Stanford or Oxford? History Ph.D.

[Oink2014]

Hi everybody,

 

I have been admitted to Stanford and Oxford for a Ph.D. in History and I am really torn between the 2 universities... any advice? I am Italian, so Oxford would be "closer" to home, family and friends, but I have always been dreaming of studying in the US. The British program is shorter (3 years), while the American is a 5-year program. I would have funding in both cases, so money is not an issue. Both universities are excellent, Oxford is higher in the History rankings, but I don't know if that means anything...

 

Thank you in advance for any information you can provide me with to help me make a choice!

[BritPhD]

Hi there,

Where would you like to work in the end? If you want to work in the US, then you should certainly go to Stanford. I have many close friends who have completed their PhD's in the humanities and social sciences at Oxford or Cambridge and have struggled to find jobs in the US, especially against US students who have completed degrees at the Ivies or similar (i.e. Stanford etc.). I am not sure the same issue exists for individuals with American degrees wanting to work in Europe! However, if you want to work in Europe, then Oxford should be just fine. You should certainly keep this in mind when making your decision.

Good luck!

[Oink2014]

Thank you so much for your answer, that was exactly my question. I think that it's slightly easier to find a teaching position in the US these days, but I'm not sure. I should probably ask my professors, they probably know the job market better.

[sacklunch]

Stanford, easily. I'm in an ancient history subfield (at a top 10 American school), so take my comments with caution, but an American PhD is worth more on the market. You are an exception, being non-American, of course (Americans attending Oxford are cash cows. They pay for the PhD almost always and generally are seen as 'not good enough to get into an American PhD'). Yes, the Oxford degree is shorter. But Stanford will prepare you for a more competitive job market. I have heard this from at least a dozen PhD students/faculty from abroad. The American PhD will train you to teach all kinds of levels, not just graduate courses particular to your subfield. You will come out of the American program able to teach introductory courses in history (and have documented that ability while in the program), which is quite valuable in today's market where the humanities are often only taught as the "general education" courses (again, not relevant for many schools abroad). In the end, they are paying you, quite well all things considering, to study what you enjoy. The job market is abysmal. You may in fact finish the PhD at either school and make less than the PhD stipend. You might as well spend the extra two years learning more, getting paid, and setting yourself up for a decent job (if one can be found at all these days...). 

[Oink2014]

@sacklunch thank you very much for your advice!

[goku_supersayan]

Stanford, anyday ... no brainer!!

How you can even compare ... its an IVY league university .... not many get a chance to study in Stanford and that too PhD..... This might be the best thing that has happened to you in your entire life ... A Stanford brand tag ....

[Lifesaver]

Since when is Stanford an ivy?

Edited April 7, 2014 by Lifesaver

[jeffleung1992]

Since when is Stanford an ivy?

It's not, but I think the poster meant that it has extremely high international brand value (much more than the non-HYP ivies mind you) in pretty much every discipline.

I think the OP should think about whether he/she wants to live in the US or UK. Personally I think Stanford/Palo Alto = win!

Congrats and best wishes!

[Ungjaevel]

My wife got her DPhil at Oxford and was disappointed in the experience. D Phil candidates enjoy very little contact with their advisers and you get little or no teaching experience. An Oxford education teaches you to produce obscure academia and little else.