MOVING TO FRONT FROM OCTOBER 8--UPDATED
This data was recently pointed out to me. Apparently, the response rate to the surveys sent out was only 10%, which is remarkably low. Many years ago, the PGR tried to survey student opinion, and here's what happened: for most programs, only a few people responded, and they were almost all really angry about their program; for other programs, the department rallied their happy students to respond en masse and praise the program. In other words, it quickly became clear the data was unrepresentative and worthless. This looks to be the same. (Of course, as I've emphasized for literally a quarter-century now, admitted PhD students must talk to current students to figure out what the situation really is at a program, and regardless of how good or bad the "student ratings" are.)
More useful is this data on job placement from the same source. It covers the period 2012-2016, so is a bit dated. Since job placement changes with changes in faculty quality (as we've seen in years past with, e.g., Rutgers, NYU and, more recently, Southern California), this is certainly a case where past performance does not guarantee future returns! (The students securing jobs in this study would have been choosing graduate programs circa 2005-2010.) (For concerns about this jobs data, see an earlier discussion.)
UPDATE: A reader points out that the APDA folks have now taken the garbage data on student responses and produced a "ranking." (It also lists the so-called "job placement" rate, which is calculated in a tendentious way that will mislead, rather than inform.) Some of the programs that got favorable responses from (some unspecified number of) students do have good reputations for having a congenial and supportive environment for students (some do not), but students would be well-advised to talk to current students at any program they are considering, whether it is listed here or not.
Recent Comments