Out of curiosity sparked by the posts regarding the state of history in
universities, I asked a historian friend and this is what he said:
 
"As for Ph.D. market, it is a mixed bag-  number graduates being
produced is down, number of old professors dying off way up, but the
real problem is that fewer students are taking history courses and most
schools like ours require little or in some cases no history as part of
their core requirements.  The odd dilemma is that the elite doctoral
programs are still turning out graduates but community colleges,
second-rate state universities and third rate private colleges are often
afraid to hire from the Ivies because these graduates are unable to
relate to the student body in "working class" institutions effectively.
So, overall it is a mixed bag, but the real question for someone in
graduate school is what is your field of specialization.  The culture
wars produced a glut of people interested in things like gender history,
African-American Studies, "cultural history" etc. and only the bigger
universities have enough students to hire these.  Keep in mind that
fashionable trends change quickly. So, if someone you know is
considering a graduate program in history, my recommendation would be,
go for it but don't specialize in something that may not be as popular
5-10 years from now as it is today."
 
The popular courses sound suspiciously like what we might consider
heterodoxy.  I also feel that the enrollment of economics majors is
supported by those interested in finance.  Here is a link from Inside
Higher Ed (2005) which described a growing enrollment at the time:
 
http://www.insidehighered.com/layout/set/print/news/2005/07/18/econ
 
Sumitra Shah