First Year: "Manageable" Without Any Prior Econ Grad Classes?

[YoungEconomist]

I use the term "manageable" loosely, as I realize that the first year is hell for pretty much everyone. However, I'm wondering specifically about people without a masters degree in econ, and those who didn't take any of the PhD core as an undergrad.

How was the first year? Were you able to pick up the material despite not seeing it before?

I'm asking these questions because I will personally be starting a PhD program without any real grad econ experience (although I did take advanced micro, which is structured very much like the first micro course, using the same book and taught by the same professor). I will be entering as a student with a major in econ and a minor in math, and I'm hoping I'll be able to keep up with the material (as much as any mere mortal can ).

[asquare]

Yes! As I've said many times, having a PhD in economics is not a prerequisite for getting a PhD in economics... Of course there is an advantage in having already seen the material, but there is a first time for everyone. Most American students who start PhDs in economics do NOT already have MAs. And despite the impression you may get from reading TM, most have NOT already taken the grad econ sequence before they start! Some people have, and they are undoubtably at an advantage, but it is neither necessary nor standard.

I had not taken graduate level economics when I started, and my math background was on the weaker end of the spectrum. First year was hard. There were definitely things that didn't make any sense at all the first time I heard them in a lecture. There were problem sets where I wasn't even sure what the question was, never mind the answer. There were times I felt like the dumb kid in the class. Everyone goes through all of those things at some point, though, even those who have taken graduate economics before.

And in the end, it all came together. Studying for prelims was an interesting experience in that I realized how far I had come, and how much made sense by prelims time that didn't make sense when I first encountered it. First year was hard, but it wasn't miserable. And contrary to what I believed at the time, the theoretical stuff I learned then really does matter for the very applied work I do now.

[anon]

When I speak to the anyone enrolled in a PhD Econ program the responses from tends to lead me to think that a PhD in Math is a requisite for entering a PhD Econ

[sonicskat]

Youngeconomist, I was in almost exactly the same position as you. I had an econ major and math minor when I came to UVA.

The work is certainly manageable, but be prepared to spend more time and effort on it than anything you did as an undergraduate. At first, myself and other students without their masters were definitely a step behind those with masters. This is simply how it is, since most of the material at the beginning is review to them, and the rigor is new to you. In the first semester, I was more towards the bottom half of the distribution as far as grades go.

By the spring however, it seemed that the work was paying off. Things started clicking, and I was able to start getting grades at the higher end of the distribution, including the top of the distribution in some classes. As I have been preparing for my core exams which are in a couple days, I realize how much I have learned, as asquare said, and how much it makes sense now. In fact, students that seemed to know the material well at the beginning of the year will now come ask me and the younger students for advice.

So don't think its not manageable.... it definitely is, but you really have to want it.

[trjohnson]

I would say the only thing taking phd courses in advance gives you is an inclination of how much work you will have to do to succeed. There's so much material that flies by you your first time around, you may even be busier trying to grasp more material the second time around.