next »

[professor_pat]

My partner's 24-year-old daughter and her boyfriend both graduated from a top-level SLAC with honors in economics. They're here on a visit and we were talking about how hard it's been for either of them to get a job in spite of over 100 applications (the daughter is finishing up an Americorps position now).

When Partner and I suggested grad school, they both said that admission to grad school/law school is extremely difficult these days, much more so than I had thought. They said you can't get into grad school any more without having held a post-undergrad responsible job that makes you "special," even with top GRE scores, highest honors, etc.

My first response was that this was an exaggeration, that it couldn't really be that bad, especially since Daughter can pay full fare.

For those of you with grad-school admissions experience (on either side): is this really the case these days? That even young people with Daughter's and Boyfriend's kind of academic background can't expect to be admitted to a strong (middling?) grad school?

[chaosbydesign]

I can only comment based on my experiences applying for grad school, but I think it depends entirely on the individual programs and what they are looking for.

[lohai0]

My field has more jobs than job-seekers (math ed), but it is not easy to get into grad school. Last year, we had about 18 apply and took 3. One of the three was a deferred enrollment. However, we only had office space for 3...under other circumstances, we would have taken more. Ideal candidates have some K-12 teaching experience or teaching certification, but it is not necessary. The program admits people with just a BS, bus a MA/MS is strongly preferred. The GRE bar is not all that high-they are looking for moderate writing and verbal scores with a very high math.

For econ, my understanding is that you have to apply to your specific branch of econ-and some areas are much more saturated than others.

[gradstudentanon]

Some of the smaller Humanities programs can get 80+ applicants for 3-4 spots. This I know from personal experience (read: failure to get in anywhere!).

[prof_j]

Is grad school admission more difficult than 10 years ago... yes probably.  The bar for GPA/GRE, extra-curricular achievements is higher than before within my field (STEM).  This is partly due to a terrible economy, which results in more folks applying to school (whether or not they have competitive applications of course... ).  This tends to skew the admission ratio ("only 10% accepted!" -- "yes, but 50% of the apps went straight in the trash!")

Additionally, there are many more opportunities for undergraduates to have meaningful extra-curricular activities (research experiences, design competitions etc...) so an excellent GPA with a blah cover letter and letters of rec. that just say "did great in class" tend to stand out a little less.

It sounds like your daughter would certainly have a competitive application with the honors/americorps etc. 

[glowdart]

Some of the smaller Humanities programs can get 80+ applicants for 3-4 spots. This I know from personal experience (read: failure to get in anywhere!).

And my students tell me that some of the larger ones take 1% of applicants.  (Thank you, schools who list the numbers of applicants and the number admitted in your rejection letters; it makes my advising job easier.)

[eugeneslament]

Some of the smaller Humanities programs can get 80+ applicants for 3-4 spots. This I know from personal experience (read: failure to get in anywhere!).

This is what my small department at an Ivy league school is like. All accepted applicants fit the exact pattern the young woman in the OP described, with a "responsible job that made them special" after undergrad.

[pigou]

My partner's 24-year-old daughter and her boyfriend both graduated from a top-level SLAC with honors in economics. They're here on a visit and we were talking about how hard it's been for either of them to get a job in spite of over 100 applications (the daughter is finishing up an Americorps position now).

This doesn't sound right. What kind of jobs are they applying for - and in what city? In the experience of the undergrads I know in econ (not at a top econ school), they get random calls just from putting their resume on monster. Does their SLAC have a career center that they have access to? There might be something wrong with their resume or their targeting.

When Partner and I suggested grad school, they both said that admission to grad school/law school is extremely difficult these days, much more so than I had thought. They said you can't get into grad school any more without having held a post-undergrad responsible job that makes you "special," even with top GRE scores, highest honors, etc.

Job experience is by and large worthless when applying to economics programs. The kind of jobs that would be useful (e.g. the world bank for someone interested in development) are not open to people with BAs and whatever is out there (e.g. finance) is too far removed from academic economics to be useful. Some people might do entry level consulting and program evaluations, but that's not going to be a meaningful competitive advantage when application time comes around.

Far more valuable would be a senior/honor's thesis or some other evidence of independent research. Maybe a conference presentation, if they can collaborate with faculty.

In terms of competitiveness, I think it's not as bad in economics as it is in other fields. A top school like Berkeley gets about 800 applicants and aims for a class of 30. So they'd offer admission to 60 people, as about half of them will turn down the offer. Out of the 800 applicants, 400 are dismissed pretty quickly - so assuming their application is done well and they do have high GPAs and GRE scores, they're looking at a 16% chance of admission. Generally, admissions to econ programs are with funding - both tuition and living expenses. The top programs seem to pay between $20k and $38k per year on top of tuition waiver and health insurance.

Of course letters of recommendation matter a lot, as does a serious background in mathematics. At the top programs, I'd expect nothing less than calculus 3, linear algebra, statistics (not for social scientists), and real analysis to be competitive. Differential equations, graph theory, abstract algebra, mathematical modeling... those I'd say are bonus classes that could help, as would a second semester of real analysis.

If they don't have a background in mathematics, then the top programs in economics won't be an option. They could aim lower, but I don't think that's particularly wise. Especially not if their application is otherwise very strong. They could instead take a semester or two of math and apply next year. Even if it doesn't work with a top 20 program, they may end up with better funding from the university that accepts them. Moreover, they will get a lot more out of a graduate degree in econ if they understand the mathematics that theory is based on.

[hegemony]

Being able to pay full fare will not help with acceptance.  They're looking for scholarly qualifications, not financial ones.  It's true that the recession means that tons and tons of students are applying to grad schools.  But they're typically aren't any more jobs for them after they come out, so not getting accepted can be a blessing.  Better to work their way up and get paid for doing so.  Are they applying to very basic entry-level jobs?  Although I know the market is bad, a lot of students also go wrong by assuming that their degree means that they get to skip the basic levels in their target profession, which is unfortunately not the case.

[daniel_von_flanagan]

In many fields, there is a disconnect between the graduation requirements for a bachelors degree and the admissions requirements for a good graduate program.  This sounds unethical, but really it makes sense: why should someone with an interest in, and aptitude for, economics be prevented from majoring in the field just because they are not quite strong enough mathematically for graduate work?

This shouldn't have been a problem for someone leaving a Williams or an Amherst with an honors BA in Econ, but - as hegemony points out - people who have had a good ride through school often have trouble setting their sights to an appropriate level.  (This is true at all levels, such as people with PhDs and postdocs at fancy schools not applying for faculty jobs at nonstellar institutions.  It sometimes takes getting kicked around a little for a sense of proportion to set in.) - DvF

[havesometea]

Being able to pay does mean that the student can take classes to make up for any deficiencies (e.g. math classes, if needed) and/or perhaps find a good volunteer position. Once the student puts together as strong a package as possible, applying may result in admission. It is not easy, however. Most students applying in my field have work experience now -- at least a year full-time in a lab (I was lucky to get in without this).

[brixton]

Has she talked to her advisor/mentor at this top SLAC school? My sense is that one of the few things faculty advisors--particularly at small schools--are good at is advising students on the path they, themselves, took, helping with connections they have.  She should use the resources at her school to get specific answers to her questions based on her field and work as an undergrad.  (It's tough to answer your questions here without knowing what sort of student she was as an undergrad.)

[professor_pat]

Brixton, what would you like to know about the kind of student she was as an undergrad?

WRT economics, she is extremely strong in mathematics, which was the basis of her honors thesis.

[oldadjunct]

I share Pigou's surprise since everything I have seen indicates that an Econ major is a very salable undergraduate degree.

Is there a difference between a BS in econ from an SLAC and one from within a business school?  The reason I ask is that my daughter is graduating in May with an econ degree from a top-20 business school at a state flagship.  She is a fine student with solid quant. skills; sounds like the folks you are talking about, OP.  Except,  she had a job offer, with signing bonus, before she began seventh semester.  She has since returned the signing bonus to accept another job (slightly less money, better career fit, same June '12 start date).  To the best of my understanding her classmates are similarly situated as they enter their eighth semester.  Daughter credits much of this to career counseling, an aggressive on-campus recruitment program, and a very active chapter of Alpha Kappa Psi.

As to Law School, pffft.  Stay away, unless you have a very focused field of interest, and yes probably some specialized background (academic or otherwise), and can get into only the very best schools in that specialization.  Econ Daughter's older sibling went the law school route armed with all of the things mentioned in my previous sentence.  In third year, specialization shifted and job prospects dimmed considerably.  When I asked why, I was told, "Dad, this is like applying to Princeton all over again.  My competition has been doing this stuff for years [when I was doing my other stuff]."  Finally pulled in a happy job match, but it was touch and go for awhile, and the salary is 30-40% less than what it was before law school, and hardly more than Econ Sibling's starting salary.
.

[pigou]

Is there a difference between a BS in econ from an SLAC and one from within a business school?

Traditional economics departments don't usually encourage internships, whereas professors in business schools might be more likely to talk about it. Certainly students in business schools tend to be more aggressive in seeking them, so there may be an effect from peers. That being said, career services tend to be organized at the university-wide level, so there shouldn't be differences in access to opportunities. In terms of content, economics departments tend to be more mathematically rigorous, but not all business schools lack rigor. As far as employers are concerned, I can't imagine there would be a difference.

In many fields, there is a disconnect between the graduation requirements for a bachelors degree and the admissions requirements for a good graduate program.

This is especially true in economics. Many (most?) universities let you get a degree in economics without ANY calculus. At this year's annual economics conference, I checked out the recent undergraduate micro textbooks and only one was calculus-based (i.e. required taking simple derivatives). So right out of the box you can't do maximization subject to constraints (which would require Lagrange multipliers) - the very heart of economics. How one teaches intermediate microeconomics without it, I don't know. (Fortunately British textbooks are calculus based.) I feel for students who did everything according to the handbook, excelled in their economics courses, and still don't have the slightest chance of getting into an economics PhD program. However, this doesn't seem to apply to the OP - a senior thesis in mathematics should send a strong signal to potential programs.