TestMagic

israelecon · 04-02-2008, 03:15 PM

princeton and harvard are better than yale. it depends what you are interested in though. if you are interested in micro yale is a bit problematic because many of their micro guys are old and not active and thus probably can't be very good advisors. i.e. they have many guys in GE, but that has been a pretty dead topic for a couple of decades now so those guys aren't on top of the current research.

Nalfien · 04-02-2008, 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frankcw

So even you do think I should wait. You think the two is better than Yale? Is that correct?

I dont think that at all, I just don't see why you should commit before you have all of the information at your disposal. All three schools are great and there are many reasons to choose any of them over another.

frankcw · 04-02-2008, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nalfien

I dont think that at all, I just don't see why you should commit before you have all of the information at your disposal. All three schools are great and there are many reasons to choose any of them over another.

Yes, I do not have to commit so early. But, if H or P or both come at the last minute, I should have a decision in mind. Otherwise, I might make a wrong choice.

frankcw · 04-02-2008, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by israelecon

princeton and harvard are better than yale. it depends what you are interested in though. if you are interested in micro yale is a bit problematic because many of their micro guys are old and not active and thus probably can't be very good advisors. i.e. they have many guys in GE, but that has been a pretty dead topic for a couple of decades now so those guys aren't on top of the current research.

This is the biggest problem here. I am just an undergraduate and not sure what I am going to major. I have done some research in contract theory and microfinance (also theory). But for metrics, I am not sure.

Even lary Samuleson is not active in research? By the way, why people here always talk about his shoes? Sorry for my ignorance

israelecon · 04-02-2008, 04:13 PM

samuelson is active. my point is just that when people list guys that make yale good (in micro), they often list scarf, bewley, etc. but, although these guys were at the top of their field in their prime, they are no longer active and their fields are often dead altogether, so they cannot be relied on to teach you and advise you on current research.

frankcw · 04-02-2008, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by israelecon

samuelson is active. my point is just that when people list guys that make yale good (in micro), they often list scarf, bewley, etc. but, although these guys were at the top of their field in their prime, they are no longer active and their fields are often dead altogether, so they cannot be relied on to teach you and advise you on current research.

Got it. What about Princeton? Besides micro, are they some big name in econometrics or other fields? From your past post, you seem to love Princeton. Correct?

israelecon · 04-02-2008, 04:59 PM

so in princeton the micro guys are still VERY active and quite young (relatively). i haven't looked so much into other fields, but i think the international guys there are at the very top and still active (e.g. dixit even though you can argue about exactly what his field is). i also think that the macro guys are active although they may be busy with consulting and have no time for students. in general this is the advantage of doing micro theory, the micro theory guys generally don't do consulting so they are very focussed on the academia.
just looking through the faculty in yale, you see that other than in econometrics, many of their big names are old and not active.
and yes, i wouldn't say i love princeton just yet. by april 15th i'll tell you if i love princeton or northwestern.

HopefulGrad · 04-02-2008, 06:58 PM

In response to the last post, I agree that Princeton has more researchers in micro theory at the top of the field; however, the placement at Yale (both this year and in previous years) seems to be just as good (arguably better).
This year P placed in Penn, BU, and Duke, but one micro theory student didn't receive any offer. This year, I don't think there was a micro theory student at Yale, but last year, they placed both of their micro theory students in Toronto. In fact, from the placements in other fields that I saw, it seems that Yale's record is

What I am wondering about is why doesn't Princeton econ,a department with more active researchers at the top of its field, outperform Yale econ? Does Yale put more emphasis on its students? Do Princeton students feel lonely and it affects their research?

israelecon · 04-02-2008, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HopefulGrad

What I am wondering about is why doesn't Princeton econ,a department with more active researchers at the top of its field, outperform Yale econ? Does Yale put more emphasis on its students? Do Princeton students feel lonely and it affects their research?

I am not sure that if you look farther back than the past 2 years you will see yale doing so well.
anyway, my understanding in princeton is that they did not put so much emphasis on micro in the admissions process until a few years ago, when faruk gul took over admissions. apparently, he is trying to get more students with better technical training that will be able to handle micro theory. according to that we should see princeton's micro theory placements improving.
the way i was told it was more or less like this:
what used to happen is that princeton took the best students regardless of their technical training and then when they got to doing research even those who were interested in theory just realized they didn't have the tools. many people who learn undergrad in the US and are interested in theory apparently don't know what they are getting into because the UG is very not rigorous in the US (not my words). so what do people do when they realize they can't do theory? they do labor, run some regressions and thats their dissertation. so thats what used to happen in princeton, and apparently the labor guys were happy about this, because they got people to do regressions for them, but the theory guys were not so happy about not having any good micro students. but, now that a theorist is doing admissions, apparently things have changed.

now before anyone get mad at my characterizations, let me remind you i am paraphrasing someone else(who knows what he is talking about).

nash12 · 04-02-2008, 08:11 PM

israelecon: so what do people do when they realize they can't do theory? they do labor, run some regressions and thats their dissertation.

I just love this. You've already starting speaking like a true theorist. Bravo..!! Really like it..

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

04-02-2008, 03:15 PM	#11 (permalink)
israelecon TestMagic Guru-in-Training Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 537	princeton and harvard are better than yale. it depends what you are interested in though. if you are interested in micro yale is a bit problematic because many of their micro guys are old and not active and thus probably can't be very good advisors. i.e. they have many guys in GE, but that has been a pretty dead topic for a couple of decades now so those guys aren't on top of the current research.

04-02-2008, 04:13 PM	#15 (permalink)
israelecon TestMagic Guru-in-Training Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 537	samuelson is active. my point is just that when people list guys that make yale good (in micro), they often list scarf, bewley, etc. but, although these guys were at the top of their field in their prime, they are no longer active and their fields are often dead altogether, so they cannot be relied on to teach you and advise you on current research.

04-02-2008, 04:59 PM	#17 (permalink)
israelecon TestMagic Guru-in-Training Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 537	so in princeton the micro guys are still VERY active and quite young (relatively). i haven't looked so much into other fields, but i think the international guys there are at the very top and still active (e.g. dixit even though you can argue about exactly what his field is). i also think that the macro guys are active although they may be busy with consulting and have no time for students. in general this is the advantage of doing micro theory, the micro theory guys generally don't do consulting so they are very focussed on the academia. just looking through the faculty in yale, you see that other than in econometrics, many of their big names are old and not active. and yes, i wouldn't say i love princeton just yet. by april 15th i'll tell you if i love princeton or northwestern.

04-02-2008, 06:58 PM	#18 (permalink)
HopefulGrad Trying to make mom and pop proud Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 2	In response to the last post, I agree that Princeton has more researchers in micro theory at the top of the field; however, the placement at Yale (both this year and in previous years) seems to be just as good (arguably better). This year P placed in Penn, BU, and Duke, but one micro theory student didn't receive any offer. This year, I don't think there was a micro theory student at Yale, but last year, they placed both of their micro theory students in Toronto. In fact, from the placements in other fields that I saw, it seems that Yale's record is What I am wondering about is why doesn't Princeton econ,a department with more active researchers at the top of its field, outperform Yale econ? Does Yale put more emphasis on its students? Do Princeton students feel lonely and it affects their research?

04-02-2008, 08:11 PM	#20 (permalink)
nash12 Within my grasp! Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 120	israelecon: so what do people do when they realize they can't do theory? they do labor, run some regressions and thats their dissertation. I just love this. You've already starting speaking like a true theorist. Bravo..!! Really like it..

TestMagic

Free GMAT, GRE, SAT Test, TOEFL practice tests