• Make sure you know what languages you need to learn in order to be considered for major graduate programs, and start learning them right away

• If your department has an honors track where you are able to write a thesis, start asking questions about this now. If your grades are not good enough to join the honors program, work seriously on improving them. But, graduate programs require writing samples, and the vast majority of successful submissions are undergraduate or Master's theses.

• Decide generally what subject matter you prefer, and become close to the professor who teaches this subject. Go to office hours. Take and do well in every class of theirs you can. You need to have solid references from history professors within (or close to) the field you hope to study in grad school.

I'm in grad school working to become a medieval history professor.

The first thing you should do is read around on the internet about the current jobs market for the humanities in general, and especially for medieval history. Visit the Chronicle for Higher Education's website and browse through their articles about graduate school, the jobs market, and adjuncting. The overall picture is rough - there are far more qualified candidates on the market than their are jobs, and a lot of people end up teaching part time for terrible pay, or leaving academia to pursue work elsewhere once they've finished their PhDs. In medieval history, there are only a few dozen jobs per year (a generous count - if you're looking for something tenure track and specialized, you're talking about numbers of positions you can count on your fingers), and very stiff competition to land those jobs. I have a lot of friends who are on the market right now, and though none of them are currently unemployed, it's rough. I don't say any of this to discourage you from pursuing this as a career: I knew the situation, and I still went to grad school and don't regret the decision. But if you plan to pursue medieval history as a passion, you should do it with your eyes wide open, knowing that you might walk away from grad school with a deep and exciting knowledge of the past - but no academic career.

Having painted that rather bleak picture, I should add that history PhDs do get good jobs - you were right to convince your parents that this is a real career you can pursue. Many of these jobs are just not inside academia, and might require you to shift directions after you get your degree.

Cautions aside, what does the career path look like? You'll obviously be applying to graduate programs. Most people get an MA first, and then apply to PhD programs. Sometimes you'll be accepted directly into a PhD program and will earn your MA along the way. No matter what you do, though, your goal is to pay as little as possible along the way. Good American programs - the ones that have the professors you want to study with - fund their graduate students. This funding is usually your tuition and enough money to pay many or most of your basic living expenses. If you're lucky, you might get health insurance, and hopefully enough to avoid going into debt. You do not want to go into debt getting a history PhD - history professors don't get rich, and you'd spend the rest of your life paying off grad school debt. It's not like med school where you pay to play; you shouldn't go into a PhD program unless they're willing to fund you through the process.

The funding you're offered varies from school to school, but usually requires you to teach for the university in exchange for your pay. This can be a lot off work, but it's important training and preparation for the job market. Some of the top tier schools (like Princeton) make the teaching optional, but you need experience to be competitive on the job market. Some schools pay you well for not a lot of work; others will ask you to teach two classes per semester and pay you below the poverty line. (My school pays us fairly to TA - assist a professor teaching - one class per semester, which gives us a lot of experience without a crippling amount of work on the average week; it's pretty much ideal.)

That said, many/most MA programs don't fund their students. If your application isn't strong enough to land you directly in a funded PhD program, you might have to pay your way through a 2 year masters. This isn't ideal, but it's common. Try not to get yourself into too much debt.

Once you're in a PhD program, you'll spend a few years (often 2) taking classes (usually discussion-based seminars). You'll almost certainly be expected to pass language examinations in your first 2 years (more on this below). You'll then have qualifying / comprehensive exams, which vary from school to school but usually involve some sort off massive reading list (mine was about 150 books) concerning your major and minor fields (my major fields were both medieval, and my minor was in 19th c. history). You then have some combination of written and oral exams, almost kill yourself from stress, and then move on to your dissertation proposal. Once this is approved, you spend the rest of your time in grad school researching and writing. Hopefully you'll continue to have funding through this whole process; if your funding runs out, you might end up adjuncting (teaching part time for near minimum wage) or applying for outside grants. If you study something medieval, you'll almost certainly be applying for external funding to spend a year in Europe working with unpublished archives. These applications are a nightmare to complete, but the payoff is great if you get one.

On average, it takes about 9-10 years to finish grad school. People in my program tend to do it a little more quickly (often 7; I'm on track to finish in 7). Then you hit the job market, and if you're lucky get a tenure-track job and spend the half dozen or so years working even harder than you did in grad school to publish a book and articles so you can pass tenure review and not be fired. But that's getting ahead of ourselves.

Right now, your biggest concern is becoming a competitive grad school applicant. Where you go to grad school unfortunately matters a lot; a recent study found that half the people who get jobs came from a short list of elite schools ('it's not what you know but who you know...'). So you want to get into a good program if you can. And you absolutely want to be a strong enough applicant that you're offered funding. To do this, you need:

(continued in comment)

All good advice so far. I'd only add that you MUST get all A's or almost all A's in your history courses, and have a good overall GPA, no less than 3.5. And even that is cutting it close. An occasional B+ or even A- is "ok", like 1-2, but no more. Otherwise it's a waste of time applying for grad school. First, you won't get into the top programs at all. Second, any program who admits applicants with a mediocre record will be of no help to you in the long term. The job market is ruthless in history. Only the best of the best (we're talking Harvard, Berkeley, etc) are realistically competitive for tt-jobs. And even then many wind up with nothing.

I would say this: "Don't do it!" The job market it horrible, and there's no sign of this improving. You will spend the next 10-12 years of you life with no money (and only a little debt if you're lucky), working your ass off, only to finish with a degree that is completely useless in any field other than academia. Want to have kids? Won't be happening until your mid-30s at best. Want to own a house? Won't be happening until your 40s at best. It is true that you might get really, really, really lucky and land a permanent job after years of contract/adjunct positions. But in my mind, it's not worth the gamble. Sorry to be a bummer, but someone needs to tell you the truth.

Source: I am a recent history PhD and contract lecturer at a major British university. And my life kinda sucks. If I could do it over again, I would choose a career in which I could actually get a permanent job and make decent money.

I really have to reiterate the "learn a second language" advice that's been given out. Many times, professors I knew were looking for research assistants. When they learned that the only language I spoke was English, I seemed a whole lot less useful.

Some tips for surviving and mastering undergrad history:

• Learn time management - You'll need it when you;re taking 4 400-level courses and writing a senior thesis. A lot of times, professors will assign a term paper at the begining of the semester and collect it at the end. It's up to you to budget your time to research, write, and proof it in addition to all your other course work. Waiting till the last minute just won't cut it.

• Learn to skim read - I made the mistake of trying to read every assigned book cover to cover. When you have three 350-500 page books assigned every two-three weeks in addition to your other assignments and college life, it's impossible. Read the first and last chapter and the first and last paragraphs of each chapter. Surf for the main ideas.

• Learn to speak up - You'll be taking a bunch of discussion based classes. For most of mine, participation was a huge chunk of the final grade and that was graded severely. Sitting in the back quietly listening isn't going to work.

• Learn to take notes quickly - taking notes during lectures is pretty easy. Taking notes during discussions is harder. Also, if a movie is shown in class, it's important; don't fall asleep.

• Know your professors - Get on their good sides. Know which ones you need to impress and which ones to slide by. Sometimes you'll have to stroke their egos if you want a grade. Professors will be great contacts and references later on. Get good with them.

• SAVE EVERYTHING - Scan in and upload your syllabi. Save every assignment, every email, every paper, every piece of research. You will need one day and it will be there waiting for you.

• If you have the option to write a senior thesis, do it - This is one of the greatest things you can do. It'll teach you how to manage your time. It'll teach you how to do extensive research (which you will need to do as a professor). It'll prep you for when you'll eventually have to write a Master's and PhD dissertation. And you'll have a nice writing sample to show people. Come up with your topic early. Take classes that might relate to your topic. Research, research, research (and keep it all organized). Proof it. I submitted my topic a year early, signed up for relevant classes, got an internship at a museum that catered to my topic, wrote it up during winter break, and spent the entire Spring Senior semester doing revisions (never underestimate the power of revisions). The end result was a perfect 4.0. Plan ahead and stay on top of your work.

• Have fun - Try to keep some semblance of a social life. Don't do what I did and trap yourself in your dorm/library and never surface. Make sure you study and work, but also try to have some fun. You'll produce better work if your morale is high.

What sort of history do you like? Knowing the continent where you live and attend college and would like to work will help focus responses. In the US 50% or more of the historians are employed in the public, non-education sector. That path can be very different from the academic one. How do you feel about museum work as opposed to being a professor? But there are many other types of historians in the public sector who do not work for museums. There are many possibilities.

What do you want to spend your days doing? How likely is it that you can make that happen? These are the questions to answer in advance to the degree possible, so it's good that you're asking these questions now. You need to figure out what you like about history and whether that could or would be what you actually do every day as a professor.

Academia can seem like an ivory tower from the outside, particularly once you set foot in the real world of work, which feels like acid at first. But it's very different on the inside. It can be so different that it can be completely disillusioning once you get into it, can be a completely different thing with a completely different outlook. I went in blind, not even realizing my hazy, uninformed impression of things was hazy and uninformed. I didn't even know what questions I was supposed to be asking, or that there were questions to be asked. And the www was only just starting to bust out as a thing, so finding something like this forum or researching "the life" online didn't even occur to me.

One of the many things that is not as apparent from outside the world of academia and the graduate level track towards it is the publishing requirement/burden. I happened to go to a small private liberal arts college that didn't exactly have a publishing requirement. It was a good school but professors were just expected to "stay current in their field." I didn't know that was an exception to the norm. Some published anyway, but unlike in a lot of places, we had no TA's (we had no grad school). Every professor taught every class. And that's what I fell in love with, along with the rest of the idealized image I had of professorial life. I had never really understood why TA's taught classes at some of my friends' colleges. The profs were busy doing other stuff!

Growing up, every history class had about 27 people in it bored out of their minds, who forgot everything as soon as the test was over, and 3 people drinking it up like chocolate milkshake, like it was the best story ever told (because it is!). I was always one of the latter. And by late in college, having had all different kinds of teachers and professors, I knew I could be someone who could help make history relevant and interesting for more students in a way many teachers had not been able to. I really wanted to do that, and had never otherwise felt drawn to anything in particular. I know I would have been a good teacher. And I pictured hundreds of colleges like mine dotted across the land, each in need of a steady stream of history professors, where idyllic college learning experiences were happening just like mine. I wanted to be at one of them and figured why not, particularly after a brief period in the bruise of the real world.

But as it turns out, most places have a publishing requirement. I never had any particular interest in research or publishing and didn't know this was a thing for professors given my lack of models other than the unrepresentative one I had. My value would have been in the teaching. When I saw the kinds of stuff we researched in grad school, and saw the dry things my professors were working on and had already published, and started looking for ideas for what my thesis would be about, and talking to my professors about the business/industry/outlook side of things, I started having a very different view of it.

The things people researched were so arcane, so esoteric, so seemingly minutia-focused, so different than the end-product stuff that I'd always consumed in my classes, that I couldn't imagine spending most of my time doing stuff like that instead of helping young minds grasp the wonder and the current relevance of the lives and times of people just like them in the past. And I learned a lot more about the politics of academia (which, in fairness, exists in most sectors of adult life, but young me just hadn't experienced that yet). And I learned a lot more about the grim job prospects and slow turnover, which sound as grim and slow today many years later judging by other comments here. And my ivory tower crumbled.

I'd had the most idealized delusion of what that life was like and was just flat wrong. I had the completely wrong idea about what academia for the most part was, what the lives of many or most professors were like, and how that life would relate to what I loved about history. It just wasn't a match. And I also wasn't doing well with the research or with coming up with original ideas of things to study (and was in a different country, with a system I wasn't used to). So I reached a natural stopping point and exited with my $20k debt and no prospects.

And then I was lost, because I thought that had been the answer. People said, "Well why don't you take that and go teach high school?" But I never wanted to teach high school. High school, public high school at least, is glorified baby sitting. Almost nobody gives a shit about the actual learning. I didn't, with very few exceptions, despite getting good grades. It's just something you had to do at that age - but the social part was what most of us were interested in, not the academics, not for their own sake. But my mind's fire had been lit when I got to college and it was completely different. That's what I wanted to do - help light other people's fires once they were actually ready to learn. That's the amazing and gratifying part to me and I knew I could do it. But there was no way I wanted to go teach a roomful of 30 versions of high school me six times a day for life, irrespective of subject.

Basically I just wanted to teach at a college like the one I'd gone to. I thought you just did three or four years of work, got your PhD, sent out your resumes, got a professor job, moved to a charming little college town, started teaching, slowly greyed to white, and stayed there until you ran out of interesting buttoned sweaters decades later. Even getting a job at a school like mine wouldn't have been what I had naively imagined it would be, but it would have been much closer than the likely outlook my grad school experience painted for me instead. But from what I gathered, that just wasn't the way it worked for most people trying to become history professors.

So to return to where we started - what do you like about history? If you want it to be your job, what do you want to spend most of your time doing? Do you want to be analyzing original sources (some court letter written in Latin on vellum) and wringing them out for info and insights and clues that none of the previous generations of people that studied them were able to extract or thought to try to extract and analyze? Do you want to be in there with the nuts and bolts, figuring out if some prior seminal historian drew somewhat unsupportable conclusions from the available source material, or figuring out if some new clue unearthed from a tomb last year means the whole thing needs to be reevaluated? Does that excite you? Would you look up at the clock and be surprised 6 hours had gone by without you noticing because you were so engrossed? Could you endure the possible prospect of trying to contort and whip disappointing findings into something somebody would actually publish? Would you rather be reading the accessible end results of other people's work, just learning it for your own joy, and helping young minds understand the relevance of it? There's no wrong answer here - it's just a question of how realistic your fantasies are.

No job will be perfect or give you everything you want - welcome to adult life, it takes a lot of getting used to - but is there one job that sounds like it would give you an acceptable balance of things you want and don't want? If so, how many of that job are there and how likely is it you can get one of them? That's what you should quiz this group on. Describe what you want your days to be like. Describe what you like about history, what you want to do, what you don't want to do, etc. Your answers to these things will be largely uninformed due to your lack of life experience but all you can do at any given point is give your best answer, so give it a shot. People here can give their views of how realistic your imagined future scenario is.

My experience was a long time ago, and I doubt I ever even learned all of the things that I was wrong about, possibly including some of what I've talked about here, but others here can give you a more current read of how things stand these days.

Good luck! I hope you... make history one way or another.

Former history major here...

I started out as Aerospace Engineering because that was where the money was (or so I thought). But I hated it and failed. Changed to History the following year, absolutely loved it and did really well. I was going to be a professor one day. Then I was going to be a museum curator. Now I work in IT testing Medicaid software.

My point is this - pursue your dreams, but at the same time, be willing to accept that things change and rarely go according to plan. Becoming a professor is a difficult path. It's a dog-eat-dog world. You need thick skin and your colleagues can be total assholes and your students can be just as bad. You need to want it more than your next breath. Also, bear in mind that the chances of getting tenure right out of grad school are low. You'll accrue a ton of debt and may be stuck with low-paying jobs that barely make ends meet until you can (and that's a maybe) land a professorship. Just be aware that the odds are stacked against you and you may not get it. Or you may put yourself through 8 years of grad school and $500,000 in debt only to find out you don't like it in the end.

If this is what you really want, good for you!! I wish you the best of luck. Just consider other options should things not go according to plan.

Speaking as one who followed the path you are considering (switched from STEM to history as an undergrad, did three graduate degrees, now mid-career history prof) I can say that the career is in fact mostly what I had hoped back when I was 20. What I didn't understand then were these considerations:

• job market reality (which you can read about anywhere)
• opportunity costs: earning a history Ph.D. typically takes 10 years now...that's a decade without a real income, no savings, no home equity, no nothing-- which usually means postponing retirement into your 70s
• geographical uncertainty: I very much wanted to live in one part of the country after college. Was told I had to go to another for my graduate work, which I did. But I never got back to region one-- didn't realize at 20 that an academic career almost certainly means giving up any hope of choosing where you will spend your adult life between graduate school and retirement.
• salaries: at 20 I thought my professors lived comfortable lifestyles and were solidly upper-middle class. Sadly, faculty salaries today (at least in the humanities) are at best middle class; everyone I know who is safely middle class depends on two professional incomes in the household. I've frequently seen students of mine with a new BS in accounting or computer science land jobs paying more than I earn as a full professor at mid-career
• work load: grad school isn't bad at all. But junior faculty routinely work 70-80 hour weeks before tenure; after that it's 50-60 hour weeks during the academic year. This is tempered somewhat by summers, during which you will work without pay but for fewer hours.
• status: once upon a time professors were accorded high status in American society. That is no longer true, for what it's worth; quite often we're either mocked for being out-of-touch or worse, for deciding to pursue a career that doesn't pay as well as _____ does.
• stress: many of my faculty colleagues suffer from significant work-related stress, to the point that it impacts their health and relationships. Sure, this happens in all jobs, and obviously there are many more stressful careers. But most people considering faculty life don't realize what a toll having your identity tied to your job can take, and how annoying it is to suffer from insomnia because you can't stop thinking about work at night.

Beyond these observations, I would say that above all else it takes luck to become a professor. I've been at it long enough to have served on a couple of dozen faculty search committees. By the time we get 200-300 applicants for a single position in US history, let's say, luck starts to play a role: at least 50% of those applicants are qualified on paper, but we have to cut them to a pool of 20 very quickly. From those 20 we cull to 10, which get Skype or conference interviews. Those ten are cut to three we invite to campus, from which we hire one. But literally every one of the top 20 (at least!) are very well qualified in research, have good teaching records, and offer outstanding references. The decision ultimately comes down to "fit," in which luck plays a very big role.

I don't recommend any of my students plan on an academic career. If it's possible to earn a Ph.D. without going into debt or taking 15 years to do it, and you have some alternative plan for a career afterward, it may be worth trying to get an academic job. But it's foolhardy to plan your life around it, especially as higher ed continues to shed faculty positions and the humanities remain under fire from STEM-centric politicians and administrators.

All of my advice and then some has been said elsewhere in this post.

The one thing I would add is to not be afraid of looking outside of the US for grad school, and if you can, try to take a class or workshop in the education field. A lot of M.A. and PhD programs kind of throw you into the classroom as a TA without adequate preparation in my opinion.

I would emphasize the languages and forming relationships with a few of your profs.

I'm doing my M.A. in history right now, so if you have any more specific questions for applications, reference letters, the workload, etc let me know!

Was in a very similar situation to you. Moved from Engineering to Classics at UT. Unfortunately I never got farther on that track than my BA, so the only advice I can give you is if things don't work out, law school is way easier than you'd think. Also the Classics Lounge in Wagner Hall is a great place to get work done.

My ex was a history major because he loved the topic so much and it came so naturally to him. He never investigated the job market and on graduation realized there was nothing he could do with his degree and he had no job prospects lined up. He is now back in school working towards a STEM / vocational degree.

Pick a job now and use college to make yourself the most competitive candidate possible. Do internships. Network. Make connections. Shadow people at their jobs. Make excellent grades and aim to be if not the best then the top 5-10 of your program. Even if your job focus changes as you gain experience this foundation will set you up for success in whatever you eventually pursue.

I know I'm super late to the party here, but I have a BA in History and a BA in English. I decided to double major in what I loved and sort of see what happens. I did originally want to pursue both of these academically and get an MA or PhD., but as I got closer to graduating, I realized that more school isn't what I wanted. One important thing to understand about any degree in the humanities is that it isn't like anything on the STEM track - the things you learn aren't going to help you get a job, it's the skills you pick up along the way that will help you.

I could write a 20 page research paper on any historical topic and I'd enjoy it, but my employer really wouldn't care. What they do care about is that I can look into and investigate anything (because I know how to research), I can write any memo, email, or policy (because I wrote papers my whole life), and I can think critically and apply those ideas to whatever I'm doing (because the humanities are all about that critical thinking).

A lot of people think the only thing you can do with a history degree is teach. It's simply not true. Look at your options, don't box yourself into becoming a professor because you're in school and professors are the only ones you see doing anything directly related to their degrees. Look at what your degree will allow you to do with the skills you have. The thing about the skills you'll pick up as a history major is they allow you to go into countless fields, and it's worth looking into. At this point, I am very likely going to get either an MBA or an MPA in the next few years, but I would never consider an MA or PhD in history or English!

As someone in community college who also recently changed my major to history because I love the subject can I ask is it better to be a history major in academia or is it better to try to find something in the private sector? If I wanted to work in the private sector would I still ideally need a PhD? Is it a given I'm going to need to know multiple languages?

Before deciding to go to graduate school, I think it's worthwhile thinking about some of the practical consequences of such a career path. You will most likely move for graduate school, spend time abroad, and then move to wherever you can find a job (possibly multiple times in the space of a few years if you get visiting positions). You'll be in your late twenties or early thirties and starting a new career. Meanwhile, many of your current friends will be starting families and being promoted in their career paths. Some people thrive on the instability and variation, but, of course, others do not.

Being a professor also tends to be a stressful job without standard hours. Flexible hours can be great during the day, but less great when you end up course planning at 3 in the morning. Long hours will be necessary because you will have to balance many tasks - research/writing, teaching, and administrative responsibilities - and your workload will be quite variable. The first few years of teaching are also the most difficult because of the course planning. These few years may well overlap with settling down and having a family which will make it more difficult.

For me, at least, life is about more than pursuing a passion so I think these are issues that need to be taken seriously by anyone considering the career.

If you want be successful in history, be prepared to make sure you are the best. Be at the top of your class, go to a top tier grad school, network your ass of, if there is an honors opportunity you take it, learn the languages that are relevant to your field (For medieval you will probably want to learn Latin and French, possibly Italian and German). Don't be afraid to look abroad for your graduate degree.

If you aren't prepared to go into it with every once of your being then don't plan on doing it as a job.

Would museum work interest you? And I mean anything--collections management, designing exhibits, collections development, etc etc etc.

I was a history major and then went to grad school in public history--I got my certificate, but never actually got my MA. I got a job instead, then had a kid, got caught in a shuffling of committees caused by a top professor's illness--and yeah the thesis itself never made it past 1 draft. My cohort? Most of them are working in museums--of all sizes. One at PBS. One went to med school (really).

Now I am a freelance writer (not on history topics though--though I often write about history museums and events). Mostly I am a mom.

Is academia your only interest? I have a BA in history, but I'm in grad school now for natural resource/recreation/tourism management. Parks, museums, and historic sites need historians. There's a whole world of site-based education out there.

I appreciate that this isn't really an AskHistorians appropriate question but I've been thinking a lot about this recently and you guys seem like you could provide some really important insight.

I'm going to university next September and I've been trying to decide between studying history and biochemistry. I have a huge passion for history (especially military history in the Middle Ages and Roman Empire) and eventually becoming a professor would pretty much be my dream job (right behind international soccer star/man of mystery). But I've heard from a load of different people that this is a really bleak prospect, especially here in Ireland. My dad wants me to go into a STEM field and I take and do pretty well in Biology and Chemistry in school so at the minute I think I'll be doing Biochemistry.

Do you guys have any advice on pursuing a career in history? I guess that most of you are involved in academia, is the job market there really as bleak as I've heard? Thanks in advance and sorry of this isn't an acceptable post.

I would check out the occupation finder on www.bls.gov and compare salaries, level of education required, and job availability. I am currently changing careers and I wish I had seen this when I was younger.

I wouldn't change your major. I've loved history my entire life, but if I could do it again I'd major in something else.

When I graduated I was presented with the opportunity to stay and complete my PhD. I turned it down because I wasn't 100% sure I wanted the degree.

It's been eight years and I haven't returned, nor will I.

Three or four years ago, I'd tell you the biggest reason I wouldn't go back was money. I didn't want to be broke in my 30s struggling to support a family or buy a house. Everyone I know who graduated with their PhD has struggled to find an academic job. A few are teaching as adjuncts (and getting paid nothing), the rest are working in publishing or out of history entirely.

Today, I'd say money still plays a role in my decision not to return, but a bigger reason has emerged. During my master's program, one of my professors said to us that historians argue so bitterly because the stakes are so low. And it's true. The more distance I have from the field, the pettier the arguments seem. I've found a career that, to me, contributes way more to society than I ever would as a professor.

I've also realized that you don't need a PhD to be a historian. Sure, you might need one to teach, but most history learning happens outside of the classroom. Guys like Dan Carlin have more prominent voices in history than most historians, yet don't have advanced degrees. If you love history, there are ways to pursue that passion without 8 years of education. I've also started doing education in my industry, which fulfills a desire I have to teach other people things.

History is a great minor or double major, but I wouldn't recommend switching to it as your sole major. The only saving grace of my education was that I completed a BA and MA in four years and early employers found that impressive.

1. Take a year off. I wish I had.

2. Apply for fully funded PhD programs.

3. Settle for a Masters.

4. With your new Masters, apply for PhD programs and get in.

5. Finish your course work and start your dissertation.

6. Question your life choices.

7. Finish your thesis and apply for jobs.

8. Settle for a post doc.

9. Apply for jobs again. Settle for another post doc.

10. Apply for jobs again. Get an associate professorship. Now you're on the tenure track. Finally.

EBT

I'm probably super late on this but I thought I'd add a few opinions/thoughts as somebody who's graduating in May and going to grad school in the fall. Funnily enough, I'm actually going to be going to UT myself although I'll be in the RTF program. Obviously that's not the same as history but they are both humanities. First like everybody has said, get to know your professors. Cultivating relationships with professors is one of the most important things you can do right now and possibly the most important thing of all. Being two years in doesn't put you too far behind but if you plan on applying to graduate school the fall before you graduate you need to start ASAP. I'm sure you already know some professors you like. Don't get too caught up in picking a specialization, though. Coming into an MA program nobody is going to expect you to know what you're going to write your dissertation on. I still don't really know what I want to do and that's okay. Get an idea of where you'd like to apply right now. Go really broad at first and narrow things down. I ended up applying to four schools which honestly wasn't enough, but if you try to apply to 10+ schools you'll be miserable.

I would highly, highly recommend taking a graduate level course before you apply to grad school. I did last spring and it helped me out so much. It's great to experience that sort of workload and to write a 15-20+ page paper. I don't know what UT is like but I'd never written anything that long here before. This is where getting to know a professor will come in handy again because most professors won't just let some random undergrad they don't know take a graduate level course. I found that schools have widely varying writing sample length requirements but it's good to have a 20+ page paper up your sleeve because some schools will want that much.

The application process is a nightmare hell and you will want to die and occasionally feel like you are actually going to die. You basically need to treat it like an extra class or two and devote that sort of time to it. You need to pick out a good writing sample and it's smart to have multiple professors look at it and edit it. A good writing sample isn't everything, of course. I know for a fact that Wisconsin loved my writing sample but some of my peripheral stuff made me a weaker candidate and I didn't end up getting in. It doesn't exactly help that they only admit 4-5 people a year but I digress. Start studying for the GRE over the summer. It's a stupid, ridiculous test but you never know how schools are going to weight it. My GRE score wasn't particularly good and while I doubt that was a deciding factor anywhere it did undoubtedly make me a weaker candidate. Most schools want three letters of recommendation and like multiple people have already said, get them from salaried and preferably tenured professors.

Your statement of purpose is also extremely important and it's probably the hardest part of the whole process. Most schools want two pages max and it's very hard to nail the tone and content but also say something substantial about yourself in such a short statement. I'm sure your professors will help you along the way and tell you what to do, and more importantly what not to do. This is probably what gave me more trouble than anything because I think I'm a thoroughly uninteresting person but I still had to sell what qualities I have. Despite that I've been told my statement of purpose is fairly good and that my voice really shines through, which is really important. You'll also have to write a resume or CV as it's typically called. Don't sweat that too much, schools really don't expect an undergrad to have much on their CV. Even still, apply for awards and departmental scholarships. I one won here and it was at least something to put on my CV.

As some other people have said, MAs aren't typically funded. I know for a fact that the RTF department at UT offers nothing in financial aid and that's not atypical. Some schools like Wisconsin do fully fund MAs (or at least their film studies program does, I don't know if that's a university wide thing) and I got into one other school that offered a 50% tuition waiver for everyone and then offered me an extra 25% as a scholarship. Still, it's best not to expect anything so you aren't disappointed. The other thing to keep in mind is that TA and research assistant positions are tough to get as an MA student. Those are almost always given to Ph.D. candidates first and then they let the MA students squabble over whatever's left. That's not to say that you can't get one, but don't expect to get that sort of job during your first semester at a program. Since you plan on getting a Ph.D. make sure you ask schools what sort of opportunities they offer to publish your work and go to conferences. I chose UT over another school in large part because there's more of a push to publish there and because they have their own publications. I've been told multiple times by professors (including Tom Schatz himself) that anybody applying to a Ph.D. program without any published work or without having presented a paper at a conference wouldn't have much of a chance of getting in.

I'm sorry for the huge wall of text there. Mostly I just want to say good luck in the short term and the long term. The application process was awful for me but getting into a school I really wanted to go to was an enormous relief and it honestly kind of changed my entire outlook on life, or at least my life for the next few years.

FYI, as long as you dont like lots of money and you dont take out loans you are OK.
DO NOT take out loans as you wont be able to afford to pay them back.

Now, being a history major, if you want to be in the history field you have very limited choice in jobs. Most likely you can be a teacher at a college or community college so you can research in your spare time to write your own book.
I suggest a "history education" major that at least qualifies you to teach high school. It is still history, but part teaching you how to teach which will get you much better pay than just a history major.
A teaching license actually means something and just a history major wont have that license.

Once you have your degree there are grants for book writing through private foundations that you can apply for.
Basically people will give you grants (not much money) to write a book about a history of a certain person. You usually can get a free office space at a certain library along with the little bit of grant money.
That is what you can do in the summers as a college or high school teacher.

It is rare and very, very hard to do, but there is a slim chance you could get a job at a museum. Just think about a place like Chicago, it has like 3 big museums and a few small ones. So there might be less than 10 jobs total for history majors in the entire city.
Dont bank on that as there are very, very few museum jobs in the US.

I will stress again, dont take out any loans. A history major costs exactly the same as an engineering degree. An engineering degree pays $60K easily. A history major most likely will end up with a $25K a year job.
If you are awesome with history then the college should be paying you to get your history degree as part of a research program.
If you cant get that then do "history education".

Good Luck, just dont get yourself in lots of debt when you know you wont make much in the future.

I dislike naysayers but you are selecting an extremely popular area of study and you're limiting your options as a result. Consider specialization that can spin into contemporary significance that can, hopefully, be spun into consulting roles, political application, or something like that.

I was a history major. I LOVED IT. The study of history (and Latin and Greek, which was my double major) continues to enrich my life. I went to law school. I am a lawyer. It's pretty much the same as far as research ability goes, the amount of reading required, and the amount of writing. Although obviously different in a lot of ways.

You should know this: out of the many smart and dedicated history students I knew when I was an undergraduate, including history and classics graduate students, only one has had any success pursuing a PhD. This man has untold amounts owed in student loans (he was a senior when I met him 8 years ago, and he is still in school), and has basically put his life on hold for all that time. He was always a little weird (in a good way!) but now he is a very weird (in a not-so-good way) and a depressed person. He and I are no longer in touch.

I hear about him from my mentor in the history department, who is a FANTASTIC lecturer, but who never made tenure after more than 30 years. My mentor just never enjoyed research, but he loves teaching. He's not a dummy in any way, shape, or form, but universities care about publications. They would have fired him long ago, probably, if he didn't get butts in seats.

My Greek professor never got tenure either. Technically, she was never even a profesor. The woman is practically fluent in ancient Greek, but no tenure. She worked at the University for decades too. Her husband is tenured teaching Roman History. He's basically a toad compared to her. She is super weird, and I have never met someone who could make the dead come alive like her. She no longer teaches, sadly. They were paying her like $20k per year as an adjunct or something. It wasn't worth it anymore.

The only professor who was tenured, an excellent lecturer, and just all around a fantastic and interesting person that I can recall was my favorite Latin professor, who was tenured in the '50s. Back then, they didn't care about publishing quite so much. But I learned a ton of Latin with him.

Were my other professors terrible? Absolutely not. They are good people, and some were good lecturers. (Note that I avoided my Greek professor's husband like the plague.) But they did not care about undergraduates. They had papers to publish. Were my law professors any different? Not really. And that's not their fault: history, Latin, Greek, or law professors. They all were doing their jobs. They were publishing as much as humanly possible. That left very little time for lowly undergraduates like me, although some really did try.

This is the climate. Despite the horrible legal market, I would say that about half of my classmates went to law school. The others became teachers in various non-collegiate capacities or did nothing at all with their degree. Sadly. And it's a lie-- companies do not want a history major. They don't care about your ability to think. They would prefer a communications major. Very few of us went to work in a non-service job at a company. They did if they were related to someone.

I'm just trying to tell you that if you major in history, these are your choices. Law isn't exactly the most fulfilling career. Teaching can be, and I'm sure being a professor most definitely is if you truly enjoy research and writing writing writing. I don't think I would take it back, because I am who I am in large part due to the history and beautiful literature I learned about. But it hasn't made me rich (yet-- I knew people and got a good law job, time will tell), and it has not made me happy, successful, or secure. And there are only a very few a history majors it HAS done that for.

If you're at UT-Austin and within the College of Natural Sciences, there is a Bachelor of Science and Arts (BSA) degree plan that would allow you to graduate with a STEM-related CNS major and a major at the College of Liberal Arts. Major in STEM at CNS to make a living and History at CLA to pursue your passion. Much better option, given what people in the field have suggested here. Link

I changed mine from biology to history. I pursued something I loved, and now I've had to practice law instead. I hope your decision works out for you.

I just received my MA this past August and now I'm adjuncting for a university. I don't regret majoring in history because I truly enjoy teaching and I love being on the other side of the classroom but some days though I do hate it. As an adjunct I only make 1800 dollars per class. Right now I'm only teaching two so I'll get 3600 a semester. Most adjuncts teach around 4 or 5 different courses and travel to different universities and community colleges. Also there's no benefits or job security. You may not be asked to teach the next semester.

But since my foot is in the door at this university I'm hoping to get a better job there. I've been applying for education coordinator and advising jobs recently. So overall I don't regret it. I absolutely loved grad school and It's a great feeling to finally defend your thesis. I've made some great friends and worked with great professors who've mentored me and provided me with some great skills.

I love history, and I majored in it as well. However, my wife got pregnant, so I decided on law school instead of doctorate in history.

Get to know Professor Anthony Hopkins. The man is an absolute genius and incredibly aware. Even if you can't take a class with him, find and talk with him.

If you want to learn a language fast and pretty well, go to Middlebury for the summer.

Also, where are you in your schooling (i.e. how many more years do you have left before graduation)?

Some great advice in this thread about preparing to get a PhD.

Apart from all of this good advice:

One thing to keep in mind is that a History major can be a fine major for other career paths as well. (business, law, just about anything, actually.) Right now, humanities majors are declining as students flock to STEM majors, desperately chasing what the media tells them will gain them employability. What this will mean in a few years is there will be a bunch of unemployed STEM majors. Because what really matters for getting a job and eventually a career is effort + engagement in your studies.

If you love your major, you'll put effort into it. If you put effort into your studies, you'll do well and learn things (like how to write and edit) and along the way, you'll make connections (with professors and others) which will likely (in the long run) open up opportunities.

The main thing is: don't just drift. Pursue. (It doesn't really matter what you pursue…!)

So, you've gotten a lot of pretty good advice here and I'm going to come out of left field a little bit. I will start by saying that I have a history undergraduate degree and wound up with a Masters in Public Administration and I am also a cynic.

University of Texas' degree requirements for history is 30 credits. It sounds like you've already taken some courses, and there were some that are core requirements.

You should consider picking up a second major. I am a History and Classical Studies Major - two bachelors. This was relatively easy due to duel credit for cross listed courses, except for the Latin thing. (If you're branching in to foreign languages, I would recommend becoming an expert in grammar, btw.)

If you are already 4 semesters into your STEM program, depending on what your classes are, you should examine what the degree requirements would be for a minor in your current field of study, or if those credits would be counted towards an additional major.

You didn't state your STEM focus, but the traditional sciences from the liberal arts & sciences generally have similar credit requirements as the arts do (As in, 30.)

If you're coming from the Engineering side of things, you've already got some physics and calculus under your belt. Those are handy things.

By double majoring, you are increasing your utility, and potentially some of your appeal to graduate programs. It also broadens the types of things you'll be able to study as you'll have skills that others in your cohort may not possess.

If you decide not to pursue a graduate degree in history, it will also help you secure employment in the private sector.

My college roommate is doing very well with his history and econ combination and I don't think he ever identified as an economics major.

So, keep an open mind about taking some more courses to wind up with a double major or at least a minor.

That being said - my advice to every history major is to double major in anything.

My standard advice to any student is that you need to study abroad.

As someone who majored in History. I have to agree with the no loans (or very little) I loved my major and can point to that as when I was happiest, but I can't do what I love because of my loans.

I may have loved those 4 years of my life but I will spend the rest of my life doing something I hate to pay for it. That's my reality 10 years out of college.

I like history too but I also like to be able to support my family. I get my history fix from tv shows, books and Internet in the evenings and do STEM related job during the day.

Go to a top 10 graduate program. Study something you think or know will be a hot topic when you graduate. Make sure you have a secondary qualification (there's often secondary qualifications in postings). Make sure you're charismatic and can teach. Network.

Becoming a professor is very doable, but you need a plan.

God, how depressing. I would consider moving to Europe to study / do your PhD there. Most of this "you need to study hard enough it almost but not quite kills you", and "you need to get into top-5, otherwise don't bother", "don't get into too much debt", etc. doesn't apply there.

The bonus is that, apparently, you need to learn a language anyway, so might just as well study in that language.

The other bonus is that, as an American having studied in Europe, you should have a certain advantage over your fellow US citizens in fields that are quintessential non-American, such as medieval history.

I hope you are not taking out student loans to get a degree in History. I'm glad you have a plan B.