<p>I'm considering getting my PhD in history (ancient), and I'm looking at top level undergrad schools. Dartmouth, Yale, UC Berkeley, Stanford, etc. Which of these schools or similar schools are well-known in helping you get into a good grad program? I've heard places like Harvard are no help to undergrads.</p>
<p>Among the top ten producers of history PhD.s per 100 undergrads are:</p>
<p>Yale, Reed, Swarthmore, Wesleyan, Carleton, Oberlin, Pomona, and UChicago.</p>
<p>Having said that, it is far too early as a high school student to have already decided that you want to be a History professor for the rest of your life.</p>
<p>"Among the top ten producers of history PhD.s per 100 undergrads are:
Yale, Reed, Swarthmore, Wesleyan, Carleton, Oberlin, Pomona, and UChicago."</p>
<p>Just curious, what are the other two in the top ten?</p>
<p>interesteddad- lol yeah, but I've wanted to since I was a kid..................yeah, I was a boring kid.....but it might help to know</p>
<p>I'm not sure, momrath, but I'd bet St. John's is one.</p>
<p>Oops. I left out Grinnel. Sorry.</p>
<p>I intentionally left out "Grace College and Seminary" as I suspect that is a bit of an aberation. Doctor of Theological History?</p>
<p>Reed College posts the top ten list in most fields:</p>
<p><a href="http://web.reed.edu/ir/phd.html%5B/url%5D">http://web.reed.edu/ir/phd.html</a></p>
<p>The actual rankings vary a bit depending on which ten year period you look at, but not too much. Schools move up or down a spot, but the same suspects stay pretty consistent. Reed picked an odd ten-year period (1992 to 2001) that tends to favor them, not that there's anything wrong with that!.</p>
<p>Reed conveniently leaves off a couple of fields, like Econ., in which they don't rank so highly. I have the complete National Science Foundation spreadsheet that I found somewhere, but it's huge and not calculated on a per capita basis.</p>
<p>Note that these lists do not include MDs or Law or business degrees. So these lists tend to favor schools that produce a lot of academic careers -- researchers, college professors, think-tankers, etc. It does correlate pretty well with schools that are regarded to be "academically intense" or "intellectual" or "nerdy" (pick your phrase!).</p>
<p>Having a good GPA at any very good school and good relationships with at least two well-established profesors who can write recs for you when you apply to graduate programs (preferably those letters will go to people who know their names and reputations if not them presonally) will help you get into a good grad school. In terms of getting to know profs, an LAC may be a better bet, but if you prefer a larger school, just make sure to make direct contact with faculty members--visit during office hours, participate in class, be more than a number. As you go through your undergraduate career you will determine which specific area of history most intersts you and then will apply to grad programs that are strong in a certain area, and top-rated history programs extend well beyond the Ivies; for example, some schools, like UVa, are especially strong in American history; others, like the University of Wisconsin, are rated in the top 10 in many sub-fields. </p>
<p>At the undergrad level I would not worry unduly about the school most likely to get you into a good grad program because there are so many excellent undergrad history departments; the key is to go where you will do best and have the best experience in every way; while it is true, as posters on this thread and other previous threads have noted, that somem of the better LACS have high proportions of graduates who go on to get PH.D.'s., people from many schools are successful in that pursuit.</p>
<p>These are the Wallstreet Journal Rankings of the best feeder schools for elite grad schools:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.wsjclassroom.com/college/feederschools.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.wsjclassroom.com/college/feederschools.htm</a>
<a href="http://www.wsjclassroom.com/pdfs/wsj_college_092503.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.wsjclassroom.com/pdfs/wsj_college_092503.pdf</a></p>
<p>The numbers of PhDs produced really doesn't tell you how helpful a school is in getting you into grad school, rather it tells you the leaning of the students. At many top colleges most students want professional schools (law, biz, med).</p>
<p>Doing well at any top or reasonably good college and on your GREs will get you into a good grad school for history.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>The numbers of PhDs produced really doesn't tell you how helpful a school is in getting you into grad school, rather it tells you the leaning of the students. At many top colleges most students want professional schools (law, biz, med).</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Right. </p>
<p>So, if your ambition is to get into a PhD program in history, why would you select a school that caterers mostly to law, biz, med customers? Wouldn't it make sense to at least consider schools that have a proven track record in catering to the needs of future History PhD customers?</p>
<p>The original question was very specific -- history PhD. I think the list of top-10 per capita undergrad producers of history PhD's is at least a relevant data point.</p>
<p>Actually I would have to argue with that. My friends at Princeton sailed into PhD programs with little competition from each other. Again, I think at some schools, the "intellectual" schools, many plan to get PhDs. They compete with each other for admissions at the top grad schools. No one school wants to take too many from a single undergrad institution. So my guess is that a top school without too many wannabe history grad students would be the best bet.</p>
<p>Who says the mentioned schools do more catering? They simply have a larger percentage of would be PhDs. Those guys are loved at schools where most are would be MBAs! Let's not forget it's the PhDs doing the teaching!!</p>
<p>It almost goes without saying that Princeton would be great to get into almost any post-grad program. For the most part, the top Ivies rank near the top of the list in total future PhD production, but fall down the list in per capita production because of the smaller percentage of their undergrad students interested in academic or research careers. Actually, in terms of total numbers, the huge state schools (Berkeley, Mich, UTexas, UWisc, UCLA, Ohio State, UCSanta Cruz) rank very high on the NSF PhD production lists for social sciences (I don't have data for total "History" PhDs.)</p>
<p>The value of the per capita PhD lists is that they highlight some schools to consider that may not be so obvious.</p>
<p>Agree. I just wouldn't want people to think Swat would help them more than H.</p>
<p>Certainly, a Harvard degree is excellent for grad school admissions. However, if we are talking about preparation for an PhD/academic career path, Swat probably provides more for its "typical" student than Harvard does.</p>
<p>Part of that is the point you mentioned: the focus of the student body is more oriented in that direction.</p>
<p>Part of it is the ability of a smaller school to provide very close student/faculty working relationships. The "typical" Swarthmore student will have spent four years in very small group settings, participating in research projects with professors, and generally enjoying the kind of mentoring that is good preparation for PhD programs. While some Harvard students enjoy that, the typical student does not, simply due to the size and the relatively weak undergrad teaching focus of the university. Swarthmore, in particular, is somewhat unique in that its honors program requires a major independent project and oral examination by a panel of outside experts in the field -- essentially an undergrad version of a discertation review.</p>
<p>I actually think the real strength of the undergrad program at Harvard is the unmatched resources for a very wide range of professional level extracurriculars. For example, no other college or university matches their student run community service program or the level of professionalism of their student newspaper. These kinds of activities are a major focus for the undergrads, more so than the classroom "book-learning" experience or one-on-one interaction with the faculty.</p>