Transfer from a so-so undergrad history program or finish with a 4.0: the grad school prospects.
May 16, 2010 10:25 AM   Subscribe

I'm going to be graduating from a small 'top 25 private university in the West', not the best, not terrible, with a 4.0. I'm interested in pursuing History as a career and want to get into a great Ph.d program. (Interests include American, Post-Modern, historiography, historical memory.) Recently, I've considered transferring to a top private university with more prestige: will this benefit me in the application process or will my glowing recommendations, independent research and grades equally impress from my middle tier school? At this point, it seems like a gamble either way.

By top history grad program, I mean any of this page: http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-history-schools/rankings

It should also be known that my history faculty love me, publish and are active in their respective fields.
posted by robox to Education (16 answers total)
 
You can't transfer to another undergraduate program if you're a graduating senior, if that's what you're talking about here.

If you're still an underclassman and have got great faculty mentorship where you are, realize that you may be benefiting from the "big fish, small pond" factor and be grateful for it--your work and recommendations will stand for themselves.
posted by availablelight at 10:36 AM on May 16, 2010 [2 favorites]


Best answer: Strong letters are a really, really important thing when it comes to the application process. If you're currently working with well-regarded faculty who can write you letters to state that you walk on water, that could very well be worth significantly more than a stronger school name on a diploma but either mediocre letters from faculty at the new school or the potential weirdness of having all of your letters come from your current program while not graduating from that program.

I'm not in History, but I recently did the application dance for a doctorate in Philosophy, and it was indicated to me in that process that the letters mattered most, so I would keep the quality and availability of writers in mind in your decision.
posted by Rallon at 10:37 AM on May 16, 2010 [2 favorites]


You might want to find out where current grad students in your PhD program(s) of choice did their undergraduate work. If some have come from your school or similar places, then don't bother transferring; but if they all have degrees from schools that are ranked significantly higher than yours, you should give serious thought to a transfer. Check websites or departmental newsletters, where info about incoming students is often published at the beginning of the school year. Also, it's not uncommon for PhD programs to have informal feeder schools that supply them with incoming grad students who are reliably well-prepared, so if you see some undergraduate institutions represented over and over among PhD students, pay attention.
posted by philokalia at 10:50 AM on May 16, 2010


Your story is very similar to mine (only in English/Literature instead of History) and it worked out for me. I'd stay.
posted by gerryblog at 10:54 AM on May 16, 2010


Stay where you are. How are you going to explain in interviews why you switched? You can't say it wasn't a good fit or that you weren't happy with the resources, because clearly it is and you are.

I think it would look bad if it became clear you only switched for prestige, when professors at your current/former school have treated you so well.
posted by Solon and Thanks at 11:25 AM on May 16, 2010


(To expand on my comment, I'm basically agreeing with Rallon about hte "potential weirdness of having all of your letters come from your current program while not graduating from that program.")
posted by Solon and Thanks at 11:26 AM on May 16, 2010


Best answer: Stay. You've already got good recs coming down the pike, you don't have to deal with any of the transfer hassle, and you'll potentially save some money (if they made you take a few extra classes, say). Reputation only matters when your profs know you. As long as your program isn't a complete joke (top-25 is not) it won't make nearly as much of a difference. /history, 3.97
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 11:59 AM on May 16, 2010


Speaking as someone outside of the humanities (but still in academia), I would definitely stay at your school. A lot of graduate school admissions are based on letters and your recommenders' connections. Having professors who care about you and can talk extensively about your ability to do high quality research is more valuable than a better branded degree without strong recommendations.
posted by eisenkr at 12:31 PM on May 16, 2010


Another vote for stay: I went to a small liberal arts college for undergrad, one which many people outside of Michigan do not know. Yet, I benefited from a fantastic relationship with my advisers, and significant original research done as independent studies, and I was able to successfully apply to a Big Ten university for their MA/PhD program in history.
posted by dhens at 1:12 PM on May 16, 2010


Grad school rankings from a magazine are completely worthless.

The AHA (or similar) associations' rankings are slightly less worthless.

Check out the gradschool tag but basically, finding an advisor with whom you can work and flourish is 95% of PhD success. Being at a 'good program' might be 2%.

So, ask your current profs for some reading lists. Try to sit in on grad classes. Find work that blows your mind and you like the methodology and phenomenon and you could expand it.

And don't transfer.
posted by k8t at 1:13 PM on May 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


Also: You probably already know this, but if you contact people you would like to work with in the graduate program and they mention their willingness to advise you (contingent on your being admitted, of course), you should definitely mention this in your letter of intent.
posted by dhens at 1:14 PM on May 16, 2010


Best answer: Here's my 2ยข as someone who has sat on the admissions committee of a moderately selective humanities PhD program. IMO, the main question you should be asking when deciding whether to transfer is, "where have people from this BA program gone to grad school in the past?" That is one of the best indicators of your real chances of admission to a top program in the future.

There are a couple of reasons for this emphasis on the BA program's reputation as well as the applicant's individual performance.

First, everyone applying to top PhD programs is going to be a great student. Applicants for our PhD program have stellar grades (3.75 and up) and stellar recommendations. They all write well, and most have written undergraduate honors theses or done equivalent independent research with close faculty advising. They all think independently and creatively; many have teaching experience already, as peer tutors or the like. On paper, our applicants can all walk on water. How do we choose? Well, it helps if you come from a program we're already familiar with, and if you've been taught by people we respect.

Second, it is vitally important for humanities PhD programs to pick the right students to admit and to fund. We want to produce successful scholars; moreover, we can't afford to make too many mistakes. If we choose students who end up failing, or dropping out, or taking 10 years to finish, central administrators and financial people get restless and start to talk about falling productivity and punitive cuts in funding. This is to be avoided at all costs.

So in practice, given a choice between a 4.0 from a lesser school and a 3.85 from a school that has sent us great students in the past, we may well choose the latter. Sure, sometimes students from long-shot schools are brilliant; but there are more than enough top-notch applicants from programs we know and respect. We have limited resources, and we would rather not gamble.
posted by philokalia at 2:01 PM on May 16, 2010 [3 favorites]


As availablelight said, "You can't transfer to another undergraduate program if you're a graduating senior." Transfers are generally not possible if you've completed more than 60 credits (generally two years) at your current university. Everything else is moot.
posted by mnemonic at 2:37 PM on May 16, 2010


Philokalia's advice is the best in the thread so far. And having done graduate admissions in history for the past five years at a respected but not top-ranked program, and having directed the program for the past three years, I'll also second the point that letters of recommendation matter a lot: in particular, letters of recommendation that identify an applicant's specific strengths.

Almost all recommendations these days praise the subject highly, so I look for evidence that the letter writer knows the subject well enough, and cares about him or her enough, to write a detailed letter. That kind of letter will be easier to get from professors with whom you have worked for several semesters.

That said, I usually put more weight on the writing sample and the statement of purpose. And even if the grad application calls the latter a "personal statement," do NOT use it to talk about how much you love history and have always loved it ever since you were a wee tot on your grandpa's knee. The statement of purpose should do three or four things: (1) explain what area of history you wish to study--e.g. early modern European intellectual history, perhaps with a focus on historiography--and why; (2) explain how your undergraduate studies have prepared you to pursue this subject at the graduate level; (3) explain why the program to which you are applying is well suited to your interests; and, if necessary, (4) address any inconsistencies, oddities, or apparent weaknesses in your record.
posted by brianogilvie at 4:08 PM on May 16, 2010 [1 favorite]


I'm no expert but I work at a major nonprofit organization and I'm on a team with several colleagues developing a fellowship program for young people interested in nonprofit work. We specifically decided that we'd give recommendation letters less consideration than the applicant's essays and resumes because chances are that if someone agreed to write a recommendation letter for you, it's going to be glowing. It's rare that people write non-glowing recommendation letters because why bother? We are much more interested in whether the applicants can communicate well on their applications and in their resumes. We're not even asking for recommendation letters until we interview them in person which is pretty late in our process. So while YMMV I thought that might be helpful to know.
posted by kat518 at 5:23 PM on May 16, 2010


A good record (recommendations, grades and writing samples) is better than a top school, or I wouldn't have gotten accepted anywhere. And I did get accepted into a History program of the sort you are interested in, from a much less prestigious undergrad.

Grad programs are less interested in name than other places; having recommendations from people who are active researchers is more important.
posted by jb at 8:30 AM on May 17, 2010


« Older Help my waterlogged iPod   |   Make my flighty resume look more solid, please! Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.