<p>I do apologize if this has been discussed previously.</p>
<p>Go to pdf page 9.</p>
<p>Any thoughts?</p>
<p>No surprise that LACs with a decent reputation for math do well in this respect.</p>
<p>Just more evidence that there is more than one way to get to the top. For all of our own personal preferences and biases, there really is an amazing number of opportunities available. Might not be able to afford them…</p>
<p>Coming from a small college, I naturally find the per-capita statistics much more interesting! </p>
<p>In addition to not using per-capita figures, the other thing I noticed is that they only looked at Ph.D.s granted from 1997 to 2002. That means you’re looking at folks who graduated from the originating institution from 1991 to 1997 or so. That’s kind of a long time ago if what you hope to glean from the data is what schools you might want to go to now. If you’re a member of the (college) class of 2016, you’re looking at data that are 20-25 years removed from your own experience!!!</p>
<p>Wow, Swarthmore is amazing. It generated 39 econ Ph.D.s from 2579 undergraduates, while Stanford only generated 51 econ Ph.D.s from 11597 undergraduates…</p>
<p>Wait, I think that Stanford only had 60 econ undergraduates, and Swarthmore had 2000 econ or related undergraduates, since … This is probably making more sense.</p>
<p>So, can we trust anything from U. Montana?</p>
<p>
Well, my immediate reaction was that this is great…if you’re one of the very, very few people who wants to get a PhD in econ. When only 5 schools send more than 10% of their econ majors to grad school, that tells you something about the interests of most econ majors!</p>
<p>I’d be much more interested if the study adjusted for the quality of PhD programs. Far too many people are getting PhDs from lower quality universities/programs and will never get a job in academia. What programs are MIT students choosing? Frostburg State students?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is not a big surprise.</p>
<p>At Berkeley, there are two intermediate micro/macro economics sequences taken as sophomores or juniors. One is light math, and one is heavy math. The heavy math version is recommended for those intending graduate school in economics. The heavy math version has only about a quarter of the total enrollment of both versions.</p>
<p>Economics (with light math) may be seen as an alternative to majoring in business.</p>
<p>I think the problem with these sorts of lists is that they show nothing about quality vs. quantity. I don’t think getting a PhD in a very low ranked university and then going on to adjunct teach at a community college is any more meaningful than getting a top MBA. I’m not saying either path is inherently better than the other for an individual, but I don’t think just showing the number of PhDs is an automatic indicator of the quality of an education. Also, I’ve heard that getting a PhD could be a sign that people are having a hard time finding jobs so they go back to school.</p>
<p>
You MAY be right about that if you’re talking about the very top programs. IMO PhDs from accredited institutions are not easy things to earn. Many people end up ABD.
I certainly agree with this but it is another data point to consider about a school.
Many people are having trouble finding jobs right now. Also some students just want to eventually teach. Or some positions require a PhD.</p>
<p>I’m kind of surprised that the University of Chicago doesn’t dominate this list. I thought all the future budding economists went there to get away from professionalism. :D</p>
<p>I’m under the impression that at the University of Chicago many of the more pre-professional students major in economics and those more concerned with the “life of the mind” choose other majors although of course I imagine there are a number of econ majors there who want to go the grad school.</p>