ericthebrave

Hey ziggysunshine, I have no idea how many others received these questions. I think it's obviously on an individual basis and perhaps different pertaining to the other specialities. I don't know what the procedure is concerning other situations. Perhaps historians of Asia have to fight to get their nominees in, perhaps it's different for americanists where the Americanist historians fight among themselves for a candidate who is the nominee. Perhaps some don't even tell the proposed candidate that they're being "pulled for" because the competition is that intense. I don't want to worry you or anyone else, but I think it's realistic to expect that among very good grad programs the process of choosing those who will fill next year's spots is extremely competitive and sometimes advisors don't want to trouble prospective candidates with the political infighting or whatever there may be. some candidates may notify at the expense of an unfortunate "in the end" rejection which would really not be great, while others say "we won't say anything until we know for sure." Just my two cents at this point. If anyone knows more about the process at Chicago and other similar schools feel free to say what they think

Asian History. It almost seems like the specialty has to battle other specialties for their nominee's spot. Good thing my project is transnational, as the POI said that Europeanists and Latin Americanists had shown interest in the topic and have actively supported my candidacy. In the grad school of the university where i am attending undergrad, it seems like a much less competitive/cutthroat process. Though paradoxically here there's much less funding around. Perhaps they're trying to make it seem even more competitive so to make me want to go there and not look as hard at other schools. Give off the image perhaps that there's a fight and that if I come out of it with an offer I should take it without question.

Hi there. Feel a bit in limbo about something which i briefly posted on the results page. I was contacted by one POI (my future advisor) at University of Chicago History Dep't. expressing his desire to recruit me. POI wanted me to answer several questions to make case stronger before the admissions committee. Part of the email "questionnaire" was probably to gauge my seriousness and see if Chicago was 1st choice or not. I got that impression when he basically said that money would not be an issue once I was accepted by the ad commitee. Contacted by 2nd POI saying that there was broad enthusiasm among specialities for my candidacy. Said: nothing is guaranteed while saying at the same time that he was looking forward to working with me next year (??). Not sure how to take that. 1st POI responded later in the day after I had answered his questions basically saying Chicago is my 1st choice. POI said my answers had helped and he had gotten past the first obstacle (??) and chances are high I will get a generous offer but that nothing is guaranteed as competition is hard so we will wait and see until decisions are made at the end of the month. What in your opinion does this say about my chances/about the admissions process at Chicago?