Departments with low/no graduate enrollments worrysome?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lavabug
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Graduate
AI Thread Summary
Graduate programs in astronomy and astrophysics at institutions like Case Western, Ohio State, and Rice University have reported low enrollment figures, with some programs showing zero enrollments for several consecutive years. This raises questions about the accuracy of the data and the reasons behind the low numbers. Possible explanations include discrepancies in funding, where more students are admitted than can be fully supported financially, leading to declines in acceptance rates. Additionally, students may choose to accept offers from other universities that provide better financial packages or more appealing locations. Despite these low enrollment figures, having a small number of graduate students can be beneficial, as it allows for more personalized support and closer relationships within the department, which can be advantageous for future job prospects. Concerns about low enrollment should be weighed against the overall reputation of the programs and the quality of support offered to students.
Lavabug
Messages
858
Reaction score
37
I have been looking at several graduate programs in astronomy/astrophysics and I've come across a few with track records of low enrollments according to AIP:

http://www.aip.org/statistics/trends/archives/astrost10.pdf

Statistics from previous years: http://www.aip.org/statistics/trends/archives/astrorost.htm

Case Western, Ohio State and Rice University for example have had 0 or 1 graduate enrollments several years in a row, even when according to gradschoolshopper (who get their data from AIP, though I don't know where), they admit many more students than the number that actually enroll. The one with 0 enrollments several years straight was Rice U.

I'm guessing this can mean one or more of the following:

-The data is wrong.
-More students are admitted that can be actually fully funded by the department, hence admitted students turn them down when they get offers with no/low tuition remission and stipend.
-Students simply took up better offers elsewhere, somewhere with palm trees.

Is this a warning sign to stay away from these universities or is it some error in the report? I quite like the programs at cwru and Ohio, I thought they had a very good reputation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you look on their web pages under "graduate student directory" or similar, do you see graduate students? Where do you think they came from?
 
Vanadium 50 said:
If you look on their web pages under "graduate student directory" or similar, do you see graduate students? Where do you think they came from?

From storks. :)

I have already looked at them. CWRU and Rice don't state the year they enrolled (Rice doesn't even state if they're in the physics or astronomy phd tracks) and Ohio only shows one grad student who graduated in 2010, which agrees with the AIP roster from 2010. But then again, any of the other students that graduated earlier could have enrolled that same year. I have already found some discrepancies between what grad departments report on their pages and what shows on the AIP roster.

I am wondering if it's common for graduate departments to send out more offers of admission than they can actually afford to sponsor, hence the sometimes large difference between the number of admitted and enrolled students.
 
Last edited:
Lavabug said:
From storks. :)


I am wondering if it's common for graduate departments to send out more offers of admission than they can actually afford to sponsor, hence the sometimes large difference between the number of admitted and enrolled students.

Extremely common. I would almost say they all do it. You never know how many people are going to enroll.

That said, low enrollment isn't necessarily a red flag. Departments with a handful of students can give them really good support, and you can get to know everyone, which is critical when you want to get a job in the future.
 
If they have 75 grad students listed on their site, I would not worry about low enrollment.
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
9K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Back
Top