(a guide mostly directed towards Americanists, but will hopefully prove helpful for our brother and sister Europeanists, Latinists, etc. as well)

• First of all, try to view the whole "comps" process in the larger context of your graduate career. The months/years of exam preparation and the completion of the exams should represent "the first very small step in an attempt, far from complete, to become a person who thinks deeply, clearly, and creatively about history and can speak the language that other historians speak. The exams are not meant to be useful except in those terms." In other words: the person taking these exams needs to be prove that they can think like a historian, and have reasonably mastered the basic historic and historiographical information of their field. The material one needs to learn for the exams lays an important foundation for the work we will do in our field. One needs to show that one has done the work to be allowed into the "historians’ club." It is not an exam about your personal work or future or worth. No employer on the job market will care how you did on the "comps," as long as you passed them. After you pass them, you will hardly think of them any longer. View the exams as a necessary and important hoop that you need to jump through, a skill that will take a lot of information and practice to master. Like in any college exam, you need to know what your professors want, and give it to them. But you also want to learn this material for your own future work, and for your personal and professional benefit. And then, after the exams are passed, move on to the more important priority, YOUR WORK. (Quoted material by Shelley Sperry)

• Get to know the basic history. Read a couple of respected textbooks (James Henretta’s textbook appears to be the consensus favorite these days), outline them, make flash cards--whatever works for you. Naturally, you don’t have to memorize every historical detail in a textbook, but after reading a couple textbooks, the larger issues that everyone taking the exams will need to know will become clearer to you. "Assume that each section of the text pertains to a particular body of scholarship and if you are unsure what that body consists of, then go ask another student with a focus in that particular area." Students in recent years have found the exams "overwhelmingly textbookish...one of the greatest misperceptions students have upon entering the graduate program is that they are somewhat beyond textbook history." As Professor Brooks has recently told a few grad students, "when you get to the point where you can visualize the monographic framework behind the text (of a textbook) and weigh the historiographical arguments for yourself while you are reading, then you are ready to take the exam." Perhaps most importantly, watch at least a couple professors (preferably ones from your comps committees) teach the basic survey classes in your field to see what they and your department in general find most significant and then make sure that you are knowledgeable concerning the periods, issues and authors they emphasize. (Quoted material by Chris Grenda and Bill Lombardo)

• Read lots of significant monographs. While the emphasis, particularly on the general comprehensive exams of recent years, has been on textbook history, professors have made it clear that they like to see more detailed information from monographs to back up and flesh out the textbook history, particularly during orals. Showing that you are up-to-date in the readings of the profession is another way that helps you prove that you deserve admission into the historian’s club, or to be less elitist, profession. Whenever possible, pick readings that you are enthusiastically interested in. The whole "comps" process should not be a chore. Hopefully, to a certain extent, you love reading and writing about history (otherwise, maybe you should rethink your career trajectory). Reflecting this in your exams can only be helpful, and picking your reading list with this in mind can only be positive. The exams present an opportunity for you to wade through a lot of material in a short time that you might not ordinarily get to read. Wherever possible, use this opportunity to your advantage--whether it be for your general interest, or books you need to read for your own work and background.

• It is a good idea to "read your advisors’ books and those of the other members of your orals committee. Read your advisors’ favorite books. Read the books that shaped the way the generation in power (i.e. the faculty) thinks about history." If possible, take classes with your committee members. Know their interests. The general exams are supposed to cover general subjects that anyone in the field could ask or answer, but, still, knowing this kind of information about the interests of your inquisitors can only help. Usually, committee members will not be subservient to their personal interests, and some UMCP profs actually frown on asking questions from their own specialty. Lastly, "demonstrating that you’ve read something other than historical monographs is always a plus." Read influential novels from various parts of American history, read the works of influential theorists or of people outside the field of history (e.g. anthropologists, literature specialists, scientists, etc.). Professors (just like TAs) love to be surprised by their students: if you can discuss the Gilded Age by combining textbook history, a couple monographs, and, say, a humorous or telling reference from a Henry James novel, this not only looks good, but shows that you are passionate about the study of history. (Quoted material by David Hostetter and Bill Lombardo)
• A large part of the exam, according to conversations with Professors Berlin, Gilbert and Henretta, consists of each student learning how to quickly glean the most important information about significant historic events. One could read dozens of books about the U.S. Constitution, but this would necessitate spending too much time on one subject, something exam takers can ill afford. Professors want us to be able to, through research and judgement, be able to pick out the 4 or 5 most significant books on each important subject. How does one do this? Look at book reviews, look at books of historiographical essays (the most used one among grad students in the department these days appears to be the 2-volume set edited by Grobe and Billias), examine the reading lists of other grad students as assembled by the History Graduate Student Association, skim the introductions and bibliographies of books you admire, look at the lists of additional readings in textbooks, and, most importantly, ask your fellow grad students. Ideally, you want to read as little as possible to get the fullest picture possible of the historical arguments in important fields--so carefully choosing what you read is crucial.

• Start preparing for your comprehensive exams during your first semester at UMCP. Make sure you take good notes. File your notes away carefully for future use. Try to take classes that expose you to as many periods of American history as possible. This will give you a good base for the comprehensive kind of view that profs want us to develop for the exams. It is much easier to "relearn" material you knew a couple years back than to learn it in the first place. Plus, you’ll hopefully have to read less when "crunch-time" comes.

• Get advice from the professors on your committees. Most of them are really good about this. In past years, there has been marked improvement in faculty attitudes on helping students taking the "comps." Ask fellow grad students about your committee’s attitudes on this subject before going to see them. Ask your fellow grad students how the profs on your committees get along with each other--there are some factions that don’t get along among the faculty in the department, and it would be useful for you to know this as you put together your strategies for exam preparation. Also, perhaps most importantly, be prepared before you enter the offices of the professors on your committees. Like it or not, it is my belief and that of many others in the department that the judging of your performance on the exams starts way before you take the exams, particularly with profs that don’t know you well. When you meet with them, look like you know what you’re doing, even if this may not be entirely true. Dress professionally (I think this counts, some will disagree). In your mind, have an organized and specific agenda for each meeting with the profs on your committee. If you wish to ask them for reading suggestions, have a reading list of your own together (use a lot of books you have already read for your seminars!) so they can see that you’ve already done a lot of thinking on this matter and are not expecting them to do everything. With most of the UMCP History profs, if you show that you respect their time, they tend to make more time and better suggestions for you.

• "Remember, the comps are only one part of a larger field on which you are being judged. If you watched the Olympics this past winter, remember how the scoring of the ice skating--why sometimes mediocre performances received higher scores than it seemed they should --was explained? Turns out that the judges watch the practice rounds and consider all sorts of non-performance criteria in making their final decisions. In other words, get to know the faculty from day one! Take as many seminars/independent studies courses as you can. Believe me, if your oral exam goes haywire, it doesn’t hurt to have taken readings courses with the members of your committee"--because they know how good you can be and won’t judge you quite as harshly when you’re flailing somewhat under the pressure of the oral exam grilling. "When you write essays/reviews/articles, etc., don’t be shy to pass them around the department. Let the faculty know that you’re alive and care about what you’re doing" and about the history profession. "Think holistically!" (Another insightful Bill Lombardo quote, with an intellectual assist from Linda Sargent)

• Get advice from all the Americanist professors (or at least the ones that are relevant to you). "It would be difficult to take every readings seminars offered prior to taking comps, but conversations with each of the professors in a given area (Colonial, Slavery, 20^th-Century, etc.) proves one solid fact--the profs love to spill their guts on what they think is important. Visiting each of the major professors, picking their brains about important themes, and familiarizing oneself with their syllabi is a much better use of time than methodically checking monographs off a list. On both my written and oral exams, I found that an intimate knowledge of my committee members’ views helped me understand where they were coming from. It just might be possible that their egos were well-served by such a process as well." (Quote by Gregory Michaelides)

• Start a study group. In the opinion of most graduate students, this method represents the best way to get up to speed on perfecting the skills you’ll need to succeed on the exam. This is the place where you can make your worst mistakes, in a relatively private situation, way before you take the exam. I would advise constructing a small group--anything over 4 people seems excessive, and might allow some people in the group to hide, which is something that you don’t want to happen. Choose people that are responsible, that work hard and that will intellectually challenge you and won’t be afraid to point out your mistakes, or make you think of different ways of thinking through important historic questions. Avoid nasty people. There are various ways of running these groups: some have methodically answered all the comps questions of recent years, some have put together outlines of each period, some do book reports for each other in order to lessen the reading load. I would advise that finding some way to deal with old comprehensive questions in a pressurized comps-like situation is essential. The old questions are all filed away in the History Department office, and are available to any grad student. As the time for the exams approaches, have your study group go to the computer room where the exam will take place in order to do a question or two under conditions that are as close to real exam conditions as possible. Professors are usually more than willing to devise new questions for such situations--sometimes it saves them time to be writing questions for an entire study group rather than one student at a time.

• Take numerous practice exams, with fellow students and with profs, both written and oral exams. Try to not look at the questions before a practice exam, so you can work under conditions that are close as possible to those as you’ll be encountering on the exam. Don’t wait until you pass the written exam before practicing an oral exam--it is not being presumptuous to practice an oral exam before you pass the written ones. Enlist your friends in the History Department who have passed the comps to give you a mock oral exam--most are willing to do so, provided that some sort of lunch or alcohol is provided for the service. In all seriousness, it is very important that the graduate student community support each other at these times. Also, be highly prepared before you do practice exams with profs--as previously stated, the judging of the performance of "comps" students starts early. Use all practice situations to get in the habit of dealing with big historiographical questions in timed, pressurized situations.

• Devise and practice a strategy for how you will attack questions on the exams. On the comps exams, one needs to learn how to think quickly and clearly, under pressure. "Knowledge is important (duh!), but won’t do much good unless it can be marshalled into coherent paragraphs...It is critical to pause and think prior to starting one’s answer. Jot down on scrap paper your thoughts, the memories of the relevant material you’ve studied, the authors of the major papers or books on the subject–as many as you can recall without getting bogged down in historiography–and the major historical facts surrounding the question [take 5-10 minutes to do this]. All this mash will, or should, start jelling into a position, a point of view that you will decide to take on the invariably broad question that has been put to you. Your notes will help you to put your point of view into historiographical context, buttressed by a ‘good-enough’ (not exhaustive or too time-consuming) set of facts that shows:

1. You can take a position, and have thought it through.

2. You can place your position alongside those of major importance in the

field under question–at least a few of them.

3. You have a reasonable (not encyclopedic) command of the basic facts,

events, names, dates, places, etc.

• Make up your own questions for practice purposes, based on your reading lists, and then answer them. Devise syllabi and lectures that will cover the material that you need to know for the exams. Try to think like your professors will when they make up the exam. (Suggestions by David Hostetter and Professor Gilbert)

• You can defer TA work during the weeks of your comps exams. Do so! It is OK and highly recommended. The profs that you teach for will understand. Some (notice I did not say "most") have even taught sections for students taking the exams during comps week--for sure, your fellow TAs will help with this load.
• Don’t get isolated. Don’t get down. See people. Work out. Make love. Take breaks during preparation. Take off your shoes. Go to the beach every so often. Do whatever you need to do to keep steady and productive and sane during this crazy-ass time in your life.

• "Stay away from the third floor of the Key building for 10-14 days before the exam." In other words, when it comes time for your exam, after you’ve spent months preparing and asking people for advice, just keep your own counsel for those last few days. Stay concentrated. Play your own game. (Quote from Chris Grenda)

• "We need to destigmatize the flunking process. We should recognize that comps failure seems to be a poor indication of future success or failure in our program" and in the profession. The great majority of those who have failed some portion of the exams once passed the second time. Many of the most successful people out of the UMCP History program failed a portion of their exams the first time through. Don’t take it personally if you fail a section of the exams. Take some time off, come back and talk to the profs, learn the lessons they want you to learn, and come back and kick those exams’ asses. One somewhat cynical UMCP PhD holder recommends viewing the exams as a "small hurdle, full of sound and fury, signifying little." Most importantly, reach out to those who have failed the exam, and those who are in the process of preparing for the exams. Buy them coffee and smoothies, chat with them, and otherwise support them. Failing comps can be seen by a student as a traumatizing and stigmatizing experience, but we as a community should do our best to make our fellow students bypass such useless and incorrect feelings and assumptions. (Quoted material by Dr. Edmund Wehrle)

This page was created by Jill Reilly. Copyright © 2002-2003, UM HGSA.

This page last updated 6 September 2004, 9:24pm.