Is it near impossible to get into phd without masters or RA?

[drmarchjune]

Hi, I'm a rising junior in undergrad majoring in math and economics. My GPA is 3.9/4, getting As in math/econ courses. My concern is that whether this would not be enough for top20 phd programs. Is working as an RA for 2 years or getting a masters degree a necessity for top programs?

[jrdonsimoni]

Hi,

To answer your question, albeit slightly differently from what you ask, the only absolutely rigid requirements are that you ace Maths classes (Linear Algebra, Real Analysis, ODE, PDE, Mutlivariate calculus), ace the GRE (+167 in Q) and have great LORs from profs who are both familiar with your work/potential for research and can compare you to other high achieving individuals (either other people in your school who went to good schools or people they have worked with/taught in their life who went to good schools).

Now more to your actual point, you can see in the Profiles & Results threads that some people make it to top 10/20 schools with a fairly "light" background, i.e. just coursework & thesis, no RA nor TA nor masters, but those people are pretty rare, and often have very strong profiles otherwise. Profiles & Results: 2012 (Profiles and Results 2012), 2011 (Profiles and Results 2011), 2010 (Profiles and Results 2010), 2009 (Profiles and Results 2009), 2008 (Profiles and Results 2008) & 2007 (Profiles and Results 2007).

I think one piece of advice that was often given to students on this forum was to take advanced classes, i.e. grad-level classes, if you can. Either at your college or at a college nearby, to prove that you can handle graduate econ/math. A masters degree will only help, I think, if it comes from a system known to have masters that prepare you for further graduate studies: e.g. Canada, the UK, Duke, Tufts or Stony Brook (apparently). While the UK is far away, and Duke/Tufts offer limited funding, most top Canadian schools who offer MA's offer funding (Toronto Doctoral Stream MA, Queen's MA, UBC's MA) and are just on the other side of the border.

RAing seems to me like a great way to both check if you really do want to go into research in economics, and a great way to obtain great LORs. You'll be working with someone who will know your work ethic, aptitudes, capacity for innovative research (or at least generating ideas), and so on and so forth.

Now, if you do keep up your very good GPA, ace the GRE, get a masters degree from one of the universities above and are a very diligent and effective RA, I don't see what could stop you. You'll find plenty of information here. This particular thread is very useful: FAQ for Grad Students (FAQs about Graduate School in Economics and Links to Useful Threads).

To answer you in short (^^): No it's not impossible, but it would substantially enhance your application, provided you do well in either or both.

[mathemagician]

Nope, absolutely not - take a look at the profile and results threads. There are plenty of students (myself included) without a masters or RA experience in top 20 programs - though most of the students came from top private, public, or liberal arts schools and took very advanced courses. You have to post a full profile though for us to properly evaluate you.

[chateauheart]

I've known people outside of top 50 colleges (in the U.S.) who got into top 5 without RA or Master's. They were extremely talented relative to their former peers, of course. But it's doable.

[OneArmedEcon]

I would wager that a majority of domestic students that enter PhD Econ programs do not have a Masters when they apply.

If you want to spend money to enhance your chances at a Top 20 programs, then you might want to consider transferring to a more prestigious school that has a well regarded econ program (this will allow you to likely get better LORs). While a 3.90 GPA is obviously quite good, what matters more is the context in which those grades were earned.

Doing that isn't necessary or sufficient, but it's probably a better use of $50k or whatever than doing a Masters given that you have strong grades and what sounds like sufficient math background.

[jrdonsimoni]

Sounds like smart advice. The US system really flexible, as a European, I sometimes wish our systems were like that

[drmarchjune]

To tell you about my profile briefly, I'm a rising junior in a private university with top 10 econ dept. Classes I took so far are pretty basic courses in math (Calc, Linear Algebra, Differential Equation) and introductory theory courses in economics(micro/macro/metrics). I'm planning to take advanced econ theory courses along with analysis next school year. I'm also planning to do econ TA starting next year. I have not done any research so far (which seems to be a problem for me)

[chateauheart]

"A private university with a top 10 econ dept" ought to be a pretty tough place, and a 3.9+ GPA in math and econ is a great signal which should be sufficient for top 10 or perhaps even top 5.

Unless it's NYU (no offense), which is the only top 10 econ I can think of that is outside of top 30 for undergraduate selectivity. But even then you can signal your ability sufficiently through taking their graduate courses.

I'd say that very few people with opportunities as good as yours need to take a master's degree. You just need to make full use of those opportunities.

[yiisheng]

If you are serious about econ phd, I would suggest you take the analysis sequence and prob sequence math to whatever level you can handle. In terms of econ, you can skip the undergrad field classes and go ahead to take grad level ones. You biggest problem is that you are only 2 years left and are still lack of math and econ (which also means it's hard for you to impress the profs).