<p>I'm sorry if this has been posted before, but if so I can't find it anywhere. I'm a freshman at a top 5 undergraduate program, and I've long had an interest in becoming a Professor. I am hoping to go to lunch with my advisor later in the semester to discuss how to work towards such a goal, but I thought I'd ask here for advise about graduate school admissions more specifically. Obviously an important step towards academia is a top graduate program in one's area of study, but are there specific things I should look at accomplishing during my undergraduate career? I have an amazing array of resources here, and I have already spent a decent amount of time interacting with top scholars in class and at office hours. I'm taking French at the moment, and I hope to do German at some point in the future. My interests in history tend to fall around intellectual history, international relations, economic history, and general modern european history. However, I may yet find that something like medieval history or Egyptology strikes my fancy. I am also hoping to starting working as a Professor's research assistant starting next fall. Besides doing well in classes and writing a senior thesis, what other types of things should I focus on? Thank you for your help!</p>
<p>History PhD programs are extraordinarily competitive. If you want to apply striaght out of undergrad and only with your BA, the standards are going to be very high. Admissions are seeing more and more applicants with MAs in their hand (and older as well) as well as more solid language background. The admit rate for top 10 to 20 programs are somewhere below 10 or 15%. Columbia University accepted about 30 to 40 out of over 500 applications. University of Michigan took in 35 out of over 400 applications.</p>
<p>As a SLAC applicant, even with the resources that you claim to have, you're going have to work extra hard and sacrifice some things because you'll be competing with people from big Us and MAs who will have stronger professional connections from top scholars who do nothing but research (as opposed to profs in SLACs that spend more time teaching than researching). I have seen very few SLAC applicants successfully get in top PhD programs without the MA. Just take a look at some of the grad student profiles on UPenn's site.</p>
<p>What really counts in admissions is your statement and writing sample. Unless you spend your summer between junior and senior year in the archives or dealing with archival materials, you're not going to have a strong writing sample in time for the early deadlines if you plan to apply straight out from undergrad. Your experience in the archives will help you in terms of showing research experience and understanding a bit of what's out there. Doing lots of reading to understand your field will help you talk about your research interests in the statement. A very strong writing sample will not only have excellent writing but lots of original analysis and research as well primary sources.</p>
<p>And yes, languages are important unless you're doing US history in which this case, your French may just be sufficient for the moment. Otherwise if you're going for Western European history, you'll definitely need French and German. If you want to migrate over towards Eastern European/Russian... there are always intensive summer language courses.</p>
<p>Thanks for all of the info! I'm actually at Harvard, not a SLAC. So i've been lucky enough to enroll in classes with and get to know some of the top historians in their fields. Without giving away too much in terms of identify, I think I stand a strong chance of working with one of several big shots next year, thanks to a few lucky breaks. But regardless of who I end up working for, I feel like Professional contacts and research opportunities won't be lacking!</p>
<p>White_Rabbit, I noticed you're a freshman at Harvard. Think really really hard if you want to pursue a history PhD. Admissions is very competitive (high GRE scores; good LORs; superb writing samples; knowledge of foreign languages; over 200 applications for a few spots at top-ranked programs is the norm). The history job market is terrible and over-saturated. Not all history PhDs become tenure-track professors. Some leave academia altogether for government/consulting/corporate industries. This advice is not meant to scare you, but keep in mind that your career options may change as you get closer to senior year.</p>
<p>Thank you very much for the advice. I have actually spent wayy too much time lurking around graduate forums, including this one, so I've been hearing plenty of horror stories about the state of jobs in History departments. However, I feel the market is similar in my other interests, law and philosophy. So I feel that if I want to be an academic, it is going to be a long, hard, and potential fruitless journey in whichever discipline I choose. So I posted this thread in hopes that a few people might be able to offer some advice as to how I might make my application stronger against such overwhelming odds. I plan to work very hard at keeping my GPA up, incase you are indeed correct and I am unable to find a viable career as an Academic. With a high GPA and a degree from Harvard, I should be able to land a job doing something soulless but viable, like consulting.</p>
<p>You're just a freshman. That's why I mentioned your career options may change over time. This is sound advice because I was curious just like you when I was a college freshman.</p>
<p>There is absolutely nothing wrong for entertaining aspirations to become a historian as a Harvard freshman. The historian's profession allows you to think deeply about the past, present, and future. If you are enthusiastic about teaching and helping students develop correct understanding of history--whichever history seems correct would be for you to decide--this profession is for you. It is true that the road is long and difficult, but if you love knowledge and argumentation, it is not insuperable.</p>
<p>Follow where your passions lead you. I changed my major from computer science to history when I was a junior, so you have plenty of time ahead of you. Read broadly, take courses broadly in different fields of human and social sciences: they will be an asset to you regardless of what you do in future. Taking Latin may help you see whether you would enjoy dead languages and people; it will also help you understand English etymologies better. Some fields will require extensive language training. French and German are useful for almost all fields of history, so it's good that you are getting started on those. When you become a junior, then you can start worrying about the GRE, writing sample, and recommendations.</p>
<p>I hope this helps.</p>
<p>I'll chime back in a bit more.</p>
<p>One of the things I love about history and chose to major in it over area studies, International Relations, and English was that it contains a little bit of everything in the humanities and social science disciplines. Economics, poltical science, philosophy, languages, and so forth all contribute to the field of history. All the APs offered by the social studies department I took gave me groundwork on how I thought about history, along with an IR class I took (you'd be surprised how many historians don't know the meaning of "security dilemma") and as well as a stats class. My language classes also colored the picture. It is true that I did have a minor and didn't leave much room for other electives on top of my gen eds and major, I wish I had taken more courses in religion and sociology. Those two would have helped me immensely in surviving some of my grad school classes.</p>
<p>Many sophomores don't choose their majors until about March of their sophomore year after fretting all year long. You have plenty of time. By then people have taken most of their gen ed requirements and have a fairly good idea of what they like and don't like. For instance, my friend entered thinking that she'll do chemistry but after taking orgo, she decided that it was far too time-consuming and she didn't want to go into medicine anymore. She knew that she was very strong in analytical skills so she looked into math and I think econ but they did okay for her. By sheer random, she took a philosophy course in the spring of her sophomore year and fell in love with it. So she started late but she was fine with it. Take chances. I entered college knowing that I wanted to major in history but after I heard history major wannabes talking about using their history degrees to become lawyers, I said, "No way... there's got to be something else besides law!" I made a vow that just to make sure I wanted to do nothing but history, I wouldn't take any history courses in my first year. So I didn't take any history course in my first semester and I wasn't planning on it for my second semester either but circumstances came up that I had to take one just to make sure that I wanted to do history. I haven't stopped taking history courses since. To supplement my history prep and skills, I took a lot of language courses (Spanish, Hebrew, Russian at different times) as well as some non-British/American literature.</p>
<p>One of the best things I've done was to study abroad. Although my specialty was in Eastern Europe as an undergrad, I went to Israel. I used that semester as a form of taking time off from academics and history (I didn't need the credit). I did take history courses but I had already mastered the materials so they were just blow-off courses for me. I spent more time studying Hebrew and the Israeli culture and society through my Hebrew classes, interacting with the Israelis on daily basis and traveling to different areas of Israel, and of course a class that would never be offered at my LAC that greatly supplemented my experience. That... that course changed my course of specialization- from Eastern Europe to the United States. Studying in Israel from a social historian's perspective changed the way I looked at the United States history.</p>
<p>Although I know that many Harvard students are reluctant to study abroad, I encourage you to do so and take advantage of the opportunity. Go somewhere different. I do think that going to Israel was a much better choice than going to Prague or London in the face of the adcoms. Especially if you've really made the most of it like I did. Some of my grad school profs are just learning how I spent those 7 months and why I keep going back and they are often... impressed by how much I know and understand the Israeli culture. Just from listening to me, I think (and hope) that they understand that I took a serious break from the academics to explore an unknown territory and took a lot of chances that many typical American students wouldn't have.</p>
<p>Thanks for all of the replies! I'm actually hoping to study French in Paris this summer, as long as Harvard can fund a large portion of the cost. So we'll see. But I do indeed plan on traveling abroad during one of my terms, since FA travels with students. I'm actually thinking of working at an archeological dig in Egypt for a semester through NYU.</p>
<p>I remember one of my history professor said, you need to be proficient in a particular language.....which meant you have to be able to speak it fluently and write in that language. Correct me if I'm wrong.</p>
<p>eva, not necessarily. If it's a non-western European language like Chinese or Russian or Arabic, two years is an absolute minimum. As a historian, you don't need to speak the language fluently as you'll be interacting with the documents which speaks to you in written words. In terms of writing, if you can string together a coherent short essay, that's fine. It's the ability to read academic journals that counts the most.</p>
<p>Firstly, I'm glad to see that there are other people on this board who are interested in history Ph.Ds. Let me give you my background as we are both aspiring history Ph.D's.</p>
<p>I'm currently a junior majoring in history and minoring in religious studies at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and am planning on applying to Ph.D programs next semester. I understand that the outlook for both admissions to a program, and work opportunities later on is very gloom, but I am still optimistic.</p>
<p>I have about a 3.6 GPA in history, and about the same GPA overall, I am fluent in Russian, Hebrew, proficient in French, and studying German currently (like you, I am interested in Modern European history, although focusing on Germany), I have done one internship working with archives, and will do another this summer at a public museum, I am attempting to work with a professor as a research assistant this semester, and am the treasurer of the local Phi Alpha Theta chapter (history honor's society).</p>
<p>I believe that if you do such things, and have great GRE's and LOR's, you should be able to get into a competitive program, especially coming from Harvard (unlike me who is coming from a mostly unknown school).</p>
<p>Good luck!</p>
<p>University of Wisconsin-Madison is not an unknown school.</p>
<p>^ <em>g</em> especially from Midwest....like you and me.</p>
<p>If you read over my post again, you can clearly see that I said "University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee", not Madison.</p>
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I received notification yesterday that I have been admitted into a top-5 program for this fall. From what I can tell, schools want to know two things: 1) why you're a good fit for the faculty member of your choice 2) if you are competent. </p>
<p>The university doesn't want to waste its time with people who might drop out after a few years due to lack of interest. You can show your interest through research experience or living overseas in the region relevant to your research interests. I'd encourage research because papers = quality LoR (better than just frequent OH visits) + potential awards + potential writing sample. The writing sample and statement of purpose are extremely important. These two documents should demonstrate that you fit well with the program's strengths and that you can write well. Absolutely, absolutely, absolutely be very clear about your interests so that the admissions committee knows that you are focused.</p>
<p>Naturally, top programs also want students whom they know can produce quality work. GPA is important, but all of your competitors will have 3.7 or higher GPAs. 3.8-3.9 are the norm for top tier programs. Equally important (at least to my future school) was the GRE score, or so I've heard from a faculty member there. Aim for at least a 90% in Verbal. Remember that grading is subjective in the humanities, so the GRE gives a standard by which all applicants can be compared. Foreign language preparation is an imperative. Plan on learning as many languages as you can and (ideally) show that you can do research in these languages! An honors thesis would probably be a plus, but I did not complete one. Instead, I did three independent research projects with different professors. </p>
<p>From my experience, internships do not matter very much. If you want a PHD, then schools want to know that you can do research -- not whether you can work in a museum or organize files an in archive. </p>
<p>If you play your cards correctly and be proactive with your educational opportunities, then you can get into a top tier program without having to do any masters work. This will save you a few years of your life and a lot of money in loans. I recommend that you do as much research as you can with as many professors as you can. Eventually, you will build a good reputation in your history department as a serious student. (Side note: one of my favorite professors quipped to me one day that serious students "rarely come along", but when they do, faculty members will notice and prod those students along). Take multiple classes with the same professor. Do foreign language research and develop a genuine interest in a single field. Study for the GRE.</p>
<p>When doing history as an undergraduate, is it best to take courses in a variety of fields, geographical areas, and chronologies or is specialization important? I will be attending a top tier liberal college with a history curriculum that mandates a broad representation of periods, geographies, etc. so I am slightly concerned that lack of specialization may be an issue. Are my fears unfounded?</p>
<p>Sligh_Anarchist,</p>
<p>Being just a student and not a faculty member, I am not a credible authority on the admissions process. But I can tell you that I ended up taking a lot of courses during my undergrad outside of my area of specialty. I would say you will be fine as long as you make your interests clear by doing research and taking extra classes in your area and time period of interest.</p>
<p>Slight_anarchist: Reading, research, and writing skills are crucial. Your honors thesis will clear demosntrate how competent you are as a future scholar. It will give you the basis for your future research- at least the topic of it will be your research interest that you will pursue in grad school. Very good history BA programs require a broad knowledge of history with a couple of courses in the students' focused area (usually upper levels and seminars). You do need to be focused but NOT too focused. You need to demonstrate that you understand the issues at hand when you talk about your general interests.</p>
<p>I disagree with calvu86 on some points but... there's really no perfect way of gaining admissions to a top 10 history program (whether overall or in a specialty). But people who have to do multiple/difficult language work find going to a MA program useful to help them stay in the academia and continue to brush up the languages without worrying about holding down a job. Non-Western languages and Classical languages/area studies typically. Internships are just good ways of gaining experience outside the academia and to demonstrate to profs/adcoms that you've tried other paths and thought of other things, as well as study abroad.</p>
<p>To clarify: I agree with you that there exists no set path to entering graduate school. I was merely trying to relate to the OP my experience and my attempt to get into the minds of the admissions people (in other words, a quick and dirty guide to admissions). I actually graduated with a BS science field as well as a BA in history and thus did not have the opportunity to pursue many interdisciplinary classes and 'outside' experiences. </p>
<p>By all means, take interdisciplinary courses and to travel abroad. They are life-changing experiences, and I'd imagine that committees will look upon the latter extremely favorably. Perhaps the best advice that I can give to you is that you have can demonstrate that you have experience as a researcher going in (using archival documents and microfilm, constructing your own projects), strong foreign language ability, and have a relatively clear and apparent vision of what you want to do -- and as ticklemepink mentioned, one that is not too specific.</p>
<p>I do want to emphasize again that I am no insider to the process, but I do have the experience of someone who managed to get into a wonderful program despite having to balance a lot of educational priorities in addition to history. I worked extremely hard in the the time I did have, and my science grades did suffer, but I believe that anything is possible if you plan ahead and work hard.</p>