Could you explain this?I've not done real analysis, but did take courses in measure theory
Cambridge MPhil research
Hello. I've been reading from here for quite a time, but this is my first time posting. I would love to hear from those who have similar experiences.
I have got offers from
- Oxford MPhil Economics (2 years)
- Cambridge MPhil Economic research (1 year, PhD track)
- LSE MSc Economics (1 year).
I've also secured a full scholarship (with a 2-year work contract with a central bank) for the study at LSE. I can self-fund for any of the courses mentioned above. I intend to go to PhD. My interests lie in micro (game theory, also quite interested in network, no experiences though).
What I'm looking for in a master programme.
- I would like to strengthen my math background for continuation to a PhD. I also want to keep the path to US PhD open.
I've not done real analysis, but did take courses in measure theory, graduate-level micro and game theory, and graduate econometrics.
- I would like more contacts with the faculty. (A smaller programme seems more attractive to me.) A chance to get supervised and get a good recommendation letter.
The second point deters me from choosing LSE. Also, although LSE is known for its focus on quants, that seems to be from MSc EME, and not the MSc Econ. From what I've seen from the course description, the micro and econometrics courses at LSE (for MSc Econ, of course) seem less rigourous. I'm not sure how MSc Econ from LSE is, compared to MPhil at Oxford and Cambridge.
So my question is, is the marginal benefits of Oxford/Cambridge worth the difference in the cost.
LSE. Given you already took grad micro, you should be able to take their Advanced Micro (instead of micro) which is supposed to be quite rigorous. Plus you could find out what electives you'll be able to take (potentially RA/Topology or other proof-based courses). Congrats on all your offers !
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)