<p>I'm a first-year History and Politics major at a liberal arts college. It's my intention to prepare myself for two different routes, which correspond to my fields of study: on one hand, to pursue a Ph.D in world history, on the other, to pursue a career in public policy. I would be happy with both of those outcomes, and am working to the point that I could comfortably do either.</p>
<p>I entered college with 30 credits (the equivalent of a year), thanks to AP exams, and college courses while in high school. My parents would like me to graduate in three years, in order to minimize cost and indebtedness. I don't have any particular problem with that, however, I'm concerned about how it may impact my preparation for graduate level study. I feel that I'm on an appropriate path: I've taken two advanced colloquia this year, am working as a research assistant for a history professor this semester, and am very consciously choosing courses to augment my interests.</p>
<p>So essentially, do you have any advice for properly preparing for Ph.D programs with only three undergrad years?</p>
<p>but really, college was the best time of my life – i even stayed an extra year to do my MS because it was just <em>that</em> good. it may be different now because you’re still a freshman, but when the time comes and you feel that a 4th year might be the way to go, don’t let your parents dictate what to do. you’re old enough to make those kinds of decisions, and the government/school is no stranger to helping out financially with grants and loans.</p>
<p>I had planned on dropping my honors seminar this semester because I was afraid that I’d be burned out before going to grad school this fall and I didn’t see the point of stressing myself if I wasn’t going to get the honors (I was cutting very close to the GPA requirements). But my professor convinced me otherwise (haha, gave me funding). I must say, I am SO glad that I did this!!! I learned SO much about writing history. I feel that I really benefited because all this time gave me a chance to improve my analyzing skills which is important for skimming texts while researching and other things.</p>
<p>So I think staying in for your fourth year will do you really good because that’s when professors really pay attention to their seniors, especially those heading off to grad schools (ESPECIALLY for MA and PhDs) because they feel that you’re mature enough to handle the demands that they want to impose on you and treat you with real respect. It’s really a whole big difference and I have to admit that this is my best year academic-wise (freshman and sophomore years still kick butt in terms of social life). </p>
<p>So don’t worry about your parents- try to explain to them the benefits of staying on for your fourth year- you will be much better prepared and less likely to drop out of graduate school.</p>
<p>One more tip - be aware of how many and which modern research languages (and/or ancient languages) PhD programs in your area of History expect. Even if you have one from HS (which seems likely based on your post) be sure to keep it active by reading journal articles and so forth on a regular basis.</p>
<p>Too much language study is one of the first roadblocks to good progress on the humanities PhD track.</p>
<p>I’ll be graduating this June with only 3 years of undergraduate study. I was worried about the same thing you’re discussing, but I decided to graduate anyway. It really came down to money for me, and since I’m nearing the end, I can tell you I think it was the right thing for me. I was just accepted into a public policy and urban affairs MA program so the early graduation wasn’t a liability on my admission. Do what you think is right. I had several faculty and advisers encourage me to stay another year, and I’m really glad I ignored them.</p>
<p>I imagine you can find a graduate program in either area after 3 years. But would it be the best program? Probably not. I can not speak for the applied, policy side so you might be a good fit there. But if you want an academic career in history, going to the best possible school is vital if you actually want a job. </p>
<p>We would not consider someone after 3 years. It’s not how many 'boxes you can check", but what you’ve accomplished and learned along the way. Its whether you are someone who knows what they are getting into, and has the wherewithall and maturity to finish a PhD and the passion to succeed in an academic career. Having said that, we would be quite concerned about what appears (however erroneously) an extremely instrumental approach to education. Real academic passion, the kind that sticks, that takes you through to a career in lifelong good research is generated from immersion and exploration and swells from the ground up. I would be quite concerned that you are getting into it for all the wrong reasons, without enough experience and immersion in the discipline and without academic maturity. One will wonder, what is your rush? You’d not be a safe bet because you look like you are not interested in learning for the sake of learning, but are motivated for extrinsic rather than intrinsic reasons. This approach might be perfectly appropriate for someone interested in something more pragmatic like a business, or an applied field, it seems misaligned for someone who wants a PhD. </p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong, I applaud your focus in many ways. And it is great if your passion today sticks for life. I also know the cost of education is no tiny matter. But as an academic I find, from the bit you’ve shared, your extremely instrumental approach a bit off-putting. But only until I remind myself that you are a young person who, because you grew up in this ‘admissions-frenzy’ nonsense, you’ve perhaps felt pressured to spend your teen years gaming your resume for college. </p>
<p>Just remember, it is not a game, a race, a to-do list. Great to have goals, but try a broader, slower, more open and ambiguous approach. Explore. The experience along the way to the goals is as, if not MORE, important than the goals. There will always be goals to approach, but if you rush to each one, you will miss the whole point of them. This is especially true at your age and experience where life is soooo amazing and precious and it would be a real shame if you missed out on this best part because of too much focus on getting past it.</p>
<p>I’m sorry it seems that way. It’s hard to convey exactly the way I feel in such a forum. I absolutely love college, and really, that is why I want to enter academia–it is an environment of learning, of engaging with ideas, and of being able to understand the world better. Perhaps that’s why I don’t feel horrible about the prospect of graduating early…if I then go directly on to graduate school, it’s still doing what I love. Of course, four years of college would be terrific, there are so many courses that I’d like to take, opportunities that I’d like to take advantage of, elements of college life that I enjoy. </p>
<p>My concern in this regard was simply whether or not graduating early would prove detrimental to graduate study–after all, I do need to have concern for my parents, and their ability to help fund my education. You’re right in that worrying about the present moment is important…my generation has been pushed a little too much into setting ambitious goals for the future. But I also need to determine whether or not my present actions are enabling me to have the future that I would like. </p>
<p>Oh, and this week was my first taste of getting a visceral thrill out of research. One of those moments in which after sifting through 20 sources, you find one single line that gives you a glimpse into the bigger picture that you’re aiming for…ahh, it was a rush.</p>