie: I want to be a historian and such things won't stop me.

I may have aimed too high this time around (I never expected to get into all or most of my top programs... but one acceptance is all that matters), but, as I've always known, "You've got to aim really high if you want to reach the moon."

[yhinferno]

It's more than that, though, isn't it? I mean, your application was read in its entirety. It may just be that certain professors fought harder for their potential students than others, or that they decided to focus on building certain subdisciplines more than others this year. I'm just speculating, and in fact, I don't think any university will weed people out on a quantitative basis. If your statement and LORs explain why scores or marks may be low, or if it blows a reader away, then they won't automatically disqualify that student. As the rejection letter stated, the applications were read. They just decided it wasn't what they were looking for.

Yeah you're right... But I wonder if there is a first round weed out via purely mechanical methods?

[yhinferno]

I am strangely resigned to my fate of not getting into a PhD program this year, except for maybe BU as it is a less competitive program. On the upside, I am sure, as my profs agree, to almost certainly get into a great MA program if I reapply next year, which will be a good stepping stone to a top-notch PhD program. I, too, don't want to spend all this money again for apps or pay out of pocket for an MA, but c'e la vie: I want to be a historian and such things won't stop me.

I may have aimed too high this time around (I never expected to get into all or most of my top programs... but one acceptance is all that matters), but, as I've always known, "You've got to aim really high if you want to reach the moon."

I have the same feeling too! I had all my hopes on Berkeley.. I have no connections with any profs at other univ... I think if I don't get in, I will sell out and apply for law school next year (and take the damn LSAT... a perfect way to ruin the summer!!!).

[canadiana]

I am strangely resigned to my fate of not getting into a PhD program this year, except for maybe BU as it is a less competitive program. On the upside, I am sure, as my profs agree, to almost certainly get into a great MA program if I reapply next year, which will be a good stepping stone to a top-notch PhD program. I, too, don't want to spend all this money again for apps or pay out of pocket for an MA, but c'e la vie: I want to be a historian and such things won't stop me.

I may have aimed too high this time around (I never expected to get into all or most of my top programs... but one acceptance is all that matters), but, as I've always known, "You've got to aim really high if you want to reach the moon."

Cornell07, we think alike! I am in exactly the same situation (hopefully will get into a GREAT MA program which will be a stepping stone to the PhD), and I won't let the rejections dampen my passion for history. I aimed too high this time as well, but I'm so glad I did. I'm a very cautious person by nature, so I've never taken any big risks. Even though I failed, I'm glad I went through it because I realized that I can actually deal with failure a lot better than I thought! Hopefully all applicants learn from this experience and are able to view themselves with more critical distance.

[canadiana]

Yeah you're right... But I wonder if there is a first round weed out via purely mechanical methods?

That's an unsettling thought! Possible, though....hmm....my GRE scores AND my GPA are very low compared to yours, though. They would have rejected A LOT of people to weed out that wide a range of applicants. But maybe you're right. I wish the decision process was more transparent.

[canadiana]

It could also be that they the broke up the applications into groupings and have worked through some of those groups. UPenn always rejects many more students than they accept, so maybe there are some acceptances floating out there that just haven't made it to the forum/board.

[NSGoddessQ]

Not to change the subject, guys, but I just checked the online status page and I got into Rutgers :mrgreen: Since I'm interested in gender history, it's quite high on my list, so I'm excited. Good luck to everyone else who applied there!

Huge congratulations, el217! I know you really like their program. Also, how did you find out to check? Mine still says "no decision," even though I've gotten emails, etc.

[crauson]

Not to change the subject, guys, but I just checked the online status page and I got into Rutgers :mrgreen: Since I'm interested in gender history, it's quite high on my list, so I'm excited. Good luck to everyone else who applied there!

Rutgers gender history acceptance buddy! Are you going for the visit in a couple weeks? What period/region of gender history are you interested in? I am going for the weekend and am interested in modern British gender history. My aim name is the same as my username, if you want to get in contact with me.

[Louiselab]

i beg to differ. upenn did not read applications in their entirety, i know this for a fact bc one of my professor's reccomendations was not in the file and no one ever asked for it and therefore did not read it. So as my last comment, i would dispell this myth.

[el217]

Huge congratulations, el217! I know you really like their program. Also, how did you find out to check? Mine still says "no decision," even though I've gotten emails, etc.

Thanks! I didn't really "find out to check;" I log in to all my status pages every night (just in case) :oops: I also got an official e-mail from Rutgers overnight. Good luck!

[yhinferno]

Contacted technical support and got a new PIN... checked status... premonition confirmed: rejection from U Penn

[TMP]

canadiana and cornell07-

i'm de-lurking here only to say that i absolutely agree with you guys! I did aim high (UMich, Penn, and NYU) but i felt that i was worthy of being fully funded so i didn't apply anywhere were funding was iffy and i wouldn't stand a chance. I haven't heard yet from UMIch and NYU but judging from UMIch, I must be in the reject pile! NYU's being very quiet... i wouldn't have been invited to their weekend anyway since i'm doing a joint-program with Judaic Studies. Also my major advisor gets some of the blame in this game- she definitely encouraged me along the way and helped whenever she could... just one of those "overconfident" professors who's pushing me at the moment with my thesis like as if I'm going to graduate school in the fall!

also just like two people here, my subfield is extremely small (American Jewish history), narrowing my list down to 3-4 schools with established professors and they were all in top programs. So I definitely needed those professors' support to get in. UGH! We know it's great to meet them beforehand but still being in undergrad where we have full schedule just makes it impossible to visit them!

Now let's see if I can scramble a little and apply to this great MA program in Judaic Studies that has a very late deadline... first, gotta find some money from somewhere cuz my savings isn't enough to cover two years! Otherwise, it's off to finding some sucky jobs and planning my overseas trip to really pick up Hebrew! :roll:

[jaw17]

For what it's worth, I don't think husband would have gotten in anywhere if he'd applied directly to PhD programs before undertaking his MA degree. Granted, that's probably particularly true for him, since he wasn't a history major in undergrad, but I suspect many of the benefits (evidence of successful grad-level coursework, LORs, writing samples, more language classes, etc.) would carry over regardless. I think these really came into play given his incredibly small and somewhat "homeless" subfield - beat modern Central Asia!- where there was added pressure to be a strong all-around candidate in the absence of an obviously perfect fit with any one professor.

[historygirl]

As far as UPenn is concerned - While the email does say that they will contact you if there are items missing...they won't. You have to check up on it using the website. I noticed that one of my transcripts had not made it there by the second week of Jan, and so I called to confirm it hadn't been received. I had it sent overnight, and my app was completed and sent to the dept. According to the grad school, it wasn't too late, as they were just about to send the big stack of completed files at that point. Thank goodness!

However, this means that yhinferno, perhaps there was a screw up, and your file may never have been marked as complete. And Louiselab

[missycari]

-------------

[abc]

I don't know if the timing of the Penn rejections means anything other than the fact that they actually coordinated with the graduate school this year. Last year, they admitted people around 2/26 but didn't inform rejected candidates until late March.

Not to burst the randomness bubble of condolences, but I think there are "types" that are much more likely to get in. From what I've gleaned, history majors at research universities with high GPAs and good GREs who wrote theses (then used as writing samples) with top scholars in hot subfields who vouch for them in LORs and to their friends at the applicant's school and then apply as a senior or after 1-2 years out are much better off than anyone else. This is not to say other people don't get in, it's just a lot harder if you don't conform to the type. If you are the type minus one, you've still got a good shot. But if you're more untraditional and you can't go back and change your major or your undergrad institution or not doing a thesis or not taking time to off to work, it's much harder. I think that's where the MA if it's in history comes in. It's a way to establish the credentials you need and get the LORs from the right people who can compare you to other grad students.

Just as an example from Political Science, a friend of mine graduated from a top 25 university and went on to Oxford to complete an MPhil in an area studies. The first time out, she was rejected by every PoliSci department. She stayed at Oxford, completed another MPhil but this time in PoliSci and then got into 3/4 of the programs to which she applied. She's stated very clearly that while she learned stuff doing the second MPhil, the coursework was just more of the same as she had done but compiled under a different heading. But it was the window dressing that mattered for the applications.

[missycari]

--------------

[NSGoddessQ]

Thanks! I didn't really "find out to check;" I log in to all my status pages every night (just in case) :oops: I also got an official e-mail from Rutgers overnight. Good luck!

I just found out this morning that I'm officially in as well! The funny part? Status webpage still says no decision! This perversely amuses me. :twisted:

Do you think you'll be at the Open House? I'm basically tickled pink that it's over my spring break. That was thoughtful of them!

[NSGoddessQ]

also just like two people here, my subfield is extremely small (American Jewish history), narrowing my list down to 3-4 schools with established professors and they were all in top programs.

Hey ticklemepink, where did you apply? The only reason this pings me is that I have a class on American Jewish history right now, and I know that one of my advisor's specialties is American Jewish history. That being said, I'm not sure that we are considered a powerful grad program in that field...

[amanda1655]

In general, I think what you write is true, except I'm not sure about taking time off. I took three years off and believe I am a much better candidate because of it. I am much more certain about what I want to do as a 24 year old than I was at 21.

Also, working for three years allowed me to be in a much better financial situation and develop more maturity. Maybe it's an individual thing. I started Kindergarten when I was four years old rather than five, so I've always been much younger than my classmates. At 24, I'm not much older than most people just graduating from college.

On the other hand, I realize that there were weaknesses within my application that may have turned some people off. I completed an interdisciplinary major, which combined a study of religion and history. And, I completed an M.Ed. from a third tier university as part of my alternative certification as an elementary school teacher. I had my two advisors for my interdisciplinary honors thesis and my graduate advisor write my letters of recommendation. As a result, only one of my letters of rec came from a history professor.

I had good stats - a 3.94 undergraduate GPA (albeit from an unknown liberal arts college), a 4.0 in a Master's degree I earned while working 40 hours a week, and a 670 Verbal on the GRE (6.0 Analytical Writing). So far, I have gotten into two top 10 programs (Michigan and Wisconsin) and the professors at Yale turned me down for the PhD but were at least interested enough to ask me to move my app to an MA program with the possibility of full funding. I have been down from several schools. My professors warned me from the beginning that I might have a difficult time because I don't exactly mirror the ideal candidate.

In short, I think people who don't match your profile can get into top programs (as my history professor put it, Michigan is an extraordinarily good place to be) but they may have more rejections than people who fit it more closely. Perhaps randomness is the wrong word. There are people who are more likely to get in than others BUT we have an imperfect knowledge of admissions decisions and there are too many variables to be able to predict who will get in where. A lot depends on the individual preferences of adcomms. Saying that something is random is a way (perhaps slightly inaccurate) to say that your rejections may have nothing to do with your scholastic ability and that people may get rejected from a third tier institution only to be accepted to a first tier one (Look at my own stats. In at Michigan, top 10 or top 5 depending on your subfield. Out at Illinois, ranked 20 - 25).