Bad US economy and grad school

[uberskooper]

Our troubled economic times has gotten me to thinking about how this might impact my grad school admission prospects. I'm not too worried about the surge of applications grad schools recieve, since it takes a lot of preperation to be a serious contender for a doctoral program.

What does concern concern me are fewer funded slots and less stipend money. Can anyone in the know tell me how grad schools are impacted by a bad economy? Are there special funds put aside to ensure that they schools have quality grad students to teach classes and do research?

[ampersand]

It depends. Public schools in states with budget crunches may very well have their funding cut, which could translate to less money to dole out to grad students. Some schools may cut the number of students they admit or reduce stipends. When I applied last year, the rumor was that a couple of the top schools in my field were facing severe budget shortfalls and didn't have the money to accept as many students as they had in the past. Private schools don't rely on taxpayer money to cover their costs and may be in a better financial situation than public schools. I think it's also very likely that the number of applicants will go up. People who have been taking time off before grad school may decide to shorten their time off, or people who have been unsure about going to grad school may be pushed in that direction by economic or employment insecurity.

What you can do about it, of course, is make sure that your applications are stellar. Apply to a wide range of schools (both public and private), and you'll be more likely to get a funded offer. Keep in mind that if a school wants you badly enough, they'll dredge up some money for you.

[rising_star]

My own department (at a public university) is planning to only admit students they can fully fund. Given that I'm in a large cohort and they want to continue funding all current students (not to mention some are delaying graduation b/c there are no jobs out there), the number of slots for incoming students will be small.

Private universities are seeing their endowments shrink. Who knows what that will mean?

[bgk]

Private universities are seeing their endowments shrink. Who knows what that will mean?

In my department it means fewer slots for new grad students.

[bgk]

For info: http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaki ... p_Emailed7

[Minnesotan]

At my school, the American Studies program has stopped funding new MAs and PhDs for next year. I can't imagine trying to hold down a real job while earning a PhD. (Luckily I'm in RhetComp, so there are always half a gajillion sections of freshman comp to teach.)

[Nicolay]

An article in the Chronicle of Higher Education for December 8, 2008 reports that the total number of GRE tests administered in 2008 is expected to fall from the previous year.

Monday, December 8, 2008

GRE Test Taking Drops This Year, Unlike in Past Downturns

By ELYSE ASHBURN and DAVID GLENN

The nonprofit organization that administers the Graduate Record Examinations is projecting that the number of tests given this year will dip

[uberskooper]

I hope that the above is true. Less competition + more TA monies = a good time for me.

[Dreams]

I think it depends on the field really. I know for instance the two fields I am applying to: Public Health and International Affairs, ar seeing a lot of applications this year. For someone like me at the bottom rung of the totem pole stat wise, this could potentially spell doom.

[cordelia]

and it's not just the US, other universities declare suspensions of hiring as well, like York in Canada

[coho]

yes, some of the profs involved in my app. process have warned me that state schools may be in an especially precarious position, student funding-wise . . .

[Minnesotan]

and it's not just the US, other universities declare suspensions of hiring as well, like York in Canada

That seems to be a ploy by the powers-that-be. York has been on strike for a couple of months. No classes = no tuition = worried executives who rake in multi-million dollar salaries (including perks).

I hate to say it, but a cut in grad admissions would be a very good thing for academics. Not only could current grads bargain for pay above the poverty line, but we could make a shift back toward tenure-track being the standard hiring situation. If that's not enough for you, perhaps the argument that most PhDs could have jobs when they graduate would work. =)

I know my graduate school trains about 15x more PhDs per year than they hire. Unless the SLACs pick up all that slack, the math is not encouraging.

[cordelia]

That seems to be a ploy by the powers-that-be. York has been on strike for a couple of months. No classes = no tuition = worried executives who rake in multi-million dollar salaries (including perks).

I hate to say it, but a cut in grad admissions would be a very good thing for academics. Not only could current grads bargain for pay above the poverty line, but we could make a shift back toward tenure-track being the standard hiring situation. If that's not enough for you, perhaps the argument that most PhDs could have jobs when they graduate would work. =)

I know my graduate school trains about 15x more PhDs per year than they hire. Unless the SLACs pick up all that slack, the math is not encouraging.

Well, I know what you mean. I'm already a PhD student at my native country, but aiming to transfer out since I won't be able to find a good place here due to the oversupply of PhDs & the competition with those who have degrees from abroad.

Yet, elitism of this kind is not the solution, either..

Best,

[rising_star]

cordelia,

I'm not so sure it's elitism. Some of it is pragmatism. Graduate programs have been churning out students because they want the relatively cheap labor of having graduate students teach introductory courses, rather than having to pay adjuncts or hire full-time faculty. The consequence is the surplus of PhD graduates and, likely, several that should not have earned a degree at all. Basically, what I'm saying is that the mismatch between jobs and graduates comes because of the system. The system where graduate students are cheap labor, preferred by universities that don't want to spend money on things like classroom teaching but don't object to new, flashy buildings on campus. The only way for the system to change, imo, is for there to be fewer funded slots so that only the most qualified and/or most determined students pursue the degree.

[Minnesotan]

Sorry -- I assumed most of us were already involved in the debate about grad admissions, so I skipped a few steps in my logic. As Rising says, I'm not trying to be elitist. In fact, the opposite is about right.

The system in place is exploitative. From undergraduate to MA, too many people are accepted, many of whom are unfunded. These are called cash cow programs, and each paying MA will subsidize a PhD. From MA to PhD, many people get cut out of the loop cause of over-admission at the MA level. More distressing is that of those who are not cut out by now, up to half won't get jobs in academe. Yet universities keep admitting far too many MA students for the cheap labor, or for the tuition income. It is irresponsible.

The point I was making is that A) we're all safe, since you can't fire a slave and, the tools of the master won't tear down the master's house.

[cordelia]

hi,

sorry for the late reply, having problems with the internet connection..

apparently i didn't express it well. what i had in my mind was the idea supporting to limit the PhD slots since there are limited academic positions for the PhD holders; a capitalist logic may prevail in the academia as well, but i don't think the system can be transformed through applying some demand & supply calculations of the market..

also, at this part of the world there are still people who do PhD for different reasons other than getting a profession.

cheers