Are area-studies degrees (i.e. East Asian Studies, Latin American Studies) typically "cash cows" for universities?

[MettaSutta]

Title speaks for itself.  Getting major cold feet.  

[pudewen]

Some are, some aren't. In East Asian Studies, the M.A. program at Columbia certainly has that reputation, while the ones at Colorado and the University of Alberta have good reputations for funding students, and punch far above their weight in terms of getting students into PhD programs. Programs like RSEA at Harvard are probably in between - they are getting a lot of full-tuition-paying-professional-types (some whose tuition is paid by their government - Singapore, for instance, does this a lot), but also are reasonably good about offering funding to academic-types who want to progress to a PhD.

[MettaSutta]

53 minutes ago, pudewen said:

Some are, some aren't. In East Asian Studies, the M.A. program at Columbia certainly has that reputation, 

Columbia has a really notorious reputation for that on these forums it seems, lol.  

[slouching]

27 minutes ago, pudewen said:

Some are, some aren't. 

This. 

I attend a master's program in American Studies. I receive full funding. There are certainly master's programs in my field that are not funded--Yale, for example--but I made a decision not to apply to those, because I didn't feel it would make sense for me to pay for this degree. I'm sure there are people who will gladly pay Yale a lot of money to attend that program, and I'm sure some of them have achieved exactly what they wanted by doing so, but for me, any program without full funding was not a viable option. If you're on the fence, I would encourage you to really consider your options.

[MettaSutta]

33 minutes ago, slouching said:

This. 

I attend a master's program in American Studies. I receive full funding. There are certainly master's programs in my field that are not funded--Yale, for example--but I made a decision not to apply to those, because I didn't feel it would make sense for me to pay for this degree. I'm sure there are people who will gladly pay Yale a lot of money to attend that program, and I'm sure some of them have achieved exactly what they wanted by doing so, but for me, any program without full funding was not a viable option. If you're on the fence, I would encourage you to really consider your options.

I was accepted for fall 2018 in March with only $10,000, but deferred to next fall.  I was told that since I'm deferring, I'll have another bite at the financial aid apple and can be reconsidered for merit-based scholarships.  

[MettaSutta]

On 9/6/2018 at 10:20 AM, pudewen said:

Some are, some aren't. In East Asian Studies, the M.A. program at Columbia certainly has that reputation, while the ones at Colorado and the University of Alberta have good reputations for funding students, and punch far above their weight in terms of getting students into PhD programs. Programs like RSEA at Harvard are probably in between - they are getting a lot of full-tuition-paying-professional-types (some whose tuition is paid by their government - Singapore, for instance, does this a lot), but also are reasonably good about offering funding to academic-types who want to progress to a PhD.

What makes the Columbia EALAC progam a "cash cow"?  

[pudewen]

11 hours ago, Bodhicaryavatara said:

What makes the Columbia EALAC progam a "cash cow"?  

They charge a massive amount of tuition and offer very little financial aid.

[juilletmercredi]

A program can be a cash cow and still be very good. Columbia's EALAC program is definitely a cash cow (very expensive; financial aid offers are rare) but Columbia's East Asian studies departments are some of the best in the world. That also doesn't mean you won't get attention and advising from your professors or professional benefit from getting the MA.

So the question is, are you wondering what programs are bad quality and expensive, or are you just wondering which programs don't offer a lot of financial aid? Area studies master's programs often are cash cows for universities, because they do tend to be expensive and don't tend to offer a whole lot of funding or aid. But that doesn't mean that an area studies master's isn't right for your particular career goals.

[Glasperlenspieler]

19 hours ago, juilletmercredi said:

Area studies master's programs often are cash cows for universities, because they do tend to be expensive and don't tend to offer a whole lot of funding or aid. But that doesn't mean that an area studies master's isn't right for your particular career goals.

However, if one's career goals are to pursue a PhD (in the humanities)  with the hope of a career in academia, then there's a strong argument to be made for not acquiring debt in the process given the low likelihood of success and the relatively low future remuneration in the case that one does succeed.