Decisions, Decisions (for historians)...

[borderlands]

It seems as though you are leaning more towards Harvard than Berkeley; the doubt stems from rankings that place Berkeley higher than Harvard.

I can speak more of Berkeley than about Harvard. Both have excellent library resources, use the semester system, expensive places to live near by, and have excellent faculty. I say go with the school that you feel would give the most personal intellectual and financial support.

Berkeley is a great place that is intellectual and politically active in social issues. More recently, the budget cuts UC system, tuition hikes, increasing out of state students-- looking more and more like the U of Michigan finacial composition. Berkeley will continue to live up to its reputation even if it means privatizing the university. History department is largely insulated from cuts. While other departments have had to cut staff and not replace retiring faculty, the history department has denied tenure to professors who do not perform up to par (this is why no Latin American emphasis students were accepted this year and why eight graduate students were left as orphans), it has hired at least three other faculty members in the last two years. Gender balanced more towards women--at the faculty level.

Berkeley also has a reputation of having graduate students guiding their own research. This is both good and bad depending upon your preference.

I'd say go where you will have the most faculty support and I think that is at Harvard.

[vtstevie]

Also, I know personally I'd rather live in Boston (Cambridge) than virtually anywhere in the US, so my gut tells me Boston...

(just as an idea for what would go into MY thought process where I lucky enough to be in your shoes)

[sankd]

My decision is not that impressive as some of the others, but still vexing.

OPTION 1

Pros: Staying at my MA institution. I got a nice offer for four years of funding as a TA. There is an expectation that I would teach a section of the Intro to Global History after defending my prospectus. I know my advisor already as well as my future committee. I don't have to move - which costs money - and a good portion of my friends will still be here. Income tax - no small matter - is lower here. I am closer to my family and major urban areas via car here.

Cons: A lot less money than option 2. Funding is tied to public/federal sources, which have their problems. Cost of living is marginally higher here. After two years of the social scene here, I am pretty tired of it. Placement is okay but not really that great lately. I would be the only student in my field (not good or bad). There is no real money for travel, whether for study or conferences. The department, while rising in reputation and graduating good numbers of PhDs, is the kid in the campus family the red-headed stepchild beats up. There is a large portion of the school that sneers at the liberal arts, and we don't even get respect from the humanities administration. The town is really segregated at times, with graduate students avoiding undergraduates, townies not really hanging out with students, etc.

OPTION 2

Pros: When you factor in the lower cost of living, I end up being paid almost double the amount of money. $$$$ for conference travel. Partial funding for language study or research abroad. Funding tied to private sources, so dependent on stock market alone. Really incredible placement rate. Better weather. Better facilities for graduate students (computers per student, office space per student, etc.). Department one of the most well-respected on campus, so administration is a big fan. Advisor is more experienced and more established in the field. More professors and students in my field. New place, new start. The town has less divisions, whether it be undergrad-grad or town-gown.

Cons: Moving costs money. Going to a new place is always a gamble. Teaching obligations from Year 2 onward (this is a con for amount of work, but a pro for job prospects). Income tax is a little higher. Not really near anything, at least under 2 hours driving. The closest person I know is 5.5 hours away, and that's only for a year. Department reputation is good regionally but not nationally yet, for some reason. While there seems to be professors that fit my intended minor fields, I don't know them yet.

Should it be all about the money? Because if so, Option 2 wins in a landslide.

[borderlands]

@Herodotus The question: What makes you say I'd get more faculty support at Harvard? Do mean a simple comparison of resources, which are clearly deeper at Harvard?

The way the Berkeley program is structured has its benefits as well as not so great things. A graduate student is admitted without having an "official" direct advisor. Graduate students are expected to be after professors rather than them guiding you. Although a relationship tends to build from taking courses and what not.

I do not mean to discourage you from attending Berkeley. After all, I was just an undergrad at this institution so it might be different at a graduate level. From my experience if one is not after professors scheduling meetings for advising they could care less about how your research is going because they have so many other students and are trying to write as much as they can. The genuine care about teaching was not there, at least, from my experience.

As far as resources they are some but like I said it's a public institution meaning that outside of the history department resources are scarce. Berkeley spends a lot in its buildings but little for human resources at libraries (cutting hours) and other administration offices. If you come from a private institution this is going to be a big change but if you come from a public university then it probably would not be any different.

Frankly, after being at a great public university, like Berkeley, having to wait in line for an hour to get the attention from the financial aid office or another offices/ services on campus has left me a sour taste. Seeing the personal attention private university students gets makes me jealous that the professor actually cares whether I learn or not and not just getting the "I do great research that's why I'm here; I really do not care about teaching". I think I may be giving Berkeley a bad rep but if you know what you are after and are able to find great faculty support I'm sure you'll do great.

Would you be more happier at berkeley than Harvard? If you want to have a life outside of berkeley I think it's definitely do able, not just family wise, there are a lot of opportunities and things to do in San Francisco and Oakland. Public transportation is arguably one of the best in the country with the BART system. Also opportunities to teach in the community college system to make some extra cash and experience. There is definitely plentiful of grants and fellowships available solely to UC graduate students. It definitely has its positives.

[cyborges]

I'm weighing U.S. programs at Harvard and Berkeley (as well as others listed below, though this question is about those two). I've visited all of them, meeting with potential advisors, current students, and fellow admits. At this point, it's about the "other" factors.

I live in cambridge now. the intellectual community is great and the graduate students are interesting and friendly, but Harvard will always have a vibe. that's part of its power, and you will probably feel really good about yourself if you attend that institution and it fits your interests in any way. You can't beat the libraries and the opportunity to interact with world-renowned scholars on a (literal) daily basis, if you choose. BOSTON, however, is boring--and that goes for all of cambridge/somerville/boston. Harvard square is like a mall, there is no good coffee anywhere, and everywhere else takes you into neighborhoods without real charm or living, interesting businesses. Central/Kendall is even worse, though I live at Inman and find it bearable. But then, there's no subway there.

i didn't live in berkeley but will simply say that the Bay Area is one of the most beautiful places in the country. the landscape is sublime (to Boston's quaint) and the cities are all incredible. San Francisco is easily among the most interesting city in the country.

AND, they'll tell you things are expensive, but Boston overall is MORE expensive. The reasons are not rent-based, but the way businesses are set up. Boston is corporate. the competition between businesses isn't holistic or community-minded, and therefore things are expensive because they can be overall-- no one has sought to prove you can sell at $7.00 sandwich in cambridge and have it still be good. again, you will never find a decent coffeeshop in the area of your school (union sq has some) and will be forced to drink pete's swill and have awkward, over-wrought interiors where nobody can possibly study.

anyway, i'd go to berkeley. However, the vagueness of your post makes it difficult for anyone to offer you any REAL advice because we can't comment on professors and field and speculate about something real--like tell you professor X or Y has two job offers for endowed chairs, or that A B C faculty don't work well together. those are much more likely to affect your experience at any institution. instead, things like "feeling" and "location" are the nature of the advice you'll get. both are good schools, both will get you appropriate, similar jobs if you do a good job for yourself.

[sidiosquiere]

My decision is not that impressive as some of the others, but still vexing.

OPTION 1

Pros: Staying at my MA institution. I got a nice offer for four years of funding as a TA. There is an expectation that I would teach a section of the Intro to Global History after defending my prospectus. I know my advisor already as well as my future committee. I don't have to move - which costs money - and a good portion of my friends will still be here. Income tax - no small matter - is lower here. I am closer to my family and major urban areas via car here.

Cons: A lot less money than option 2. Funding is tied to public/federal sources, which have their problems. Cost of living is marginally higher here. After two years of the social scene here, I am pretty tired of it. Placement is okay but not really that great lately. I would be the only student in my field (not good or bad). There is no real money for travel, whether for study or conferences. The department, while rising in reputation and graduating good numbers of PhDs, is the kid in the campus family the red-headed stepchild beats up. There is a large portion of the school that sneers at the liberal arts, and we don't even get respect from the humanities administration. The town is really segregated at times, with graduate students avoiding undergraduates, townies not really hanging out with students, etc.

OPTION 2

Pros: When you factor in the lower cost of living, I end up being paid almost double the amount of money. $$ for conference travel. Partial funding for language study or research abroad. Funding tied to private sources, so dependent on stock market alone. Really incredible placement rate. Better weather. Better facilities for graduate students (computers per student, office space per student, etc.). Department one of the most well-respected on campus, so administration is a big fan. Advisor is more experienced and more established in the field. More professors and students in my field. New place, new start. The town has less divisions, whether it be undergrad-grad or town-gown.

Cons: Moving costs money. Going to a new place is always a gamble. Teaching obligations from Year 2 onward (this is a con for amount of work, but a pro for job prospects). Income tax is a little higher. Not really near anything, at least under 2 hours driving. The closest person I know is 5.5 hours away, and that's only for a year. Department reputation is good regionally but not nationally yet, for some reason. While there seems to be professors that fit my intended minor fields, I don't know them yet.

Should it be all about the money? Because if so, Option 2 wins in a landslide.

Hi Sankd - did you a get a chance to meet the potential advisor at option 2?

[sankd]

Hi Sankd - did you a get a chance to meet the potential advisor at option 2?

I did! Last week. They were very nice and extremely knowledgeable.

[paint]

I'm an Americanist interested in matters of racial and ethnic identity; language and ideologies; and transnational, comparative notions of race. My period--to extent that it will be necessary--is likely the late nineteenth- and early twentieth centuries, though there are some interesting underpinnings in early America. At this point, you could just as easily put me in the U.S. Intellectual History category as the U.S. Social History one. Needless to say, these interests may shift over time.

As of now, the scholars break down like this--though this could change with shifting interests, departures, or new hires. (Note that, as an Americanist, there are several people at each school with whom I could work. I'm therefore thinking in "committee" terms.)

Harvard: Jill Lepore, Walter Johnson, Lisa McGirr, Sven Beckert

Berkeley: Brian DeLay, Waldo Martin, Kerwin Klein, Mark Brilliant (more of a focus on the Southwest, borderlands)

There are certainly brilliant (and potentially pertinent) scholars left out of that list. Richard Candida Smith, Robin Einhorn, and Rebecca McLennan at Berkeley are all well-regarded scholars that could "switch out" for the people I've listed above, as things evolve. At Harvard, Lizabeth Cohen, James Kloppenberg, and Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham could do the same. I'm not lying--or repeating some statement-of-purpose talking points--when I say that both places have a faculty replete with people with whom I could address these intellectual concerns.

Does this clear up the picture at all? Do you recommend Berkeley strictly based on your preference(s) about location?

I'd add David Hollinger to your Berkeley list of possible people with whom to work, especially if you veer toward intellectual history.

While I know of the work of the people you list, I don't know enough about how they work with students to contribute palpable information to that question. I do think, however, that finding the group of people with whom you want and will feel comfortable/confident working is crucial. You can always move after coursework; you can't necessarily find a different group of scholars with whom to work. The range of the Harvard list seems broader chronologically and thematically which may be good or bad, depending on whether they work together well or not. Talking to students at these programs is really the best way to find out if the combos you list are viable.

[paint]

Thanks for the suggestion. He was very high on my list until I learned that he's planning on retiring in 2012. Though he'll still "be around," it won't be in any officially capacity and he won't be directly advising students. The same goes for Paula Fass. Those are significant losses for Berkeley and I'm told they're looking to hire two new hot-shots to plug the hole.

Good to know. I didn't realize he was retiring (one of my friends works with him, but he'll finish in the next couple of years so I guess retirement doesn't really affect him).

[borderlands]

@ Herodotus. I'm interested in knowing what you are thinking of working on. I can tell you a little more about the professors you've mentioned since I know some of them quite well.

DeLay is a great professor to work with, he is relatively young (compared to most professorial standards) and highly talented. He was one of my letter of recommendation writers and was very supportive. He is giving a talk at SMU on April 2, 2011, http://smu.edu/swcenter/ContestedSpacesEarlyAmerica.htm Its kind of like a who is who in U.S. Southwest borderlands with some early Americanists.

Martin Waldo is also a great cultural and social historian. Known for being supportive but his ideas differ from David Hollinger who is on the post-racial America. Hollinger is a great professor whom getting a recommendation from him will take you to far places but there is are some differences between him and Waldo.

Kerwin Klein, as you know, focuses on more historigraphical issues in history from the frontier and imagination; to his to be released book focusing on history and theory, a critique of historians engaging with questions of memory and its dangers. Candida Smith is just up the alley from Klein although his focus is more on oral history and Western/ California artists.

Brilliant is a great lecturer who's interest are in modern U.S. history but he does deal with issues of race and inequality but more from a social and law perspective. He is also comparatively young and supportive of graduate students.

Rebecca McLennan focuses more on the rise and use of prisons although does not really have an interest in race also she is very busy writing and on high demand. She has slowed down a bit after recovering from a heart attack.

I'm interested in knowing what your research interests are in U.S. southwest borderlands.

[sidiosquiere]

I did! Last week. They were very nice and extremely knowledgeable.

Yeah, maybe option 2 would be a good option then. Do they offer FLAS? If option 1 has FLAS and option 2 does not, I personally would take option 1. If neither have FLAS, I would go to the program with the better language resources, IF you still need more language training. Are you planning on doing CASA?

[sankd]

Yeah, maybe option 2 would be a good option then. Do they offer FLAS? If option 1 has FLAS and option 2 does not, I personally would take option 1. If neither have FLAS, I would go to the program with the better language resources, IF you still need more language training. Are you planning on doing CASA?

They don't offer FLAS because they are completely privately funded. Option 1 has no FLAS. Nothing. No help at all for language study or research abroad.

CASA was suspended this year, right? I hopefully will do CASA at some point, probably after prelims.

[natsteel]

@Herodotus

Pro: It's Harvard!

Con: It's not Yale!!!!

Sorry. Couldn't resist...

[okokokok]

SCHOOL A

- high ranking

- full fellowship offer

- very far away

- one very prestigious advisor, one younger advisor

- worried that neither advisor is doing exactly what I want to do? (eg - political or social hist. vs. cultural) - not sure how much this matters

- would probably have a much easier time getting a job in the end

SCHOOL B

- much lower rank

- similar funding, but would have to TA more

- close to home, friends, family, etc.

- already have friends in the city; still re-rooting, but not be as overwhelming

- advisors still not absolutely perfect match for me, but I maybe mesh better with them

I'm an Americanist, 20th cen. I am a little reluctant to post specific info about schools and advisors and things, but if you think you can be more helpful, I can send it in a message! I think this is kind of similar to Iknownothing's UMich/Penn State decision, actually. Have you decided yet?

[sidiosquiere]

Yeah, as far as I know, it was cancelled in Egypt for this year, but given the current political climate there, who knows what will become of CASA. There is, however, an option for Syria, and I am going to apply for it next year. I believe your potential advisor at Arkansas did CASA. Maybe you can ask him about his experience. Good luck, though! I hope you are happy wherever you end up.

They don't offer FLAS because they are completely privately funded. Option 1 has no FLAS. Nothing. No help at all for language study or research abroad.

CASA was suspended this year, right? I hopefully will do CASA at some point, probably after prelims.

[sidiosquiere]

I need some help too. I study the modern Middle East. PM me if you would like to know the specific schools.

Option A

-prestigious program

-offered a fellowship

-well known advisor, but he does not specialize in what I do. His knowledge is vast, though.

-excellent language learning opportunities

-outside funding options available such as FLAS

-amazing library

-far, far, from home

Option B

-better fit in terms of research interests

-offered a fellowship

-i know the potential advisors well professors well, and one of them is very well known and respected

-no FLAS options

-no language learning opportunities

-library is geared more towards sciences, so i'd have to ILL everything

-close to home

[paint]

SCHOOL A

- high ranking

- full fellowship offer

- very far away

- one very prestigious advisor, one younger advisor

- worried that neither advisor is doing exactly what I want to do? (eg - political or social hist. vs. cultural) - not sure how much this matters

- would probably have a much easier time getting a job in the end

SCHOOL B

- much lower rank

- similar funding, but would have to TA more

- close to home, friends, family, etc.

- already have friends in the city; still re-rooting, but not be as overwhelming

- advisors still not absolutely perfect match for me, but I maybe mesh better with them

I'm an Americanist, 20th cen. I am a little reluctant to post specific info about schools and advisors and things, but if you think you can be more helpful, I can send it in a message! I think this is kind of similar to Iknownothing's UMich/Penn State decision, actually. Have you decided yet?

I think the biggest consideration with faculty is will they support what you want to do -- whether it's what you said in your SOP or you change your mind. I have a cmte of people who all touch on the work I do but none do exactly what I do. It's fantastic b/c they're all committed to my success and like the promise of my work. My advisor certainly has experience with some of the materials I'm using, but my scope and project still differs from the main thrust of her work. My topic hasn't changed all that much from my SOP but my approach, methods, scope, and thinking about it has changed significantly -- in a good way -- because all the people I work with, including those not formally on my cmte, have pushed and critiqued to sharpen my thinking. Whatever I produce by the end will be better because I've worked with people who want me to succeed and each person lends his/her ideas, methodology, topical expertise, and critical eyes to my work.

It's important not to hate the location, but the faculty and program environment are the most important factors and should weigh more in calculations.

p.s. if you want to pm me specific info, I'll comment if I know anything about the programs/people you're considering.

Edited March 24, 2011 by paint

[qbtacoma]

I need some help too. I study the modern Middle East. PM me if you would like to know the specific schools.

Option A

-prestigious program

-offered a fellowship

-well known advisor, but he does not specialize in what I do. His knowledge is vast, though.

-excellent language learning opportunities

-outside funding options available such as FLAS

-amazing library

-far, far, from home

Option B

-better fit in terms of research interests

-offered a fellowship

-i know the potential advisors well professors well, and one of them is very well known and respected

-no FLAS options

-no language learning opportunities

-library is geared more towards sciences, so i'd have to ILL everything

-close to home

Sounds like option B is more limited in the supplementary but still extremely important areas of language opportunities and library resources. You really should have easy access to the vast majority of secondary sources, and you shouldn't have to rely on ILL - it will just make things so much more difficult/expensive for you in the long term. I've often had to go back months later and double check citations and if the book isn't in the library or Google Books, you are going to waste a lot of time for little things. I'm confused a bit on the language opportunity bit - is it just that there's no money for intensive study, or is it that no one teaches the languages you nee? Is there another university or CC in option B's town where you can find language opportunities?

[boringusername]

It's unprofessional to discuss the pros and cons of working with various professors on a public forum. Even if you substitute your potential advisers' real names for "Professor A" or "Professor B," it's not hard to tell who you're talking about. Mentioning someone's health problems ("so-and-so had a heart attack") is beyond the pale. There's a private messaging feature. Use it.

Edited March 24, 2011 by boringusername

[barricades]

I agree wholeheartedly with herodotus.

This is a HUGE decision. A lot of us don't have much experience with the intricacies of the academic world. Also, while we have access to graduate students and professor of the programs we have been accepted to, we do have the right, and probably the obligation, to be skeptical of what they say (and what they don't say). They are, after all, trying to sell themselves now. Of course, you have your advisors to talk to, but sometimes that isn't enough. It's nice to get the perspective from people who are on the same boat as you. And if professors can't handle discussions on their teaching/advising practices, or the strength of their placement records/departments, then that's their problem. I do not find it unprofessional at all. This is a public forum, but it is, after all, a profession where one of the main goals is to serve the public good.

[sankd]

Our potential advisors are under no illusions that applicants/prospectives discuss these things. The fact that it is on an internet forum - and thus a permanent record - shouldn't change anything.

@sidiosquiere: Yes, I discussed CASA with him. He wants me to do it (he also wants to redo it himself) if/when it restarts, but not for a couple of years. I should qualify skill-wise after next year anyway. As for your choice of schools, I think you should go with Option A, but the distance from home thing is a big deal too. You don't want to go to a program where you may be personally glum because of non-academic reasons. We all talk about toughing it out, but under those circumstances most of our work tends to get worse.

Let me know what happens! See you (and the other ME people) in DC this fall.

[KM3]

Possibly a stupid question, but I'm just one my first cup of joe today...

Is there any sort of ranking that has been done by area of study....like say, Americanist? For example, I know one of my choices is highly ranked because of its overall ranking in another field (so clearly, that has been ranked).

Also, general poll....what is more important: prestige or advisor fit?

[sankd]

Possibly a stupid question, but I'm just one my first cup of joe today...

Is there any sort of ranking that has been done by area of study....like say, Americanist? For example, I know one of my choices is highly ranked because of its overall ranking in another field (so clearly, that has been ranked).

Also, general poll....what is more important: prestige or advisor fit?

Ranked by what, the US News Subjective Opinion of 25% of Department Chairs in 2008?

The other question has gotten its own thread on this forum repeatedly. My short answer is that you need a good mix, since they both will have some impact on your future ability to get a job.

[TMP]

Top programs may or may not be able to weather without a quality professor in the field. I purposely avoided one of the top 10 programs for my list because that professor in my field is on his way out and I was told by other professors in the department that it may take a few years to fill in his shoes... because of budget cuts and other fields that they need to fill in as well. What if come comps time, they still haven't heard anyone to examine me in that field??

I know of another solid program that's missing a historian in that particular field. They were *supposed* to start doing searches in 2009 but apparently something happened. They're still without that historian and professors who have related interests are doing their best to make up for that "gaping hole." It's unknown to me when the department will be able to hire for this position, if not later than sooner... again due to budgets.

Could I have survived in those programs? It's a mixed bag. On one hand, I've survived for a while without a historian in my specific field to put me under his/her wing in terms of guiding me and introducing me to historiography. So what's another degree without such person? Also, by working with professors outside of my direct interests, I can learn much more and put on a more interesting spin on my work. On the other hand, I would really have liked to have stimulating conversations about things that *I* like to talk about and the person can actually talk to me instead of just nodding along.

It really depends on how flexible and independent you are. Are you curious enough to explore other possible areas that other professors are truly experts on that you can bring to your dissertation/research? If you are, then the program's prestige should matter more. If not, then go with the adviser, regardless.

Also, question whether or not you will still be able to get examined in that special field beyond general geographical and thematic if the department is missing that specialized professor.

[sankd]

A top-rate department can weather a major loss, usually replacing a top scholar with another big name within a couple of years with relative ease. Not only that, top scholars are less likely to want to leave a top-shelf program, since they've already climbed to "the top" so to speak. A less-than-elite program can land a famous historian, lose him/her, and then have a hard time getting another one. So our well thought-out search for fit--sometimes with major sacrifice--is often more tenuous and risky than we think.

One wonders how the prestige of the UC's (or Wisconsin) will hold up in the coming years. I think their current perception will take a huge hit as they lose research resources, are unable to fill retirements/departures, and lack competitive funding for quality graduate students. It could end up streamlined like my MA institution. I think we're better because of our massive cutbacks.

Anyway, faculty retention is pretty pointless for graduate students. People coming and going can happen at any time, and ultimately the most important near-term concern is if Professor A is going to be around when you are a student in the department. Prestige of program, which is not correlative to money, should have a positive correlation with placement.

Edited March 25, 2011 by sankd