Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 November 2022
We are hearing a great deal these days about a declining marketplace for our Ph.D.s. The evidence collected by the American Political Science Association and many of its sister disciplines is clear: The number of academic jobs is declining. Yet, despite reductions in graduate enrollments, the more than 110 departments of political science which grant doctorates produced over 765 Ph.D.s in 1974.
What might be done to solve the problem of this imbalance? One proposal recommends dismantling many of our doctoral programs. I have mixed feelings about this. The argument that only the most distinguished departments should continue to grant Ph.D.s, because only they produce a marketable product, is fallacious. In my experience, the most distinguished departments have no better record in placing their doctorates than those which are less distinguished. I have been involved personally in program reviews at a number of institutions of various prestige levels, and I have found that some of the “so-called” marginal programs do extremely well in placement.
This paper is a revision of remarks made at a workshop on professionalism at the Southern Political Science Association meeting, November 6, 1976. The views expressed are those of the author but reflect much of the deliberations at recent meetings of the Committee on Departmental Services.
