Hobson-Jobson

Thanks for all the feedback so far. I had not really placed as much value on the networking aspect of things as perhaps I should have. Presumably, ceteris paribus, a broader network is better than a narrower one. At risk of sounding naïve though, what is the practical value of having a broader network for a graduate student? More people to write letters? To provide feedback on written work? More ways to get invited to participate in panels, write book chapters? I agree that having a broader network is "important," but I guess I am less clear on the tangible value it has for a graduate student in practice. A lot of it just seems difficult to quantify. (For job placement, for example, I'm assuming that the quality of one's written work and the strength of the advisor's recommendation are the primary deciding factors once you've cleared the "prestige" hurdle, so the extensiveness of one's network seems less directly relevant there unless one is applying to a place specifically within that network. But please feel free to correct me -- I genuinely am curious.)

Anyone with personal experience at either of these institutions is particularly welcome to comment, although helpful advice from others in the community is of course welcome too. (This is not meant as a "brag post" -- I realize that I am very fortunate to have these two schools as options -- I have just been beating myself up over the decision, so I am reaching out for some outside perspectives.) Some details: Chicago -Good faculty fit with primary advisor -Environment in which I feel comfortable (I know this from having done my M.A. there); my guess is that I would reintegrate easily and be happier (or at least less stressed) than at Harvard Harvard: -Better (arguably the best) placement in my sub-field -Better funding, even after adjusted for COL; that said, Chicago's stipend would also be more than enough to cover my living expenses, so the threat of debt is not an active concern -Less direct fit with primary advisor (but interesting secondary/tertiary people who work on topics loosely related to my interests) Both advisors are fantastic scholars and people, so it is tough to choose between them. For those of you who are already in programs and can reflect on the most important factors that have made your graduate experiences good/bad, I would be all ears. Thank you for your input.

Good luck, Brooke. If you are who I think you are, I believe I met you at the Hopkins and UCLA open houses, and you were very nice. I'm in a somewhat similar boat, in that Chicago is a better fit for my interests but Harvard and Princeton are, well, Harvard and Princeton. If a "10" would be a perfect fit for what I want to study, then Chicago is an 8.5, Harvard a 7, and Princeton a 6, but ranked by funding packages they stand in the exact opposite order. Not really sure what to do, although I have promised myself that I won't be flipping a coin. But for what it's worth, I think we should all just embrace our decisions (whatever they turn out to be), enjoy the years ahead of us, and not look back.