Attrition Rates

[YoungEconomist]

Is there anyway we could start a thread which has a listing of various schools attrition rates? It seems that this info would be extremely relevant when people are deciding where to attend. I imagine that many people on this board know the attrition rates at a few institutions, and if we could get this information all on one thread, I think many TMers would appreciate it. Hopefully, if we got a good number of schools on there, we could even have a sticky for it, because it seems like just as informative as the Profiles and Results threads. Anyways, it was just a thought, and I'd love to hear feedback on it. If we got a good number of programs, I'd even be willing to put all the information in an excel spreadsheet and post it.

[trjohnson]

Attrition rates are only useful to know if you have like 5 or 10 years of cohort data. Taking rates just a year at a time per school isn't a good idea, because a lot of schools have a lot of variance in their attrition rates as years go by. Besides, you should be going to the school with the best program (on the margin) and not basing your decision on something like an attrition rate. I'm of the opinion that if you're that worried about how many people fail out in a given quartile of rankings, you may want to be aiming for a lower quartile of schools.

[YoungEconomist]

Attrition rates are only useful to know if you have like 5 or 10 years of cohort data. Taking rates just a year at a time per school isn't a good idea, because a lot of schools have a lot of variance in their attrition rates as years go by. Besides, you should be going to the school with the best program (on the margin) and not basing your decision on something like an attrition rate. I'm of the opinion that if you're that worried about how many people fail out in a given quartile of rankings, you may want to be aiming for a lower quartile of schools.

 

I tend to disagree with a lot of this.

 

First, it seems like knowing recent attrition rates is probably better than knowing the last 10 years. I don't care what Wisconsin's attrition rate was 10 years ago, I know it's high in recent years.

 

Second, how can you say that attrition rates don't matter? If MIT failed 75% of those taking the prelims, but somewhere like Minnesota only failed 10%, are you really telling me you'd still go to MIT. I think attrition is a very reasonable thing to be concerned about, and will likely play a role in the offers I accept. Some schools fail about 50% of those that take the prelims, and I would consider that a pretty risky proposition, and I'd definitely be willing to drop down in the rankings a bit if I could go somewhere where it was only 20%.

[GymShorts]

Second, how can you say that attrition rates don't matter? If MIT failed 75% of those taking the prelims, but somewhere like Minnesota only failed 10%, are you really telling me you'd still go to MIT. I think attrition is a very reasonable thing to be concerned about, and will likely play a role in the offers I accept. Some schools fail about 50% of those that take the prelims, and I would consider that a pretty risky proposition, and I'd definitely be willing to drop down in the rankings a bit if I could go somewhere where it was only 20%.

 

I agree. If I was torn between two similar programs, and found out they have greatly different attrition rates, that could be a deal breaker for me. It's valid info.

 

I do think that attrition from a single year may not be a good indicator, but I don't think you need to go back 5-10 years. I think 3-5 would suffice.

[TruDog]

I agree. If I was torn between two similar programs, and found out they have greatly different attrition rates, that could be a deal breaker for me. It's valid info.

 

I do think that attrition from a single year may not be a good indicator, but I don't think you need to go back 5-10 years. I think 3-5 would suffice.

 

I agree completely with GymShorts. Programs (or at least prelim committees) can change considerably in a period of a few years, so attrition rates are generally meaningless after about five years. Likewise, looking at just one year can exhibit extreme variance, so looking at 3-5 years is your best bet.

 

I've said this a couple times before on this forum, but it does seem like Wisconsin's attrition rate is dropping somewhat. There were a few years in the early 2000s during which attrition was almost unreal, but now it's getting to where something closer to 15-20% of all students cannot pass prelims. However, a larger number of students seem to leave the program here before taking prelims (although not in my class). My theory is that Wisconsin takes more chances on students than most other schools, which is great for people like me but also can put people in way over their heads.

 

I'll just keep studying for prelims so I can help bring down that attrition rate. :)

[asianeconomist]

Hey TruDog, is there a correlation between people who fail the comps and those who were not offered funding ?

[TruDog]

Hey TruDog, is there a correlation between people who fail the comps and those who were not offered funding ?

 

It seems like the few students on fellowship tend to do better on prelims, but these are the students who are expected to be the best in the department. Otherwise, those who get TA or research positions really don't seem to do any better on prelims than those not offered funding at all.

[asquare]

When thinking about attrition, it's important to consider attrition at different stages of the PhD program separately. I don't mean to suggest that we can determine who is "to blame" for various types of attrition, but I do think departures at different stages convey different information about the departments.

 

Some people leave during the first year of the PhD, before the first attempt at prelims. IMO, that sort of attrition is entirely personal, either because of some personal issue that came up during the year, or because the student didn't have realistic expectations about the PhD program, or because they just changed their minds about what they want to do. I don't think this type of attrition has much to do with the department at all, and therefore isn't particularly informative for the prospective student choosing one school over another.

 

Other students leave after failing the prelims once, but before being asked to leave. Attrition at this stage is harder to parse out. Students who leave at this stage aren't taking advantage of all of the opportunities afforded to them, but they may feel squeezed or pressured out, or inadequately supported. This is especially true if they are denied funding in conjunction with failing exams.

 

Attrition as a result of failing prelims and being asked to leave is what I think most people have in mind when they ask about attrition. (I'd lump people being asked to leave because of extremely low grades into this category, also, though that's much less common.) There certainly is information about the program in the ultimate pass rate for the prelim exams. However, people who have posted earlier are correct in suggesting that 1) a single year's pass rate may be an outlier and doesn't provide much information and 2) there can be substantial medium-run trends and other policy changes within programs are correct.

 

The last category of attrition I would worry about is attrition among students who have reached candidacy. These students have completed coursework and exams, but for some reason don't succeed in receiving their PhDs. This can (though doesn't necessarily) suggest that the department doesn't provide adequate support throughout the research process, that advisors are in short supply, that funding for upper year students is scarce, or that there is a poor environment in the department. Of course, some students don't finish for reasons entirely of their own -- they decide that while they were good at course work, they don't like research, or "life" happens and they need to relocate, earn money, or devote time to their families.

 

I'd encourage you to ask departments about attrition at various stages of the program. Ask about what the department views as its role in reducing each type of attrition (or if the department even thinks it needs to be reduced), and how the department supports students in each stage of the program. Consider your own strengths and weaknesses -- a student with a strong math background and excellent test taking skills, but no research experience or who knows him/herself to be undisciplined, might worry more about a program that has a low completion rate among students who achieve candidacy than about a program with a low prelim pass rate. The opposite might be true for a student who is worried about the course work, but has substantial work and research experience and is more confident about that stage of the program.

 

In general, you want to think beyond the first year of the program. The prelims seem like a huge deal until they are over, and then they are completely irrelevant...

 

(PS. Good luck to those of you studying now!)

[YoungEconomist]

When thinking about attrition, it's important to consider attrition at different stages of the PhD program separately. I don't mean to suggest that we can determine who is "to blame" for various types of attrition, but I do think departures at different stages convey different information about the departments.

 

I totally agree. I'm most worried about the % of people who do not pass prelims and are asked/told to leave. IMHO, I believe this is the most telling. Those that drop out during the first year are probably unprepared, don't like graduate econ, personal issues, life happens, etc. However, it's disheartening to know that various bright, hard working students, that work hard during the first year, and learn a lot will be asked to leave because of the prelims.

[asianeconomist]

 

The last category of attrition I would worry about is attrition among students who have reached candidacy. These students have completed coursework and exams, but for some reason don't succeed in receiving their PhDs. This can (though doesn't necessarily) suggest that the department doesn't provide adequate support throughout the research process, that advisors are in short supply, that funding for upper year students is scarce, or that there is a poor environment in the department. Of course, some students don't finish for reasons entirely of their own -- they decide that while they were good at course work, they don't like research, or "life" happens and they need to relocate, earn money, or devote time to their families.

 

Thanks a lot for the useful post.

 

I would have thought that this type of attrition would be extremely rare, or is it not ?

[asquare]

I would have thought that this type of attrition would be extremely rare, or is it not ?

 

Attrition after reaching candidacy is not rare. In fact, I would guess that in a reasonable number of programs, more students leave after passing their prelims (or just never complete the PhD) than fail out because of the prelims. I don't have exact numbers, but my impression is that is the case for some years at U-Mich. (That said, I think U-Mich does an excellent job of mentoring students through the research process, especially in the applied micro fields -- labor, PF, development).

 

The PhD is less than halfway done when you pass the micro and macro exams. Those exams are big and real hurdles and I'm not trying to diminish the importance or accomplishment of passing them. However, the most important part of the PhD program is research. Research is also less defined, less structured, and less similar to what most students have experience with. There's no "formula" for getting it right. To me, it's not a surprise that the research is at least as great a hurdle as the course work.

 

Just as schools can't be held accountable for every student who fails prelims, they can't be held accountable for every student who does not complete a dissertation despite passing prelims. However, I think patterns of non completion amongst candidates are as telling as prelim fail rates, and worth considering when choosing between otherwise similar schools.

[mosfro]

i must add that there were losers like me who could not hold down the gpa requirement and were asked to leave before being able to attempt the prelims

... i must add, that I think I am the only one I've ever heard of this happening to...mainly because normally, if a student was strugglin in the first few weeks of the first semester because he was lacking multiv. calculus, he would probably have realized that he was underprepared and would have voluntarily left the program before wasting his time

 

I also think that many phd students who leave before the Phd degree, or defense of a dissertation may be in programs that are lower on the rankings, mainly because if they were to land some corporate gig after the degree, the corps / private companies dont care too much about the dissertation. They sometimes only care that you have the tools necessary to do so.

[YoungEconomist]

the corps / private companies dont care too much about the dissertation. They sometimes only care that you have the tools necessary to do so.

 

I agree that they would only care about you having the tools to complete a dissertation, rather than the dissertation itself. However, they can't really know if you possess those skills unless you complete a dissertation. As asquare already pointed out, some people pass prelims and then struggle writing a dissertation.

[Karina 07]

Thanks a lot for the useful post.

 

I would have thought that this type of attrition would be extremely rare, or is it not ?

 

Definitely not rare. Quite possibly larger than attrition in the first two years. Think about it, isn't it usually said that something like 60-70% of those who start an econ Ph.D. program complete it? (I remember seeing that around the web and on TM.) If 10% drop out during the first year or two, the rest of that has to come from those who drop out later; even if it's 20% who drop out in the first year for whatever reason, it could be 20:20. I would think that in the majority of programs the bulk of the overall attrition comes from people who just leave for personal reasons. There are a lot of people who don't realize what research is all about and are perfectly happy aceing classes when all of a sudden research hits them like a brick wall.

[GymShorts]

I wonder if some plan to drop out after 2 years so they can earn a funded masters degree, rather than pay a lot of money to a terminal masters program.

[bertthepuppy]

This may be a stretch but the prof. I was an RA for once told me that some foreigners start econ Ph.D.s in the U.S. because they want to have children that are U.S. citizens. They are smart and talented enough to complete the Ph.D., but they don't desire it. I was surprised by this hypothesis, but it could be true.

[GymShorts]

This may be a stretch but the prof. I was an RA for once told me that some foreigners start econ Ph.D.s in the U.S. because they want to have children that are U.S. citizens. They are smart and talented enough to complete the Ph.D., but they don't desire it. I was surprised by this hypothesis, but it could be true.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if that was a major reason for some. One of my professor says he got his PhD so he wouldn't have to return to his home country, where there was a war at the time, because he knew he would've been drafted.

[YoungEconomist]

I wonder if some plan to drop out after 2 years so they can earn a funded masters degree, rather than pay a lot of money to a terminal masters program.

 

I guarantee some people do this. I would imagine the number is probably not that high though, because of the competitiveness of getting funded offers at Econ PhD programs (not to mention the rigour of the core classes). A chemistry teacher at my community college did exactly this, that is, she entered a chemistry PhD program intending to leave with the masters degree. If I only wanted a masters in econ, I'd probably do this. One reason would be to save money. The second and more important reason is that I believe the rigour would come in handy in the job market (especially the econometrics background).

[asianeconomist]

This may be a stretch but the prof. I was an RA for once told me that some foreigners start econ Ph.D.s in the U.S. because they want to have children that are U.S. citizens. They are smart and talented enough to complete the Ph.D., but they don't desire it. I was surprised by this hypothesis, but it could be true.

 

This sounds pretty weird from a north-american context I guess, but I actually know at least one teacher of mine who had similar plans.

[spork88]

If MIT failed 75% of those taking the prelims, but somewhere like Minnesota only failed 10%, are you really telling me you'd still go to MIT. I think attrition is a very reasonable thing to be concerned about, and will likely play a role in the offers I accept. Some schools fail about 50% of those that take the prelims, and I would consider that a pretty risky proposition, and I'd definitely be willing to drop down in the rankings a bit if I could go somewhere where it was only 20%.

 

I think you're right. I read a post on another forum from a 3rd or 4th year grad student (at Wisconsin maybe) who said he would have gone somewhere else if he had known about the attrition rate.

[argmax]

This may be a stretch but the prof. I was an RA for once told me that some foreigners start econ Ph.D.s in the U.S. because they want to have children that are U.S. citizens. They are smart and talented enough to complete the Ph.D., but they don't desire it. I was surprised by this hypothesis, but it could be true.

 

I am surprised as you, but i still think these kind of people are the very rare. I have never heard of anything like this before, so i think the effect of these people in attrition is very little to be considered.

 

I also think that the importance one gives to attrition is very much related with self-confidence. Obviously there is some randomness about the issue but you would still go to MIT over Minnesota (to continue with the example about 75% vs 10% attrition rates) if you are pretty confident you will pass. It is certain that attrition matter in your decision but how much it does is very personal and has a lot to do with self confidence.

[macroeconomicus]

I could concede that a lot of PhD programs at relatively unknown state universities are filled with foreign students who view their PhD course as a necessary stepping stone and possibly a necessary evil on the way of becoming a US citizen. However, if you're smart enough to be admitted into a good US PhD program, there are far easier ways to get into the united states and obtain a good job compared to going through the whole Ph.D. ordeal.

[Lokayot]

Unfortunately, it is not always the case. It is actually easier to enter USA through the education programs for people from a lot of countries.

[kartelite]

there are far easier ways to get into the united states and obtain a good job compared to going through the whole Ph.D. ordeal.

 

Particularly if you're from, say, Cuba.

[Lokayot]

And a lot of Muslim (and developing) countries too.