Hi everyone, I graduated 2 years ago with a B.A. in Communications. To make a LONG story short, I had absolutely no idea what I wanted to with my life during college, and Comms just became a default.
My final year, I began to develop a passion for history. I began to think I should switch my major over to History even if meant adding on another semester or two, but everyone in my life (family, advisors) told me I shouldn't, and unfortunately, I listened to them.
I'm looking at various area studies M.A.s, and would like to get a History PhD eventually. Is it too late, though? Will I be taken seriously as an applicant for a History PhD without that background?
No, it’s not too late! I think you’ll need an MA in History to get into a PhD program but it’s not too late. People switch fields and careers all the time. When I got my master’s, I took a class with a woman who had been a stay at home for her kids’ entire lives and when they were finishing high school, she got her master’s and was then pursuing her PhD in a very competitive program. People have many different paths to a PhD and there’s not one exact way to get there.
The specific reason I think you’ll need the MA is that history as a field has a fairly specific way or writing and researching. If you don’t have that background knowledge, a PhD would be very difficult to complete and you’d likely be unable to formulate your proposed dissertation topic in the “correct” way. Having the MA shows you’ve done the work to prepare for a PhD.
Go for an MA in History. You will be fine. Don't worry about it being too late. I was in my mid thirties when I decided to quit my career and go back to grad school for history. My mom was almost 50 when she got her PhD. Age doesn't matter or time away from school for that matter.
Anyways, I had several students in my program who had acquired BAs in fields other than history. That's ok because there is a significant difference between an undergraduate history education and a graduate history education. Most people have this idea that history is learning about people, places, dates, and events. To an extent it is that but it is really so, so much more. That's what you learn in graduate school. The simplest way to describe it is you learn history in undergrad and you learn historiography in grad school. Theory and historiography.
Learning the basic facts of who did what when is the easy part. It's so easy that it receives very little attention in an MA or a PhD program. You will never see a test on facts like you would in undergrad. Instead you will be reading, analyzing, and critiquing approximately 3 monographs (books) a week (on average, often times it can be more). This means somehwere arpund 700 to 1200 pages of reading a week. In addition, you will be required to submit a variety of writing assignments ranging from book reviews, critical analysis essays, historiographical essays, annotated bibliographies, reasearch papers and articles. These assignments range from a few pages to 30 or more pages. The small assignments sound easier than they are because you have to squeeze analysis of an entire book into 3 pages. If you just summarize things you will fail, you need to be beyond that. The prof will smoke you if you have incorrect facts but that doesn't happen because it's so easy to avoid. What the prof is really looking for is your ability to demonstrate an understanding of historical theory and methodology. You will be deconstructing the arguments of brilliant thinkers and fleshing them out. You will then be expected to apply this knowledge to your own research. You'll also be expected to bring your A game to seminars which are typically once a week 3 hours a session with anywhere from 5 to 15 fellow classmates. A large portion of your grade in every class will hinge on participation in seminar. You will be expected to have already done the work and be ready to discuss your analysis in depth.
I will not sugar coat it, it will be difficult. Aside from the massive workload you will also be engaging with independent research and for someone like you with no history background you may be find yourself looking for remedial instruction. You're going to hear a lot of terms you've never heard before get thrown around constantly or you'll have to spend a few hours researching some philosophy in order to understand an argument. Don't be intimidated though, all grad students experience this to some degree.
Honestly you were right not to switch majors at the last minute. A BA in history is not worth a whole lot beyond the writing and critical thinking skills you acquire. A BA doesn't make someone a historian, not at all. I compare the process of becoming a historian with that of becoming a medical doctor. You get a BA then either go directly into a PhD program or get your masters then a PhD. Most PhD programs are 5 years and MA programs are 2 years. By and large PhD programs will not accept masters credits (there are exceptions). So you're looking at anywhere between 9 to 11 years of education just to get a PhD. You can get an MA and go work at an archive, a museum, public history, the govt. If you want to be an academic historian you need that PhD. After your PhD its off into the wilderness where hopefully you snag a fellowship (think residency for med school grads). There you will likely expand and publish your dissertation. After all of that, hopefully you land a job.
You will be taken seriously as a candidate, Iassure you. Keep in mind all that I have said though. This is a road that will consume the rest of your life and will demand a lot of sacrifice. Obviously we don't do it for the money.