2010 Vs. 2009 admission competitiveness

[clovus]

We all know 2009 was a very competitive year for admissions. Do you think 2010 will be even more competitive, flat, or less competitive?
I believe it will be less competitive. Here are my reasons.

1. The economy is getting better. For the 2009 season, the economy was in a downward spiral. It scared people into the safety of grad school.
2. 2009 was a huge year for applicants. I think the poor economy (people being laid-off and poor job prospects for people new on the job market) caused a number of people that were on the fence to apply due to a lack of other options. I think 2009 dried up the potential applicant pool to some extent.
3. A Ph.D. takes 4-5 years to complete. Unless this is something you really want to do, job prospects in the “real” world will improve much before 4-5 years pass.

[hispano_phd]

Hi:

IMO, it might be too early to know for sure how 2010 will compare with 2009. Probably by February using TM activity as metric some infereneces could be made. Also, maybe by that time some admission stats could be available...

Nice point.

[rupantor]

I think that the year-to-year deviation in competitiveness does not play any significant role in improving admission chances. There are always more qualified candidates than the number of enrollment slots. So even though number of applications may increase or decrease, but the characteristics of the admitted student profile remains fairly stable.

[clovus]

In most of the programs I am looking at, average GMAT scores jumped 20-ish points from 2008 to 2009. Granted, my schools are in the 30-70 range, not top 20. I think more people in the pool increases the competitiveness to some extent.

[possible_phd]

Correlation is not causality, and a one year fluctuation in average score means very little.

[clovus]

I would agree that some flux is more or less meaningless, but when you see the same thing across many schools, it becomes harder to ignore. Besides, I am fairly sure there is a long term trend here (grad school in general), a poor economy is generally paird with more applications. There is less oppertunity cost.

[possible_phd]

"More applicants" doesn't necessarily mean "more competition," because the quality distribution in the "would have applied regardless of the economy" pool and the "help me escape this economy!" pool are not identical; most people running from an economy will not be competitive for admission. None of the admits in my school from any field were casualties of the economy, and none of the other admits I met at other schools were, either (all top 10 schools).

The trend has been for stronger profiles over time, and there is not enough data to draw any sort of conclusion with regard to impacts from the economy, as far as I know.