bleistift

I'm not sure this makes a difference because the decisions are all done by committee, and committees would wait to make a decision at one time, after all applications are evaluated. If batches go out at different times, it's likely because of internal bureaucracy.

No, transcript requests went out 3-4 days later both last year and the year before last, which means Monday is a possibility. If you don't get one by Tuesday, things will probably be looking grim :/

Yep based on last year's thread, there were transcript requests 3-4 days after the initial batch of requests. Congrats to those with transcript requests!

I can't say with certainty (you might want to check last year's Fulbright thread), but the way it works for what I've seen thus far and from my full grant to Taiwan is final notification comes from an email from New York, followed by a letter from New York, and your official packet that includes your grant authorization will come from Beijing. However, the final decision is nonetheless made by folks in Beijing, and IIE in New York is merely forwarding that decision (once you are a finalist, you have already passed all IIE decision making).

I received notification of a full grant to Taiwan. Congrats to all the ETA folks -- wondering if there are any other full grantees to Taiwan out there?

First off, I need to frame my reply with the fact that I went to Berkeley for my undergrad and I am a huge football fan. I was one of those Berkeley undergrads who thought football was a waste of time and money, but I went to a few games and got hooked. The culture is unfortunately nothing like the SEC. The city despises football (for the traffic, construction, culture, etc.). Graduate students in general are vaguely aware of its existence. But among undergraduates there has been a growing following of football (since 2003 when the program was turned around under Jeff Tedford) and more recently basketball. If you go to Memorial on Saturdays, at least after you cross Piedmont, it will feel a lot like SEC country with the chants and uniforms and facepaint. I'll be headed back to Berkeley for my PhD, and honestly I'm mostly looking forward to football season. Go Bears!

I'm fairly sure PhD students are guaranteed housing through Columbia, and in general the graduate student apartments are very close to campus (the majority are in Morningside Heights), affordable, and fairly spacious. I'm currently living in graduate student housing 1.5 blocks away from the 110th St. 1-line station (20 minutes to midtown), a 5-minute walk to campus (114th St.), and 5 minutes of great restaurants, supermarkets, bars, etc. Feel free to PM me if you have specific questions.

Congrats on Columbia to both of you. It's really a great program with wonderful professors.

I've accepted Berkeley. Hope to see some familiar Gradcafe faces in the fall.

Sent you a PM

Lack of funding is a serious issue, but I am a little bit more optimistic than some of the others who have posted their opinions about it here. Depending on the department, there is the chance that you will be able to secure a TAship after your first semester or first year. It's important you inquire about the exact statistics (if these are not provided, try gathering yourself via interviews) to see if this is a possibility. In some places, like the UK, unfunded offers are standard for PhD programs, which means you are often left to your own initiative to finance your expenses. It's a draining process, but it is possible.

Is your adviser Jeremi Suri? If so, he will probably be having lunch with one or two people who will have some influence in admissions.

There is actually a lot of truth behind this, but it's very largely tied to the role that Asian historians (both East and South & SE Asian) have as dual-appointments in history and EALC or SSEAS, and work in places like IEAS, etc. It essentially doubles their administrative and advisee workload. I very much doubt you'll see this in Early Modern Europe.

Well, the way I see it is that prestige qualifies tremendously into your eventual appeal as a job candidate in 6 years when you are on the market looking for a tenure-track position. Quality of instruction matters during the 6 years and how you get to establish your candidacy. Both are important, and you'll have to see how they balance in each case. By your program in decline reference, I can only assume you are pointing to Berkeley. While I can't predict the future, I can say that Berkeley will fight tooth and nail to prevent losing their key faculty and to continue to attract top talent. I assume you've been admitted, so you should see some of this on visit day next month. I'm pretty sure the department chair (Prof Berry, who also happens to be an East Asian historian) will be very willing to discuss her views.

Oh no, I didn't mean to imply that UCSD's department was bad. I was commenting in terms of department prestige, which as we all know is merely one aspect of the overall strength of a department. I'm not very familiar with UCSD's department other than the published works of Esherick, hence my hesitation. For your specific interests though, I think Esherick would be well qualified to advise, and it sounds like the rest of the department is pretty great too.

Which country are you studying, specifically? Asian history is very large, and most programs will force you to specify a specific country (i.e. China, Japan, etc.) Berkeley's East Asian history has declined due to a few renowned professors passing away or retiring but they are still very set on maintaining their prestige. UCI and UCLA are also very strong in East Asian history, so I'd say it depends on one's specific interests. However, for modern China, I'm not quite sure I agree with you on UCSD. What do you study specifically in modern China? Of UCSD's faculty I would only say Esherick is particularly famous.

I just wanted to add a few thoughts to this. You may get lucky if members of your admissions committee happen to read German and study the same field as your letter-writers, but I would not depend on this possibility. To mitigate this, I'd highly suggest you work closely with professors during your stay at UGA and, if possible, get more than one LOR. Even though your stay is short (1 year?), that should be sufficient for a very good recommendation if you take seminars, participate, go to office hours, and finish research papers involving primary sources. That will give the full range for your professors to evaluate you. Also, yes American letters tend to heap praise. I don't know if it's acceptable in Swiss culture to do this, but you may want to express this concern to your Swiss professors and perhaps imply they should write a letter to match American norms.

When I was doing research on MAPSS (I was given admission after being rejected from their PhD program), my understanding was that it was largely a cash cow program for Chicago. That's not to say most MA programs aren't, but I didn't feel it was particularly difficult to be admitted. If you are waiting for the MAPSS admission, my guess is if you have a decent GPA and test scores, you won't have to worry. Not sure about the answer to your second question, but MAPSS did have full time representatives who were willing to discuss the program. You can try asking them about statistics for admission into Chicago PhD programs.

Sorry I meant ajl1239, but it's good to hear how you funded yours as well! It's interesting to see the different ways people find funding, and I only wish I had explored these prior to applying.

ajl, I'm similarly considering MA programs (not your two specifically, but in the same field at similarly priced private institutions). Just curious, how were you funding your education? At this point I have a clear cut favorite, but the price tag is simply daunting!

I do remember from last year, and a hearty congratulations Cornell07! Best of luck.

I would not blame too much on the liberal arts college. I come from a highly ranked research university from undergrad, and my primary adviser held a visible post and a long and decorated academic CV. He had high expectations for me as well. Although I haven't given him my news yet, I'm sure he will be surprised. Alas it does seem true that things have changed recently.

Another member of the working force chiming in here. I'd also be sacrificing a high salaried career in finance to try to join the ranks of academia. I made mention of my job in my SoP this round, as my hours (which aren't bad at all relative to my peers, but draining at times) prevent me from making significant progress to shore up my credentials (in languages, additional coursework, independent research. etc). Doesn't seem to have helped, as I am 0 for 5 with 2 left. My credentials were strong to begin with, at least in terms of foreign languages. I suspect it's tough to compete as undergraduates against candidates with master's degrees, who have 1 to 2 more years of language training, a larger choice of writing samples, and an additional set of LoRs to supplement their application.

I'm writing my response as sort of a "lessons learned" and future "action items" in hopes that others can read and learn from my experiences. Being a part of this forum has helped me through this process immensely, as it has given me both a dose of realism and a glimmer of hope as well. Without further ado -- For those unfamiliar, my previous year in a nutshell: I was rejected from all PhD programs last year and received 2 late MA acceptances, either of which I would have gladly taken had they offered even a minutiae of financial aid... Alas, I ask too much. Crestfallen after months of gung-ho pre-grad excitement (or call it naivete), I transitioned into 6 months of "soul searching" as I did the 9-5 (actually quite a bit more than that), testing my resolve to pursue a life in academia while slowly accumulating a little nest egg should I receive the same results this fall and need to supply my tuition entirely out of pocket. Now: In many ways I have not improved my application and even digressed in application strength relative to my age just by the fact that I have almost no time to improve my credentials outside my already busy professional life. With this in mind, I will need to focus on what is within my power to improve. [*:wfuh36jy]I will begin with my SoP. My original was weak to begin with. "Mundane" is the best description I have for it. Half a year has given me a better idea of what drives me to academia...and what life on the other side is like. I hope to apply some of this perspective in this application. [*:wfuh36jy]I am quite a bit more realistic about my "targets" and "safeties" (I'm embarrassed to say I considered my undergraduate institution as my safety, thinking "oh my undergrad professors loved me, why wouldn't they take me?"). I had applied with the intention of "making myself fit the faculty interests" instead of the other way around. I realized the true gravity of my error when the response I received from one of the schools I applied to was a blunt "we really have no professors who specialize in your field of interest." I could not have experienced a greater feeling of stupidity after reading that email, especially since I paid $75 for a one sentence statement I already knew. I'll focus less on reputation and more on schools with a number of professors who would actually share my interests. [*:wfuh36jy]This time around I will apply for a wider range of PhD programs, and leverage the $@*~! out of any financial offer I receive against schools who don't offer me anything. I've seen how ruthless financial aid offers are, and I don't plan on being the one on the receiving end this time.

cornell07, I just turned down the offer due to personal financial reasons, so hopefully you can get my spot. I'll be reapplying next year and hopefully they will toss me a bone and offer a fellowship (I missed the FLAS deadline this year). And if not, well, like you said, going $60k in debt ($30k x 2 years) is something I won't cry over.