LSE MSc as a PhD Track Degree

[cdreier]

I wonder if anyone has any insight into how the Econ MSc program at LSE works as a feeder into PhD programs? It's the only Master's program that I would consider passing up good PhD offers for (UCSD, Minnesota) because it seems like there's a fairly established path to move on to the PhD program if all goes well enough. It's not entirely clear to me how common that is, though, and exactly what "well enough" means. I've contacted the department, but haven't heard back, so I just thought I'd see if anyone has any experience or direct knowledge of the viability of that path.

Thanks!

[sgecon]

Hi,

 

I don't know if you received this, I think getting a Distinction should suffice:

"Finally, we’d like to draw your attention to the option for progression to the MRes/PhD within the department. To be eligible to proceed to the MRes/PhD in Economics programme commencing in September 2020, you must obtain your MSc with Distinction. After registration for the MSc in Econometrics and Mathematical Economics you will be informed how to confirm your acceptance of your conditional offer of progression to the MRes/PhD in Economics programme. Please note that there are requirements for progression to the PhD through the stages of the MRes/PhD programme."

[cdreier]

Hi,

 

I don't know if you received this, I think getting a Distinction should suffice:

"Finally, we’d like to draw your attention to the option for progression to the MRes/PhD within the department. To be eligible to proceed to the MRes/PhD in Economics programme commencing in September 2020, you must obtain your MSc with Distinction. After registration for the MSc in Econometrics and Mathematical Economics you will be informed how to confirm your acceptance of your conditional offer of progression to the MRes/PhD in Economics programme. Please note that there are requirements for progression to the PhD through the stages of the MRes/PhD programme."

 

Yea, that's what makes the program seem promising to me, but it's not clear exactly what that means. Do the top 2 or 3 students get Distinction, or is is more like half the class? I'd just like to have some idea of my chances before throwing away great PhD offers.

[tutonic]

One thing to remember. Almost everyone who enters the EME will have the exact same goal as you (i.e. to use this programme as a signal of ability and get into a good PhD programme). Therefore, you must be realistic in how you measure yourself against your potential classmates. I'm not saying it is, but it could be a big fish, small pond type of situation, where you're currently at, and that your masters grades might suffer when doing the EME, since the programme is very selective and attracts only the brightest of students.

 

Personally, I think it is borderline dumb to give up a place at any top 15 for the EME at LSE. If you're looking at the top 15/20, all incoming students have demonstrated high levels of aptitude, so any variance in actual admission will solely depend on research experience & the strength and connections of your letter writers (none of which can be remedied via the EME route). Furthermore, there is no absolute guarantee that you'll even get into said school again next year, since the pool of applicants might change, and you might've just made the cut this round, hypothetically. In addition, the benefit of doing the EME only materialises when you apply in 2 years, not next year, since EME grades won't be available when you apply, and, to adcoms, the value of being enrolled in LSE's EME is borderline helpful at best, considering that you've already gotten a place in a top 20, which points to the fact that you're already academically very capable.

 

edit: I just realised you were talking about the MSc Econ, and not the markedly more rigorous MSc EME. It is a terrible idea to put off a top 20 admit for that. I know someone who graduated from LSE couple years back, and is now in a top 20. He ended up with a 60+ score average (you need 70 average for a Distinction). He mentioned that the quality of instruction is quite bad there, and that very few actually manage to get Distinction, and even then, out of that group, only 1 or 2 made it into top 10, while the rest got into top 15/20. Mind you, my acquaintance scored first in his cohort from our undergrad institution many years ago, when he was doing his undergrad.

[cdreier]

One thing to remember. Almost everyone who enters the EME will have the exact same goal as you (i.e. to use this programme as a signal of ability and get into a good PhD programme). Therefore, you must be realistic in how you measure yourself against your potential classmates. I'm not saying it is, but it could be a big fish, small pond type of situation, where you're currently at, and that your masters grades might suffer when doing the EME, since the programme is very selective and attracts only the brightest of students.

 

Personally, I think it is borderline dumb to give up a place at any top 15 for the EME at LSE. If you're looking at the top 15/20, all incoming students have demonstrated high levels of aptitude, so any variance in actual admission will solely depend on research experience & the strength and connections of your letter writers (none of which can be remedied via the EME route). Furthermore, there is no absolute guarantee that you'll even get into said school again next year, since the pool of applicants might change, and you might've just made the cut this round, hypothetically. In addition, the benefit of doing the EME only materialises when you apply in 2 years, not next year, since EME grades won't be available when you apply, and, to adcoms, the value of being enrolled in LSE's EME is borderline helpful at best, considering that you've already gotten a place in a top 20, which points to the fact that you're already academically very capable.

 

edit: I just realised you were talking about the MSc Econ, and not the markedly more rigorous MSc EME. It is a terrible idea to put off a top 20 admit for that. I know someone who graduated from LSE couple years back, and is now in a top 20. He ended up with a 60+ score average (you need 70 average for a Distinction). He mentioned that the quality of instruction is quite bad there, and that very few actually manage to get Distinction, and even then, out of that group, only 1 or 2 made it into top 10, while the rest got into top 15/20. Mind you, my acquaintance scored first in his cohort from our undergrad institution many years ago, when he was doing his undergrad.

 

Perfect, this is exactly the kind of first/secondhand knowledge I was looking for, I really appreciate it. I guess their marketing got me somehow, but it sounds not unlike the American Master's programs that I immediately declined. Thanks for the help!