ANGELA TATE, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
Proposal Type
Structured Conversation
Seeking
- Seeking Additional Presenters
- Seeking General Feedback and Interest
Related Topics
- Advocacy
- Reflections on the Field
- Teaching and Training
Abstract
Career diversity! alt-ac! transferrable skills! Public humanities will save the discipline!
These are conversations cropping up across academia in the wake of the Jobs Crisis. And yet, traditional doctoral programs often struggle with how to build room for this–or if they want to do so–in the graduate school experience.
So what happens when two PhD students with a background in public history enter the fray?
Description
We want to spark a conversation about the tensions and triumphs of doing public history in graduate programs that are not built around the field. How do you navigate not wanting to go on the academic job market? How do you make connections? Advisor-advisee relations. Interdisciplinary fields vs disciplines. Location. Funding. Building a community.
Basically, talking to both academics and graduate students about the intersection of higher ed and personal desires.
We are seeking feedback on the topic, as well as potential co-panelists interested in this topic.
If you have a direct offer of assistance, sensitive criticism, or wish to pass along someone’s contact information confidentially, please get in contact directly: Angela Tate, [email protected]
All feedback and offers of assistance should be submitted by July 1, 2019. If you have general ideas or feedback to share, please feel free to use the comments feature below.
As a master’s candidate about to begin the process of choosing a PhD program, I feel this conversation is SO necessary for everyone looking into PhD programs or who are in their 1st year. So many questions about choosing a location/program and the concern of funding. This topic proposal is a great way to start that conversation.
I think this would be an excellent conversation, both for graduate students and faculty. I choose a PhD program which was openly supportive of non-academic and public history careers, but that doesn’t mean that the faculty entirely understand what the field (and jobs in the field) look like.
This is, indeed, an important topic – one with a long history. This could be a great conversation. I
Really great idea – could you give us some sense of how this debate has played out across different institutions and perhaps other countries?
Who else did you have in mind to participate? I think including people at different stages would be fab.
I agree with Tanya I think this is a great idea and well timed. But I am curious how this is playing out across this country and globally and within different stages of a career.
This is an excellent idea–the notion of public history as a primary career aspiration as opposed to a “Plan B”–which, if it is not gaining traction in the academy, certainly has been the subject of academic history conference panels in recent years. It would be useful to include a practicing public historian who did not study public history in grad school, to show the similarities and differences in expectations and methodologies, but also to get first-hand stories of how they handled skeptical professors and advisers.
Thank you all for your amazing comments!
I think that is a great topic. If you decide to submit this as a proposal, maybe you could team up with the NCPH Students and New Professionals Committee (I have been a member of the committee for a few years). I know I have seen links to resources and info and articles on this topic, since there has been a joint effort between AHA, OAH, NCPH for I think 8 years to promote “alternative careers,” etc. for historians. As someone doing her PhD in Public History, I still find that even when your PhD program has en emphasis in this area, you can still run into a lot of the important issues you’ve raised here. I was also thinking about this website: https://www.historians.org/jobs-and-professional-development/career-resources/careers-in-public-history