nashville0808

If you don't have enough funding from TC, it's better to go to a school with full funding (I'm talking about a doctoral program). Some doctoral students drop out or transfer to a cheaper school in the middle of the program because of the costs. Quality of faculty members at TC is high (this may depends on the field) but it's just too expensive to go without funding. In addition, if your department is large, you are less likely to work with your adviser and publish papers in peer-reviewed journals. It is even difficult to get an RA/TA job. For master's programs, if your program is professional degree program and you are interested in pursuing a career outside of research, I would recommend you go to a cheaper school. I wouldn't think it matters whether you graduate from TC or CUNY or a local state school if you eventually work as a classroom teacher or school counselor. It is not worth it. If you plan to apply for a doctoral program or pursue a career in research after finishing the master's program, it may not be a bad choice to go to TC but you may want to consider the cost-effectiveness.

@missgord - I think people on this thread are interested in measurements, evaluation, and assessment (psychometrics) rather than policy analysis. Statistical methods used in the former area is quite different from ones used in the latter. What I'm frustrated with courses offered in the former field (I have a good math background) is that instructors do not explain how formulas were developed. They introduce formulas from somewhere and explain how to use them. They don't use mathematics or prove theorems. So you will end up using them without knowing them in depth. You will always wonder where these formulas come from in your career unless you receive rigorous theoretical training. It depends on your satisfaction. If you just want to do applied stuff and don't care about theories, probably you don't need to know the details. A problem with this is that when someone develops new theories, which affect applied stuff, you won't be able to understand them until someone explains them to you. I don't feel good about this if I work as a researcher or a professor. If you go to a program in measurement, evaluation, and assessment, I would strongly recommend that you concurrently take courses at a stat department. I ended up taking many courses from stat/math departments.

Columbia's MS in applied statistics is not as rigorous as you think. All courses are not difficult and focus on applied analysis. They are weak in theory. This may be true to most of the quantitative programs within schools of education.

I'm at Peabody. Based on my experience and what I hear from students at other schools, Peabody's funding package is one of the best, and given its low cost of living it is way better than Stanford, Harvard, UPenn, or UMich. Peabody's funding package includes very attractive grants for Ph.D. students that other competitive schools do not offer.

Based on my experience with past admission offers and my current school as well as my friends' experience with other schools, top private schools tend to give Ph.D. students with full funding (i.e., full tuition coverage, health insurance, stipend (service and service-free)) with some exceptions such as Columbia. The amount of stipend varies from school to school but for 9 months, it would be between $25K and $30K. With summer employment, which is usually not guaranteed though, an annual income becomes between $35K and $40K. For top state schools, if you are among one of the best incoming students, you will be offered full funding comparable to top private schools. Faculty members at top to mid-ranking schools tried to recruit me with full funding with a $26K 9-month stipend and summer research grants. I heard from other people that University of Arkansas offers full funding. Given its location, students can live comfortably. In addition, if you get into a top school, you are likely to find some informal job openings for consultants at education policy organizations, state and local departments of education, private educaiton consulting groups, etc. One year, I got a consulting job working for a government and earned about $40 per hour. Chances will diminish as you go to lower-ranking schools.

Each deparment looks for clues for academic success among candidates. You should check your deparment's website and figure out what type of students they want to admit. If you are uncertain but really want to study at Peabody, whether or not your research interests match with those of your deparment or faculty members, then I would suggest that you don't talk about anything provocative, carefully interpret what faculty members are thinking about, and try to give a good impression. Remember that being invited to this recrutment event means that you are almost admitted. This is a final check among faculty members to see if anything stands out, especially whether candidtes fit well with the departments' missions and goals. A few candidates are rejected afterward. Probably for applicants not invited to this event, they want you to screw up : )

This depends on departments but I think that each department invites a couple of more candidates than the "minimum" number of spots. This means that, if a department has a budget to admit 10 students, they will invite around 10 candidates, assuming that they find 10 candidates with glorifying qualifications. Yet, in their mind, they want to get at least 7 students in the end. Each year across the departments, a few candidates are rejected after the interview or do not accept admission offers. I also think each department has the number of spots available to each program within the department. So if a department has four programs and the maximum number of spots is 10, then, typically each grogram has two or three spots. This varies from year to year, though.

Those who haven't heard from Peabody about Ph.D. programs are not short-listed. Yet, they are still in a pool of potential admits. Whether you will receive an admission offer from Peabody depends on responses of applicants who are invited to the recruitment weekend, which will be held from 2/13-2/15.

I hear that a Ph.D recruitment weekend will be held from 2/13-2/15 (not confirmed yet). If you haven't received an invitation from Peabody, you are not short-listed. Yet, if you haven't received a rejection letter, you still have a chance, as a couple of candidates are rejected after the recruitment event or they decline an admission offer from Peabody and accept an offer from another school.

Some applicants invited for the interview are rejected in the end. Then, applicants on a waiting list are contacted.

Caffeinated, it is better not to share your personal information as admission officers can easily recognize you.

In general (not specific to a certain program), not all invited applicants receive an admission offer. Faculty members meet with the applicants to see if they fit well with their program. If something stands out, the faculty members discuss it after the recruitment weekend and decide whether to give an admission offer. Usually each program has a limit on the number of students they can admit and invites slightly more students than they can admit.

@StheBD & @lilgreycells, I was not invited for the recruitment weekend but got an offer early April, about one week before 4/15. My department did not inform me that I was on the waiting list. It appears that they do not do so. I needed to contact them in late March because I had offers from other top schools and sensed that they wanted me to make a decision soon. Then, the department told me I was on the waiting list. I think I gave this information but I had a chat with an admission officer at my department. The person said that the department has already made a first cut. This means that weak applicants were rejected and top applicants were invited for the recruitment weekend. Those in the middle are on a waiting list. I don't know how many are on the list. The number could be just five or close to 100 for one or two possible seats. There is still a hope but at the same time keep in mind that Peabody offers a generous funding so it is rare that those with offers turn them down unless they have other offers from such schools as Harvard, Standford, Northwestern, etc.

I don't think there are many students every year who are accepted from a waiting list. I would think this is a rare case, as few applicants deny an admission offer from Peabody, which comes with very generous funding, unless they receive offers from Stanford or Harvard (or other schools with full funding in great locations). So very few people know about a timeline for those on a waiting list. One thing I noticed about Peabody's doctoral students is that not all of them come from prestigous undergraduate institutions with a master's degree from a top-ranking school and great professional and research experience. Some come from a local state school without a master's degree and/or with little work experience. It appears Peabody likes to take open-minded students (I mean in terms of research direction).

I was accepted to one of the doctoral programs at Peabody early April. I didn't hear from the school at all and inquired my status in March and found I was on a waiting list. If you haven't heard from Peabody yet, you are likely to be on a waiting list (not sure where on the list). As those invited for the campus visit reject an admission offer and the total number of incoming students becomes small, the top applicant on the waiting list is given an offer. I hope this gives some hope to those who haven't heard from Peabody by this time.