really online Ph D
January 3, 2010 9:25 PM Subscribe
Recommend an online course of study leading to a Ph D in history
I am interested in a completely online or distance course of study. Last time I looked, many schools required a limited residency. Since I live on Maui, in addition to other reasons, this is not feasible. I am particularly interested in American History. I can attend the University of Hawaii at no cost, but I would have to fly to Oahu, an expensive proposition. I have two master's degrees.
I am interested in a completely online or distance course of study. Last time I looked, many schools required a limited residency. Since I live on Maui, in addition to other reasons, this is not feasible. I am particularly interested in American History. I can attend the University of Hawaii at no cost, but I would have to fly to Oahu, an expensive proposition. I have two master's degrees.
Sorry to say, but I doubt you are going to find an accredited program that offers an online PhD. As decathecting said, it does, however, depend on your goals. If you just want a PhD and don't care about its quality, you may have slightly more luck, but the academic job market for PhDs in history is woeful, even for graduates of top programs.
posted by proj at 10:24 PM on January 3, 2010 [4 favorites]
posted by proj at 10:24 PM on January 3, 2010 [4 favorites]
You could do a distance PhD at a UK university on a full time or part time basis, though full might be more difficult to arrange. UK PhDs tend to be quicker to complete anyway which might be an advantage, though they may not carry the same respect as a US origin PhD. They would be accredited however. You would likely need to make some trips to the UK home institution though I guess this could be avoided with the right supervisor.
posted by biffa at 2:16 AM on January 4, 2010
posted by biffa at 2:16 AM on January 4, 2010
If you don't need the PhD for a job, I have kind of a screwball suggestion: why not just research and write a book in the field that interests you (probably something more specific than American History)? If you have two MAs already, you should be all set with research skills, and most of your time as a PhD candidate would be spent writing your dissertation anyway. I just finished a round of PhD applications, and none of them offered any sort of distance programs-- since the practical purpose of getting a PhD is qualifying for an academic career, a huge part of the degree is becoming part of an academic community.
posted by oinopaponton at 5:09 AM on January 4, 2010
posted by oinopaponton at 5:09 AM on January 4, 2010
As far as I know, the UK universities are the only English-language programs which will permit you to earn a Ph.D. without a residency requirement. Unfortunately, their interest--and expertise--in American history is perhaps less than you would find in an equivalently prestigious institution in the US, in no small part due to the availability of original sources. I wouldn't worry about whether or not the UK Ph.D.s are respected. They are. Or, at least, the extent to which they aren't has far more to do with the regular reasons a given program might not be respected--faculty, quality of previous grads, etc.--than its national origin.
But I think it pretty likely that you misunderstand the nature of these programs. The reason UK institutions offer these programs is not because they offer online courses, but because they don't involve courses. You get a Ph.D. by writing a dissertation. That's it. This is expected to take three to five years, as opposed to the normal five to seven, because you aren't spending a year or two taking classes. Given that you aren't taking or teaching classes, there doesn't appear to be all that much you need to be on campus for, and in recognition of this, many institutions are content to let you study and write wherever you like. The result is not as much a distance learning program as it is a non-resident researcher arrangement.
You can do this, in theory anyways, but you're going to have to find a program and a professor willing to deal with you and your project. I think you'll find that an avocational interest on your part will not be sufficiently compelling to attract much attention.
This is because unlike undergraduate degrees, Ph.D.s aren't something you get just for the getting most of the time. They represent too great an investment by the institution for them to take on any student that wants to attend. Doctorates are generally only pursued by people who want to become professional academics of some stripe. Pursuing this course of study to become a more well rounded person isn't something most people can afford, and because such a motivation is not likely to lead to high volumes of quality research, most institutions have no incentive to encourage such dabbling. Furthermore, becoming an academic almost certainly means leaving Maui, since there may as well not be any jobs there at all given the likelihood of your actually getting one there. So if you aren't willing to leave Maui for a program, would you be willing to do so for a job? If not, I think you're going to have a very hard time convincing someone to take you on as a student.
I think you need to spend some more time considering your career and professional goals.
posted by valkyryn at 5:48 AM on January 4, 2010 [3 favorites]
But I think it pretty likely that you misunderstand the nature of these programs. The reason UK institutions offer these programs is not because they offer online courses, but because they don't involve courses. You get a Ph.D. by writing a dissertation. That's it. This is expected to take three to five years, as opposed to the normal five to seven, because you aren't spending a year or two taking classes. Given that you aren't taking or teaching classes, there doesn't appear to be all that much you need to be on campus for, and in recognition of this, many institutions are content to let you study and write wherever you like. The result is not as much a distance learning program as it is a non-resident researcher arrangement.
You can do this, in theory anyways, but you're going to have to find a program and a professor willing to deal with you and your project. I think you'll find that an avocational interest on your part will not be sufficiently compelling to attract much attention.
This is because unlike undergraduate degrees, Ph.D.s aren't something you get just for the getting most of the time. They represent too great an investment by the institution for them to take on any student that wants to attend. Doctorates are generally only pursued by people who want to become professional academics of some stripe. Pursuing this course of study to become a more well rounded person isn't something most people can afford, and because such a motivation is not likely to lead to high volumes of quality research, most institutions have no incentive to encourage such dabbling. Furthermore, becoming an academic almost certainly means leaving Maui, since there may as well not be any jobs there at all given the likelihood of your actually getting one there. So if you aren't willing to leave Maui for a program, would you be willing to do so for a job? If not, I think you're going to have a very hard time convincing someone to take you on as a student.
I think you need to spend some more time considering your career and professional goals.
posted by valkyryn at 5:48 AM on January 4, 2010 [3 favorites]
It may be of use to you to have a look at the UK institutions which have American Studies research groups, they are rated in this table on their results in the last research assessment exercise.
I will also reiterate what valkyryn says, an insitution will be more interested if they can see you have something that you can demonstrate you are committed to, they will be wary of taking on someone who is doing a PhD for the sake of it as bitter experience indicates a much lower success rate. Your changes of being accepted at a Uk institution will (in my experience) be significantly raised if you can pay your own way, fees wise.
posted by biffa at 9:46 AM on January 4, 2010
I will also reiterate what valkyryn says, an insitution will be more interested if they can see you have something that you can demonstrate you are committed to, they will be wary of taking on someone who is doing a PhD for the sake of it as bitter experience indicates a much lower success rate. Your changes of being accepted at a Uk institution will (in my experience) be significantly raised if you can pay your own way, fees wise.
posted by biffa at 9:46 AM on January 4, 2010
Big problem with doing a PhD online: there aren't enough books online yet. In history, most research is not published in journals, but in books. And half the journals aren't even online. I am currently finishing a PhD in history while at a distance from my university, and I could not do it if I didn't have access to a university library here. To do a PhD in history, you must have access to academic history books, some of which are printed only in runs of a few hundred and aren't even accessible on Amazon -- and if they are, they are prohibitive expensive. A friend of a friend in New Zealand managed to do a distance-learning history masters from the University of Wellington or of Auckland, but could not go on to the PhD because it was impossible to do without access to a university library. If you have a local college with a library but no history program, you might be able to get what you need on interlibrary loan.
If you can get a hold of the books, there may still be no reason to do a PhD unless you think that you need a) the coursework or b) the guidance, neither of which can be provided well at a distance. If what you are interested in is doing independent historical research, just go ahead and start playing with archives, and reading what history books you can get. That's what PhD students in history do. No one teaches us how to research -- they have us read a bunch of history books, talk about them, and then throw us into the deep end of an archive. Some of us drown in the deep paper end. You could use local archives, or online sources (the CIA have a lot up); there are also published sources in paper - but they tend to be in the university libraries.
If you want to have your work published in journals, you will have to engage with other academic historians and recent research, but no one will check your credentials -- indeed, the review will be double blind (you don't know name of reviewers, they don't know your name). For books, you will either need to know editors (for chapters in books) -- who you meet at academic conferences, etc -- or submit a manuscript with or without a literary agent. Again, to be taken seriously, you should be aware of (but not obsessed with) the current research in the field of history you are working in. But it's not impossible to be an independent history researcher -- some excellent social and demographic history in my field is done by independent scholars (aka those without a job in a university).
posted by jb at 7:07 PM on January 4, 2010
If you can get a hold of the books, there may still be no reason to do a PhD unless you think that you need a) the coursework or b) the guidance, neither of which can be provided well at a distance. If what you are interested in is doing independent historical research, just go ahead and start playing with archives, and reading what history books you can get. That's what PhD students in history do. No one teaches us how to research -- they have us read a bunch of history books, talk about them, and then throw us into the deep end of an archive. Some of us drown in the deep paper end. You could use local archives, or online sources (the CIA have a lot up); there are also published sources in paper - but they tend to be in the university libraries.
If you want to have your work published in journals, you will have to engage with other academic historians and recent research, but no one will check your credentials -- indeed, the review will be double blind (you don't know name of reviewers, they don't know your name). For books, you will either need to know editors (for chapters in books) -- who you meet at academic conferences, etc -- or submit a manuscript with or without a literary agent. Again, to be taken seriously, you should be aware of (but not obsessed with) the current research in the field of history you are working in. But it's not impossible to be an independent history researcher -- some excellent social and demographic history in my field is done by independent scholars (aka those without a job in a university).
posted by jb at 7:07 PM on January 4, 2010
« Older Is there a standard and proven "this is fair use"... | What does 20% savings really mean? Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by decathecting at 9:33 PM on January 3, 2010 [1 favorite]