The good bad old days

[coho]

interesting 1966 Times article:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... -1,00.html

if you're feelin' down about the application process, just remember--at least we don't get shipped off to 'Nam if we don't get in! :shock:

[Minnesotan]

"Graduate applications have increased 75% in the past five years, partly because seniors apply to as many as ten schools

[studentfromLA]

Double-sigh!

"Out of 5,246 applicants last fall, Harvard took only 1,853. Yale's Law School got 2,000 applications for 165 openings. Michigan's graduate office mailed out 20,000 applications, got 12,000 back, accepted half, enrolled 2,000. Chicago enrolls only 1,500 of 6,000 applicants."

So, back in 1966, only Yale was still as hard to get into as it is today :-) Harvard accepted 35% of applicants, Michigan accepted 50% and Chicago 25%. Those were the good old days!

[Astaroth]

Wow, it's like they're describing a different planet... so different. I wonder whether it will keep getting tougher in the future?

[Minnesotan]

Wow, it's like they're describing a different planet... so different. I wonder whether it will keep getting tougher in the future?

I hope so. They really need to discourage more people from attempting to earn PhDs.

[coho]

I hope so. They really need to discourage more people from attempting to earn PhDs.

But not by raising the price of applications. In fact, they really ought to lower it. 60 dollars per application is a lot, but some schools have a whopping $90 fee. Plus $20 for "additional" score reports. To pay that much just to lower the chances of one's being rejected from 100% (not applying) to ~90%. sheesh. Back to 10 dollars, I say!

[Dreams]

But not by raising the price of applications. In fact, they really ought to lower it. 60 dollars per application is a lot, but some schools have a whopping $90 fee. Plus $20 for "additional" score reports. To pay that much just to lower the chances of one's being rejected from 100% (not applying) to ~90%. sheesh. Back to 10 dollars, I say!

Who knows. If we stop ordering the ASRs like people stopped buying gas, maybe ETS will lower the price

[Minnesotan]

Who knows. If we stop ordering the ASRs like people stopped buying gas, maybe ETS will lower the price

laff

[Astaroth]

Keep in mind, that's $10 in 1966 prices. That actually translates to about $60-70 if you factor in inflation. So application fees haven't actually changed. I think one way to reduce the number of people applying for PhDs is to convince employers that people with MScs, or even BScs could be well worth hiring for more than technician positions! I think that this is really the problem. People want PhDs because they don't want to be stuck doing repetitive work. I don't really see why someone with an MSc couldn't supervise a research project in an academic lab. Sure, it wouldn't be a tenure track position, and perhaps funding might be harder to come by, but it's better than the current situation whereby if you have anything less than a PhD and at least one Post-Doc, you have little chance of working as a researcher in academia. I know lots of people really just want to get a job and settle down, but still apply for PhDs because of the gap in academic employability. Given such a situation, at least some of those people will choose the halfway solution instead of going all the way with a PhD in order to speed up their career.

Personally, though, I'd still do a PhD. I guess I'm ambitious, or maybe I'm just trying to emulate my supervisor, but I know it's what I want to do.

[seunghwane]

Did anyone see this graph?

http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive ... micid=1078

[miratrix]

I'd be quite happy not getting a PhD if I knew I could get funding for grad school and a decent job (not necessarily in academia, but in the field) with an MA...but the chances are just better with the PhD.