Warwick MSc and getting into a top US PhD programme

[italos]

I was referring to their Econ MSc. Reactor said the things as they stand.I hope he recalls my post about 2-3 weeks ago on Warwick hiring and Polemarchakis behavior to the MSc Macro class.It is quite true that the exams and the marks are unfair . I recall that a classmate went to the MSc Micro lecture to ask some explanation on how she should had result the question.She got the reply that it is his philosophy that students should always learn even during in an exam.I do not known that this could happen anywhere or it s just that lecture.Besides, you don't even have the right to view your exam script .The marks are all provisional and are subject to the MSc exam Board to decide if those mark will stand or not.It is circulated among students (it is not a rumor) that they do not wish to give many high marks and it is called ''adjustment process.''(or ''cooking'' ).The average mark is around 65% and it is difficult to obtain over 70% .On the MSc thesis they assign you a supervisor and s/he is obligated to see you for consultation only for 2 hours.They usually do not help or don't even care.

The exams are ALL essay style except from the MSc micro and Polemarchakis part on MSc marco(you have to resolve an OLG exercise for his part).How can you write down everything you known on the question where you must also care about the correct essay style form?Is it fair for someone who does not have this experience and/or is not accustomed with this exam style?

Conclusion the department cares only for its own reputation:Better reputation more customers(students).I remember last year Dixit visited the Department for a Conference.We started talking and since he was teaching at Warwick in the late 70's asked my opinion on the Master program.I was negative saying to him what I was actually believing.The graduate director hearing the conversation asked me to follow him in his office.He asked me not to be so negative(particularly to people of Dixit calibrate)as I was hurting the University's reputation.So no freedom of speech I thought.I also recall that he said to Dixit that the Department is trying to push the number of admitted students in order to obtain more funding for the PhD.

Final remark, I observed that you get your MSc by studding only about 18 topics for 6 exams for the value of 7000GBP(if home student) or 388.88 GBP per topic.

I am not going to tell you what to do.It is your own decision.You may go there,differ the offer for a year and reapply or decline.In any case good luck!

[twinkley]

well I was a Msc student at Warwick few years back, with the intention of continuing to a phD. Unfortunately the same I applied for LSE too late and now I wish I was either more pushy or I had asked for a related discipline. I actually did do very well on my GRE. I later on went to LSE for some more research work but I lost the interest for phD. I didn't do fantastically well on my course either cos I really lost the inspiration along the way.

Teaching wise, I don't see that much difference to be honest, I didn't like the exams either but I never like them and I think there is no need to complain cos everyone has to face the same thing. it is really the name and reputation, and maybe the intellectual atmosphere you have that is much better in LSE than warwick. I have been to Oxford for lectures too but my experience is too limited to make any comments.

Warwick grads do fairly well though, at least in my year, a guy got into Cambridge but decided to stay in warwick because of scholarship. at least 3 went on to US phD programs, actually one princeton, one U penn and one Boston, these are the ones I know.. and some went back to home countries and work for central banks and stuff.. and few ended up working for banks.. such as loser me..

I think if you were keen on doing phD, anywhere is the same, I mean of course you can't go to a horrible school but the rest is your making, it is a long and lonely journey and if you dont have true love for knowledge, economic knowledge particularly, it is better you save your time and do something else more productive with your life. If you do, you can make the most out of what you have anywhere..

[reactor]

Nice post twinkley! I appreciate that you share your experience and infromation with us.

I think there is no need to complain cos everyone has to face the same thing.

If you refer to the exams at Warwick the not everyone has to face the same thing, just the Warwick MSc econ studets. If for example you have horrible microeconomics lecturers and they put a horrible exams only the students who take the exam "face the same thing" and there UK is nothing like the US; there is no proper scaling after the exam (unless of course no one has got above 70% or too many people are above 70%). So if you get 60% with highest mark in the course 70%, you are stuck with the 60% even if you are in the top 5 of you class (say 90 people).

I think if you were keen on doing phD, anywhere is the same, I mean of course you can't go to a horrible school but the rest is your making[...] If you do, you can make the most out of what you have anywhere..

Maybe between the top 10 US econ PhD programs there is no big difference. Maybe between Warwick and Oxford, Cambridge, UCL (even LSE) the distance is not huge. But I cannot be convinced that Warwick is comparable to top 20 US econ phd programs. I'm convinced that even if a student who could go to top 20 econ PhD programs did come to Warwick, the quality of her job market paper and job prospects would end up significantly poorer.

[CC_Blood]

Spoke to a BSc Econ student and a fellow analyst here at Deutsche Bank research who did the MSc Econ at Warwick a few years ago. They said you’re less overwhelmed by the quality of the curriculum as by the quantity of it. So I’ll expect lots of cramming. They didn’t say anything about exams being especially unfair, maybe the essay style is a big hurdle for students who are only used to multiple choice exams, but I did quite a lot of essay exams at St. Gallen so I’m not too scared =).
In my opinion, if you still have to rely on good teaching to obtain good grades in your Master you’re about to face serious problems in the “real” world, i.e. your first job – from my experiences at banks and consultancy firms I can state that self-dependency in learning is one of the key assets in a working environment.

[HomoEconomicus]

Hey there,

as most of the posts are already a little bit and being a current student in the Warwick MSc Economics programme, I will give my best to update this discussion as far as I can:

First: Yes, from what I hear from other people at LSE/Oxford, Warwick does not play in their league yet. But the department and the people in place (e.g. Abhinay Muthoo, head of department) are very ambitious and want to get there.

You can actually feel this in the MSc as well. Complaints or suggestions were taken always seriously so far, a lot of improvements have been made already and the atmosphere in the department is very warm. The cohort is quite large (>100 people), the elective courses cover a huge bandwidth of specializations, however I feel that overall the programme could be a bit more quantitative. Nevertheless quantitiy-wise it is still difficult to keep up with all the materials that were taught to us. And so far (after having finished the core modules) I have never encountered any unfair exams here.

With regard to Top Unis in the US I can say that Warwick seems to be very well connected. There are four weekly research seminars with external speakers and you will find guests from US Top 10 Unis every week.

Best, HomoEconomicus

[contagion]

Hi everyone, I think that Warwick in term of reputation is lower than LSE, UCL and Oxford. For me Cambrigde is not so well, they are living from their old glories.


I think that Warwick has been improving a lot during the last years, although it would take 5 or 10 years to earn the same reputation as LSE of Oxford.
Currently, they have changed their program (now they have a 2 year MRes plus 4 years Phd), they have the money to improve their students (through funding) and professors. Also, according to its webpage they are accepting people with a GRE-quant of 166. I have a friend in Warwick (Phd) and he said that a lot of their classmates are not well prepared, so I think that this requirement will keep away bad students. I think that they are in the right direction.

Best!