Why can some programs offer better funding than others?

[psych0000]

Hi all,

What are some factors that determine how well a program is able to fund their graduate students? I am curious about the variability among those PhD programs that do offer partial or full funding (not the the variability between those that are for-profit professional and those that are not -- I understand that.)

I'm sure a large (if not the largest?) factor is the grant funding that the professors bring into the program. More grants = more RA opportunities = better student funding. But what else? Are other things a factor?

I will likely accept an offer this year from a program that offers partial funding and it would give me some peace of mind to have a better understanding of what keeps schools from being able to offer better packages. I'm using the term "packages" because I understand that talking just in terms of dollars is confusing because of different tuition, city of costs of livings, etc.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

Funding provided from grants is a very separate issue from funding provided through TA-ships.

TA funding is divvied up by the university administration to each department and then within each department among the separate programs. This process is different in each university. I would say, generally its based on how much money the department brings back to the university and the goals of universities. I have seen how TA-ships are allocated in 3 very different, research-focused universities.

1. An R1, large Midwest university: the department as a whole were allocated a very fair amount of TA-ships a year with some wiggle room. Nothing is guaranteed but students were 95% likely to feel safe having academic year funding for 5 years. The university's goals were to encourage their faculty to not spend too much time on teaching and to write more grants. Thus, TAs are a low cost workforce. IMO, this would allow the university to become even more well known.

2. A big name, large city university. Very limited TAs and no tuition reimbursement. Only students in the program already, after a few years, had an opportunity to teach. The school does not have a large undergrad population and faculty were expected to bring in large grants and have RA-ships. Few lucky people got a chance to teach.

3. Top tier coastal, public research university. TAs are somewhat limited/available. Faculty are expected to only accept a student if they can pay the tuition and provide an RA-ship for that student in the first year. After the 1st year, only those student's who's faculty advisor could no longer provide the tuition and RA-ship would be allowed to TA. This of course becomes a sensitive balance. This university has a very large undergrad population but, IMO, the university is more concerned about not letting faculty slack and keeping up the pressure for them to keep writing grants.

Some of my experiences. But, again, it depends on the university and revolves around what the administration is trying to accomplish in concert with the department's popularity.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I would agree with DynamicDydactic's post in that it's likely to be very university-specific, both in terms of the number and amounts of stipends provided to each department, and the university's willingness/ability to let departments offer tuition remissions. Other factors may include the popularity of the department (psychology is usually at or close to the top at programs with large numbers of undergrads), how much money the department is bringing in to the school (as DynamicDydactic said), the size of the department, and other factors that I'm sure those working in academia know much better than do I.

I attended a large, public R1 in the southeast, and funding w/tuition remission was guaranteed to each student for 5 years (with, to my knowledge, all those staying longer than 5 years being able to secure it as well). The amount provided varied depending on the actual funding source--TA-ships (funded by the university) paid the least but were widely available, external practica paid a bit more (usually funded by training grants) and were generally where more advanced students obtained their stipend, and RA-ships may have paid a bit more than that (funded by individual faculty grants).

 

[WisNeuro]

My experience is almost identical to AA's, besides location. R1 in the Midwest, 5 years guaranteed funding, had an occasional student go an extra year or two with no problem securing Ta-ships and stipends. We also did very well at securing grad fellowships, and several faculty had large grants for RA-ships. I mainly TA'd and did some outside clinical testing work for a good deal of side money.