brookelikeshistory

Hi! Yeah the way someone else put it for me was if you can get name-value plus a few people to work plus money that's the best bet. Stanford has all of those things, plus nice weather, and I think I fit into the department vibe pretty well. You're doing East Asia right? At some of the programs would you be in History and East Asian studies in others? I would think weigh the pros and cons of that (if it matters). The vibe at Chicago was just off for me. I liked UCLA but I feel like I might have more job chances and surely more money if I go to Stanford. I liked Hopkins, but I want to go to California at this point haha but if I remember correctly you had a partner on the East coast? Harvard would be awesome! If you remember Kelly--my fellow Africanist from UChicago and Hopkins visits--she told via email that she's most likely going there. And yeah, like you said, once we make a decision--no regrets! Good luck!

Thanks for your input Macchiato. I kind of feel like a sell-out for going to the school that offered me the highest stipend, but it's also the place that would be the most expensive to live. I look forward to exploring the bay area once I get there. Especially since I'm a black woman, I'll need to find community somewhere, maybe in Oakland? And yes, the Stanford history department is really small, but the students are very close-knit which I like and I hope to make friends in other departments to get away from historians once in a while But yeah, Stanford made it very clear when I visited that they have lots of money for their students, for anything! (conferences, research travel...) which makes me feel very secure. Grad housing is actually very appealing to me, especially if it's furnished because I've spent my whole undergrad living in the dorms and I don't have any furniture haha not to mention moving across the country and trying to find a place.

Thanks for weighing in rising_star , Sigaba, and fancypants09. After getting my phd I do want to teach at a university and continue to do research. I think you're right that I've kind of lost sight of other things that are important when evaluating my pros and cons. I turned down Northwestern for petty reasons, mainly for its location and because I had just visited Johns Hopkins and I felt sure I would go there. Though I now regret turning down NW as several people have told me that I should have given that program more serious consideration, I'm not going to let it haunt me... Job placement and grants-wise, all of the advisors that I'm looking to work with at all these places have been successful in placing their students (when reported) and their students have gotten grants. Current students at these institutions could also cite colleagues who were currently away in Africa or France on grants. I'm basically decided on Stanford. I can get big name value plus awesome advisors and enough people who could serve on my dissertation committee. Thanks for your help everyone!

zenosparadox - I visited UChicago and I loved the potential advisors that I would have there, but they have too many students. They were clearly invested in all of them and cared about them on a personal level, but each prof had about 9 students across different years. I need more individualized attention than that... UChicago is a beautiful campus and Hyde Park wasn't bad and the city of Chicago itself has a ton to offer. I would go there if I had no other options. They really seem to cultivate a culture of harsh critique. The history dept's intellectual community is great! People there love to think and talk about big ideas, but I just kept getting weird vibes from the students. They all seemed stressed and anxious and not as generally happy as they were at other places. They would all stress that they're doing good work, not that they were happy. Which "happiness" is kind of important to me. Some other admits I talked to liked the emphasis on rigor and "doing good work" vs. "happiness" and that's cool for them, but not what I wanted. Even though they don't have competitive funding anymore (now they give everyone the same package), there was a still a weird competitive atmosphere. Also I'm sure you might have heard that the unofficial undergrad slogan there is "UChicago: where fun comes to die" or "UChicago: Hell does freeze over." Not cool in my book. But like I said, it would be totally different if I didn't have other options. There are great people there and their program in top 10 in History. Just not for me =) but good luck with your visit there and at Stanford! ilovelab - thanks for the input. I just can't decide....... I know I can negotiate with UCLA to maybe top up my funding more. I still can't just settle on one school, I like them all! Does anyone have any advice on finally making a decision and sticking to it? Like how did you self-coach yourself into a "no regrets" attitude to definitively make a decision? Or what types of things help you feel most secure in your decision in the end?

Thanks so much for weighing in maelia8, ilovelab and julietmercredi ! I'm still ruminating but I've given myself until the end of the month to decide otherwise I'll drive myself insane! Cost of living in LA is still high but not as high as Palo Alto and Baltimore is definitely way cheaper than both. Do you think there's a major difference between living in grad housing or other housing owned and operated by the university vs. living in a regular apartment? Somedays, I'm all for UCLA and somedays I feel like I want to be at Hopkins or Stanford. My undergraduate institution is a huge state school so I think I want to try the private school thing out to show on the job market that I have experience on different types of campuses (but that might be another reason why I liked UCLA so much, because the large undergrad-heavy environment felt familiar to me...). I think I'll end up at Stanford though. maelia8, I know you said you're biased toward California schools, but is there anything you think I should know before I commit to going to school out there? Something someone from the east coast might not expect? Or something you would warn a friend or a family member about? Thanks again everyone for your responses!

I'm trying to decide between Stanford, UCLA, and Johns Hopkins. I never thought I would get into all of them, but here I am. All of them have offered full funding for five years towards my completion of a PhD in history. I want to study French colonial history in North and West Africa, but I also have interests in modern France and francophone literature. I'm lucky that I've had the chance to visit all of these programs and meet with my potential advisors and current students, so I feel like I have a pretty good idea of what each program is like. TLDR pros and cons (from my point of view) Stanford pros: beautiful campus, school spirit, current students were really close to each other and really friendly, lots of focus on teaching, California weather, big internationally recognized name, this school is rolling in $$$$ cons: I didn't like Palo Alto, I have concerns about being surrounded by tech industries, my meeting with one of my potential advisors wasn't as engaging as my meetings have been at other places, quarter system (I'm used to semesters) UCLA pros: California weather, school spirit, Los Angeles (diversity, things to do, I have family an hour away), beautiful campus, I loved the professor who would be my primary advisor, current students were nice but mostly older (I'm coming straight out of undergrad so it's still a little awkward for me to think about befriending 30 year olds with children), there are a ton of people I could work with. cons: I've heard that it's hard for UC students to get jobs on the east coast?, bigger department and cohorts, less financially stable compared to the private schools, quarter system Johns Hopkins pros: small and close-knit department, I liked the current students, I loved who my advisors would be and I really connected with several different faculty members, semesters, no course catalog (professors come up with classes according to what their students need) cons: Baltimore aka staying on the east coast, no course catalog, reputation of the department (? I've gathered mixed reviews from other professors) So I'm stuck. I connected most with the people at Hopkins, but UCLA has the most people for me to work with. Stanford has the money and name value and the teaching training I want. In a perfect world, I would move Stanford to Los Angeles and work with the Hopkins' faculty haha. HELP I'll take all the advice and perspective I can get!