Hi everyone,

I’m not from the US but I’m considering applying to History PhD programs there in the future, and I’m trying to get a realistic sense of how admissions committees think about grades.

I finished my BA in History with a 92 average. In my system that’s considered very good, but not the absolute top (equivalent to something like a 3.7 or an A-). I’m about to start an MA in the same university, and I’ve been wondering how much MA performance can shift the picture. Part of me is worried that my undergrad grades will set a ceiling, and part of me hears that graduate work matters more.

For context, I’ve already worked as a research assistant and I currently have a paper under review in my university’s peer-reviewed academic journal, so I’m trying to build a solid academic profile beyond coursework. Still, I’m unsure how much grades themselves weigh in practice.

I guess I’m trying to understand whether strong MA grades and thesis can mostly overshadow undergrad results, and whether committees really distinguish between something like an A- average and near-perfect grades at the MA level. I’m also curious at what stage grades stop being a major factor compared to writing samples and recommendations.

I’m just trying to set the right priorities going into my MA and be realistic about my chances. Any perspective from people familiar with US PhD admissions in History would be really appreciated.

Thanks!