The win-win of withdrawing an application from a non--preferred school

[Pancho Villa]

I'm sure this is a more complicated topic than presented here, so I look forward to hearing about the drawbacks of withdrawing an application. That said...

I had a very enlightening, and ultimately incredibly rewarding (read on), talk with my advisor yesterday that resulted in withdrawing two of my applications to places that definitely rank lower for me than others to which I have been accepted (one school that has yet to make decisions and one school where I am accepted). I wasn’t sure about the recommended practice in such cases. When I see that someone has been accepted to both Princeton and Berkeley, and yet he [please forgive gender pronouns] seems to be eagerly anticipating a decision from UNC, Davis, Boulder, etc., I think that’s kind of strange, but then again I understand it. My advisor called such students “affirmation junkies” and warned me about the drawbacks of being one of them. He also advised me on the possible benefits of not being one of them (more on this in a sec). He said that I cannot use lower ranked acceptances in negotiations, and that withdrawing an application from a pending school would leave the impression to existing schools (if it comes up) that I would have been accepted. He did not demand that I withdraw any applications, but he did more or less forbid me from going on any visit to a school I knew I would not attend. He said that faculty at the schools where he has taught (poli sci, top 10-15 [Ivy] and top 25 [public R1]) end up doing some eye rolling every year over students who show up for the visit – on the stretched budget of the department - who are clearly going to attend a school that dominates. He did acknowledge that there are some cases in which students have irregular preferences (relating to geography, family, interdisciplinary interests, etc.) but that these are much more rare than are students who present these as important factors, and he claims that the difference is usually very obvious to faculty (who, btw, in the long run often come back into contact with said candidates via conferences, journal reviews, and the job market). This freaked me out enough to do some real soul-searching about why I still had applications at one pending school and one where I was accepted that (if honest with myself) I know I won’t be attending. So I (reluctantly and maybe awkwardly) emailed the DGS at each of the schools where I decided to withdraw, and guess what? Within an hour, in each case, I received a very appreciative email, thanking me and (more or less) commending my conscientious, collegial behavior! At the school where my application was still pending, the DGS was full of gratitude and said that they can spend upward of 3 or 4 hours (or more) putting together funding packages for EACH student because packages are tailored to student characteristics (I imagine this relates to subfield and/or institutional fellowships), and so it can save the department a lot of work when a student does as I have. Both emails indicated the DGS looked forward to meeting me in the future, and one was even specific about this (we are getting coffee at MPSA in April!). I feel so grateful for my advisor’s advice and wanted to pass it on, in case anyone else is dealing with similar decisions. Of course, it might not pan out for you exactly as it did for me, but I don’t see how anyone could feel anything but content after withdrawing an application to a place he definitely knows he will not attend. I felt such relief, even before receiving the great email responses. I will admit that, yes, you withdrawing an application could conceivably benefit me. But, given the schools to which I have been admitted already, this isn’t highly likely, so this message isn’t exactly self-serving. More likely, withdrawing will help someone (or more than one person) at a slightly lower-ranked school than where you will end up. My advisor also said that leaving decisions until April 15 is a very poor practice, for any school, even those that are top ranked. He said, as soon as I have had all of my visits, and my offers are all finalized (clearly no more negotiation on funding, etc.), I should make my decision as soon as possible, because it’s very unusual for most schools (especially top schools) to be able to bring in a funded student after 4/15. So far, all of my visits are before the last week of March, and I aim to make my decision as soon as I feel my offers are squared away. Hope this helps someone! Best of luck to all!

[upsy]

One school I've been accepted to that's somewhat lower in rank still appeals to me because it probably has the best fit based on my research interests and has very substantial funding. It released results early, so withdrawing was never really an option, but I wouldn't have considered doing so. I think the deciding factor should really be that you as an individual don't prefer the school, not its mere rank. There are some very highly ranked schools that I'd consider withdrawing my application from because I don't think I'd be happy there.

I think there's also some wisdom in leaving yourself with multiple options, particularly since funding info doesn't come out until a while after acceptances. In speaking with current grad students, I've also learned that visit events can be immensely important in shaping their choices. No doubt, you should take the 5+ hours that admissions committees and administrators put into reviewing your application and developing your offer into consideration, and insofar as you may interact with those people in the future, they'll appreciate your having done so.* But, this is also a 5-7+ year commitment for you, and you have to ensure that you leave yourself with enough options to be able to make a well-informed decision.

 

*I'd also say that anyone who holds a grudge against you years down the road because they spent an hour or two reviewing your application when you ended up going to a different school is probably someone who'd find a reason to dislike you no matter what you do. 

[IcedCovfefe]

10 minutes ago, upsy said:

One school I've been accepted to that's somewhat lower in rank still appeals to me because it probably has the best fit based on my research interests and has very substantial funding. It released results early, so withdrawing was never really an option, but I wouldn't have considered doing so. I think the deciding factor should really be that you as an individual don't prefer the school, not its mere rank. There are some very highly ranked schools that I'd consider withdrawing my application from because I don't think I'd be happy there.

I think there's also some wisdom in leaving yourself with multiple options, particularly since funding info doesn't come out until a while after acceptances. In speaking with current grad students, I've also learned that visit events can be immensely important in shaping their choices. No doubt, you should take the 5+ hours that admissions committees and administrators put into reviewing your application and developing your offer into consideration, and insofar as you may interact with those people in the future, they'll appreciate your having done so.* But, this is also a 5-7+ year commitment for you, and you have to ensure that you leave yourself with enough options to be able to make a well-informed decision.

 

*I'd also say that anyone who holds a grudge against you years down the road because they spent an hour or two reviewing your application when you ended up going to a different school is probably someone who'd find a reason to dislike you no matter what you do. 

I agree with everything here.  There are a lot of different factors beside rank that you need to evaluate when you’re getting ready to commit the next 5+ years of your life.  You need to examine the funding offers and cost of living, you need to meet with your potential advisers and determine if they’re people you could see yourself working with for 5+ years, you need to talk with current graduate students to determine their happiness with the department and how they feel about the mental health factors of the program, attrition rates, time to completion, and the list goes on.  These are important variables that take time to evaluate.  I understand OP’s frustration with how the process plays out, but I don’t think that we should get irritated with people who want to compare their options and choose the best one for them individually. 

Edited January 31, 2019 by IcedCovfefe

[Pancho Villa]

2 minutes ago, upsy said:

One school I've been accepted to that's somewhat lower in rank still appeals to me because it probably has the best fit based on my research interests and has very substantial funding. It released results early, so withdrawing was never really an option, but I wouldn't have considered doing so. I think the deciding factor should really be that you as an individual don't prefer the school, not its mere rank. There are some very highly ranked schools that I'd consider withdrawing my application from because I don't think I'd be happy there.

I think there's also some wisdom in leaving yourself with multiple options, particularly since funding info doesn't come out until a while after acceptances. In speaking with current grad students, I've also learned that visit events can be immensely important in shaping their choices. No doubt, you should take the 5+ hours that admissions committees and administrators put into reviewing your application and developing your offer into consideration, and insofar as you may interact with those people in the future, they'll appreciate your having done so.* But, this is also a 5-7+ year commitment for you, and you have to ensure that you leave yourself with enough options to be able to make a well-informed decision.

 

*I'd also say that anyone who holds a grudge against you years down the road because they spent an hour or two reviewing your application when you ended up going to a different school is probably someone who'd find a reason to dislike you no matter what you do. 

I agree with almost all. Certainly one should take time to consider personal priorities as well as "fit," and it sounds like you are taking the less traveled, more thoughtful route to your decision. That's great! The reality remains that the vast majority of students (while maybe talking up the complexity of their inner process, etc.) will ultimately decide based on a couple of very simple considerations, most notably rank (whether discipline rank, sub discipline rank, or overall reputation of the school). From the outside (or from the perspective of the lower ranked schools they visit), students who end up at higher ranked schools could be perceived as less conscientious in their process than some who withdraw their applications. I only meant to shine a light on this possibility, as it has just been illuminated for me. Best of luck to you!

[Pancho Villa]

4 minutes ago, IcedCovfefe said:

I agree with everything here.  There are a lot of different factors beside rank that you need to evaluate when you’re getting ready to commit the next 5+ years of your life.  You need to examine the funding offers and cost of living, you need to meet with your potential advisers and determine if they’re people you could see yourself working with for 5+ years, you need to talk with current graduate students to determine their happiness with the department and how they feel about the mental health factors of the program, attrition rates, time to completion, and the list goes on.  These are important variables that take time to evaluate.  I understand OP’s frustration with how the process plays out, but I don’t think that we should get irritated with people who want to compare their options and choose the best one for them individually. 

I absolutely agree! I only meant to point out, as my advisor did for me, that if you already know you won't attend a school, you should consider withdrawing your application. No real judgement on how you decide, and anyone who decides strictly on rank is (in my mind) missing the point. That said, my advisor mentioned that, in his 25+ years as a professor, and 30+ in academia, he has been surprised by a student's decision once or twice (out of hundreds of decisions). Seeing it from his point of view made me look more closely at my own decision-making process and made me question whether I was being completely honest with myself. Am I likely to attend a school that seems to be an equal fit in terms of subfield and advising but that, in the end, places students in TT jobs about 20% of the time versus one that places them about 60% of the time, particularly given that the latter places in schools that offer much better research opportunities, resources, etc.? As much as I definitely believe the former school could provide just as good a setting for my PhD, I have to admit that there's little the former school could do in the process of a visit to attract me. That said, not everyone is aiming for a TT academic job, or for a research job, but for better or worse almost everyone acts like they are when applying to schools and accepting offers. All the best to you in your process!

[eggsalad14]

TIL I am an affirmation junkie 

But sort of joking aside, I kind of agree with you on some points but think maybe it's a little extreme. 

It definitely doesn't make sense to attend visits for schools that you 100% know you won't attend. I'm sure people do it, but doing it makes no sense unless you're trying to like accrue airline miles or visit that city in itself (and don't actually go for these reasons). But it's a waste of time all around. Still in school? You'll have to miss class, miss time to binge drink/work on your thesis.  Have a job? That means you need to take PTO or get less in your next paycheck. Plus, you'll have to sit around in presentations that have no relevance to you, and lie about actually considering that school. This is why I want to add on a little piece of my own advice: make sure you're scheduling your visits at places where you're really considering, even if it means waiting a bit for more decisions. Sometimes (especially if you're waiting for Stanford or Harvard, who are kind of late sometimes) this isn't completely possible if other schools have RSVP deadlines, but what I generally mean is don't schedule your Wisconsin visit the day you get admitted, when you applied to the entirety of the top 15. 

 

On withdrawing before hearing anything back from certain schools -- it sounds maybe kind of eager to let others know "I got into somewhere better than you, I need to let you know your school has no chance now" in my opinion. If schools are really concerned about their yield and about how long it takes to make funding packages, they ought to do what I've heard Emory (used to?) does: call up applicants and ask if you'd like to still be considered for admission. Besides, virtually every school uses a waitlist -- they'll get the cohort they want regardless of if you withdraw your application now or decline on April 14. 

 But also, I've paid over $100 each to apply to schools, I think I should be entitled to a decision. I like to think the costs of making award packages are built into that fee. Again, if it's really a burden for programs, they can shoot me an email and I'll happily click "I no longer wish to be considered at The University of Northern Southern West Virginia."

 

That being said, yes, don't wait until April 14 or 15 to say no to places that aren't on your radar. This is universally good advice regardless of any circumstance. It's the kind thing to do -- you're going to save an anxious young adult a lot of stress. 

[Pancho Villa]

2 hours ago, eggsalad14 said:

TIL I am an affirmation junkie 

But sort of joking aside, I kind of agree with you on some points but think maybe it's a little extreme. 

It definitely doesn't make sense to attend visits for schools that you 100% know you won't attend. I'm sure people do it, but doing it makes no sense unless you're trying to like accrue airline miles or visit that city in itself (and don't actually go for these reasons). But it's a waste of time all around. Still in school? You'll have to miss class, miss time to binge drink/work on your thesis.  Have a job? That means you need to take PTO or get less in your next paycheck. Plus, you'll have to sit around in presentations that have no relevance to you, and lie about actually considering that school. This is why I want to add on a little piece of my own advice: make sure you're scheduling your visits at places where you're really considering, even if it means waiting a bit for more decisions. Sometimes (especially if you're waiting for Stanford or Harvard, who are kind of late sometimes) this isn't completely possible if other schools have RSVP deadlines, but what I generally mean is don't schedule your Wisconsin visit the day you get admitted, when you applied to the entirety of the top 15. 

 

On withdrawing before hearing anything back from certain schools -- it sounds maybe kind of eager to let others know "I got into somewhere better than you, I need to let you know your school has no chance now" in my opinion. If schools are really concerned about their yield and about how long it takes to make funding packages, they ought to do what I've heard Emory (used to?) does: call up applicants and ask if you'd like to still be considered for admission. Besides, virtually every school uses a waitlist -- they'll get the cohort they want regardless of if you withdraw your application now or decline on April 14. 

 But also, I've paid over $100 each to apply to schools, I think I should be entitled to a decision. I like to think the costs of making award packages are built into that fee. Again, if it's really a burden for programs, they can shoot me an email and I'll happily click "I no longer wish to be considered at The University of Northern Southern West Virginia."

 

That being said, yes, don't wait until April 14 or 15 to say no to places that aren't on your radar. This is universally good advice regardless of any circumstance. It's the kind thing to do -- you're going to save an anxious young adult a lot of stress. 

Haha, most of us are total "affirmation junkies," and I'm pretty sure my advisor's main point was to suggest that I was/am definitely behaving like one.  With the rest, I agree completely. Ok, almost completely ? I'm not sure that all schools will "get the cohort they want regardless of if you withdraw your application now or decline on April 14." And few of the schools to which I am applying maintain a formal (or from the looks of it even informal) waiting list. I know that, at several highly competitive schools (including more than one Ivy), the graduate school dictates the number of offers that can be made by each department annually, and the number of students accepting an offer can (and does) vary widely. Schools can somewhat control how many students accept the offer by coming up with more funding (summer money, RA vs TA, etc.), but there is a limit to this, and sometimes this method of management ends in an unexpectedly large, or unexpectedly small entering cohort. Over time, cohort sizes obviously approach the desired average, but in a given year this way of allocating admissions spots can have a fairly large impact on rate of enrollment. There probably isn't a way to rectify this at the most competitive schools (where applicants, for good reason, will never withdraw their applications), but perhaps there is a way to make the process more predictable and/or efficient at middle and lower ranked schools, if only more students were willing to admit when they have no intention of attending a trumped school. One important thing I realized in talking with my professor is that, for me, there is little-to-nothing to be gained in leaving my application open at a school I know I won't attend (even if, yes, those damn applications are pricey!). To start with, there is always the chance I will be rejected (since the process can be very quirky), whereas withdrawing an application is often seen more nearly as rejecting an offer. As for coming off as eager to let schools know, "I got in somewhere better," I don't think anyone could have construed it that way in my case. I think most professors have a pretty nuanced understanding of how their school ranks in the mind of the average student, and they're rarely surprised when a student decides to go to a school that has many more resources, much "better" placement, and 10+ higher ranking (in discipline and in subfield). With regard to the rankings, fancy undergraduate schools get extra points from students for name recognition. For example, schools like Northwestern, Brown, Cornell, and Vanderbilt will get more 'yes' responses, and more/stronger applicants than they otherwise might, because of their strong undergraduate reputation, and I would therefore hesitate to assume professors at schools like these would see the competitiveness of their program as aligned with the rankings.  Likewise, strong programs that are remote or less well known (in terms of undergraduate study) will experience the opposite, and these are (for better or worse) probably easier to decline. My decision to withdraw applications took into consideration my impression of the level of insult I might be levying, and it especially took into consideration the perspective of my main advisor as well as my three other letter writers (who are all tenured at R1 institutions), each of whom either favored me withdrawing applications or was neutral to me doing so. [Yikes - sorry for carrying on ]

[eggsalad14]

24 minutes ago, Midwester said:

Haha, most of us are total "affirmation junkies," and I'm pretty sure my advisor's main point was to suggest that I was/am definitely behaving like one.  With the rest, I agree completely. Ok, almost completely ? I'm not sure that all schools will "get the cohort they want regardless of if you withdraw your application now or decline on April 14." And few of the schools to which I am applying maintain a formal (or from the looks of it even informal) waiting list. I know that, at several highly competitive schools (including more than one Ivy), the graduate school dictates the number of offers that can be made by each department annually, and the number of students accepting an offer can (and does) vary widely. Schools can somewhat control how many students accept the offer by coming up with more funding (summer money, RA vs TA, etc.), but there is a limit to this, and sometimes this method of management ends in an unexpectedly large, or unexpectedly small entering cohort. Over time, cohort sizes obviously approach the desired average, but in a given year this way of allocating admissions spots can have a fairly large impact on rate of enrollment. There probably isn't a way to rectify this at the most competitive schools (where applicants, for good reason, will never withdraw their applications), but perhaps there is a way to make the process more predictable and/or efficient at middle and lower ranked schools, if only more students were willing to admit when they have no intention of attending a trumped school. One important thing I realized in talking with my professor is that, for me, there is little-to-nothing to be gained in leaving my application open at a school I know I won't attend (even if, yes, those damn applications are pricey!). To start with, there is always the chance I will be rejected (since the process can be very quirky), whereas withdrawing an application is often seen more nearly as rejecting an offer. As for coming off as eager to let schools know, "I got in somewhere better," I don't think anyone could have construed it that way in my case. I think most professors have a pretty nuanced understanding of how their school ranks in the mind of the average student, and they're rarely surprised when a student decides to go to a school that has many more resources, much "better" placement, and 10+ higher ranking (in discipline and in subfield). With regard to the rankings, fancy undergraduate schools get extra points from students for name recognition. For example, schools like Northwestern, Brown, Cornell, and Vanderbilt will get more 'yes' responses, and more/stronger applicants than they otherwise might, because of their strong undergraduate reputation, and I would therefore hesitate to assume professors at schools like these would see the competitiveness of their program as aligned with the rankings.  Likewise, strong programs that are remote or less well known (in terms of undergraduate study) will experience the opposite, and these are (for better or worse) probably easier to decline. My decision to withdraw applications took into consideration my impression of the level of insult I might be levying, and it especially took into consideration the perspective of my main advisor as well as my three other letter writers (who are all tenured at R1 institutions), each of whom either favored me withdrawing applications or was neutral to me doing so. [Yikes - sorry for carrying on ]

Understandable about your perspective of withdrawing. I guess I drew upon my own undergrad experience with withdrawing an application from a school, and it was definitely out of a "F you, I got into somewhere better and I don't care if you reject me because I reject you" mindset for me (I promise I've since matured). Understandably, things are much different in grad school where rankings are somewhat less arbitrary than undergrad rankings, and faculty members don't seem to hold grudges as badly as undergraduate offices of admission. My bottom line is still that it's probably not that big a deal, and if it were, admission committees would do something about it. And that my intense curiosity as to whether or not I got into Eastern Western North Dakota State University is going to get to me, even if I get into Harvard tomorrow. 

 

Cohortwise yeah I did mean in general and on average. I know there's always some year to year compensating for deficiencies in the last year even at schools as high ranked as Duke. I wasn't aware that some schools could only put out a certain number of offers (seems weird because you'd think at the heart of the matter is the money they ultimately give out, not the total amount of people accepted). I'm no advocate of small government but wow that is some big government bureaucracy ??

 

 

[upsy]

I agree with eggsalad's suggestion that schools could check back in to be sure that applicants are still considering them, if schools are really that concerned about the time they spend reviewing apps. More broadly, the fact that there's so little information available about graduate admissions compared to undergrad admissions means there's going to be a lot of inefficient behavior. There's some uncertainty built into admissions even when you have, as you do for undergrad apps, admissions rates, 25-75% SAT/ACT and GPA ranges, college counselors in your high school, and tons of other resources besides. Grad admissions lacks all of that. For most programs, even something as simple as an admissions rate is impossible to find, and you're lucky to find average GRE scores and GPAs for admits. Funding information is also completely opaque until very far down the line, and that's obviously crucial. If schools were really bothered by the inefficient applicant behaviors that this sort of uncertainty generates, they'd respond by making more information available earlier in the process or doing things like confirming applicants' interest. They don't, so applicants have to hedge.

I totally agree with you both that visiting a school you're sure you won't go to seems bizarre. I'm surprised your advisor's seen multiple applicants do it.

[Pancho Villa]

44 minutes ago, upsy said:

I agree with eggsalad's suggestion that schools could check back in to be sure that applicants are still considering them, if schools are really that concerned about the time they spend reviewing apps. More broadly, the fact that there's so little information available about graduate admissions compared to undergrad admissions means there's going to be a lot of inefficient behavior. There's some uncertainty built into admissions even when you have, as you do for undergrad apps, admissions rates, 25-75% SAT/ACT and GPA ranges, college counselors in your high school, and tons of other resources besides. Grad admissions lacks all of that. For most programs, even something as simple as an admissions rate is impossible to find, and you're lucky to find average GRE scores and GPAs for admits. Funding information is also completely opaque until very far down the line, and that's obviously crucial. If schools were really bothered by the inefficient applicant behaviors that this sort of uncertainty generates, they'd respond by making more information available earlier in the process or doing things like confirming applicants' interest. They don't, so applicants have to hedge.

I totally agree with you both that visiting a school you're sure you won't go to seems bizarre. I'm surprised your advisor's seen multiple applicants do it.

Absolutely agree with all. As for my advisor, he can't have known whether any particular candidate had a genuine interest, but he basically said decisions that don't conform to expectation are extremely rare, while students who behave as if they might be about to make an unexpected decision are extremely common. From his perspective, some of the idiosyncrasy and inefficiency associated with the process can be reduced if students are more honest with themselves and/or if they are willing to put in a little more work into the process of making a decision. That said, he definitely acknowledges that the bulk of the freakiness of the process originates with programs, and the discipline itself, not with students. He, btw, seems to think gradcafe (and really anything that increases transparency) is probably good, though it might take pressure off the departments themselves in terms of providing information. 

[eggsalad14]

12 minutes ago, Midwester said:

Absolutely agree with all. As for my advisor, he can't have known whether any particular candidate had a genuine interest, but he basically said decisions that don't conform to expectation are extremely rare, while students who behave as if they might be about to make an unexpected decision are extremely common. From his perspective, some of the idiosyncrasy and inefficiency associated with the process can be reduced if students are more honest with themselves and/or if they are willing to put in a little more work into the process of making a decision. That said, he definitely acknowledges that the bulk of the freakiness of the process originates with programs, and the discipline itself, not with students. He, btw, seems to think gradcafe (and really anything that increases transparency) is probably good, though it might take pressure off the departments themselves in terms of providing information. 

Sort of related, and this is something that this discussion has made me think about, is that maybe part of the problem is how much we stress the idea of "fit" with a department. I'd be surprised if a lot of what your advisor seems to resent is the types that get into places like Madison and also Stanford, and goes to both visits. Maybe there is some wrongdoing on the students side when it seems obvious from afar that they're going to choose Stanford, but I also feel like a lot of them might be trying to give the Madison type a genuine chance before they really crunch the numbers and really realize that Stanford is almost unilaterally a better choice (and maybe it's largely because of the probably apparent difference in resources of a rich private school vs a school that the state is desperate to weaken). 

[Pancho Villa]

2 hours ago, eggsalad14 said:

Sort of related, and this is something that this discussion has made me think about, is that maybe part of the problem is how much we stress the idea of "fit" with a department. I'd be surprised if a lot of what your advisor seems to resent is the types that get into places like Madison and also Stanford, and goes to both visits. Maybe there is some wrongdoing on the students side when it seems obvious from afar that they're going to choose Stanford, but I also feel like a lot of them might be trying to give the Madison type a genuine chance before they really crunch the numbers and really realize that Stanford is almost unilaterally a better choice (and maybe it's largely because of the probably apparent difference in resources of a rich private school vs a school that the state is desperate to weaken). 

Yes, agree. It's also awkward to cancel a visit once the ticket is booked, meetings with faculty are set, etc. As long as a lot of competitive schools are making decisions late, obligatory visits to top, but not tiptop, schools will surely remain fairly common. Speaking of Wisconsin, I've been doing some homework, and I don't think it will be as easy to tear down as the media would have had us believe when the last (nutty) governor was around. After all, it's the clear flagship U in the state, it's big and long established, and there's a lot of community commitment behind it (even in more rural and conservative circles). Seems to have great faculty, at least in my area, but boy do folks here (and in rumors) enjoy sounding the alarms about it. 

Edited February 1, 2019 by PonchoVilla

[eggsalad14]

1 minute ago, Midwester said:

Yes, agree. It's also awkward to cancel a visit once the ticket is booked, meetings with faculty are set, etc. As long as a lot of competitive schools are making decisions late, obligatory visits to top, but not tiptop, schools will surely remain fairly common. Speaking of Wisconsin, I've been doing some homework, and I don't think it will be as easy to tear down as the media would have had us believe when the last (nutty) governor was around. After all, it's the clear flagship U in the state, it's big and long established, and there's a lot of community commitment behind it (even in more rural and conservative circles). Seems to have great faculty, at least in my area, too, but boy do folks here (and in rumors) enjoy sounding the alarms about it. 

You're right it'll definitely take a lot to really ruin Wisconsin, but I know they face some problems that other top tier publics don't often have. For example, their stipends, even though Madison is cheaper than most big city colleges, I've not competitive at all with most peer schools. The faculty is indeed excellent, which is why they're still successful despite some money issues and a nutty past governor. 

[Pancho Villa]

From phdstipends.com, Wisconsin's stipend looks about right (24k last year), but I don't see anything recent about fellowship time, RA/TA duties, summer money, etc., so maybe those things make it a bad option in comparison to similar schools?

 

[eggsalad14]

24 minutes ago, PonchoVilla said:

From phdstipends.com, Wisconsin's stipend looks about right (24k last year), but I don't see anything recent about fellowship time, RA/TA duties, summer money, etc., so maybe those things make it a bad option in comparison to similar schools?

 

Oh that's good, sounds like it's gotten better from the 11-15k I've seen in older threads on PSR. I suppose some of my information might be outdated. 

Edited February 1, 2019 by eggsalad14

[transrelativity]

(Edited -- sorry, wrong thread!)

Edited February 1, 2019 by transrelativity

[Pancho Villa]

20 minutes ago, eggsalad14 said:

Oh that's good, sounds like it's gotten better from the 11-15k I've seen in older threads on PSR. I suppose some of my information might be outdated. 

Yikes, 11-15k would NOT be good!