This roundtable is a response to take up several of the points raised in the 2021 Perspectives article, “Terminal Does not Mean Dead: Why the History M.A. Deserves our Attention.” While many professional and disciplinary conversations about graduate education have focused on the realities of the declining academic job market, the necessity of preparing PhD students for careers outside the ivory tower, and the future of History PhD programs more generally, the History M.A. degree has received much less attention. This is even more the case for terminal M.A. programs – history graduate programs in departments which do not offer the Ph.D. Still, at many institutions, the History M.A. degree program is thriving – despite declining undergraduate enrollments and decreasing institutional support. This roundtable brings together representatives from four different M.A. programs – programs with different backgrounds, goals, student populations, and disciplinary strengths – to discuss how their departments have reacted to and met the challenges that their programs have faced in the past decade. In particular, they discuss how they adapted their programs to support more professional-based education in Public History and Secondary Education; how they have adapted their courses to support delivery to working professionals; how they have revised curriculum components to democratize access to resources; and how they have partnered with other local and regional institutions (community colleges and smaller, liberal arts colleges) to encourage and diversify enrollments. While the roundtable participants do not pretend to have all the answers regarding the long-term purpose and future of the history M. A. degree, they do aim to ignite a much broader and sustained conversation among colleagues and administrators about the place of the History M.A. within graduate education and encourage them to take a hard look at their own programs with a view to improving student experiences and outcomes. In addition to curricular and professional topics (such as Public History, Digital Humanities, and MATs), the participants also discuss the role of local and statewide trends; funding structures and sources; department resources; and recent educational trends.