How to choose between all of my dream schools

[brookelikeshistory]

I'm trying to decide between Stanford, UCLA, and Johns Hopkins. I never thought I would get into all of them, but here I am. All of them have offered full funding for five years towards my completion of a PhD in history. I want to study French colonial history in North and West Africa, but I also have interests in modern France and francophone literature.

 

I'm lucky that I've had the chance to visit all of these programs and meet with my potential advisors and current students, so I feel like I have a pretty good idea of what each program is like.

 

TLDR pros and cons (from my point of view)

 

Stanford

pros: beautiful campus, school spirit, current students were really close to each other and really friendly, lots of focus on teaching, California weather, big internationally recognized name, this school is rolling in $$$$

cons: I didn't like Palo Alto, I have concerns about being surrounded by tech industries, my meeting with one of my potential advisors wasn't as engaging as my meetings have been at other places, quarter system (I'm used to semesters)

 

UCLA

pros: California weather, school spirit, Los Angeles (diversity, things to do, I have family an hour away), beautiful campus, I loved the professor who would be my primary advisor, current students were nice but mostly older (I'm coming straight out of undergrad so it's still a little awkward for me to think about befriending 30 year olds with children), there are a ton of people I could work with.

cons: I've heard that it's hard for UC students to get jobs on the east coast?, bigger department and cohorts, less financially stable compared to the private schools, quarter system

 

Johns Hopkins

pros: small and close-knit department, I liked the current students, I loved who my advisors would be and I really connected with several different faculty members, semesters, no course catalog (professors come up with classes according to what their students need)

cons: Baltimore aka staying on the east coast, no course catalog, reputation of the department (? I've gathered mixed reviews from other professors)

 

So I'm stuck. I connected most with the people at Hopkins, but UCLA has the most people for me to work with. Stanford has the money and name value and the teaching training I want. In a perfect world, I would move Stanford to Los Angeles and work with the Hopkins' faculty haha.

 

HELP

 

I'll take all the advice and perspective I can get!

[maelia8]

Based on what you've written yourself, it seems to me that you didn't click with the folks at Stanford all that well and are only attracted to the school's reputation and money, a Johns Hopkins you're worried about the reputation and staying on the East Coast as well although you liked the faculty, while at UCLA you liked the school, the location, and everything except for the ages of the students and the larger department. It seems to me that UCLA fulfills your basic requirements the best and you have the least concerns, so let me see if I can assuage your doubts (as a current history Ph.D. student at another UC). 

 

I am 25 and about the median age for my cohort, but if you're worried about making other young friends, you shouldn't be. First of all, the "older" people in my cohort (in their 30s) are all really nice and engaging and we connect on an intellectual level. We've become good friends, and those in my cohort who are coming directly out of undergrad are treated as equals and don't find it hard to connect with the rest of the cohort. If you don't end up connecting with them, there's always the thousands of undergrads, who can be pretty nice and fun to hang out with - I've met a lot of them, as well as grad students in other departments, through campus clubs and associations (including sports groups) and grad division events. A lot of people at my institution get jobs back east after they graduate, and I've never heard that voiced as a concern. If you want to end up back on the East Coast after you graduate, it shouldn't be an obstacle that you went to a top West Coast institution. In terms of funding, the UCs are not rolling in cash like private schools, but I've always found my grad funding to be perfectly adequate for my living needs, and for me at least, it's guaranteed through for five years with inflation adjustment if necessary. You won't have a huge financial cushion if you rely solely on department funding, but if you apply for external/summer grants you should be able to live quite comfortably.

 

Disclaimer: I don't go to UCLA, and I am somewhat biased towards West Coast/California schools as a West Coast native who's done all of my schooling here, but in my opinion, the weather and diversity alone make it worth coming out here for school

[ilovelab]

I'm trying to decide between Stanford, UCLA, and Johns Hopkins. I never thought I would get into all of them, but here I am. All of them have offered full funding for five years towards my completion of a PhD in history. I want to study French colonial history in North and West Africa, but I also have interests in modern France and francophone literature.

 

I'm lucky that I've had the chance to visit all of these programs and meet with my potential advisors and current students, so I feel like I have a pretty good idea of what each program is like.

 

TLDR pros and cons (from my point of view)

 

UCLA

pros: California weather, school spirit, Los Angeles (diversity, things to do, I have family an hour away), beautiful campus, I loved the professor who would be my primary advisor, current students were nice but mostly older (I'm coming straight out of undergrad so it's still a little awkward for me to think about befriending 30 year olds with children), there are a ton of people I could work with.

cons: I've heard that it's hard for UC students to get jobs on the east coast?, bigger department and cohorts, less financially stable compared to the private schools, quarter system

 

So I'm stuck. I connected most with the people at Hopkins, but UCLA has the most people for me to work with. Stanford has the money and name value and the teaching training I want. In a perfect world, I would move Stanford to Los Angeles and work with the Hopkins' faculty haha.

 

HELP

 

I'll take all the advice and perspective I can get!

I can't speak for Stanford or Hopkins but I did my undergrad at UCLA so hopefully I can offer some helpful advice. UCLA has the same name recognition as Stanford/Hopkins. There is a reason it is the most applied to university in the country. I don't know about history, but for the sciences you don't have a problem finding jobs/getting into grad school from UCLA (obviously you have to be qualified). Bigger department and cohort sound like bonuses to me. If you don't like one POI chances are there is someone else you can work with. UCLA has a MASSIVE Graduate population. They always have mixers etc for grad students and more clubs than you know what to do with. You don't have to be great friends with people in your cohort, chances are your housemates will be some of your best friends in grad school (unless they are roommates from hell).

If your funding is guaranteed for 5 years you shouldn't worry about $$$. Unless you are worried you can't finish in 5 years. Still you can TA/apply for fellowships, I wouldn't worry about the $$$ at this point since you have 5 years guaranteed.  The quarter system can be killer if you are not on top of your stuff. It also means that you are going to have to grade essays/projects faster than if you were on the semester system. That shouldn't be a deal breaker though.

[juilletmercredi]

I agree that you seem to be leaning towards UCLA - it fits your requirements the best and your concerns seem to be pretty small/unimportant, aside from the financial difficulties they're having. You'll adjust to the quarter system, and academia is a national market so going to UCLA is not going to hinder you from getting academic jobs on the East Coast. Even if you left academia, UCLA is a nationally-respected name - you'll have no problem trying to come back out here. A bigger department and cohort is a matter of preference, but it's not necessarily a bad thing.

 

Not clicking with one potential advisor is not a big deal if there are others that you could work with, and I'm not sure why being surrounded by tech industries would affect you at all. One thing to think about is whether the cost of living in Palo Alto is lower than Los Angeles. I genuinely don't know, but it could be worth investigating. PhDs are long and being able to afford a reasonable standard of living is important.

[brookelikeshistory]

Thanks so much for weighing in maelia8, ilovelab and julietmercredi ! I'm still ruminating but I've given myself until the end of the month to decide otherwise I'll drive myself insane! Cost of living in LA is still high but not as high as Palo Alto and Baltimore is definitely way cheaper than both. Do you think there's a major difference between living in grad housing or other housing owned and operated by the university vs. living in a regular apartment?

 

Somedays, I'm all for UCLA and somedays I feel like I want to be at Hopkins or Stanford. My undergraduate institution is a huge state school so I think I want to try the private school thing out to show on the job market that I have experience on different types of campuses (but that might be another reason why I liked UCLA so much, because the large undergrad-heavy environment felt familiar to me...). I think I'll end up at Stanford though.

 

maelia8, I know you said you're biased toward California schools, but is there anything you think I should know before I commit to going to school out there? Something someone from the east coast might not expect? Or something you would warn a friend or a family member about?

 

Thanks again everyone for your responses!

[zenosparadox]

I noticed you were also accepted at UChicago.  Can I ask on what grounds you eliminated them?

 

I'm visiting Stanford this weekend, but have many of the same misgivings as you.  It is quite expensive to live, I'm not terribly fond of the immediate surroundings, and for whatever reason I don't seem to click as well with the faculty (although that could change depending on in-person interactions).

 

I do have many friends at UCLA in multiple departments.  Apparently it's a fantastic place to study and none of them have had difficulties with funding.  California is very much invested in the prestige of its UC programs, especially Berkeley and LA.  They don't benefit from the depreciation of those programs on the international stage and will continue to invest in them, even if it requires cuts in other schools or related areas. 

 

That said, you have fantastic options and it is mostly personal preference at this point.  I would probably go with UCLA but you can't go wrong with Stanford if that ends up being your choice.

Edited March 26, 2015 by zenosparadox

[ilovelab]

Thanks so much for weighing in maelia8, ilovelab and julietmercredi ! I'm still ruminating but I've given myself until the end of the month to decide otherwise I'll drive myself insane! Cost of living in LA is still high but not as high as Palo Alto and Baltimore is definitely way cheaper than both. Do you think there's a major difference between living in grad housing or other housing owned and operated by the university vs. living in a regular apartment?

 

Somedays, I'm all for UCLA and somedays I feel like I want to be at Hopkins or Stanford. My undergraduate institution is a huge state school so I think I want to try the private school thing out to show on the job market that I have experience on different types of campuses (but that might be another reason why I liked UCLA so much, because the large undergrad-heavy environment felt familiar to me...). I think I'll end up at Stanford though.

 

 I would personally live in Grad Housing my first year. Its usually close to campus, Weyburn at UCLA is in westwood so you can walk to campus. That way you don't have to worry about a major commute.

 I'll be honest NO employer is going to care that you went to a public school for undergrad and a private for grad school. They will care about the work you did primarily @ your grad school. I would put more emphasis on who you want to work with than if its a state school/private school.

[brookelikeshistory]

zenosparadox - I visited UChicago and I loved the potential advisors that I would have there, but they have too many students. They were clearly invested in all of them and cared about them on a personal level, but each prof had about 9 students across different years. I need more individualized attention than that... UChicago is a beautiful campus and Hyde Park wasn't bad and the city of Chicago itself has a ton to offer. I would go there if I had no other options. They really seem to cultivate a culture of harsh critique. The history dept's intellectual community is great! People there love to think and talk about big ideas, but I just kept getting weird vibes from the students. They all seemed stressed and anxious and not as generally happy as they were at other places. They would all stress that they're doing good work, not that they were happy. Which "happiness" is kind of important to me. Some other admits I talked to liked the emphasis on rigor and "doing good work" vs. "happiness" and that's cool for them, but not what I wanted. Even though they don't have competitive funding anymore (now they give everyone the same package), there was a still a weird competitive atmosphere. Also I'm sure you might have heard that the unofficial undergrad slogan there is "UChicago: where fun comes to die" or "UChicago: Hell does freeze over." Not cool in my book. But like I said, it would be totally different if I didn't have other options. There are great people there and their program in top 10 in History. Just not for me =) but good luck with your visit there and at Stanford!

 

ilovelab - thanks for the input. I just can't decide....... I know I can negotiate with UCLA to maybe top up my funding more. I still can't just settle on one school, I like them all!

 

Does anyone have any advice on finally making a decision and sticking to it? Like how did you self-coach yourself into a "no regrets" attitude to definitively make a decision? Or what types of things help you feel most secure in your decision in the end?

[rising_star]

Yea, here's my advice. Your research is likely going to require trips to the archives in those countries, right? So you need to be also looking at the success of students in getting the types of grants you'll need (Fulbright, Fulbright-Hays, SSRC, etc.). It's also worth considering what kind of work is required in exchange for that funding. Some schools (esp. private schools) will let you have a year of funding where you don't have to TA/RA, which means you could potentially use that year for data collection if you strike out on getting a grant. You do want some teaching experience but not so much that it delays your progress and you start to worry about running out of funding. You need to think about summer funding and its availability for taking preliminary trips to those archives so you can begin your research. And, you also need to be thinking (and asking) about what happens beyond the 5th year if you're not done. I don't know many history PhDs that have gone straight from undergrad, done research internationally, and finished in 5 years. I didn't see any discussion of this in your posts, though you did mention "full funding" for 5 years. 

 

For me, I would view living in a tech oriented area as an asset. Think of the dating prospects! But also, you could potentially get a summer internship in the tech field that could expand your skill set and marketability post-Ph.D., which is worth considering. Good luck! Let us know what you decide!

[Sigaba]

Your list of pros indicates to me that your evaluation matrix needs significant refinement.

You are not focused on what really matters: the training you will receive (chemistry is important, but not in the way you suggest), the available resources (people, archives, library systems), and how you fit into each department (not the other way around).

(UCLA should not be ahead of Chicago, Hopkins, or Stanford in your evaluations.)

Edited March 30, 2015 by Sigaba

[rising_star]

What Sigaba said! I was actually surprised to see Northwestern on the declined list. I'm not in history at all but I know that Northwestern has a fairly well respected African history PhD program. I really do think the training, resources, and placement record matter a lot. You didn't talk about your career goals or where those departments are placing graduates but that is definitely something to consider. And when I say placing graduates, I mean where the African history grads are working because, for your purposes, it really doesn't matter where the American history or Latin American history PhDs are placed. 

[fancypants09]

Your list of pros indicates to me that your evaluation matrix needs significant refinement.

You are not focused on what really matters: the training you will receive (chemistry is important, but not in the way you suggest), the available resources (people, archives, library systems), and how you fit into each department (not the other way around).

(UCLA should not be ahead of Chicago, Hopkins, or Stanford in your evaluations.)

 

Respectfully disagree. There are two Francophone African lit superstar specialists in all of America: Christopher Miller at Yale and Francoise Lionnet at UCLA. Other schools may have stronger history departments, but depending on how big the Francophone aspect (and the literature aspect) is to your research, I don't think you can go wrong with UCLA (all other things being equal). 

 

Just my two cents. 

Edited March 30, 2015 by fancypants09

[Sigaba]

Respectfully disagree. There are two Francophone African lit superstar specialists in all of America: Christopher Miller at Yale and Francoise Lionnet at UCLA. Other schools may have stronger history departments, but depending on how big the Francophone aspect (and the literature aspect) is to your research, I don't think you can go wrong with UCLA (all other things being equal). 

 

Just my two cents.

Your point is well made in general. However, the OP does not strike me as committed to the point where he/she would stake his/her future to a scholar in a different department.

Even then, without an established relationship with Professor Lionnet, the OP could be taking an extraordinary risk to assume that she (Lionnet) will work with the OP, or even be at UCLA. (Academic rockstars sometimes pick up and move.)

[maelia8]

Thanks so much for weighing in maelia8, ilovelab and julietmercredi ! I'm still ruminating but I've given myself until the end of the month to decide otherwise I'll drive myself insane! Cost of living in LA is still high but not as high as Palo Alto and Baltimore is definitely way cheaper than both. Do you think there's a major difference between living in grad housing or other housing owned and operated by the university vs. living in a regular apartment?

 

Somedays, I'm all for UCLA and somedays I feel like I want to be at Hopkins or Stanford. My undergraduate institution is a huge state school so I think I want to try the private school thing out to show on the job market that I have experience on different types of campuses (but that might be another reason why I liked UCLA so much, because the large undergrad-heavy environment felt familiar to me...). I think I'll end up at Stanford though.

 

maelia8, I know you said you're biased toward California schools, but is there anything you think I should know before I commit to going to school out there? Something someone from the east coast might not expect? Or something you would warn a friend or a family member about?

 

Thanks again everyone for your responses!

 

@brookelikeshistory, I'm a native Californian and have never lived on the East Coast (though I've visited), and all I can tell you is is what you've probably already heard: that weather, when it exists, is very mild, people are very casual and very friendly, and rents in the Bay Area are crazy expensive, but, at least in my case, still cheaper than living in official grad housing. I recommend coming out for a visit to seek out housing, as it can be competitive enough in some student areas that you have no chance of getting a place without presenting yourself in person. I don't go to a private school, so my stipend is smaller, but in my experience, university housing comes with a whole other set of costs that are not present in regular housing, in addition to frequently being near housing occupied by fraternities or other loud undergraduate dorms. Every historian I've met from Stanford has been nice, although it's smaller institution than a UC and doesn't have such a large cohort to form cohesive buddy groups. If you go there, you'll definitely never have to worry about funding

[brookelikeshistory]

Thanks for weighing in rising_star , Sigaba, and fancypants09. After getting my phd I do want to teach at a university and continue to do research. I think you're right that I've kind of lost sight of other things that are important when evaluating my pros and cons. I turned down Northwestern for petty reasons, mainly for its location and because I had just visited Johns Hopkins and I felt sure I would go there. Though I now regret turning down NW as several people have told me that I should have given that program more serious consideration, I'm not going to let it haunt me...

 

Job placement and grants-wise, all of the advisors that I'm looking to work with at all these places have been successful in placing their students (when reported) and their students have gotten grants. Current students at these institutions could also cite colleagues who were currently away in Africa or France on grants.

 

I'm basically decided on Stanford. I can get big name value plus awesome advisors and enough people who could serve on my dissertation committee. Thanks for your help everyone!

[brookelikeshistory]

Thanks for your input Macchiato. I kind of feel like a sell-out for going to the school that offered me the highest stipend, but it's also the place that would be the most expensive to live. I look forward to exploring the bay area once I get there. Especially since I'm a black woman, I'll need to find community somewhere, maybe in Oakland?

 

And yes, the Stanford history department is really small, but the students are very close-knit which I like and I hope to make friends in other departments to get away from historians once in a while 

But yeah, Stanford made it very clear when I visited that they have lots of money for their students, for anything! (conferences, research travel...) which makes me feel very secure.

 

Grad housing is actually very appealing to me, especially if it's furnished because I've spent my whole undergrad living in the dorms and I don't have any furniture haha not to mention moving across the country and trying to find a place.

[Hobson-Jobson]

Good luck, Brooke. If you are who I think you are, I believe I met you at the Hopkins and UCLA open houses, and you were very nice.

 

I'm in a somewhat similar boat, in that Chicago is a better fit for my interests but Harvard and Princeton are, well, Harvard and Princeton. If a "10" would be a perfect fit for what I want to study, then Chicago is an 8.5, Harvard a 7, and Princeton a 6, but ranked by funding packages they stand in the exact opposite order. Not really sure what to do, although I have promised myself that I won't be flipping a coin.

 

But for what it's worth, I think we should all just embrace our decisions (whatever they turn out to be), enjoy the years ahead of us, and not look back.

Edited April 1, 2015 by Hobson-Jobson

[brookelikeshistory]

Good luck, Brooke. If you are who I think you are, I believe I met you at the Hopkins and UCLA open houses, and you were very nice.

 

I'm in a somewhat similar boat, in that Chicago is a better fit for my interests but Harvard and Princeton are, well, Harvard and Princeton. If a "10" would be a perfect fit for what I want to study, then Chicago is an 8.5, Harvard a 7, and Princeton a 6, but ranked by funding packages they stand in the exact opposite order. Not really sure what to do, although I have promised myself that I won't be flipping a coin.

 

But for what it's worth, I think we should all just embrace our decisions (whatever they turn out to be), enjoy the years ahead of us, and not look back.

 

Hi! Yeah the way someone else put it for me was if you can get name-value plus a few people to work plus money that's the best bet. Stanford has all of those things, plus nice weather, and I think I fit into the department vibe pretty well. You're doing East Asia right? At some of the programs would you be in History and East Asian studies in others? I would think weigh the pros and cons of that (if it matters). 

 

The vibe at Chicago was just off for me. I liked UCLA but I feel like I might have more job chances and surely more money if I go to Stanford. I liked Hopkins, but I want to go to California at this point haha but if I remember correctly you had a partner on the East coast? Harvard would be awesome! If you remember Kelly--my fellow Africanist from UChicago and Hopkins visits--she told via email that she's most likely going there.

 

And yeah, like you said, once we make a decision--no regrets! Good luck!