The difference between an MS in Math and an MS in Statistics before an Economics PhD?

[Econophobe]

I would go that route. I rushed math courses and took them out of sequence. That was a good way to make my life miserable and not get the marks I wanted anyway. Math courses generally don't teach to the bottom, or even middle of the bell curve, so there isn't a lot even a very good student can do to skip ahead if he doesn't have a good base. Someone who really really enjoys and excels at mathematics will inevitably chime in and contradict me, but the overwhelming and unanimous advice among faculty in my math department was to not race ahead (advice they give to their own majors, much less dabblers from other disciplines). I should have listened to them.

Thanks for the advice. I was just trying to figure out how many math courses I can pile on in a semester. I guess I shouldn't rush the process.

[Humanomics]

Thanks for the advice. I was just trying to figure out how many math courses I can pile on in a semester. I guess I shouldn't rush the process.

That depends on your honest evaluation of your own maturity -- just bear in mind that evaluation will be terribly biased by knowing that spending more time in college will make you feel stupid and cost you money, and by the feeling that you need to measure close to the yardstick of math-major profiles on here (a ship that has most likely already sailed -- aim for sufficient math prep and awesomeness in other areas - you're not a homogenous product and you can establish comparative advantage). I have three B's and a W on my math transcript and the *only* thing that's going to make up for that is an A in Real Analysis and Grad Micro I this semester, plus really good letters (and that won't even completely make up for it, as lots of people have A's in topology, measure theory, etc). If you're really good at math, and really really enjoy it -- push the envelope a little. If it's an experience riddled with anxiety, and you're still trying to remember rules of exponents while you do volume of revolution integrals, slow down.

[jz722]

Not quite but nice try though.

I've located a couple of math/statistics MS programs that will allow me in with the math/stat classes that I've already taken. However, those classes are nowhere near the prep I would need to get into a decent Economics PhD program.

Now if anyone has any constructive criticism, I will worship you forever.

Yes Quite

You have not taken Calc 3 OR Linear Algebra, name me ONE Masters in Math program that will take you. And we aint even talking about real analysis, complex analysis, abstract algebra here.

My advice, drop the Masters in Stats/Math hopes, those will be very difficult with the background you have.

Pick up AT LEAST Calc III and Linear Algebra at your local community college/university.

It should be relatively easy to complete Calc III, Linear Algebra, Probability (actual probability, one that requires Calc III), and ODE in one semester. Then if you have the adequate Econ background, go apply for the Econ PhD.
If you REALLY want to do a Stats degree, I would recommend taking at least: Regression analysis, Statistical inference. Any reputable Masters program in Stats will require at least those two courses for their admission. I wouldn't recommend the Stats degree because you're around 5 courses behind (Calc III, Linear Algebra, Probability, Regression, Inference) which would take another 2 semesters and the degree itself will be 1-2 years.

[Econophobe]

That depends on your honest evaluation of your own maturity -- just bear in mind that evaluation will be terribly biased by knowing that spending more time in college will make you feel stupid and cost you money, and by the feeling that you need to measure close to the yardstick of math-major profiles on here (a ship that has most likely already sailed -- aim for sufficient math prep and awesomeness in other areas - you're not a homogenous product and you can establish comparative advantage). I have three B's and a W on my math transcript and the *only* thing that's going to make up for that is an A in Real Analysis and Grad Micro I this semester, plus really good letters (and that won't even completely make up for it, as lots of people have A's in topology, measure theory, etc). If you're really good at math, and really really enjoy it -- push the envelope a little. If it's an experience riddled with anxiety, and you're still trying to remember rules of exponents while you do volume of revolution integrals, slow down.

Will do! Thanks

[Humanomics]

Will do! Thanks

No problem. I'm glad my abysmal decision making can benefit someone else. Ha.

[anonecon]

Linear algebra, calc III, and undergrad real analysis I (you can do this all in one semester if you are ambitious) are probably the three first courses you need to grab for any one of stats, math, or econ masters. From there, you can decide if you want to apply to PhD programs or masters programs (or apply to both and figure it out after you know what your options are).

[Humanomics]

It should be relatively easy to complete Calc III, Linear Algebra, Probability (actual probability, one that requires Calc III), and ODE in one semester.

Easy for whom?

I've know some people that are very good at mathematics, and they don't recommend taking four math courses in one semester (whether one or a few of them are cookbook or not). I took ODE the same semester as Calc III, and got a B in ODE (just kinda said f*ck you when they made us do the heat equation at the end of the semester, and frankly couldn't even read the textbook, much less do the practice problems without a supplementary lecture).

I tried to take three math courses at the same time last semester, and ended up with two B's (granted those were from anxiety and procrastination rather than a lack of ability -- I sloughed -- the attitude among applying cohorts that one must be prodigal in mathematics by 15 years-old, to consider a successful career in economics didn't help my anxiety and procrastination).

For those who had calculus in high-school, or just steady math training to keep algebraic and arithmetic skills up, and decided after taking a UG course or reading enough economics op-ed that they wanted to be an economist, the transition to a mathematics major might be relatively smooth. It's really tough to appreciate what a mountain one has to climb when they haven't used in years or possibly ever learned basic mathematics, and need to quickly train to a minimum of Real Analysis in a year or two. There seem to be a wealth of people who come to this forum in that position.

Given sufficient time and work, anyone can learn to do advanced mathematics. But I think it's misleading, and ultimately destructive, to tell people who have had Calc II or less that a semester of four math courses "should be easy," as that kind of attitude can leave (and has in my case has left) one feeling like he is just not cut out for economics, since he isn't a latent undiscovered mathematical savant. (Granted, OP came asking about a math MA, which might have signaled he is such a savant -- I think it's more likely he's just interested in being an economist and trying to find a way to boost his profile like everyone else here, though)

[jz722]

Easy for whom?

I've know some people that are very good at mathematics, and they don't recommend taking four math courses in one semester (whether one or a few of them are cookbook or not). I took ODE the same semester as Calc III, and got a B in ODE (just kinda said f*ck you when they made us do the heat equation at the end of the semester, and frankly couldn't even read the textbook, much less do the practice problems without a supplementary lecture).

I tried to take three math courses at the same time last semester, and ended up with two B's (granted those were from anxiety and procrastination rather than a lack of ability -- I sloughed -- the attitude among applying cohorts that one must be prodigal in mathematics by 15 years-old, to consider a successful career in economics didn't help my anxiety and procrastination).

For those who had calculus in high-school, or just steady math training to keep algebraic and arithmetic skills up, and decided after taking a UG course or reading enough economics op-ed that they wanted to be an economist, the transition to a mathematics major might be relatively smooth. It's really tough to appreciate what a mountain one has to climb when they haven't used in years or possibly ever learned basic mathematics, and need to quickly train to a minimum of Real Analysis in a year or two. There seem to be a wealth of people who come to this forum in that position.

Given sufficient time and work, anyone can learn to do advanced mathematics. But I think it's misleading, and ultimately destructive, to tell people who have had Calc II or less that a semester of four math courses "should be easy," as that kind of attitude can leave (and has in my case has left) one feeling like he is just not cut out for economics, since he isn't a latent undiscovered mathematical savant. (Granted, OP came asking about a math MA, which might have signaled he is such a savant -- I think it's more likely he's just interested in being an economist and trying to find a way to boost his profile like everyone else here, though)

We aint talking about Complex analysis, real analysis, measure theory or topology here...
We're talking about Calc III, Linear Algebra and ODE, all three of them being lower level courses.
Maybe it might not be "easy" but if you cannot take only 3-4 lower level math courses in a semester and do well (A- or above here, maybe B+ in one of them?) then succeeding in an Econ PhD program is going to be at the very least, challenging.

Succeeding in Calc III, Linear Algebra and ODE does NOT mean you are a math prodigy by age 15. All three courses are quite mechanical and computational in the sense that there are no proofs, very little thinking, and most of it requires row reducing a matrix, plugging in some formula for the differential equation etc. These are lower level math courses. I'm not saying you must get an A+ in measure theory based probability, abstract algebra, real analysis, functional analysis, harmonic analysis, algebraic number theory etc...

Nothing against you or the OP, but I think taking 4 lower level math courses in one semester should not be too bad for someone aiming for a PhD in Economics. If you struggle with ODE (which is essentially memorizing solver formulas and methods for linear first order differential equations, autonomous equations etc etc) and lower level Linear algebra (which is basically finding determinants, row reducing a matrix... calculating its eigenvalues and eigenvectors... etc) then tell me exactly HOW one will handle PhD courses? or even Masters level Statistics.

[Humanomics]

Maybe it might not be "easy" but if you cannot take only 3-4 lower level math courses in a semester and do well (A- or above here, maybe B+ in one of them?) then succeeding in an Econ PhD program is going to be at the very least, challenging.

Succeeding in Calc III, Linear Algebra and ODE does NOT mean you are a math prodigy by age 15. All three courses are quite mechanical and computational in the sense that there are no proofs, very little thinking, and most of it requires row reducing a matrix, plugging in some formula for the differential equation etc. These are lower level math courses. I'm not saying you must get an A+ in measure theory based probability, abstract algebra, real analysis, functional analysis, harmonic analysis, algebraic number theory etc...

Nothing against you or the OP, but I think taking 4 lower level math courses in one semester should not be too bad for someone aiming for a PhD in Economics. If you struggle with ODE (which is essentially memorizing solver formulas and methods for linear first order differential equations, autonomous equations etc etc) and lower level Linear algebra (which is basically finding determinants, row reducing a matrix... calculating its eigenvalues and eigenvectors... etc) then tell me exactly HOW one will handle PhD courses? or even Masters level Statistics.

You're talking about applied linear for engineering majors. My linear had proofs.

ODE was extremely difficult for me. Lecture left me with no intuition for how to do the problems, and the book had maybe one example, and then a handful of extremely difficult practice problems. A level of maturity was assumed that I did not have, nor would I suspect our calculus sequence to have commonly trained (as the agony among even motivated students in the course would have indicated -- it's a weed-out course for the engineering department at my school).

Frankly I haven't taken mathematical probability yet, but from my experience in the run-up course to it in my program, I'm not quite sure how it would feel like a cookbook course without some basic background in the intuitions of probability and distributions, etc.

My point was that lower level courses, which might have felt easy to people with proper preparation for them, are extremely difficult for people who walk into them cold. Try learning what a derivative is, much less its intuition or an epsilon delta Jr. Proof, when you're still double, maybe triple-checking in your head if you can indeed factor that x out of an integrand.

One's ability to cram four lower level courses into a semester, being woefully unprepared to do as many as two, is a signal of one's ability to enter a Ph.D. program two years later, almost not at all. The guy hasn't gotten past Calc II. Would you imagine he has *any* idea what kind of material he would face in a statistics MA? Were his expectations reasonable? No. That's why he came here. And telling him that it should be easy for him to do those four courses in a semester stands to do more to discourage him than update his priors.

[Humanomics]

There were math majors in my intro proofs course last semester that were astounded and dismayed when I told them that the rest of their degree was going to be like that course or harder. The responsibility of people on these forums isn't to scoff at uninformed people like the So You Wanna Get a Phd in _______ Youtube videos (which are hilarious, as parody and caricature -- not as recommendations for how to actually approach people).