Ranking MSc for a US PhD

[EconBest]

Hello to everyone

 

I am mulling over the idea of enrolling to a MSc in Economics in Europe order to strenghten my knowledge because my Bachelor was only 3 years and I want to apply to a Top 10-20 PhD in the USA. Now, I have come up with these options and I would like you to, first, notify if I missed something important and, second, to tell me if your ranking would be different. I have excluded MPhils because I seriously doubt I would be able to pass directly to that level from a 3 years undergraduate and MSc like Pompeu Fabra because I have been told that it is a program extremely difficult even after a MSc, let alone a Bachelor. I am also not considering one-year Masters, because it is difficult to get references. I am however opened to the idea of doing a one year master after a two year master or, try to do some research in a think-tank or a Central Bank. Without further do, here we go...

 

Consider: Stockholm School Of Economics, Mannheim, PSE, Bocconi, Tilburg, Zurich, UCIII

 

Ranking: Tilburg, SSE, Bocconi, Mannheim, PSE, Zurich, UCIII

 

Thank you so much!

[okun]

I was in your situation a few months ago and after all the research I've done, I hope I can be of help with a few thoughts I came around:

 

1) The only real problem with a 1 year master's is that you have to spend a gap year between the master's and the PhD. Therefore, it is a matter of whether you want to spend 2 years preparing yourself for the PhD or only 1 (less preparation but more work experience & money). In any of the two cases you would apply during December of your second year; if you were doing a 2 year master's you would only have your first year grades at that time, thus it is the same than doing a 1 year master's application-wise. (There could be details that pull in both ways... such as: under a 1 year master's you probably have done a thesis already, which is a piece of research that might enhance your chances of admission; under a 2 year master's although you may be able to spend the summer working as RA for a professor... etc)

 

2) I don't see why the MSc in Pompeu Fabra (Barcelona GSE, to be precise) would be more difficult than Bocconi for example. I think you should definitely include it in your list. If you excel at Barcelona you will have very good chances of making it to top 20. And definitely also add Oxford's M. Phil. I don't know much about Cambridge's, but from what I've read, I would add it too.

 

3) Unless you are Italian, and specially unless you did your undergrad at Bocconi, I would take Bocconi off the list. They keep the good LoRs for Bocconi undergrads that do the master's and have been closely followed by the faculty since their final year of the undergrad, usually working as RA or TA. You can google "IGIER visiting students" and you will see that every year they have a list of c. 15 selected students that come from their own undergrad... Besides, it is a massive programme, with around 150 students every year... even if they didn't favor their own students, you would have a difficult time getting good LoRs in a programme like this.

 

4) You are missing probably the best place in Europe to do a master's if you want to apply for a top PhD... CEMFI (Madrid)! Not only they have great placements every year, they also have a very small cohort (about 25 students per year), they say the place is awesome in terms of relationship with professors and other students, and they even have lots of funding opportunities.

 

5) I cannot tell about your ranking because I don't know much about SSE, Mannheim or Zurich... But I definitely tell you that CEMFI (1st) and Barcelona GSE (2nd) are on top of Tilburg, Bocconi, PSE or UCIII in terms of placement to top PhD programmes. From the MSc/MPhil programmes I know, I would rank: CEMFI, Oxford, Barcelona GSE,

 

6) Having said all this, keep in mind that you will have to be a top student in any programme you attend. PhD applications to top programmes are extremely competitive. If you are not sure you will be a top student, you might want to "adjust" your ranking with an extra variable: your interest for the PhD programme at each university. Staying for the PhD at the same university where you did your master's is usually the "safe" option. You will still have to be a very good student to be admitted, of course. And it is not a bad option at all, since you would spare yourself 2 quality years of your 20's!

 

Well, there go my two cents.

Good luck!

[EconBest]

I was in your situation a few months ago and after all the research I've done, I hope I can be of help with a few thoughts I came around:

 

1) The only real problem with a 1 year master's is that you have to spend a gap year between the master's and the PhD. Therefore, it is a matter of whether you want to spend 2 years preparing yourself for the PhD or only 1 (less preparation but more work experience & money). In any of the two cases you would apply during December of your second year; if you were doing a 2 year master's you would only have your first year grades at that time, thus it is the same than doing a 1 year master's application-wise. (There could be details that pull in both ways... such as: under a 1 year master's you probably have done a thesis already, which is a piece of research that might enhance your chances of admission; under a 2 year master's although you may be able to spend the summer working as RA for a professor... etc)

 

2) I don't see why the MSc in Pompeu Fabra (Barcelona GSE, to be precise) would be more difficult than Bocconi for example. I think you should definitely include it in your list. If you excel at Barcelona you will have very good chances of making it to top 20. And definitely also add Oxford's M. Phil. I don't know much about Cambridge's, but from what I've read, I would add it too.

 

3) Unless you are Italian, and specially unless you did your undergrad at Bocconi, I would take Bocconi off the list. They keep the good LoRs for Bocconi undergrads that do the master's and have been closely followed by the faculty since their final year of the undergrad, usually working as RA or TA. You can google "IGIER visiting students" and you will see that every year they have a list of c. 15 selected students that come from their own undergrad... Besides, it is a massive programme, with around 150 students every year... even if they didn't favor their own students, you would have a difficult time getting good LoRs in a programme like this.

 

4) You are missing probably the best place in Europe to do a master's if you want to apply for a top PhD... CEMFI (Madrid)! Not only they have great placements every year, they also have a very small cohort (about 25 students per year), they say the place is awesome in terms of relationship with professors and other students, and they even have lots of funding opportunities.

 

5) I cannot tell about your ranking because I don't know much about SSE, Mannheim or Zurich... But I definitely tell you that CEMFI (1st) and Barcelona GSE (2nd) are on top of Tilburg, Bocconi, PSE or UCIII in terms of placement to top PhD programmes. From the MSc/MPhil programmes I know, I would rank: CEMFI, Oxford, Barcelona GSE,

 

6) Having said all this, keep in mind that you will have to be a top student in any programme you attend. PhD applications to top programmes are extremely competitive. If you are not sure you will be a top student, you might want to "adjust" your ranking with an extra variable: your interest for the PhD programme at each university. Staying for the PhD at the same university where you did your master's is usually the "safe" option. You will still have to be a very good student to be admitted, of course. And it is not a bad option at all, since you would spare yourself 2 quality years of your 20's!

 

Well, there go my two cents.

Good luck!

 

First of all, thank you for taking the time to answer me! Appreciate it!

 

Then, thank you for showing me CEMFI 'cause I had totally missed the place ;) It looks promising indeed!

 

As far as BGSE is concerned, let me tell you what a very good friend of mine told me: he went there after doing another MSc in Economics graduating with the maximum. He said that there he saw multiple people having nervous breakdowns because of stress & study, many who cried out of desperation, some who gave up, they did only two things: study and sleep, professors who made exams who were as difficult as it can get. He usually managed to go only half-way through them...Yes, some of his classmates ended up in Berkeley, Stanford or MIT but these were natural geniuses so...you know...

 

What I would like to do is a MSc which can bring my knowledge to a end-of-a-top20-bachelor-degree-in-Economics, not something that goes beyond that because I am positive I don't have enough basis to put up to that. I mean, I'll graduate without even having done a course in Econometrics (two in Statistics, one in Maths covering anything from Calculus to some basics of Linear Algebra and the standard things in Multivariable Calculus, one in Financial Maths, one in Intermediate Micro and one Intermediate Macro. That is the core stuff I have done/will do)...I cannot go to places which start off with Advanced Econometrics and Barcelona is one of them. I will surely consider it after a 2 years Master who will allow me to cover the missing ground! My feeling is that CEMFI does exactly that...

 

Well, I hope I made myself more clear now!

 

Looking forward to other opinions or to what, Okun, you might have to say now!

[okun]

Well you can check the 2-year tracks at LSE for doing the MSc in economics or the MSc in EME. In Barcelona GSE you also have the standard track which probably isn't that hard. From your friend's comments I bet he was doing the advanced track. The problem is that you most likely won't get good LoRs out of the standard track; but well, one step at a time, right?

 

In any case, you can check in each programme's website that many times they publish the syllabus of the main courses. That way I was able to compare CEMFI's to Barcelona's coursework and saw that they cover very (VERY) similar stuff in the 1st year. (And I'm talking about the advanced track courses at Barcelona).

[fakeo]

Then, thank you for showing me CEMFI 'cause I had totally missed the place ;) It looks promising indeed!

 

Talking about programs you missed: Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, UCL, Warwick, Bonn, Toulouse, IHS Vienna, and maybe others... Also, if you have some money to spare, then consider UBC and UofT as well. If you think you're not good enough for PhD-level coursework yet, then you need a 1-year masters that serves as a bridge between undergrad and grad. For instance, Toulouse's M1 serves this purpose. Then you can do the M2 doctoral track in your second year, or just take a year off working/RA'ing before the PhD.

 

Regarding Tilburg: lots of horror stories out there that they don't support students who don't want to do a PhD at Tilburg. This may only be applicable to the MRes, or may not be true at all, I don't know I just read these comments from random people on the internet. But it's certainly something to consider/research before going there.

[EconBest]

Talking about programs you missed: Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, UCL, Warwick, Bonn, Toulouse, IHS Vienna, and maybe others... Also, if you have some money to spare, then consider UBC and UofT as well. If you think you're not good enough for PhD-level coursework yet, then you need a 1-year masters that serves as a bridge between undergrad and grad. For instance, Toulouse's M1 serves this purpose. Then you can do the M2 doctoral track in your second year, or just take a year off working/RA'ing before the PhD.

 

Regarding Tilburg: lots of horror stories out there that they don't support students who don't want to do a PhD at Tilburg. This may only be applicable to the MRes, or may not be true at all, I don't know I just read these comments from random people on the internet. But it's certainly something to consider/research before going there.

 

@Okun: what do you think about the idea of doing two one-year Masters at BGSE? First year I fill the gap withe standard, second year I take wing with the advanced

 

@fakeo: do you think that Oxford first year can be compared to Barcelona standard track? The problem with LSE master, if I understood correctly, is that PhD students teach so who the hell is going to reference me?

 

Thanks to you both

[MR14]

I very much doubt the Tilburg stories for non-PhD stayers are true. I have heard such stories about Tinbergen, not about Tilburg. If you are interested in Tilburg for a PhD prep, make sure you go for the 2 year MRes, not the MSc.

[okun]

@Okun: what do you think about the idea of doing two one-year Masters at BGSE? First year I fill the gap withe standard, second year I take wing with the advanced

 

 

I think that is a good idea. And it will help you at obtaining good LoRs after doing the advanced track, since you will have been around for 2 full years already and professors will probably have gotten to know you.

 

Regarding your question about Oxford vs. BGSE standard track, Oxford MPhil's = BGSE advanced track. But let fakeo confirm that.

 

Fakeo was also right about Toulouse M1... I would say that is similar to BGSE standard track. The problem with all these programs is that they wont get you straight into a top PhD; you'll need to do the "easy" master's and then the "hard-mode" master's in order to get good LoRs. Just as the example of the two one-year master's at BGSE. Thus, you may wanna think about doing the "easy master's" at your home country, and then attending the "hard master's" at a good university. This should make it easier for you, specially in terms of costs and adaptation. (BGSE is more or less expensive; Toulouse has quite a bad reputation regarding student atmosphere; Paris School of Economics, another possibility for the M1, is freaking expensive to live in Paris;... etc)

[okun]

I very much doubt the Tilburg stories for non-PhD stayers are true. I have heard such stories about Tinbergen, not about Tilburg. If you are interested in Tilburg for a PhD prep, make sure you go for the 2 year MRes, not the MSc.

 

According to Tilburg's Research Master in Economics website, they expect you to stay at their own PhD, like Tinbergen... You can see they say something like.. those who don't stay at our PhD go on to the private sector or government agencies, basically. This probably reflects their spirit on the issue.

[EconBest]

Thanks to everybody! You are awesome, folks!

 

I know that I have to do the "easy" master before going trying to get into a Top PhD but hey...I have to deal with the fact that my Bachelor is pretty ****** as far as material covered is concerned (excellent grades, though).

 

Now I'll set up another question about the GRE which I'll have to take next year and I still have to understand

1) if these programs care only about the Maths section or if also other parts are considered: if I have to study for Verb e Analytical as much as I will have to study for the GRE I have to study for 9 months or so which seems crazy to me

2) which are the best books to study on

 

Thanks!

[Where To Go]

I had a look at European master and PhD programs as well (but luckily did not have to apply). My impression was that in the Netherlands, the 2 year research master programs are more of a technical thing you need to do to be allowed to do a PhD in the Netherlands. So I understand that they expect you to stay afterwards. I don't know how good placement into U.S. PhD programs is after the one year programs, though.

 

 

Studying for the GRE for 9 months is ridiculous. At top places in the U.S., you won't be cut due to low verbal immediately, they typically do that only for low Q. It could have an impact later in the decision process though. From talking to admitted students, anything above 160V will be normal. I didn't talk to enough students to see what a lower bound might be. There are people with truly awful AW sections admitted at the very top places.

The above comments are based on conversations with admitted students, so sample size is small and maybe they stand out in some other way.

[arrm]

If you're aiming for top 20 then you'll probably want to shoot for 165Q to be safe. 160 might disqualify you from some places and you probably want to maximize your chances. The other sections aren't vital, but it's not exactly a good signal to score terribly on them.

 

Also, to be very blunt, if you can't get a decent score on the quantitative portion of the GRE with a month or so of studying then you aren't cut out for a top-20 economics program. Nine months of studying is insane overkill. When I took it, I bought a standard study book (Princeton Review's I believe), did some vocabulary practice, took 3-4 practice tests over a couple weeks, and then took it.

[EconBest]

Yeah, sure. 9 months is useless. The point I was trying to make is that I have been told, considering I haven't done any geometry or things like that for 6 years or so, that in 3 months I should be able to have gone through all the things again without too much stress or rushing (or spending on the GRE 10 hours a day). If I were to prepare the other parts dedicating to them as much time as I am supposed to dedicate to the Q part, well that would be 9 months but I am glad to know that that will not be the case. I am no English native speaker but I was a European C1 level, corresponding to a 7.25 Ielts, when I was 17 so...how much time should I dedicate to the Verbal part given this level of knowledge of english?

Also, going back to the topic of the thread, do you feel that doing two one-year masters at Barcelona, first year doing standard-track because of the bad choices my University did setting up the Econ Degree, which ended up being 50% or so Managerial stuff rather than some more Maths exams or some thorough Econ courses, and second year doing the advanced track should be a good way to aim to a top-20 PhD?

Thanks a bunch to everyone!

[Econhead]

Yeah, sure. 9 months is useless. The point I was trying to make is that I have been told, considering I haven't done any geometry or things like that for 6 years or so, that in 3 months I should be able to have gone through all the things again without too much stress or rushing (or spending on the GRE 10 hours a day). If I were to prepare the other parts dedicating to them as much time as I am supposed to dedicate to the Q part, well that would be 9 months but I am glad to know that that will not be the case. I am no English native speaker...

Thanks a bunch to everyone!

 

Perhaps others' experiences differ from mine, but you'll probably benefit most (from studying) by making your studying time intensive. That is, studying 2 hours a day for 2 weeks (28 hours total) would probably be less useful than spending 4-6 hours a day for 4-6 days. (I'm not necessarily saying this is the amount of time you should or need to study, just an example.)

 

Note: This is my recommendation for the Q section, and under the impression that you either never learned some of the material, or haven't seen it in awhile. If you draw it out with such a small amount per day, you'll forget old things while learning new material. If you already know the material and just need to practice problems, sure, practice a couple hours a day for a couple weeks if that fits your schedule better. (See my post here about my thoughts on A.W.)

[Where To Go]

Take a practice exam to see what score you get. GRE verbal is not a standard "do you speak English" test such as IELTS and TOEFL; how well people do without practice varies a lot.

 

For Q, I personally did not find buying a book necessary. There is a pdf on their website giving you lots of math exercise covering slightly more topics than are on the test. It will take you a weekend or so to go through it, and probably will be enough of a refresher. After that, it's about being familiar with the test and in general not freaking out when having to take a test. You can probably find 5-10 free practice tests online (not all official, but most of the prep material companies provide similar tests).