<p>The “cash cow” concept is misleading. I’ve heard ppl say masters programs from top universities, like Stanford and Columbia, are “cash cow”, i.e. you get in because they expect you to pay full tuition on your own. This is completely false, and to some extent, complete B.S. If they want to make money, then they should admit EVERY SINGLE students who apply, not just 30 or so percent, right? I mean, if they admit 100% of applicants, the tuition money would go up more than 3 times, right? Better yet, they should just waive all application requirement like GRE and personal statement to encourage more people to apply, i.e. more $$$. You don’t get financial aid because you are not expected to perform extensive research like PhD students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“Cash cow” might be misleading if we were talking about a field that isn’t engineering, but many MS students get their education paid for through assistantships and so people who are paying large sums to add perhaps $10k onto their starting paychecks are suckers unless they came from a school without a national reputation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course, schools cannot admit 100% of the applicants because some (most?) applicants are just so awful that the school’s reputation is reduced by more in social capital than it gains in tuition dollars should it admit them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Assistantships are not an equivalent exchange. I got paid 3x my rent every month to grade papers 5 hours a week as a TA. Schools throw money at people they want and subsidize it with people they don’t necessarily want.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I was one of those grad students who needed the “alternative path” to grad school admissions…get in as “provisional”, take some courses, ace them, them apply for admission.</p>
<p>Well Columbia boldly states “completing one of the graduate certificates (first 4 courses of MS program) does NOT guarantee admission into the MS program.” That tells me that Columbia will still weigh your past HEAVILY for your admission.</p>