Accepted to top Econ programs, but feeling ill-prepared. Do I defer?

[redrose27]

I've been accepted to some fine schools in canada and the uk, canadian schools with full or 75% funding, for masters in econ programs (MA and MSc). I think i got in on the weight of my professor's letters (tenured faculty, prominent in field) but i am realizing that i am very, very ill prepared for the mathematical content of these very theory-heavy and phd-track programs.

 

My math profile:

- 1 econometrics (did poorly, a B, but that was after the class average was scaled since almost everyone failed the exam. Although there were 3 people in the 100 person class who got A+ or high As so it was possible)

- 1 econ stats class (pre req for metrics, A-, but it was 4 years ago)

- 2 intro calc classes (differential vs integral, high A+ in one, high A in other, but 6 years ago)

- 1 multivariable calculus class (did terribly, low B-, almost a C, although some of that can be chalked up to hard life circumstances at the time including illness)

 

and that's it. I did the GRE once and got only a 163 quant (extremely high verbal and analytical though).

- No linear algebra

- No real analysis

- No set theory

- None proofs-based

 

I honestly don't know how these programs could have accepted me, but they did. And at first i was confident because i got in, but then i realized, looking at the course material for the core courses, that i have absolutely no preparation for even beginning to understand these. I borrowed Mas Collel for two weeks and couldn't grasp any of the material except for memorization. None of my classes were proofs based. Even my micro and macro classes were quite applied in their math. no proofs, we only had to be able to use lagrange method.

 

I'm scared that i'm in over my head. These are all phd-feeder programs and thus rely quite heavily on the advanced theory. I knew that i was already weak given that my math classes were 4-6 years ago and that econometrics never really "clicked" for me, but i'm genuinely worried now that I cannot handle these programs. People keep telling me "oh people go in to these programs with just as little math as you" but i doubt those people stay in these programs. Do I defer for a year? or do i switch into a different field? applied math always made sense to me (just optimize something and then you're done, etc.) but the theory/sets/analysis just never really was emphasized in my education and i never had an easy time (or even doable time) with them. Do I try to learn EVERYTHING and refresh everything else in 2 months? Or do I own up to my lack of preparation and defer?

[Food4Thought]

Did you ever talk to your letter writers about this and discuss your concerns about how ill-prepared you are? If yes, then the fact that they still wrote you strong letters should indicate that they believe in your ability to succeed.

[Follicle]

Of course you should go... why did you apply if you were just going to ***** out anyway? I did Msc before I did Real Analysis. I think I only had Calc I and II and I chose my school's "phd prep" track (we also offered more private sector focused ones). Micro was tough, but honestly the proof writing skills I developed in RA didn't overlap all that much with what I did in micro. I guess this can vary a lot based on what's covered in one's RA class. Micro was harder, but I think RA would have helped only marginally. It does kind of depend on the prof though. My micro prof just assumed everyone had taken a ton of proof based math and offered no real instruction and it was tough and I had to learn from classmates a lot. Then I did a financial econ theory course afterword and this prof gave lots of handholding and guidance for how to write proofs.

 

And if it's that much of a concern, check the curriculum. Sometimes the math econ course will get into real analysis. You might also have the option of taking RA as an elective through the math department at some schools.

 

Just go dude. Attrition rates at master's programs are pretty mild and mostly from part time students.

[Where To Go]

what's your goal? Do you want to continue with a PhD afterwards? What range of school would you be happy with? How well would you have to do in the masters to be one of the students that gets send to such a place?

[Econhead]

None of my classes were proofs based. Even my micro and macro classes were quite applied in their math. no proofs, we only had to be able to use lagrange method.

 

I'm scared that i'm in over my head. These are all phd-feeder programs and thus rely quite heavily on the advanced theory. I knew that i was already weak given that my math classes were 4-6 years ago and that econometrics never really "clicked" for me, but i'm genuinely worried now that I cannot handle these programs. People keep telling me "oh people go in to these programs with just as little math as you" but i doubt those people stay in these programs.

 

Although one of my majors was math as an UG, it seriously ill-prepared me for graduate econ. I had no idea what I was getting into. I had never even seen a Lagrange multiplier-in Econ or Math. Stats-courses aside, mostly what my math major did was teach me calculus and give me exposure to Diff EQ, RA, and linear Algebra. After UG I went to a T70 for some graduate econ coursework. I had to learn a LOT along the way. It was intense-but it can be done. I was accepted to Purdue's Ph.D program this cycle-And you better believe that I am attending without even second-guessing it.

 

This isn't a Ph.D you are actually after right now-it's a master's. You don't have to worry about passing prelims. This lack of stress will make it easier to study, given the stress associated with a lack of math preparation. And, to be honest, you probably need a master's anyway before you go into a Ph.D program.

 

You can do it, you just have to be determined.

 

You can take the dog out of the fight, but you can't take the fight out of the dog. I'm a dog with fight. You have to determine if you are.

 

Choosing to not go is lose-lose. You not only lose out on this opportunity, but you'll regret it. The worst that happens when you go is that you decide this isn't right for you. It's a blow to the ego, but it's not like you walk around afterward trying to get a job with a big sign on your forehead that says "ECON WASN'T FOR ME! WENT TO MSC AND SCREWED UP/DIDN'T LIKE IT!" You just lose a 1-2 year period of your life. Everyone-especially those of us with less math rigor-are nervous. That's ok.

 

Attending IS the dominant strategy.

[redrose27]

Did you ever talk to your letter writers about this and discuss your concerns about how ill-prepared you are? If yes, then the fact that they still wrote you strong letters should indicate that they believe in your ability to succeed.

 

I didn't discuss with them how ill prepared I am. To be honest I didn't realize until much too late that my math background is so weak. My undergraduate economics program does a much poorer job of mathematically training us than I had realized---it's a high ranked school but clearly it doesn't translate to the quality of the undergraduate education, which is quite applied. It's only after sitting in on classes for another school in January that i have realized how different the math preparation is. The other school did linear algebra, mathematical economics, proofs, advanced micro, advanced macro, etc. all as required components of the degree. My undergrad was just 1 intermediate micro/macro/metrics, and 2 intro calculus courses. Because i had done well in my program I had thought i was prepared but i have realized how untrue that is, long after the deadlines have passed. None of my letter writers taught me in empirical or mathematical classes---they all taught me relatively social policy/social sciencey economics classes, in which i excelled. so they probably are very unaware of my difficulties with quantitative analysis. i don't know whether i should tell them this.

 

Of course you should go... why did you apply if you were just going to ***** out anyway? I did Msc before I did Real Analysis. I think I only had Calc I and II and I chose my school's "phd prep" track (we also offered more private sector focused ones). Micro was tough, but honestly the proof writing skills I developed in RA didn't overlap all that much with what I did in micro. I guess this can vary a lot based on what's covered in one's RA class. Micro was harder, but I think RA would have helped only marginally. It does kind of depend on the prof though. My micro prof just assumed everyone had taken a ton of proof based math and offered no real instruction and it was tough and I had to learn from classmates a lot. Then I did a financial econ theory course afterword and this prof gave lots of handholding and guidance for how to write proofs.

 

And if it's that much of a concern, check the curriculum. Sometimes the math econ course will get into real analysis. You might also have the option of taking RA as an elective through the math department at some schools.

 

Just go dude. Attrition rates at master's programs are pretty mild and mostly from part time students.

 

None of my programs include electives in real analysis---they're all really structured programs and they assume you are entering the micro, macro, and metrics courses with a strong existing background in all of these, linear algebra and metrics especially. the programs i've been accepted to actually have pretty high attrition rates. one of them is 20% (or was, last year) though i don't know how many are part time. If I go, i will have invested a ton of money and time and stress and then ruin my chances for ever doing any other form of grad school later in another field, both in terms of the failure and the money lost (70 grand)

 

what's your goal? Do you want to continue with a PhD afterwards? What range of school would you be happy with? How well would you have to do in the masters to be one of the students that gets send to such a place?

 

I don't want to do a PhD anymore. That had been my long time goal because i had foolishly thought that my background in this area was indicative of what was to come, until I realized how incredibly untrue this is. I would want to work in policy, and in that case an applied econ masters would have been a much better choice. unfortunately none of these are applied economics schools; they're all theory schools. For a phd, generally you'd have to be one of the top 3 students in the MSc program (UK, no grade inflation, so most people get low 60s/high 50s) or an A student (so top 5 or 4 out of 50?) in the MA programs. I think I might not even be able to pass these courses.

 

Although one of my majors was math as an UG, it seriously ill-prepared me for graduate econ. I had no idea what I was getting into. I had never even seen a Lagrange multiplier-in Econ or Math. Stats-courses aside, mostly what my math major did was teach me calculus and give me exposure to Diff EQ, RA, and linear Algebra. After UG I went to a T70 for some graduate econ coursework. I had to learn a LOT along the way. It was intense-but it can be done. I was accepted to Purdue's Ph.D program this cycle-And you better believe that I am attending without even second-guessing it.

 

This isn't a Ph.D you are actually after right now-it's a master's. You don't have to worry about passing prelims. This lack of stress will make it easier to study, given the stress associated with a lack of math preparation. And, to be honest, you probably need a master's anyway before you go into a Ph.D program.

 

You can do it, you just have to be determined.

 

You can take the dog out of the fight, but you can't take the fight out of the dog. I'm a dog with fight. You have to determine if you are.

 

Choosing to not go is lose-lose. You not only lose out on this opportunity, but you'll regret it. The worst that happens when you go is that you decide this isn't right for you. It's a blow to the ego, but it's not like you walk around afterward trying to get a job with a big sign on your forehead that says "ECON WASN'T FOR ME! WENT TO MSC AND SCREWED UP/DIDN'T LIKE IT!" You just lose a 1-2 year period of your life. Everyone-especially those of us with less math rigor-are nervous. That's ok.

 

Attending IS the dominant strategy.

 

 

I'd lose 1-2 years of my life, plus tens of thousands of dollars, all my savings, loans, my dignity, and my ability to ever apply to a graduate program again since they all require complete records of your education. If I ever decided to pursue another route (public policy, law, development studies) this would seriously jeopardize my ability to do so.

 

**** i'm so lost.

[Econhead]

I'd lose 1-2 years of my life, plus tens of thousands of dollars, all my savings, loans, my dignity, and my ability to ever apply to a graduate program again since they all require complete records of your education. If I ever decided to pursue another route (public policy, law, development studies) this would seriously jeopardize my ability to do so.

 

If you "aren't into it," you'll find it optimal to quit early on. Plenty of people do. If you're "into it" but don't want to pursue a Ph.D, you'll know it but stay in the program. If you're "not into it" but are capable and want an industry job, you'll fight like hell to get good grades. If you are completely inept (I'm not even considering this-you seem capable, just scared), you'll quit early on. Graduate programs have inflated grading scales-it requires very little effort to get a straight 3.0. It requires moderate effort to get some B+'s, A-'s, and/or A's. Unless you're working full-time, you'll have no problem earning a good GPA and getting a job afterward if going for a Ph.D isn't for you.

 

Don't be so hard on yourself. Be realistic. Think about this like an economist. Think about this like a game. What is the optimal strategy-what are your contingency plans should things not go as planned. Make a plan for ALL your outcomes. Taking the time to formulate this will probably make you feel better.

[Catrina]

Do you actually no longer want to do a PhD, or do you think that you are unable to do a PhD? Are you no longer interested in research? If you actually don't want to do a PhD, I would recommend just entering the workforce now or maybe doing an applied masters.

 

However, if you still want a PhD you can still do it. I think that you are doubting your abilities too much. However, I think that you are right to be concerned about your math abilities for a PhD-preparation masters. While normally I don't think planning to study math in the summer before PhD is optimal, in your case I think you should. I think that you should try your best to learn basic set theory, how to write proofs, and some basic real analysis. Do you know anyone who can help you with this? You can try to teach yourself from online videos and textbooks, but it would be helpful to have someone who knows how to write proofs look over your proofs to see if you are doing them correctly.

 

So I would say that you shouldn't give up yet. You can do it, but you will be more likely to succeed with some additional preparation.

[redrose27]

If you "aren't into it," you'll find it optimal to quit early on. Plenty of people do. If you're "into it" but don't want to pursue a Ph.D, you'll know it but stay in the program. If you're "not into it" but are capable and want an industry job, you'll fight like hell to get good grades. If you are completely inept (I'm not even considering this-you seem capable, just scared), you'll quit early on. Graduate programs have inflated grading scales-it requires very little effort to get a straight 3.0. It requires moderate effort to get some B+'s, A-'s, and/or A's. Unless you're working full-time, you'll have no problem earning a good GPA and getting a job afterward if going for a Ph.D isn't for you.

 

Don't be so hard on yourself. Be realistic. Think about this like an economist. Think about this like a game. What is the optimal strategy-what are your contingency plans should things not go as planned. Make a plan for ALL your outcomes. Taking the time to formulate this will probably make you feel better.

 

My contingency plans are to go into alternative programs. I've had two policy programs (one economic policy, one public admin) say that they'll look at my profile and offer me a spot if someone declines. I've also got the possibility of transferring into one development studies program, and one acceptance to a dev studies program already (at a very expensive UK school, so not a likely possibility). I'd like to continue with economic policy, but at this time the theory based masters programs seem unwise to enter.

 

Do you actually no longer want to do a PhD, or do you think that you are unable to do a PhD? Are you no longer interested in research? If you actually don't want to do a PhD, I would recommend just entering the workforce now or maybe doing an applied masters.

 

However, if you still want a PhD you can still do it. I think that you are doubting your abilities too much. However, I think that you are right to be concerned about your math abilities for a PhD-preparation masters. While normally I don't think planning to study math in the summer before PhD is optimal, in your case I think you should. I think that you should try your best to learn basic set theory, how to write proofs, and some basic real analysis. Do you know anyone who can help you with this? You can try to teach yourself from online videos and textbooks, but it would be helpful to have someone who knows how to write proofs look over your proofs to see if you are doing them correctly.

 

So I would say that you shouldn't give up yet. You can do it, but you will be more likely to succeed with some additional preparation.

 

I actually have never been sure about going into PhD. I applied to these programs because they were the best way to make sure a phd was still in the cards (they're masters programs) but i've realized that is not at all what i want to do with my life. I'm much more interested in policy now---policy analysis, policy creation, with an economics background.

 

My last option is to just take one of these programs and pursue it very slowly, part time over two years.

[economyclass]

My contingency plans are to go into alternative programs. I've had two policy programs (one economic policy, one public admin) say that they'll look at my profile and offer me a spot if someone declines. I've also got the possibility of transferring into one development studies program, and one acceptance to a dev studies program already (at a very expensive UK school, so not a likely possibility). I'd like to continue with economic policy, but at this time the theory based masters programs seem unwise to enter.

 

 

 

I actually have never been sure about going into PhD. I applied to these programs because they were the best way to make sure a phd was still in the cards (they're masters programs) but i've realized that is not at all what i want to do with my life. I'm much more interested in policy now---policy analysis, policy creation, with an economics background.

 

My last option is to just take one of these programs and pursue it very slowly, part time over two years.

 

Your concerns are valid, graduate economics is definitely at another level compared to undergraduate econ. But I would hesitate to assume you can't do it based on reading through Mas-Collel on your own or seeing some lecture slides from the prospective classes. Of course you can't understand them yet, no one has taught it to you. That is in fact what the masters is for.

 

Full disclosure I don't attend any of the programs you got into, but if you do decide to go to one of the Canadian schools I would recommend Queens. From what I have read I get the feeling that it would be the easiest of the three (I don't really have anything to back this up except that the collegial atmosphere would probably help a lot in this regard).

Also you mentioned that you would have to pay back the funding if you quit early. Is this an NSERC thing? I think if you are worried about that couldn't you just decline the NSERC and see if the school would be willing to fund you through normal scholarship/TA?

[Unikkatel]

Your profile is somewhat similar to mine, at least in terms of math prep - I had Calc 1 (B-), Calc 2 (A-?) and LA1 (A) going in with no Calc 3 or higher level maths. Although my math background was somewhat weak vs other students, I came out of the program pretty strong (A overall). This is not to say it was easy as you do need to put in real work. But you already knew that before applying...

 

I do think preparation wise you will be fine and that you may be overestimating MA requirements (and in the process psyching yourself out). 90% of the battle is putting yourself in the right psychological mind frame, because the rest will tend to sort itself out.