Prestige vs Pay

[cellec]

Not sure if anyone else is experiencing this but I wanted to reach out in case anyone had some insights. Currently, I am faced with the challenge of selecting a program based on its prestige (ranking) vs their pay (financial support), with the higher ranked school not offering as much support as the lesser ranked one. They are located in similar areas, as far as cost of living goes so I'm just having a hard time picking, as they both are a great fit. Anyone have any thoughts or advice on this?

[guest56436]

How big is the gap in rankings? What range are we talking about here?

[cellec]

Around 10 spots (not too sure if that's splitting hairs)...

[VMcJ]

If their fits to your profile and research are really similar, perhaps you should consider negotiating your stipend with the higher ranked school. But before that you should gather all information possible about them, and visit them if possible.

And as @Comparativist said, if the ranking gap is relatively small (let's say, 5-10 gap) you should pay less attention to the ranking. If we're talking 20-25 or more, only a considerably better fit could really create competition among them.

[resDQ]

3 minutes ago, cellec said:

Around 10 spots (not too sure if that's splitting hairs)...

 

subfield or overall? I would say the higher ranked one, but if it is a Duke/UNC type distance from each other (not the best example) then go to the one with more money because you can take courses at either dept (from what I've heard).

[VMcJ]

4 minutes ago, cellec said:

Around 10 spots (not too sure if that's splitting hairs)...

Provided we're not talking about Top 5 vs Top 15, I think what I said above still applies, but you're probably on the edge of having an easy decision, particularly if your money concerns are addressed by the higher ranked school.

[terefere]

Hard to give you any concrete advice without knowing what the schools are, your subfield, and what are they offering in terms of money.

[dagnabbit]

I think you should go to whichever place has better placement in your subfield. Presuming that both programs offer full funding, it seems to me that 5-7 years of living modestly is worth it for better job prospects.

[fuzzylogician]

I faced a version of this question. I had an offer from a school that was *significantly* higher than my other offers (they got me some special named fellowship of some kind and are in a fairly low COL area, probably a top 15ish school), and an offer from the top-ranked school in my field (you could quibble about whether it's #1 or #2-3, but that's the range, in one of the most expensive cities in the US). The top-ranked school happened to also be a much better fit, and has a much better placement record. I ended up going to that school, once I verified that the stipend they offered was enough to live on, although I wouldn't be nearly as comfortable than with the other offer. I don't regret that choice even for a minute. I thought of it as an investment in my future, and I think the higher-ranked school had a whole lot more to offer. That said, I think I would have made a different choice if the stipend wasn't sufficient or if I had a family to take care of, so I don't think there is just one correct answer here. There is a set of considerations that you need to weigh based on your preferences and life circumstances. 

[rising_star]

Similar to fuzzylogician, I left a bunch of money on the table to go to a higher ranked program that was also a better fit for my research interests. There were a few moments when I regretted it (you know, like when all your working friends from college are going on a vacation and you can't because you don't have the money) but overall it was the right decision.

[TakeruK]

5 years ago, I was deciding between three schools, all with very similar rankings but vastly different research fits. I went with the school that had the most research fit and highest ranking, but it was also the lowest stipend offer after adjusting for cost of living. The other two schools paid well enough that grad students can buy houses! The school with the highest offer was the lowest ranked in my subfield (but not by much) but the worst research fit (it looked a lot better on paper than it did when I actually visited---part of the reason why I always encourage people to visit their top choices). I think after adjusting for cost of living, that highest offer would have paid me about 60% more than the offer I actually took. Cost of living can be misleading though---if you are interested in saving money for the future (beyond grad school), having an extra $1000 in the bank in a low cost of living city is worth the same as $1000 in the bank in a high cost of living city!

However, after ensuring that the offer from my best-fit school was enough to live on, I made the same decision as fuzzylogician and rising_star and decided that attending the best fit school was worth the difference in pay. Grad school is only for 5 years and at least in my field, postdoc pay is way higher than student pay so it makes more sense to take the action that will result in better career prospects and earnings in the long term. I don't regret my decision at all, especially after finishing my job search for postdocs this year (wow, the market is way more competitive than I thought and I thought I was prepared for it). I ended up getting just one job offer, but it's to my top choice postdoc and I know that the specific experiences that I developed at my top choice grad school was a critical factor in getting this position. 

Looking back, I have no regrets but there were certainly tough times along the way where I wondered if I made the right choice. Seeing all of my friends from high school and college with "real jobs" that allowed them to buy homes or go on nice vacations etc. was hard sometimes, even if I knew that I was on my own path that will eventually get me the things I want. And, there were many moments where nothing research-wise was working and I was wondering if all the work was really worth it. 

That said, I would have certainly gone for a higher stipend offer if my top choice school didn't offer enough to actually live on. It would not have been enough if my spouse was not able to work in the US or if I had to support additional family members. I guess it was the right choice for at least three of us here who have gone through grad school (or almost finished it!) but it's something that will certainly vary from person to person.

[cellec]

Hey again

Thought I'd come back with a more fleshed out scenario. My subjects of interest are American Politics and Methodology, focusing on voting behavior and attitudes (sort of broad, I know).

School A: Top 35 School, Full Tuition (Guaranteed for 5+ years), Benefits, Summer funding. RA/TA maximum 10 hours a week. All said, stipend just under 25k. Good fit. Small Program 

School B: Top 25 School, Full Tuition (Guaranteed for 4 years), Benefits, No guaranteed summer funding. RA/TA minimum 20 hours a week. All said, stipend just above 15k. Large Program

School C: Top 100 School, Full Tuition (Guaranteed for 5+ years), Benefits, No guaranteed summer funding. RA/TA work maximum 13 hours a week. All said, stipend just below 23k. Okay fit, but they are starting a national poll in the fall. Medium Program.

School D: Top 10 School (top 5 in subfield), Full Tuition (Competitive Funding for 6 years), Benefits, No guaranteed summer funding. No information on RA/TA work yet. All said, stipend just below $23k. Good fit, opportunity to work on a national, representative poll. Small Program.

I know school D seems like a no-brainer, but I am not dead set on entering academia (still toying with the idea of working in corporate, political research/ polling). I'm uncertain about the competitive funding. What about School A? School B is a great choice but they are offering basically nothing compared to the others.

I'm just a little lost and would love any advice anyone may have...

[guest56436]

Now this becomes a totally separate matter. You aren't dead set on going into academia? Then you really shouldn't be getting a phd. You are too obsessed with funding which seems to me that you are not in the right mindset here. This isn't a job...it is an apprenticeship that is training you to be an academic. 

Choice D is a no brainer and there is nothing really to debate here only IF you are doing it for the right reasons.

A phd is not going to advance your career...it actually may hinder it.

Furthermore, as far as I can see all these funding packages (except for B - I know what this program is) are pretty similar the only difference are working hour conditions. So again, I really don't see how funding is really a huge factor here.

Edited March 2, 2017 by Comparativist

[TakeruK]

1 hour ago, cellec said:

School A: Top 35 School, Full Tuition (Guaranteed for 5+ years), Benefits, Summer funding. RA/TA maximum 10 hours a week. All said, stipend just under 25k. Good fit. Small Program 

School B: Top 25 School, Full Tuition (Guaranteed for 4 years), Benefits, No guaranteed summer funding. RA/TA minimum 20 hours a week. All said, stipend just above 15k. Large Program

School C: Top 100 School, Full Tuition (Guaranteed for 5+ years), Benefits, No guaranteed summer funding. RA/TA work maximum 13 hours a week. All said, stipend just below 23k. Okay fit, but they are starting a national poll in the fall. Medium Program.

School D: Top 10 School (top 5 in subfield), Full Tuition (Competitive Funding for 6 years), Benefits, No guaranteed summer funding. No information on RA/TA work yet. All said, stipend just below $23k. Good fit, opportunity to work on a national, representative poll. Small Program.

I would figure out what School D means by competitive funding. What fraction of students are fully funded (at the $23k level) for the entire degree? Is summer funding on top of the $23k or would you only get $23k if you are able to obtain summer funding?

To me, the only sensible alternative to School D is School A. B sounds like it's not enough funding, plus the high RA/TA minimum can hurt you. C doesn't sound competitive at all. 

Another question to answer is whether $2000 per year will make a big difference based on the locations of A and D. That is, is $23k/year a livable stipend in the location of School D? How does that compare to $25k/year at location of school A? 

In my opinion, the money difference between A and D is not important unless $23k/year is not livable at the location of School D. If it is enough to live on, I would only be concerned with how often students go without funding. Because otherwise, $2k/year for like 5 years is only a $10k difference and I think the better program will more than pay for itself.

[resDQ]

A PhD isn't the best thing to do for the private sector (for the most part). With that said, you need good quantitative training to get anything out of your program for the private sector. I doubt your other programs will offer training that is better than what is offered at School D. 

[VMcJ]

9 minutes ago, resDQ said:

A PhD isn't the best thing to do for the private sector (for the most part). With that said, you need good quantitative training to get anything out of your program for the private sector. I doubt your other programs will offer training that is better than what is offered at School D. 

Precisely the point I was going to make. I can't think of a good enough reason to ditch School D with this set of options. There could be a fight if School B was far more generous and research fit was far better and you were 100% committed to an academic career. If you want to keep your options open (I sympathize with that a whole lot), a Top 10 should have the upper hand.

[cellec]

24 minutes ago, resDQ said:

A PhD isn't the best thing to do for the private sector (for the most part). With that said, you need good quantitative training to get anything out of your program for the private sector. I doubt your other programs will offer training that is better than what is offered at School D. 

I know this tends to be true but I've done my research and PhD is what I need if I want to go private or stay in academia so that's how I'm here.

Thanks so much for your feedback y'all!

[rising_star]

To me, the funding amounts are meaningless without taking into consideration cost of living, @cellec. Do you care about the size of the program? If not, leave that out. Do you care about the ranking? If not, leave that out when you're considering things. 

[ThousandsHardships]

As long as they're giving you a tuition/fee remission and enough of a stipend to live on, I wouldn't even take money into consideration when making a decision. It's your life and future at stake. No amount of money is worth not being in a place you like that gives you the support you need. I mean, if one is hazy about future funding while another guarantees you for X number of years, then by all means choose the one with the guarantee provided you'd be happy there. But apart from financial security, I can't think of another reason to even consider the funding. Personally, I wouldn't care if they gave me $20,000 a year or $80,000 (yes I know an exaggeration) a year. I don't even care about summer funding (though I totally understand those who do). I'd simply choose the school that's best for me, provided it's paying me enough to live on.

Edited March 9, 2017 by ThousandsHardships