Oxford/LSE or Try Again?

[phdhope2013]

I was wait-listed at 6 top 20 programs (according to US news), but have been rejected from all of them. However, I do have acceptances for a Dphil/PhD at Oxford/LSE both fully funded. I am not sure if I should accept these offers or if I should turn them down and go for the US schools again. The problem is that my letter writers come from both of these schools, so I am afraid that I will not be able to ask them again or they will find it offensive and not write good letters for me. Before anyone criticizes me, both of these schools do not have wait-lists, so I am not hurting anyone by not having made a decision yet. 

[ThisGuyRiteHere]

Think about the signals you are being sent.

Lets use economic reasoning.

You have been rejected to every school but Ox/LSE. No school has admitted you, or offered you funding. However Ox/LSE has decided to admit you and fund you. Why is this?

1. Your GPA/GRE was satisfactory

2. They figured that you are a strong enough fit to give acceptance and funding

So answer these questions:

1. So why would Ox/LSE choose to admit you and no one else?

2. PV theory - Things are worth more today than they are tomorrow - if you give up a funded Ox/LSE offer this yr for a *chance*, you may do better, you may not. Is it worth the risk?

3. What are you going to do to strengthen your profile by next year? Are your improvement in your GRE or other minimal changes going to be enough to garner you a higher admission next year? You more than likely already have a MA, so you really can't get another one...

4. Psychic cost - Will you be able to live with yourself knowing you have up a sure thing at a good uni for a chance at a better uni. Will you mentally be able to cope with your whole life on hold? easy to make the decision today to give it up, but I made a mistake 2 yrs ago and i live with it every day knowing my situation can be different. I have fallen into depression multiple times this year because my life is essentially on hold. It is not fun.

5. If your results are the same, or worst next yr, will you be able to live with yourself?

[ThisGuyRiteHere]

The Main thing you would have to live with is the psychic costs.

I put my life on hold twice. And it has sucked both times. this last year, i have been depressed once a month. Why? Because my life is on hold. you have to live with this decision 365 days. And you are in a good place because at the end of the day, you have some idea what to expect. You know the quality. If it is not up to your standards, dont go, but be prepared to live with your choice.

How is your job situation...do you think that is going to change? Will be sitting at home still living the same ol life? Running errands, watching tv, etc. not learning. not advancing. Can you live with that? Even if you get a job, if it is not 100% what you want to do, can you live with working a job that you are not satisfied with, knowing that you could be in England learning and advancing as a scholar?

You will be stuck for a year. Most people who defer, go on to MA's but that option is dead since you have one. Finally, are you willing to start paying on your loans and do you have the ability to do so? Also are you willing to take the risk on "life happening?" Maybe you may meet someone and want to get married, settle down, influence school selection, etc...are you willing to take that chance? Also are you willing to take the risk of hitting the job market a year later?

If you can answer all these positively, then wait. if not, go.

[phdhope2013]

Thanks for all of the advice and I am considering all of this. I will talk to my advisors tomorrow and see where I go from there. I know its been mentioned elsewhere that transferring out is always an option if you don't like where you are at, but, once again, I come up against the problem of "who will write my letters of recommendation?" And what if I am rejected everywhere again? I would totally make people in whatever department I am at feel like they are my second choice... I really am over thinking this. 

[ThisGuyRiteHere]

No, you are right about the 2nd choice thing. at at the PhD level (post MA) its tough to make the argument that you need to transfer, other than you just dont want to be there

[phdhope2013]

Thanks for the input. Not that making a life changing decision of this magnitude is easy, but your perspectives are appreciated. 

[jazzrap]

I am surprised you are even debating with yourself. Oxford is probably as good as a top 20-25 in the US. I am saying this merely because I assume your eventual goal is to get a TT job in US. In Australia, Singapore, and New Zealand, perhaps Oxford is more respected than a top 20 program in UNews. I am not sure if folks in non-north American OECD countries necessarily appreciate the value of a PhD from a top 20 marginal on UNews.

 

There are six schools that did not accept you. Too bad they all made a stupid decision. At Oxford you are guaranteed with a really great cohort (because it is Oxford) and professors who have already liked you (I assume one or two letter writers of yours teach at Oxford). 

 

Okay, now let's turn to the grandma factor. A non-CHYMPS non-Ivy League school does not carry a brand that can "make your grandma happy". You are going to be in academia most of your life. However, you do have to interact, socialize, or run into people outside of the academia who have no idea that Madison, UCSD, and OSU have world's best PhD programs despite their much lower general university ranking. I hate pedigrees, but most of normal human beings judge people along those stupid lines. LSE and Oxford can give you satisfactory pedigrees to live with. I know you too may hate pedigrees. However, again, a lot of people love pedigrees. 

[phdhope2013]

There are six schools that did not accept you. Too bad they all made a stupid decision. At Oxford you are guaranteed with a really great cohort (because it is Oxford) and professors who have already liked you (I assume one or two letter writers of yours teach at Oxford). 

 

Thanks for this. I like to think that they made a stupid decision as well (it really does make me feel better). At the end of the day, I would probably be more upset if people who know me rejected me! I should stop caring about what a bunch of Professors who have very little information about me aside from the application sitting in front of them think of me. 

However, my goal is a TT job in the US (I am not picky. I would be happy with a decent SLAC), so that is why I am worried. If I wanted to stay in the UK, then I would have absolutely no problem (as long as my thesis kicked ass and I published well, but these are uncontrollable factors). You are right about the quality of the cohort I would be studying with. You always have to be on your "A" game. 

You are also right about name recognition. No one outside of academia, and even some in academia in the UK, would care that you have a degree from Madison or UCSD (except for Essex because they do security stuff there). 

And yes I do hate pedigree. 

Edited April 16, 2013 by phdhope2013

[Guest hopefulfool]

I would just like to point out that if you go by world rankings or TRIPS, then you've done quite well for yourself. 

 

Note - I am not starting a rankings war. Just pointed out a fact. 

[Curiouslyoptimistic]

Brother (or sister?), go to one of the great schools to which you've been accepted.  Nice problem to have. 

[MyUSofWhatever]

While I say this without a firm grip on the value of a professional network vis a vis a program's pedigree, professors at Oxford and LSE will likely not have as strong of a network in the US as they will in Britain. It might not actively hurt you to not have this kind of network in the U.S. to tap into when looking for a job, but it puts you at a disadvantage when competing against candidates who do have a professor or professors who can call up friends in departments where you are applying for a job.

 

It would also be interesting to know if/how often grad students or professors from British and other international universities attend conferences in the U.S.; I would imagine that the answer is 'not very often' because of the cost/time/distance to travel. Being an incoming grad student, I'm not sure whether a lot of concrete job offers - or the foundations for job offers - come from presenting or meeting people at conferences so maybe this is not a factor. Any current students or faculty care to comment?

 

All that said, LSE and Oxford's reputations (and more importantly, the programs themselves!) are good enough, as other people have said, that you should not have to worry too much on that front. Plus, you clearly liked both programs enough to apply, so why not go for it? Getting waitlisted to over 25% of the top 20 means that you probably would get in somewhere in the U.S. if you try again, but 'probably' is a lot less certain than definitely having a couple of good offers in your hand now.

 

Sounds like a hard choice either way, good luck!

[phdhope2013]

Job networking is my main concern. From experience, most professors at LSE/Oxford are gone every single weekend and often during the week at some conference or giving a lecture somewhere. Most students go to the big conferences in the US such as ISA and APSA and both schools do provide a separate stipend to pay for travel to these conferences.

I do like the programs and the people there, which is why I applied to these schools. I am just having severe pre-PhD entry nerves and all of those rejections have me questioning my ability (yes, I know the application process is not the best indicator of this).

Edited April 16, 2013 by phdhope2013

[Guest hopefulfool]

If you got funding, then it should mitigate any risk in doing a PhD. It sounds like a TT job is your first priority, but don't forget the name brand value of both of these schools. You are more likely to get a job at an NGO or IO coming from Oxford or LSE than someone graduating from a US school that doesn't have that international recognition. Also, you have access to an entire methodology department at LSE, so you wouldn't be worse off than those at UCSD (if the rumors on PSR are true). Does LSE/Oxford have the methodology training that other US schools have? I don't know, but you needed to have a dissertation proposal to get into those schools, so you clearly have a brain and ideas. You could be an expert in methodology, but still fail at publishing if you don't have a viable topic to write on. As long as you were not planning on becoming a methodologist, I think you should be fine. 

 

The main difference is that in the US Professors hold your hand through the process while in the UK you really are on your own. What you get out of your degree is what you make of it. I would probably aim to do a post-doc somewhere. Even people at top schools are doing them now, which I don't understand because if you go to a top 10 school you should technically be able to find a job...but I guess the market really does suck. 

 

I have absolutely no experience with UK PhDs. Just a lot of friends over there. 

[jazzrap]

Thanks for this. I like to think that they made a stupid decision as well (it really does make me feel better). At the end of the day, I would probably be more upset if people who know me rejected me! I should stop caring about what a bunch of Professors who have very little information about me aside from the application sitting in front of them think of me. 

However, my goal is a TT job in the US (I am not picky. I would be happy with a decent SLAC), so that is why I am worried. If I wanted to stay in the UK, then I would have absolutely no problem (as long as my thesis kicked ass and I published well, but these are uncontrollable factors). You are right about the quality of the cohort I would be studying with. You always have to be on your "A" game. 

You are also right about name recognition. No one outside of academia, and even some in academia in the UK, would care that you have a degree from Madison or UCSD (except for Essex because they do security stuff there). 

And yes I do hate pedigree. 

OP, it would be better if we know your potential research topic. If you are worried about network, then I am not in the position to comment. The faculty I want to work under at Oxford graduated in a US school and still goes to US meetings, so network for me is not a problem. But I am pretty sure that those teaching at Oxford/LSE are also respected in the US. Tim Besley, for example, is respected among a lot of folks here in the US as the no.1 guy on authoritarian regimes. Again, my examples are not representative. 

 

I think for the US market, a PhD from Oxford is equal to a PhD from a top 20-25 program in US. So what you need to do is to publish one piece on a top-tier journal besides dissertation, do a post-doc  US, and get a job. 

[phdhope2013]

OP, it would be better if we know your potential research topic. If you are worried about network, then I am not in the position to comment. The faculty I want to work under at Oxford graduated in a US school and still goes to US meetings, so network for me is not a problem. But I am pretty sure that those teaching at Oxford/LSE are also respected in the US. Tim Besley, for example, is respected among a lot of folks here in the US as the no.1 guy on authoritarian regimes. Again, my examples are not representative. 

 

I think for the US market, a PhD from Oxford is equal to a PhD from a top 20-25 program in US. So what you need to do is to publish one piece on a top-tier journal besides dissertation, do a post-doc  US, and get a job. 

 

I don't want to go into detail about my research topic, but broadly it involves a lot of theory (normative and positive) and its focus is on international cooperation. I was planning on doing a postdoc, but once again I would have to compete against people with US PhDs... The problem is that both schools do not have complete information about placement. I did ask the DGS from both schools and they just told me where their advisees were placed (all in good UK schools and some US postdocs), however, they don't have data on where all students in the department were placed (whether in academia or the private sector). 

 

At Oxford there are no teaching responsibilities, but at LSE you are required to teach. Both of my potential supervisors are very well known in academia (i.e. anyone who has taken comps will have read something by them)...

Edited April 19, 2013 by phdhope2013

[jazzrap]

I don't want to go into detail about my research topic, but broadly it involves a lot of theory (normative and positive) and its focus is on international cooperation. I was planning on doing a postdoc, but once again I would have to compete against people with US PhDs... The problem is that both schools do not have complete information about placement. I did ask the DGS from both schools and they just told me where their advisees were placed (all in good UK schools and some US postdocs), however, they don't have data on where all students in the department were placed (whether in academia or the private sector). 

 

At Oxford there are no teaching responsibilities, but at LSE you are required to teach. Both of my potential supervisors are very well known in academia (i.e. anyone who has taken comps will have read something by them)...

Well, at the end of the day you have to make your own decision, but if I were you, I would go to Oxford. It is a great school. Plus, Oxford ABDs do get interviewed at US schools and some of them get TT jobs.