History Admissions 2009

[Martha Washington]

Maybe - but I have no funding at the school I was accepted to, and I still have to reply by April 15. I'm going to try to negotiate that deadline, but they aren't necessarily flexible.

not to worry -- i do believe that the guidelines for the 15th deadline only applies to fully funded offers. so you should be ok

[sra08]

UCLA wants a response by April 15 whether you have funding or not. I don't know if that's "technically" allowed, but it seems as though quite a few universities are doing it. Having to wait until the fifteenth just to find out if I'm even on the waitlist at all just feels profoundly inconsiderate, especially when Rutgers hasn't contacted me since December. It's great that they fund all their students, but I also appreciate actually having time to make an informed decision.

[gomezdm]

UCLA wants a response by April 15 whether you have funding or not. I don't know if that's "technically" allowed, but it seems as though quite a few universities are doing it. Having to wait until the fifteenth just to find out if I'm even on the waitlist at all just feels profoundly inconsiderate, especially when Rutgers hasn't contacted me since December. It's great that they fund all their students, but I also appreciate actually having time to make an informed decision.

I think it is allowed - outside the strictures of the CGS agreement, universities can make whatever policies they want. Making non-funded students decide by April 15 is not expressly disallowed by the agreement, so we have to assume it is valid and acceptable for universities to do so. With that said, I really hope that my school lets me take a few days to a week longer to choose.

[Sgt. Pepper]

All I know is, there is no way I am waiting around for Rutgers. New Brunswick is not exactly a place worth waiting around for, and to be completely honest, I'd rather be in a department that wanted me and treated me in a remotely respectable fashion. If this is how they run admissions every year, then they must anticipate receiving a lot of rejections of their own. They can't expect us to wait around for them if and when they decide to start talking, since they certainly aren't the only funded game in town. Hopefully, in the future perhaps the Gradcafe will function as some kind of Better Business Bureau for grad school and people will avoid Rutgers.

[historynerd]

All I know is, there is no way I am waiting around for Rutgers. New Brunswick is not exactly a place worth waiting around for, and to be completely honest, I'd rather be in a department that wanted me and treated me in a remotely respectable fashion. If this is how they run admissions every year, then they must anticipate receiving a lot of rejections of their own. They can't expect us to wait around for them if and when they decide to start talking, since they certainly aren't the only funded game in town. Hopefully, in the future perhaps the Gradcafe will function as some kind of Better Business Bureau for grad school and people will avoid Rutgers.

Me-ow! And on that note, let's get the board started back up! I need something to read during the day - good procrastination and all that. Anybody get any news today? Of any variety? I got no new grad school news, but can tell you that my cats hate the new food I bought them. Aaaannnnnd.... Discuss.

[brinswan]

I'll bite . . . I'll ask for advice where to go. Choice is between two schools:

school 1: Not history but area/ethnic studies in a program incredibly prestigious for this one tiny piece of academia - history of great scholars, good placement, etc. Nice city near friends and family. Good fellowship but high cost of living (but enough). A few rather eminent professors who seem attentive and helpful but not the *best* intellectual fit. Also having trouble figuring out exactly how everything is structure - I get this *feeling* that things might be pretty disorganized there and I might have to work hard to figure things out for myself.

school 2: history phd, top 20, good reputation but not necessarily "prestigious"; placement is relatively good but nowhere near school #1 in having a history of producing well-known scholars. nobody with exact interests but several faculty who have related, peripheral interests and who also seem attentive and kind, although nobody as eminent as at school #1. Fellowship is good - less money but with cost of living being lower may be worth more in real terms. Nice enough town but isolated from loved ones. God a really good "feeling" when I visited - program seems well-organized, well-structured, and competent.

OK, any takers? I literally change my mind every day.

[gomezdm]

I need something to read during the day - good procrastination and all that. Anybody get any news today? Of any variety? I got no new grad school news, but can tell you that my cats hate the new food I bought them. Aaaannnnnd.... Discuss.

Uh, yeah. Right there with you on procrastination. So - sdklos, I suggest you go to the school that gives you the best feelings and where you think you will be happiest. Nothing matters as much as where you feel you will fit - not research-wise, because no school will take you if you aren't a good research fit! - but personality-wise. If there is one school that speaks to you, even if there is no rational reason for it, go there. This is where you have to spend the next five years of your life, and it doesn't matter how good the placement is - if you don't absolutely LOVE the place (or at least like it and feel safe and content there) it will be hard for you to work well and get through the degree. Just my two cents!

[sra08]

sdklos, is it possible for you to get into contact with current students at both programs? (Through the website, or by e-mailing the grad program coordinator.) That might give you some insight as to the program's organization, the faculty, etc. Talking to current students at my accepted programs has been quite useful in terms of feeling that I'm making the right choice.

Also, it sounds as though a big part of your decision has to do with it being an interdisciplinary program vs. History. Do you have a preference in terms of the kind of dissertation you see yourself writing, the type of preparation, etc.? It sounds like you have two great choices either way, so good luck.

[IrishHistoryKid]

Uh, yeah. Right there with you on procrastination. So - sdklos, I suggest you go to the school that gives you the best feelings and where you think you will be happiest. Nothing matters as much as where you feel you will fit - not research-wise, because no school will take you if you aren't a good research fit! - but personality-wise. If there is one school that speaks to you, even if there is no rational reason for it, go there. This is where you have to spend the next five years of your life, and it doesn't matter how good the placement is - if you don't absolutely LOVE the place (or at least like it and feel safe and content there) it will be hard for you to work well and get through the degree. Just my two cents!

Yeah, I think there's a lot of truth to this. Obviously prestige, job placement and all that matters but you will be living and working in this university for 6 or 7 years at the least. If you're just not happy there then it'd be difficult to do well in your studies. Plus top 20 in History is a pretty good rating.

[brinswan]

Thanks for the advice guys . . . As far as which place "feels" better this is where the problem is - when I think about where I'll be happiest logically school #1 makes the most sense, but for some reason emotionally it's the opposite experience. Part of it might just be my visit to #2 was more elaborate, more money was thrown at me, etc., and I wonder if I'd had a similar opportunity of visiting school #1 it wouldn't be the same. sra2008 - I have talked to current students at each school, although talked to more at #2 than at #1. They all seem pretty happy with their programs - it's hard to really quantify based on that, especially since I just met more from school 2 than school 1. The difference in type of degrees really is a curious issue for me. I can't even figure out which one is necessarily better. Earlier I was thinking the fact that I wanted a history degree was a dealbreaker, but now I'm starting to think maybe interdisciplinary is the way to go, considering the terrible academic history job market - people at school #1 seem to also get very cool jobs doing non-academic things, which I like. So . . . I suppose I am leaning towards school 1, but this time last week I was positive I was going to school 2. Which is why I'm so confused. It just seems whichever school I seem to have more contact with at the time is the school I want to go to. Is that crazy? I just wish someone would tell me where to go!

Do you guys have opinions about language issues? If my program of study is language intensive - is there any way to evaluate which program would be better at giving me the resources in this way? I've asked and gotten "assurances" from both places about this, but I can't seem to figure out exactly how that would work. This matters a lot to me, if for no other reason because I love languages and want to go to a program that will support me in that. Are there ways to figure this out?

[lhistoire]

Thanks for the advice guys . . . As far as which place "feels" better this is where the problem is - when I think about where I'll be happiest logically school #1 makes the most sense, but for some reason emotionally it's the opposite experience. Part of it might just be my visit to #2 was more elaborate, more money was thrown at me, etc., and I wonder if I'd had a similar opportunity of visiting school #1 it wouldn't be the same. sra2008 - I have talked to current students at each school, although talked to more at #2 than at #1. They all seem pretty happy with their programs - it's hard to really quantify based on that, especially since I just met more from school 2 than school 1. The difference in type of degrees really is a curious issue for me. I can't even figure out which one is necessarily better. Earlier I was thinking the fact that I wanted a history degree was a dealbreaker, but now I'm starting to think maybe interdisciplinary is the way to go, considering the terrible academic history job market - people at school #1 seem to also get very cool jobs doing non-academic things, which I like. So . . . I suppose I am leaning towards school 1, but this time last week I was positive I was going to school 2. Which is why I'm so confused. It just seems whichever school I seem to have more contact with at the time is the school I want to go to. Is that crazy? I just wish someone would tell me where to go!

Do you guys have opinions about language issues? If my program of study is language intensive - is there any way to evaluate which program would be better at giving me the resources in this way? I've asked and gotten "assurances" from both places about this, but I can't seem to figure out exactly how that would work. This matters a lot to me, if for no other reason because I love languages and want to go to a program that will support me in that. Are there ways to figure this out?

I am in the EXACT same boat...and I similarly have no idea what to do. Academically, I should go to school 1, but the "feel" of school 2 is calling my name. The problem with me is that I've been planning on attending school 2 for about a month now, I just recently got accepted into school 1 off of the waitlist. Bah. So. Difficult.

[synthla]

sdklos: have you been assigned an advisor at each school already? how well do you mesh with them? that made a big difference for me - that is, (1) knowing who i would be working with, at least initially, and (2) that i got along well with them and could see a good relationship developing. in my case, the pieces just came together for the school i thought i wanted to be at from the beginning, but certainly the "feel" that i got when i visited could not have been the result of just my high hopes, so i think there's a lot to be said for that. if you're confident that you can produce great work at either place, i'd say go with the place at which you'll feel happiest and most a part of the intellectual community. i know graduate school will be hard work, but i'd still like to enjoy it as much as i can and people and vibe are a big part of that. also, top 20 seems like it won't close any doors for you, and after that it really is about you, individually - that is, what have you done while you were there.

[Sonic]

I'm curious if anyone else thinks their decision is going to be made on April 14th (or, on April 15th!).

I'm still on the line for one school that is in a strange funding bind, and they keep saying they'll know more closer to April 15th. I feel like I can't make a decision until that school's funding situation becomes at least a little clearer, but I really want this to be over with!

[reallywantcolumbia]

OK -- now I really need advice

Background: Two schools -- both ranked almost identically. Both give full fellowships that are comparable when you account for COL. Both have excellent placement rates. Time to degree is comparable. Financial resources for research are comparable. Both have great law schools (I'm thinking about a JD/PhD). And I haven't done a campus visit at either.

One of the problems is that I was absolutely SURE I wanted to go to school 1 when I applied, but now that I've had a month of being recruited by school 2, I'm a lot less sure. I think that's party because I've just got so much more info on school 2 now -- much more than I have on school 1. So I don't know how that skews my viewpoint. And how much of this is a question of ego? -- school 2 obviously wants me more than school 1.

So, fire away folks -- I need all the advice I can get!! I don't want to leave this decision till the beginning of next week!

[fortiesgirl]

OK -- now I really need advice

Background: Two schools -- both ranked almost identically. Both give full fellowships that are comparable when you account for COL. Both have excellent placement rates. Time to degree is comparable. Financial resources for research are comparable. Both have great law schools (I'm thinking about a JD/PhD). And I haven't done a campus visit at either.

If I were making the decision, I would choose School 2 without any hesitation. I was accepted to programs with profiles like your school 1 and school 2 this time around and I took an offer from a school 2 without ANY hesitation before I even back from my school 1this time around- lol. That's because I already had my other school 1 experience in grad school and NOTHING--NO amount of money, pretige, etc., would make me repeat that experience. On another note, I guess I am a little apprehensive to give someone advice on a matter that will affect their future, but you asked for it, so here it goes. I went to a grad school with, as you call it, the "faculty superstars." And I'm thinking about the school I think you are, our school #1 are pretty similar.

As you so eloquently pointed out, not much attention goes to the grad students (of course this depends on the person, but if you are saying this is an overall trend, then it's a problem) of the faculty superstars. I think I am about to open up a pandora's box here because this is certainly not the case at every school with its superstars, but it is the case with certain faculty and their egos. Before I piss off some of you, I absolutely adored some of the faculty with whom I worked at my school 1, and they are brilliant, humble, and kind. I have dealt with egos so inflated that some individuals have insisted that grad students interview, yes INTERVIEW!, to take classes with them. This is the type of b-s that goes on behind the scenes at some schools and you don't know it until you are one of the little guppies in the big stream.

To address one of your other points---"None of the faculty seem super excited about the work I want to do, despite the fact that it closely ties into their own interests." It's because they are self-absorbed and self-obsessed with their own projects and their own work that they might/ or will not focus on your interests. It really depends on the person, but if that's the vibe you're getting already, then I would advise you to steer clear. I've been there and done that and it's not a good sign. Don't sign up for 5-7 years of misery. Your other point regarding--"Rumors of student disaffection," Yeah, well no wonder. If the faculty breed competition amongst themselves, it is bound to wear off on the students. This was also my experience. The competition was AWFUL!!!! Students would steal articles on reserve, books placed on reserve that were out of print, and entire SHELVES of books from the library. This would occur when research paper topics were decided on publicly in class. You would then go to the library and poof! books were gone. It's not that I can't handle competition, but preventing people from doing their required course work is not right IMO.

Now on to school 2 ...

"lots of good people in the field. People (faculty and grad students) have been INCREDIBLY nice and have gone out of their way to help me. Received several international phone calls from possible advisers." What more can I say? This is what sold me on my program. You can have prestige but if they aren't willing to work with you and develop you as a scholar, then what will it really get you in the long run? I also believe that you can have humble professors with amazing records (in the same places) who train their students to do great things.

"The department seems to get on really well and seems to be free of the kind of backbiting that's found at other places. Really collegial atmosphere and seemingly unlimited access to professors." Personally, I thrive in this type of atmosphere. Others don't. To each his own. Grad school is hard and competitive, but I think it helps to have a supportive environment. I do believe that you can find this type of environment at a prestigious program, but it all depends on the spirit of the student body and faculty.

"Completely interdisciplinary and much more conducive to a 'do your own thing' approach. Professors all seem extremely excited about my work and my academic goals. Lots of good professors in other departments who seem to be actively involved in working with history people. Seems almost certain that I will have a more congenial and nurturing academic experience here." You need to be in an environment that will be most conducive to your learning. Meditate on this thought.

"While there are lots of good people here, none of them are doing work in the exact area I'm interested in. While school 1 has about 7-8 people I would love to work with, school 2 has more like 3-4." Are they interested in closely related fields? I think this is important because they can help shape your research interests without stealing your ideas (btw--that happens too!). What are your fields of interest? What are theirs? How about the interdisciplinary fields? How many faculty are there in those particular fields? Out of curiosity, could you provide more info on this? You don't need 7-8 people working in your field to have a cohort for your dissertation. You need about 3, so that's right on the money.

"There is also something of a geographic mismatch -- the people who are doing the kind of methodological work I'm interested in are doing it in areas of the world I'm not familiar with. And, possibly most importantly, I really think I might struggle in the town this university is in." You really need to determine how much of a con this is in comparison to the other pros and cons of school 1. For me it didn't matter as much. Commuting within the environment of my school 1 became too much of a headache after awhile. I don't miss it at all, but you need to be happy at your new locale.

[Sgt. Pepper]

Ah, the ubiquitous "School 1" "School 2" problem. Well, I am not in your exact field, but I do have an inkling of how to address your problem since we seem to be approaching a similar situation with similar questions.

"I want to go to Columbia," you cry. "It has centers, institutes, faculty, oh my!" The possibilities, it seems are endless, you can even take courses at other top five universities, what is there to not like? The faculty in your exact field are superstars, they're famous, but this name recognition comes at a price: they aren't very interested in your work when they have so much of their own to do. "It's in New York," you tell yourself, "Where I really want to live!" Because although you don't necessarily say it this way, Michigan and Ann Arbor are in the middle of nowhere. They're hick towns and you're a cosmopolitan intellectual. Most New Yorkers and even East Coasters would agree, there's nowhere between here and California worth living, it's all tumbleweeds and Okies. They're fat and wear fanny packs; you'd be isolated from everything the country has to offer that is good and worthwhile. As a New Yorker myself, I know the feeling quite well. We used the term "flyover states" for a reason.

But beyond the shiny surface, the cracks begin to show in ubiquitous school number 1, and school number 2 (note which one received which numbers) has been wooing you like Romeo did Juliet. They offer you money, they at least feign excitement over your research. They act cooperatively and demonstrate a collegial atmosphere. Yet still you hesitate. "The faculty isn't precisely in my field," you might retort. But consider this: what if your field changes as you read further and discuss new ideas? Being exposed to different ideas might prompt you to re-evaluate your field in a way those with the exact same interests could never accomplish. "I'm not familiar with their areas," but who is stopping you from learning and vice versa? In fact, I have found that faculty who are completely unrelated to my field have the most insightful remarks to bring to my work and, remarkably, they have advised some excellent dissertations that overlap nicely. Eager faculty will also be more willing to work cooperatively both with you and other adivsors to give you the support and intellectual environment you feel you need. If they're excited about your work and your goals, then obviously the divergence in subject matter does not preclude them from thinking they have something worthwhile to offer you. Have you seen copies of recently advised dissertations?

Engaged and interested faculty will go a long way towards helping you finish in a quick, efficient manner. Five years into your program, do you want to be tracking down Socrates on his world lecture tour to give you comments on your first dissertation chapter? Graduate school, despite what many grad students and others might think, is not a punishment. You should not be resigned to "doing hard time" at your graduate institution. It is a time to grow as a scholar, to discover your voice and career path. For a very long time, scholars believed that seclusion and natural surroundings fostered deeper intellectual thought. Columbia tried to escape New York, but didn't quite move far enough.

But still you hesitate. Since School 1 has yet to offer you admission, this discussion is relatively academic. As scholars, though, this certainly does not preclude us from fretting over the theoretical and hypothetical. If School 1 ultimately rejects you, would you simply turn down 2 in favor of re-applying next year? Is there no place other than 1 where you can grow as a scholar and historian? I suspect, and forgive me for lapsing into Dr. Frasier Crane, that your hesitation regarding school 2 stems from some deeper problems. You "really want Columbia," you've wanted it since before you even applied. Already you have envisioned yourself in their gated fortress above Morningside Heights, engaging with the Socrates of your field. You've purchased your Columbia Tshirt and worn it around the house! School 2 is not contending with School 1, it's contending with your fantasy of school 1. I am most certain that, had school 2 treated you the same way as 1, you would have simply said "fuck you" and moved on. Part of letting go of 1 is letting go of the fantasy and dream. You saw yourself in Manhattan, cosmopolitan, witty and urbane, not a tiny town in the Midwest. God invented planes, trains and automobiles so you could travel, but Ann Arbor doesn't have three international airports and countless trains, but then again who else does? Which do you care about more: your subject matter or your living environment? If you answer the latter, perhaps you can find an alternative employment that allows you to live in the Big Apple. If it is the former, I suspect you have already decided where you should be, but perhaps now is the time to stop fighting it.

[feisty]

I love you. Pretty much lost it at "Dr. Frasier Crane"

Ann Arbor is great. The Ivy League is for squares.

[brinswan]

OK, I'll chime in with advice for "reallywantcolumbia" - btw, Sgt. Pepper that was some great advice you gave already. You wouldn't perhaps care to do the same for my dilemma?

Anyways, since it's always easier to tell other people what to do than make decisions ourselves . .. "reallywantcolumbia" I'll play Devil's Advocate to some other advice. First of all, placement is really strong in both schools you say, but is it equally strong in your specific subfield? I've heard similar rumors about school 1's disaffection, disagreements, etc., but I think if people who come out of that program still are able to find good jobs - how harmful can it be? Similarly for the fear of disinterested professors - if the professors are interested enough to help students produce dissertations strong enough to get them good jobs - I wouldn't worry *too* much about it, I think. Some advice I got, which doesn't really help me in my decision, but may in yours - is that more than the department or even the subfield, you should look at how a specific potential *advisor* has done placing his or her students - apparently this matters a lot too. So is there any way you can find out the info about specific former students of said professors? Anyways, my vote is for school 1 because I think you'd be so much happier living in that city, it's always been your dream school, etc. No place is going to be perfect but this sounds like it's worth the risk of some internal departmental friction. However, if you end up not getting accepted off the waitlist it sounds like your school number 2 option is just as fantastic (if not more, as some people would argue). So, congratulations! Either way you're going to be going to a fantastic school.

[gimlet]

Wait a minute-- you're choosing between a school you've gotten into and a school you haven't? Just wait a couple days to see how the waitlist works out, but really? I think you are way ahead of yourself with the lengthy pro/con lists. School 2 accepted you because they thought you'd be a good fit and they've actually been nice to you. School 1 didn't give you a full admission. That says a lot right there. I'm sorry to be so blunt but this is ridiculous. I hate to call this into question, but did you really want to go to grad school, or did you really just want to move to New York? Your experience at any school will be what you make of it, as will your career. There are plenty of people who find jobs coming out of less than prestigious programs because they are talented people, not because they went to Ivy League schools. Everyone has fantasy programs, but there comes a point when you have to get in touch with what's being offered to you. Columbia has offered you nothing at this point.

Sidenote-- I worked with a "superstar" in my department and it was one of the worst experiences of my life. I came away with a thesis that I'm not crazy about and I won't be able to use my chair for a reference. I was treated with zero respect because he thinks he is god's gift to the discipline. He believed that since he deigned to work with me, I was allowed no margin of error and had to understand his uncommunicated expectations by osmosis (as if I could get a meeting with him, as he travels a lot). Being able to say "I worked with so-and-so" was not worth it and I can't imagine doing that for five years. There are assholes everywhere but I wouldn't let "superstars" factor too much into your decision because the fact of the matter is-- you never know what you're going to get with people. "Superstars" are just as prone to personality conflicts as anyone else-- and probably moreso, really.

[misterpat]

"I want to go to Columbia," you cry. "It has centers, institutes, faculty, oh my!" The possibilities, it seems are endless, you can even take courses at other top five universities, what is there to not like? ...Michigan and Ann Arbor are in the middle of nowhere. They're hick towns and you're a cosmopolitan intellectual. Most New Yorkers and even East Coasters would agree, there's nowhere between here and California worth living, it's all tumbleweeds and Okies. They're fat and wear fanny packs; you'd be isolated from everything the country has to offer that is good and worthwhile. As a New Yorker myself, I know the feeling quite well. We used the term "flyover states" for a reason.

You "really want Columbia," you've wanted it since before you even applied. Already you have envisioned yourself in their gated fortress above Morningside Heights, engaging with the Socrates of your field. You've purchased your Columbia Tshirt and worn it around the house! School 2 is not contending with School 1, it's contending with your fantasy of school 1. I am most certain that, had school 2 treated you the same way as 1, you would have simply said "fuck you" and moved on. Part of letting go of 1 is letting go of the fantasy and dream. You saw yourself in Manhattan, cosmopolitan, witty and urbane, not a tiny town in the Midwest. God invented planes, trains and automobiles so you could travel, but Ann Arbor doesn't have three international airports and countless trains, but then again who else does? Which do you care about more: your subject matter or your living environment? If you answer the latter, perhaps you can find an alternative employment that allows you to live in the Big Apple. If it is the former, I suspect you have already decided where you should be, but perhaps now is the time to stop fighting it.

What a great post.

[Sgt. Pepper]

btw, Sgt. Pepper that was some great advice you gave already. You wouldn't perhaps care to do the same for my dilemma?

Hello caller,

Like most people undertaking this grueling process, you have dreams and aspirations. We've all heard the stories of tenure track job shortages and the purgatory that is life as an adjunct, but being perhaps young and naive we use a variety of responses to counteract those realities. "It won't happen to me, I'm talented, gifted, I'll make it. The job market might change by the time I finish, I'll be okay." "I can worry about that in five, six, seven years when the time comes. I've got skills. I've got options. I can live with little money, I can live in a small town; I can't live without Marxist theory."

Your post is brief and information scarce, so this diagnosis is based on little and perhaps worth even less. Which path to choose? Your dilemma is not one of not being wanted, or of fantasy versus reality. You are not a postmodernist, there is a concrete "reality" and "truth," feelings hold little sway. Your practical side is screaming "I NEED A FUCKING JOB AT THE END OF THIS!!!" while the other side of you thinks "But school 2 leaves me warm and fuzzy, it feels right." Despite the academic fetish for a classless society and its radical leftist tendencies, we need prestige and firmly believe not all universities are created equal. Much as we fight it, brand names like Harvard are the academic equivalent of Chanel.

The first issue you must confront is branding yourself. Presumably you applied to both ethnic studies and history programs for a specific, undisclosed reason. You, like myself, are torn between two worlds and sometimes pure history just doesn't feel fulfulling. Perhaps these alter egos are why you have decided according to personal, predefined standards that neither department "fits" you intellectually. For you, ethnic studies and history are like a black and white cookie: take away the chocolate and the "feel" isn't right. Perhaps your solution should be found outside your department, and you need to think of the magic word: interdisciplinary. Which department will let you explore other opportunities? Which move away from narrow labels and agree, "history is the study of many other fields" or "ethnic studies requires looking back as much as it does examining the present."

The advisers you've chosen present a challenging dilemma: "eminent professors who seem attentive and helpful." Helpful and eminent? A tantalizing dilemma, indeed. Had they simply been cruel, viscious beasts on either side you would most likely be feeling relieved right now, but neither treated you badly. Tant pis. But the post does not mention current graduate students. Graduate students are a unique breed: their predilection for pontificating the negative aspects of their life makes them perfect wells of knowledge for fresh, young students. They know where the bodies are buried, and most are more than willing to say, "Eminent professor is nice, but try getting him to read a dissertation chapter and return it on time." They understand the inner bureaucracy that lurks in every department. Graduate students will let you know how disorganized a department is, for some know the dirty little secret that the administrative assistant has a tendency to forget to submit the proper forms for paychecks. Oops. As a good graduate student, regardless of adviser, you should verse and arm yourself well in the departmental bible: the departmental policies and procedures handbook. Directors come and go, and most scholars cannot be bothered with trivial things like "administration," but you are a smart cookie. You will know what forms to fill out and even have them in ahead of time: you're funding will always been renewed punctually. Why? Because, as we all well know, knowledge is power.

And you are left saying, "But this doesn't solve my problem. I'm still lost and confused, torn between two decent options." And so the next question to arise is the practical one, where your brain is still screaming "I NEED A FUCKING JOB." We all need employment, and you state that school 1 has a better placement record than school 2, so where does that leave you? First, you have already established an unequal playing field. History degrees have a glutted market, but what about ethnic studies? Debating between the two, you must first ask your advisers "what have you done to further the employability of your grad students today?" Some urge a specific minor field, while others illuminate divergent fields with better employment options. One may even say the words "public history." We all have dreams of tenured glory, with monographs that, being the scholarly achievements they are, almost 300 people read, including our families who were forced against their will. The responsible adviser and graduate student will diversify their portfolio and have the dreaded "plan B." It can never hurt. Advisers are the people who find and obtain job interviews, ask you adviser at school 2 exactly what their track record is, and don't settle for "Well, I can't really remember..." Because they always do.

As for geographic location, this seems a minor question. Your pursuit of happiness is primarily concerned with the interaction within the Ivory Tower, not outside of it. So many people say, "It's in a great city," so few say "the department has exceptional workshops where grad students and faculty get together and discuss their work in a free, open and constructive fashion." Before thinking of the world outside the classroom, think about the world within. Have you left the department with a tingly feeling, eagerly rushing home with visions of planning your first workshop? It is a question of growing as a scholar, and loved ones, especially relatives and friends, are excellent at playing the bum just to see what the new town is like. There is now unlimited calling to family and friends, video chatting online, too, so you will not be stranded in the hinterlands without contact.

Lastly, do not immediately dismiss feelings. Rational thought is an excellent tool, but in all honesty historians (and ethnic studies people, too) are humanists and we care about feelings. At least most of us, anyway. If the feeling is right, then it's right. If the feeling is wrong, do not ignore your instinct. The people who do on television are usually the ones who end up in bad accidents or dumpsters, and we wouldn't want that for you.

[synthla]

OK -- now I really need advice

Haha... I got my JD at your School 1 and am now going for my PhD in a small midwestern city not unlike Ann Arbor; I did not even apply to School 1 this time around, as after one graduate school experience there, I had no desire to even contemplate ending up there again. I suppose if I'd been more of a prick I would have fit in better and been happier there, and if I got a thrill off telling people I went to a Top 5 law school ("Ivy League Bitches!"), the brand name would be useful - but honestly, I don't even know where my physical diploma is now and I toss the alumni mail unopened. Living in NYC was great fun, but not worth it - at least I got to breathe the same air as those super stars though. :wink:

edit: This post reflects the views of the poster only; i'm sure there are people who have had wonderful experiences at School 1.

[StrangeLight]

reallywantcolumbia,

since everyone's giving you their two cents, i'll throw mine in with them.

i think that a department's atmosphere contributes a lot to the quality of your work. i was scared off from applying to a few schools based on the recommendations of my undergrad advisors who told me that school A "is like poison" or "everyone at school B hates each other" or "yeah, school C is good, but they just want to churn out as many PhDs as possible and they don't really give students any individual attention."

there will be plenty of time to live in new york. the fact is that columbia hasn't even accepted you yet. wait to hear their answer before giving michigan the yes or the no, but still... it seems like there are a plethora of negatives about columbia, and the biggest positive attribute is its location to the most distractingly fun city in the world. if the superstars are going to ignore you and the students hate their school and each other, that's not a conducive environment to even finishing your degree, let alone putting out a quality dissertation. as much as i hate ann arbor (and everyone i've known from A2 has hated it), the department and your cohort should matter more than your location.

[brinswan]

Wow, thanks Sgt. Pepper! That was a very entertaining and I think helpful read. Everyone keeps talking about "feel" from the department and I have a very different opinion about this sort of thing. I don't think gut feeling can necessarily be trusted. I've had this uneasiness about department number 1 for a long time and I only just realized why, and it's not logical or based on reality, whatsoever. Similarly the "nice" feeling I had about number 2 was not based on anything I can put my finger on, so why should I trust it? I'm not saying you should never pay attention to it but I do think sometimes gut feelings can be misleading.

[reallywantcolumbia]

BAM -- I just got pwned!

But seriously, good advice --

School 2 is not contending with School 1, it's contending with your fantasy of school 1. I am most certain that, had school 2 treated you the same way as 1, you would have simply said "fuck you" and moved on. Part of letting go of 1 is letting go of the fantasy and dream. You saw yourself in Manhattan, cosmopolitan, witty and urbane, not a tiny town in the Midwest.

Honestly, no argument there. I do have a fantasy about school 1 (and know I have that fantasy) -- which makes taking rational decisions about it difficult.

If School 1 ultimately rejects you, would you simply turn down 2 in favor of re-applying next year?

Of course not -- School 2 is an amazing institution with great scholars working there!

BUT, let me push back on this a bit. As sdklos mentioned -- what matters is your particular adviser, and not necessarily the department as a whole. The people I want to work with at school 1 (at least the top two guys there) are superstars, not in the academy at large, but in my particular subfield. At least one of them is known to be a really nice guy. I am a huge admirer of his work and a couple of my undergraduate advisers know and respect him. I'm not eager to work with him because he's a superstar -- I want to work with him because he is a really good scholar doing very interesting work. Also, yes, there are rumors of backbiting -- but NOTHING close to the stuff fortiesgirl was talking about. Maybe the really bad stuff is being brushed under the carpet, but I've talked to friends of friends who are/have been in the department -- and while they might not have been ecstatically happy about the program, they certainly weren't very unhappy. All PhDs at both schools are fully funded and, while history grad students at School 1 don't hang out and socialize with each other as much as people in school 2, they aren't competing with each other.

That said --

But consider this: what if your field changes as you read further and discuss new ideas? Being exposed to different ideas might prompt you to re-evaluate your field in a way those with the exact same interests could never accomplish. "I'm not familiar with their areas," but who is stopping you from learning and vice versa? In fact, I have found that faculty who are completely unrelated to my field have the most insightful remarks to bring to my work and, remarkably, they have advised some excellent dissertations that overlap nicely.

This is not something I had thought and yes -- I agree with you guys. School 2 does make a lot more sense academically -- in the sense that it seems a lot more accommodating of me. And yes, School 1 didn't accept me straight off the bat -- that does say something.

And,

Wait a minute-- you're choosing between a school you've gotten into and a school you haven't?

(Actually, I was just accepted to school 1)

So yes, School 2 sounds a lot better than School 1 and I should probably go there. School 2's niceness and interest in my work is very gratifying. But, it is also (I think) a product of the fact that they accepted me and are trying to recruit me. True, that's neither here nor there now. But I think it (at least partially) rationalizes the way I've been feeling about this decision. A prof at School 1 is calling me tomorrow morning to talk about the program and my 'fit' in it. I will certainly go into that conversation a lot more skeptical than I would have been before this gradcafe conversation. It's true, letting go of a dream program is hard to do -- especially when you don't have things like funding/ranking/placement to justify that decision. But honestly guys, isn't that a decision you would find hard to make?

And I think this is a bit of a low-blow

I hate to call this into question, but did you really want to go to grad school, or did you really just want to move to New York? Your experience at any school will be what you make of it, as will your career.

Which do you care about more: your subject matter or your living environment? If you answer the latter, perhaps you can find an alternative employment that allows you to live in the Big Apple. If it is the former, I suspect you have already decided where you should be, but perhaps now is the time to stop fighting it.

I agree -- academics is the primary thing I should be thinking about. BUT, that isn't the be-all and end-all. Living conditions do matter. If you're not happy with the town you're in, you are probably not going to be as happy/productive as you would be otherwise. I recently had a conversation with two newly-minted PhDs who are friends -- one went to school 1, the other to school 2. While both admitted that school 2 provided a closer and more nurturing environment, both also admitted that school 1 was a more vibrant intellectual environment. Furthermore, the friend who went to school 2 said the town "drove her batty," while the one who went to school 1 said NYC helped her get through her PhD and generally made her a happier camper. So I just want to push against the idea that these kind of decisions are a straight choice on academics. In terms of placement and other related indicators -- the schools are pretty much identical. In terms of academics they are very close -- one has nicer people, the other has scholars who specialize in my field. I don't think my worries about location warrant questioning my life goals. This is not some 1-2 year course that I can buckle down and get through (ignoring my physical surroundings) -- this is the next 5-7 years of my life and, I'm sorry, I kinda feel that my personal happiness with my physical location will have some bearing on my academic success. Also, I didn't just go through a hellish year-long application process just "so that I could live in NYC." Neither am I locking myself down to 5-7 years of near penury for the same reason. There are easier ways to do that...

"It's in New York," you tell yourself, "Where I really want to live!" Because although you don't necessarily say it this way, Michigan and Ann Arbor are in the middle of nowhere. They're hick towns and you're a cosmopolitan intellectual. Most New Yorkers and even East Coasters would agree, there's nowhere between here and California worth living, it's all tumbleweeds and Okies. They're fat and wear fanny packs; you'd be isolated from everything the country has to offer that is good and worthwhile. As a New Yorker myself, I know the feeling quite well. We used the term "flyover states" for a reason.

Oh man; I had to wipe a tear from my monocle and put down my snifter of brandy when I read this -- you know me so well!!

Still, thanks folks. The advice was much appreciated and, frankly, I'm probably going to end up at school 2. The last few posts really helped me figure out my thought process going into this decision -- and some of the responses raised important points I hadn't considered. Long Live gradcafe!

p.s. Sgt. Pepper -- Dr. Frazier Crane = awesome!