Deferring enrollment for a year at Brown?

[rand]

A friend of mine in the department told me that 21 offers were accepted. Their target was 12 and they are having problems with funding. My fear is that they will try to make the core exams harder and force some students to leave the program after first year. It happened a few years ago. Do you think I should consider deferring enrollment for a year? Any suggestions will be appreciated!

[econdoc]

Have they provided any subtle signals to incentivize it? I think if they have not directly provided the information that they have indeed 21 accepted offers this time, they want to keep you. But it is a very interesting question and others might differ. Also remember, your funding decision will have to be made all over again.

[Lacxa]

A friend of mine in the department told me that 21 offers were accepted. Their target was 12 and they are having problems with funding. My fear is that they will try to make the core exams harder and force some students to leave the program after first year. It happened a few years ago. Do you think I should consider deferring enrollment for a year? Any suggestions will be appreciated!

are you Patrick?

 

this is not a suggestion, indeed I will follow this post...but am not likely to ask for a defferral

[blackandwhite]

A friend of mine in the department told me that 21 offers were accepted. Their target was 12 and they are having problems with funding. My fear is that they will try to make the core exams harder and force some students to leave the program after first year. It happened a few years ago. Do you think I should consider deferring enrollment for a year? Any suggestions will be appreciated!

 

It really depends on the case by case. If you do not think you are fully prepared this year. It is not a bad idea to defer your offer for one year and prepare yourself for the next year. Also, it depends on how you spend your gap year. If you have good job or at least earn some money, it may be better to wait for next year. Since they oversold their admissions tickets this year, they will definitely weed out someone and they will have smaller entering class size next year which means a less competitive environment. Also, you may ask for more funding if they do ask someone to defer voluntarily. All in all, this decision is totally based on your life status right now, your knowledge preparation status and your expectation for the next year.

[IMB8000]

I maybe naive here, but why not ask brown directly?

 

I feel like they can easily tell you if the size of the incoming class will be a problem for them and if they consider giving you a deferral. They have no reason to lie as your decision can help them out.

 

I like the idea of a deferral year if you have something to do during this year (work, take extra class, prepare more, whatever) and feel you aren't the strongest of candidate (not the normal, pre phd anxiety and self doubt). However, if you know that you wont do anything productive with this year off, then my advice is just to start now.

[tm_member]

I have to say "no." The opportunity cost of deferring for a year is, in my opinion, not worth it. If you have a contract that gives you funding at a great school only real doubt about whether you want to do this at all would make me recommend deferral. I'll try to lay this out as clearly as I can

 

1. Brown has no reason to shoot themselves in the foot. If there are X students who are good enough in that 21, then those X will be kept. Remember, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Therefore, by transitivity, surely worth well more than one in the bush. (That is, no reason to get rid of a capable student to admit an unknown).

 

2. That brings me to my core point, the effects of a large class will ripple out significantly into the other years. In fact, maybe moreso if the cohort is good. Being one year behind that class will be little different to being in that class when it comes to its effect on funding.

 

3. You risk getting an unfunded offer next year. That is common when you defer but may not be the case at Brown. However, I guess it is.

 

4. My intuition will be that next year's cohort will be very small which may not be a good thing. Peers matter, friends matter, there is a sweet spot for PhD econ class size, I personally think it is 15-16. You may not want to be in a smaller cohort.

 

Overall, deferring costs you a year of research, a year of future high wages, risks losing the funding you have been offered, and would place you adjacent to the large class (which may be even more affected). This would be done just to give you a tiny chance to be the same fish in a smaller pond right next to the large pond. Deferring makes no sense to me.

Edited April 23, 2015 by tm_member

[econ girl]

Darn, I was going to apply to Brown for the next cycle. If you don't mind me asking, are you confident in your source telling you that this year's cohort is large?

[ColonelForbin]

tm_member. You've killed it with that answer.

[rand]

23+2 deferred last year + 1 with Indian government scholarship

Way too crowded.

 

Darn, I was going to apply to Brown for the next cycle. If you don't mind me asking, are you confident in your source telling you that this year's cohort is large?

[fantinity]

This is horrible. 26 people is actually more than UCSD got (and they were targeting 25).

 

While tm_member's argument probably works for admitting 10 students instead of 6, I would argue, that here it doesn't. 26 people is more than 2x their target, and I don't think they will be able to fund x worthy candidates in later years if x -> 26. In other words, I think they might try to 'get rid' of average people, who would have made it any other year (harder prelims or tougher grading). Even if they don't, the thought that they might would kill my motivation, I think.

 

I have a semi-relevant anecdotal experience from undergrad: the school admitted around 100 people, although it was targeting 40 (they got the funds from the government somehow). Out of those, a usual number of ~30 graduated. The quality of graduates was better than usual, but then again, 70 people didn't graduate, and not because the school was trying to get rid of them, but just because the standards rose.

[ColonelForbin]

Why wouldn't they adjust by letting in a few smaller classes in later years?

[arrm]

This is horrible. 26 people is actually more than UCSD got (and they were targeting 25).

 

While tm_member's argument probably works for admitting 10 students instead of 6, I would argue, that here it doesn't. 26 people is more than 2x their target, and I don't think they will be able to fund x worthy candidates in later years if x -> 26. In other words, I think they might try to 'get rid' of average people, who would have made it any other year (harder prelims or tougher grading). Even if they don't, the thought that they might would kill my motivation, I think.

 

I have a semi-relevant anecdotal experience from undergrad: the school admitted around 100 people, although it was targeting 40 (they got the funds from the government somehow). Out of those, a usual number of ~30 graduated. The quality of graduates was better than usual, but then again, 70 people didn't graduate, and not because the school was trying to get rid of them, but just because the standards rose.

 

I don't think deferring helps though. As has been stated, being the year behind a huge class is just as bad as being in the huge class. The funding and faculty limitations are going to be just as persistent.

 

In some ways it could be even worse to be behind them. Imagine trying to get time with faculty in a couple years when they're all already swamped with advising the class before you.

[IMB8000]

I don't think deferring helps though. As has been stated, being the year behind a huge class is just as bad as being in the huge class. The funding and faculty limitations are going to be just as persistent.

 

In some ways it could be even worse to be behind them. Imagine trying to get time with faculty in a couple years when they're all already swamped with advising the class before you.

 

If the assumption is that they'll make it their mission to reduce the class size this year, then by the time he will need faculty interaction, this years class size would already be greatly reduced, no?

tm does make great points about what it means to defer and what the opportunity costs are. But I tend to agree with Fantinity that he shouldn't completely rule out a deferral, as 26 is a lot of people specially as Brown is normally a very small program. I would again recommend talking to brown and seeing where they are at, and see what it means to defer. and what are your alternatives for this gap year?

[ccfinance]

Considering Brown is a very small department, I find it hard to believe that Brown would be able to provide funding for all these students in their second year. They may already go into "debt" by providing funding for their first year. To balance the budget, they will probably raise up the standard for passing the prelims and force some of them to leave the program by the end of first year. It would be sad for those who could have passed the prelims in the previous years with a smaller cohort. It would be life-changing for many, especially for foreign students.

[tm_member]

Ah, I see the disconnect here. All of my advice was if the student had a funded offer. I think some of you are unaware of what that really means. Just to remind you, a funded offer is a commitment from the graduate school/university (not the department) that will be honored if the student gets above a 3.0 and passes prelims and comps. The department will not weed out students based on funding, the university (again, not the department) is on the hook for that. They allowed the department to send out that many funded spots. If you need me to explain this further, I will.

 

They will only weed out on ability, and as I said, a bird in the hand is worth at least one in the bush.

 

The problem is the next few years - the department will be allowed to make fewer funded admissions next year and the year after to balance the university's (again, not the department's) Econ Graduate Program budget line item.

Edited April 24, 2015 by tm_member

[arrm]

Ah, I see the disconnect here. All of my advice was if the student had a funded offer. I think some of you are unaware of what that really means. Just to remind you, a funded offer is a commitment from the graduate school/university (not the department) that will be honored if the student gets above a 3.0 and passes prelims and comps. The department will not weed out students based on funding, the university (again, not the department) is on the hook for that. They allowed the department to send out that many funded spots. If you need me to explain this further, I will.

 

They will only weed out on ability, and as I said, a bird in the hand is worth at least one in the bush.

 

The problem is the next few years - the department will be allowed to make fewer funded admissions next year and the year after to balance the university's (again, not the department's) Econ Graduate Program budget line item.

 

The issue is that the requirements for passing comps are often not transparent at all. As far as I know, few programs will give you a prior indication of what a passing score entails, and it's very possible that they will adjust the passing benchmarks year-to-year or even determine them after seeing the scores. I have no idea whether Brown does this or not, but it definitely isn't unheard of.

[tm_member]

That doesn't matter, the department decides who gets through and the university is on the hook for the funding. Classic principal-agent problem but that's how they set it up. Brown might just as likely lower the standard if worried they'll have less funded spots in the future.