Abstract
Cost-benefit analysis may be used as a heuristic framework for rationalizing the often confused thinking surrounding academic planning at the multicampus system and governmental levels. To illustrate the utility of this approach and to contrast it with prevailing approaches to academic program review and analysis, it is applied to the issue of the appropriate number, size and location of doctoral programs at the nine-campus University of California.
The analysis indicates (though the evidence can only be summarized here) that, at the margin, some important benefits of doctoral programs have generally been understated. At the same time marginal costs with respect to doctoral enrollments (and thus potential savings from enrollment reductions) have tended to be exaggerated by higher education policymakers in recent years. Further, it is argued that, if funding criteria are properly designed, under current circumstances program and enrollment decisions can safely be left in the hands of the institutions without sacrificing accountability, thus preserving the advantages associated with managerial and political autonomy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Astin, A., King, M.R. and Richardson, G. T. (1970–1981). The American Freshmen: National Norms for Fall 19XX. Los Angeles: Graduate School of Education, University of California, Los Angeles.
Balderston, F. E. (1974a). “Difficulties in cost analysis of graduate education,” in National Board on Graduate Education, Federal Policy Alternatives Toward Graduate Education. NBGE Report No. 3, Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Balderston, F. E. (1974b). Managing Today's University. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Barak, R. J. and Berdahl, R. O. (1978). State-Level Academic Program Review in Higher Education. Denver: Education Commission of the States.
Beachy, D. (1980). “France chops graduate programs, despite opposition from presidents,” The Chronicle of Higher Education (6, October): 21.
Becker, G. S. (1975). Human Capital. 2nd edition. New York: Columbia University Press.
Blackburn, R. T. and Lingenfelter, P. E. (1973). Assessing Quality in Doctoral Programs: Criteria and Correlates of Excellence. Ann Arbor: Center for the Study of Higher Education, University of Michigan.
Bowen, H. R. (1973). “Manpower management and higher education,” Educational Record 54 (Winter): 1.
Braddock, D. (1978). “The oversupply of PhD's to continue through 1985,” Monthly Labor Review (October): 48–50.
Breneman, D. W. (1975). Graduate School Adjustments to the “New Depression” in Higher Education. National Board on Graduate Education Technical Report No. 3. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Cartter, A. M. (1966). An Assessment of Quality in Graduate Education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
Cartter, A. M. (1976). PhDs and the Academic Labor Market. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dolan, W. P. (1976). The Ranking Game: The Power of the Academic Elite. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Dresch, S. P. (1974). An Economic Perspective on the Evolution of Graduate Education. National Board on Graduate Education, Technical Report No. 1. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Dressel, P. A., ed. (1980). The Autonomy of Public Colleges. New Directions for Institutional Research series, No. 26. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
European Research Foundation (1981). Employment Prospects and Mobility of Scientists in Europe. Strasbourg, France.
Fogel, W. W. and Mitchell, D. J. B. (1974). “Higher education decision making and the labor market,” in M. S. Gordon (ed.), Higher Education and the Labor Market. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Freeman, R. B. (1975). “Supply and salary adjustments to the changing science manpower market: physics, 1947–73,” American Economic Review 65 (1, March): 27–39.
Freeman, R. B. (1980). “Employment Opportunities in the Doctorate Manpower Market,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 33 (2, January): 185–197.
Glenny, L. A. and Dalglish, T. K. (1973). Public Universities, State Agencies and the Law: Constitutional Autonomy in Decline. Berkeley: Center for Research and Development in Higher Education.
Hansen, W. L. et al. (1980). “Forecasting the market for new PhD economists,” American Economic Review 70 (1, March).
Hernandez, D. J. (1979). “A review of projections of demand for PhD scientists and engineers,” in National Research Council; Committee on Continuity in Academic Research Performance, Research Excellence Through the Year 2000. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Kidd, C. V. (1981). “New academic positions: the outlook in Europe and North America,” Science (17, April): 293-298.
National Research Council (1967–81). Summary Report: 19XX Doctorate Recipients from United States Universities. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
National Research Council (1980). Science, Engineering, and Humanities Doctorates in the United States: 1979 Profile. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Neave, G. (1980). “French universities face cuts,” The Times Higher Education Supplement (9, September).
Niskanen, W. (1971). Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
Powel, J. H. Jr. and Lamsom, R. D. (1972). Elements Related to the Determinants of Costs and Benefits of Graduate Education. Washington, DC: The Council of Graduate Schools.
Premfors, Rune (1980). “How much higher education is enough? A comparison of public policy in France, Sweden and the United Kingdom,” Comparative Education Review (October): 302–322.
Radner, R. and Kuh, C. (1978). Preserving a Lost Generation: Policies to Assure a Steady Flow of Young Scholars Until the Year 2000. A Report to the Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education. Berkeley: The Council.
Roose, K. D. and Anderson, C. J. (1970). A Rating of Graduate Programs. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
Scaff, A. H. and Staley, S. C. (1972). “A graduate program's impact on the state's economy,” Educational Record 53 (4, Fall).
Schultz, T. W. (1971). Investment in Human Capital: The Role of Education and Research. New York: The Free Press.
Smith, B. L. R. and Karlesky, J. J. (1977). The State of Academic Science: The Universities in the Nation's Research Effort. New Rochelle, NY: Change Magazine Press.
Solmon, L. C. (1980). Economics. 3rd edition. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Solmon, L. C. (1981). Why Only a Master's Degree: Its Meaning in a Time of Retrenchment. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute.
Thompson, F. and Fiske, G. A. (1978). “One more solution to the problem of higher education finance,” Policy Analysis 4 (4, Fall): 577–580.
Thompson, F. and Zumeta, W. (1981). “Control and controls: a reexamination of control patterns in budget execution,” Policy Sciences 13: 25–50.
Thompson, F. and Zumeta, W. (1981b). “A regulatory model of governmental coordinating activities in the higher education sector,” Economics of Education Review 1(1): 27–52.
Trow, M. (1975). “The public and private lives of higher education,” Daedalus (Winter): 113-127.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (1975). PhD Manpower: Employment Demand and Supply, 1972–85. Washington, DC: GPO.
U.S. National Science Foundation (1975). Projections of Science and Engineering Doctorate Supply and Utilization: 1980 and 1985. Washington, DC: GPO.
U.S. National Science Foundation (1979a). Academic Science: Graduate Enrollment and Support, Fall 1979. Detailed Statistical Tables. Washington, DC: GPO.
U.S. National Science Foundation (1979b). Projections of Science and Engineering Doctorate Supply and Utilization, 1982 and 1987. Washington, DC: GPO.
Vaughan, T. and Sjoberg, G. (1972). “The politics of projection: a critique of Cartter's analysis,” Science (14, July).
Zumeta, W. (1978). The State and Doctoral Programs at the University of California: Academic Planning for an Uncertain Future. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International.
Zumeta, W. (1981). The Changing Role of Postdoctoral Education in American Universities: A Progress Report. Berkeley: Center for Studies in Higher Education Occasional Paper #15, University of California, Berkeley.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The author wishes to thank Fred Thompson for helpful comments on this paper, and Thompson and Martin Trow for invaluable advice during the conduct of the study on which it is based.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zumeta, W. Doctoral programs and the labor market, or how should we respond to the “PhD glut”?. High Educ 11, 321–343 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00155622
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00155622