The Allan R. Millett Dissertation Research Fellowship Award Submission Guidelines
Applicants should send proposals and curriculum vitae as a single PDF document in an email attachment to Professor Lorien Foote of Texas A&M University, the Chair of the Committee (email@example.com). Advisors should send confidential letters of support in a separate email attachment to Professor Foote. The winner will be notified by January 31, 2023.
- Committee chair will receive applications and letters of support, then upload all materials to the Millett Committee team drive.
- Committee members will have access to this drive provided to them by the SMH.
- After the application deadline, the committee chair will check to see that all recommendation letters have been received. In the case of outstanding letters, the chair will contact the dissertation advisor and give her or him an extra couple of days to submit the letter.
- Committee members will review all applications and keep notes of their assessment of each application.
- The committee members will all submit their top three choices to the committee chair by January 31.
- Over the next few days, the committee will deliberate either via email or zoom conference to arrive at an award winner.
- In the event that the committee does not arrive at consensus, a vote will determine the winner.
- If the committee does not arrive at a winner on the first ballot, run-off elections will be held until one applicant receives at least two of the three votes.
- Committee chair will notify the award winner.
- Committee chair will notify the other applicants of the committee’s decision only after the winner has accepted the award.
- Committee chair will notify the SMH president and vice president of the committee’s decision.
- Committee chair will upload all pertinent communication regarding the deliberations to the Millett Committee team drive.
To ensure the committee members evaluate proposals on the same criteria, they should use the following rubric.
65 points total
Proposal clearly describes the project’s topic in a way that is understandable to anyone familiar with military history.
Research goals are clearly stated and appear reasonable. Author outlines appropriate archives, libraries, or sources and has a clear plan for pursuing this research. Research will clearly advance the project.
Proposal makes a clear intervention in existing historiography about the specific topic. A proposal about Napoleon will make clear, for example, how the author’s conclusions will change or reframe what historians think about Napoleon.
Proposal demonstrates how the project will make important contributions to the broader field of military history. It should be clear, for example, how a project on Napoleon will be important for all historians, not just those interested in Napoleon. Historians of all persuasions should be able to grasp the historical significance of the project.
Recommendation suggests confidence in the proposal and the author’s ability to produce an admirable dissertation.