Hi Polecon, I was reading through the website, and it seems that linear algebra was needed (for the PhD in public policy), which seems to be lacking from your profile. maybe you could consider taking some courses in the summer at a university? courses in analysis and linear algebra will strengthen your profile. The PhD in political economy likely requires both.Originally Posted by PolEcon
.jpg "asianeconomist's Avatar")
First off, I fully agree with Karina07's advice. I really do think that a 3-year PhD in UK will suit you much better than a 5-year US PhD. Also, if you can't get into a good UK university with a LSE degree, then the probability of getting into a good US program with the same profile will be even slimmer.
The 3 optional courses all cover Development from a pretty non-technical perspective. Therefore, although this will give you an overview of the models and theories in the field, I do not think that you'll become proficient enough to become comfortable in using them in an Econ PhD. IMHO, the program at Princeton is known to have more of a quantitative focus among the PP schools and with your quantitative background it might be quite difficult to manage an admit. I don't think 1/2 publications can help you to turn the tide around (unless it's in a blue-ribbon journal), actually Princeton only asks for a writing sample to determine your ability in research.
I also come from a developing country (and worked in the Donor sector) and can completely empathize with the predilection of people/practitioner's towards 'big-name' schools. Under these circumstances, your best bet should be moving on to a PhD @ LSE. Don't worry about the rankings too much. Overall, LSE is among the Top 5 universities in UK/Europe. Since your focus is more on brand-repute, LSE shall fantastically suffice.
Good Luck.
The Pens have been lifted and the Pages have dried. - recorded by At Tirmidhee.
I am not entirely sure. But my sister is in LSE too. I might ask her for more information regarding this.
The Pens have been lifted and the Pages have dried. - recorded by At Tirmidhee.
Just to be gender-wise correct, I made a small correction.
The Pens have been lifted and the Pages have dried. - recorded by At Tirmidhee.
Thanks...well first of all i would be a little optimistic...its not that bad with an LSE degree and probably a good US program can take me in... i give you an example of the civil services in our country from which everyone goes to harvard kennedy school just for a masters in PA... their mathematic skills are zilch and they are going there just because the government is paying harvard the full fee....after the completion they come back and join the government department and serve for 5 years! that is about it...
Yes i know that the optional courses are more of theory and concepts and there is nothing applicative in this...however i have decided not to pursue an econ phd....i think that the best way is to waitThe 3 optional courses all cover Development from a pretty non-technical perspective. Therefore, although this will give you an overview of the models and theories in the field, I do not think that you'll become proficient enough to become comfortable in using them in an Econ PhD. IMHO, the program at Princeton is known to have more of a quantitative focus among the PP schools and with your quantitative background it might be quite difficult to manage an admit. I don't think 1/2 publications can help you to turn the tide around (unless it's in a blue-ribbon journal), actually Princeton only asks for a writing sample to determine your ability in research.and ask the professors at LSE about what they think of future possibilities
Yes to an extent you are right but i will continue exploring other opportunities...there is no harm in that... LSE's ranking is okay...nothing much but still it is manageable...I also come from a developing country (and worked in the Donor sector) and can completely empathize with the predilection of people/practitioner's towards 'big-name' schools. Under these circumstances, your best bet should be moving on to a PhD @ LSE. Don't worry about the rankings too much. Overall, LSE is among the Top 5 universities in UK/Europe. Since your focus is more on brand-repute, LSE shall fantastically suffice.
ThanksGood Luck.
Well he is in cambridge...
Oh Sorry! I didnt know
I was going through Cornell's Applied Economics and i got a profile of their existing student http://aem.cornell.edu/grad/vitae/green_cv.doc who has done an IR Degree for Masters... i am thinking of writing to him and asking about the course requirements...he might have taken quantitative subjects as optionals during his master!!!First off, I fully agree with Karina07's advice. I really do think that a 3-year PhD in UK will suit you much better than a 5-year US PhD. Also, if you can't get into a good UK university with a LSE degree, then the probability of getting into a good US program with the same profile will be even slimmer.
The 3 optional courses all cover Development from a pretty non-technical perspective. Therefore, although this will give you an overview of the models and theories in the field, I do not think that you'll become proficient enough to become comfortable in using them in an Econ PhD. IMHO, the program at Princeton is known to have more of a quantitative focus among the PP schools and with your quantitative background it might be quite difficult to manage an admit. I don't think 1/2 publications can help you to turn the tide around (unless it's in a blue-ribbon journal), actually Princeton only asks for a writing sample to determine your ability in research.
I also come from a developing country (and worked in the Donor sector) and can completely empathize with the predilection of people/practitioner's towards 'big-name' schools. Under these circumstances, your best bet should be moving on to a PhD @ LSE. Don't worry about the rankings too much. Overall, LSE is among the Top 5 universities in UK/Europe. Since your focus is more on brand-repute, LSE shall fantastically suffice.
Good Luck.
What do you think?
I went through the blog and some of the observations were related to the personal experiences of people.... so with a MPA / ID you are bound to add up at a monitoring and evaluation level at a donor agency....or maybe some basic research work (not real time policy analysis)...i have already gone through this phase of M&E working on projects related to devolution and impact assessments etc... but if MPA / ID can guarantee some good foothold in PhD economics like Blattman...i might be willing to take a go at it
Some interesting Comments that i would like to refer to
and another oneFor those that want to work at the World Bank or IADB, the MPA/ID is a ticket unmatched by any other program - and that very much includes economics doctorates at top-ranked programs. It's true that the "brand" is strong at these institutions, but what will ultimately give you a job is the network of faculty and alumni, which is simply amazing.
- If you want a job at the IMF, get an economics doctorate and spend your spare time building a time machine that will take you back to the age when anyone actually had a use for the institution.
- Jobs at the IFC seem to mostly go to those with BAs and consulting / i-banking experience. My sense is that they don't like policy wonks much there.
- The African and Asian Development Banks recruit in strange ways no one I know seems to know much about.
- For NGOs and most UN agencies, my experience informs that personal connections and field experience matter much more than any academic qualification. In fact, for those interested in doing substantive humanitarian work for the rest of their lives, I'd venture to say that most post-bachelors programs (save the mid-career master's) are a complete waste of time and resources.
- For government / donor agencies, the technical rigor of the MPA/ID (and economics master's) may actually be detrimental to one's career prospects. A vanilla master's degree from any "name" public policy institution will suit you fine and, contrary to the MPA/ID, won't set you up for a career of being consistently vexed at the fluffiness of your co-workers.
- Regardless of what anyone wants to do with the rest of one's life, those who can get into top-5 b-schools should not pass up the chance opportunity. Consulting firms will take public policy graduates, but only after they've explained themselves to death.
- The only option for anyone that wants to ask interesting questions and come to serious answers is a Ph.D. All but the most extremely time-efficient do not have the time to embark on serious research endeavors during a master's. Those who think they might be interested in research but just aren't sure should find Ph.D. programs which award master's to those who decide to depart early and stay well clear of policy schools, which wil only waste the time and money of those who decide later they really want to do some serious research.
One of the MPAID Student wrotethe MPA/ID program has misleading marketing and is only a good match for a very small portion of the students that actually go through it. The program is designed for people that:
1) want PhD's that can't (or don't want to) go directly to PhD
2) want to work in academic-like setting of the research parts of IMF or World Bank, a think tank, or research lab (and are fully aware of the fact that most alumni in these roles head back for PhD a couple years later after growing tired of being second class citizen in their groups and facing the prospects of a career as a research assistant).
For the vast majority of people in development careers that are looking for preparation to be future managers and leaders in development world, this is quite a poor match. It is a pre-PhD program and, despite its marketing, it is not an MBA for the development community. This is a shame as I think original idea of program (reflected in its marketing) is great, but I will never understand how they ended up concluding that 20 page calculus problem sets are an efficient, or even relevant, way of teaching development practitioners. Perhaps just another example of what can happen when too many economists and too few people with real world experience are involved in a project?
Something which i already said earlier about brand but is now being emphasized againThe network and training of the MPA/ID enabled me to find a respectable research assistant gig at the WB. As I didn't get into development to spend my career staring at a computer in DC, though, I hoped to make the jump into a more operations-based position after a year or so of research assistance. This was a lot tougher than I thought - operations want people with specialized knowledge, either of a sector or a country. Owing to my inexperience when I entered the MPA/ID and the program's generalized approach, this was something I didn't have. After a couple of years of being told I needed to get a Ph.D. if I wanted to go anywhere in the WB, I finally just relented and went back to get one.
think the MPA/ID, as it currently stands, is probably an excellent choice for those who want to work as RAs at the Bank and probably an even better choice of those who want to work in evaluations of development programs (one of the few areas in the development workplace which combine serious management challenges with serious academic challenges and which is therefore well-suited to the skills the MPA/ID aims to impart). I agree with anonymous, though, that those who can get into a top MPA program and are interested in more entrepreneurial or managerial positions in the development workplace should opt for the MBA. Those who want to work in IFI operations, the UN, or at NGOs are probably best served by getting a job in the field (even as a volunteer) and then saving time and money at LSE's development studies master's.
Chris - thanks for a balanced and interesting posting. It seems little has changed in the syllabus in the last 6 years, but the people taking the class have changed - fewer frustrated PhDs. Many of this year's MPA/ID class are heading for consulting because we don't want to end up as RAs at the Bank (or anywhere else). The only people going into governments or donor agencies are people from developing countries where a Harvard degree is respected - if you're from the US or Europe (like me) it's almost a disqualification for a public service job. I'm still convinced, though, that with the quality of the people who take the program, we'll change that opinion!From the above most of the comments imply that the most you can start with with an MPA / ID is an RA job at WB which i am not inclined to do so...secondly those who had a chance to move upwards within their organizations were told to get a PHD...hence this validates my experience to an extent that without PhD you will be fighting with other PhDs for a senior management position...In my personal experience, the MPA/ID is a good fit for candidates with a sound quantitative background that want to move to a change maker career in development. If your goal is to become a RA, a bureaucrat, the head of a central bank, don't waste your time and get your PhD. To what extent the PhD will provide the necessary skills to do the job is another story, but at least it will send a stronger signal.
Regards
I want to clarify one thing about Harvard's MPAID: The first year of the program is not equivalent for the first year at an econ phd program, even though Blattman finally went for the Phd in economics after the MPAID.
Econ phd students usually take the three M's during their first year, Micro, Macro and Metrics. MPAID students take about two thirds of the first year in the three M's. Those courses are then, despite it's technical rigour, geared towards development policy, neither pure theory nor development economics, as in a fully fledged econ phd program.
What you can do
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks