Why/how is the recession affecting Pure Mathematics programs?

[coffeeintotheorems]

For example, consider top schools: I highly doubt that someone would be working in industry ("the real world"), lose his job last year, and then decide, "Oh, what the heck, I'll go ahead and apply to Princeton's pure Mathematics PhD program."

No, it seems that a career in pure mathematics is something you would pursue independently of the economy--that is, NOT as an alternative to having a "real job," i.e. it's not something you're going to decide on a whim or as a back-up plan in case you lose your job.

Note: I am not applying to any top-10 pure mathematics programs. Nevertheless, I would think the same principle would still apply to the strong second-tier schools to which I am applying.

But it isn't. Or, at least, it appears not to be: yesterday, the graduate secretary at Indiana University Bloomington told me that the number of their applicants both this year and last has been over 200, which is "higher than normal." I intend to eventually get similar information out of the other programs to which I have applied.

What do you guys think?

[kdilks]

The main increase in applications due to the economy would come from people that are about to graduate and don't like the prospects of the current job market, not people that have already gone to "the real world" and would be returning to academia (though I'm sure there are also plenty of people whose recent unemployment has motivated them to pursue old dreams/try to increase their marketability).

[coffeeintotheorems]

...people that are about to graduate and don't like the prospects of the current job market...

That's a good point. However, how would you characterize the "current job market" for people who were planning to apply to strong Mathematics programs? I would think there would be little variability in this area--i.e., these people (we?) wanted to go to grad school anyway, i.e. grad school was our first/only choice, ahead of working in industry straight out of undergrad.

[coffeeintotheorems]

[whoops, sorry for multiple post; seems I can't delete the duplicate]

Edited February 17, 2010 by coffeeintotheorems

[origin415]

A lot of schools lost large portions of their endowments, so are spending much less, and therefore bringing in less students with funding, regardless of any increase in applications. For instance, on the results search, there were a couple of posters who mentioned that Penn is only bringing in 4 people this year, as opposed to their usual ~15.

And I'm sure there are plenty of people working in finance, as an actuary, or in industy who are recently unemployed and want to go back to school to enhance their resume. It doesn't seem so far fetched to me to have some of them apply to pure math programs (for example, people who went into applied for the money coming back to pure because it is their true interest and it turns out the money isn't so hot right now), but its probably applied math and statistics that are being hit harder.

[someDay]

Philosophically the argument "Pure maths is dislodged from the real world and thus the economy would not affect pure maths applications" is compelling, but reality tells a different story. Every DGS I have spoken to has confirmed that application numbers have gone up, in particular those from highly qualified students. At the same time funding has been cut, though UPenn (15 down to 4) is the exception rather than the norm.

I think this is due to two reasons:

- Students apply to more universities than they have in the past to not "lose out".

- Banks (amongst others) used to hire a high number of extremely bright people who would've had no problems getting into top unis. These people are still lured by the promise of $$$ and unemotional sex in airport hotels in return for 80hrs/week, but instead now apply to PhD programs, although I guess perhaps more so in applied and stats.

Personally I think this does not affect the tiny minority that is truly exceptional, have their IMO gold medals and really good publications. There're still at least 100 (or so) places at the top departments, more than enough for this group. The rest (which includes me, unfortunately) will have a very very hard time this year.

sD.

[coffeeintotheorems]

These people are still lured by the promise of $$ and unemotional sex in airport hotels

[hubris]

- Banks (amongst others) used to hire a high number of extremely bright people who would've had no problems getting into top unis. These people are still lured by the promise of $$ and unemotional sex in airport hotels in return for 80hrs/week, but instead now apply to PhD programs, although I guess perhaps more so in applied and stats.

This, hiring is up but the credit markets are still pretty tight.

PS: Keep in mind that those entering IBs at the analyst level are expected to level up within in a few years.

[martizzle]

I think this is due to two reasons:

- Students apply to more universities than they have in the past to not "lose out".

- Banks (amongst others) used to hire a high number of extremely bright people who would've had no problems getting into top unis. These people are still lured by the promise of $$$ and unemotional sex in airport hotels in return for 80hrs/week, but instead now apply to PhD programs, although I guess perhaps more so in applied and stats.

wow...airport hotels huh...I would prefer hotels by a beach lol. About the other stuff, I would say you are right though. With banks hiring less, more people (those about to leave school; leaving school; recently left school, may decide grad school is a better option than whatever else they would have done/liked to do. Combined with the depleted funds in many programs, things could get (or rather; ARE) crazily competitive.