pseudo-random

Econ 204 has a website where you can see last years handouts and some previous years' exams. I'm guessing that it's intensive enough that you shouldn't miss it unless you're really confident about your math, but lax enough that you can still do some apartment hunting and basic settling in while attending it.

A bit worried about whether the graduate stipend is enough to live off. Does anyone know approximately how much it pays (per month) to work as a research assistant during the summer break?

You're absolutely right about this. The point, however, is not that you are directly competing with more "soft" economics undergraduates when applying to PhD programs. Rather, it is that if there is a correlation between the quantity of economics undergraduates and the quantity of economics PhD applicants then the competition over spots in the top programs will be more intense. This is because the number of top programs has hardly changed over the past decades, nor have they increased their intake of students. So more people are competing over less spots, and as this forum never ceases to demonstrate, the price in terms of required signals increases. Once again, the key is that the supply of spots in top programs has generally stayed put, while demand for them has not. As for the connection between the number of undergraduates and the number of PhD applicants, Cassin brought up one possible tie - increased demand for teachers. It's also possible that just having more undergrads exposed to economics means that the small percentage which is drawn to academia now includes more people (and perhaps this affects how many non-economics majors hear about economics PhDs second hand, too).

According to this link from the Wall Street Journal, there has been an explosion in the number of economics majors all over the world during the past decade. If the number of economics graduates roughly follows the same trends as the number of undergraduates, then this year's competition is likely to have been more fierce than in previous years (regardless of how it compares with last year in particular).

Israeli masters programs are also quite good at getting people into the top economics programs. I know of at least five students who got into top 5 economics programs this year from the Hebrew University alone. Of these, two made it into Harvard/MIT, and a sixth student made it into Northwestern. Moreover, there are other students who applied whose outcomes I don't know about, and there are likely similar numbers from Tel-Aviv University.

I turned down Yale's offer last week.

I plan on attending Berkeley, but not the visit this week. It's quite a distance from me plus I'm already decided, so I'm skipping the whole flyout ordeal and I went ahead and notified them and the other schools last week. I'll be glad to hear about it, though. PM if you want.

I think you're missing the point argyecon. We don't just say that MIT is the better school because of what we've heard, we also believe it because of what we've heard, and so will anyone who observes you later on in life. True, Princeton is an excellent school, but MIT is perceived as being even better, regardless of what actually takes place there, and that is a good enough reason to make it the better choice for you. Both schools are terrific and will give you an excellent opportunity to do anything you choose, so you're guaranteed the best education either way, but one of them has a clear advantage over the other that totally eclipses any other differences between them. Trying to figure out which school is truly better, putting aside for a moment how they are perceived, is both futile and emotionally costly (you're worried, uptight, and might forever regret the road not taken). Spare yourself the deliberation, go to MIT and never think of it again. (Apart from that, even if MIT's education is not better, the whole Cambridge clique - MIT/Harvard/NBER - is hardly just a matter of perception, but can actually provide you with very concrete benefits.)

delete - triple post

delete - double-post

I'll be 29 when I enter the PhD program this year (Berkeley). I'm international and I spent 5 years in the military, 2 years studying for a non-economics BA, 2 more years doing an economics BA (shortened by taking summer semesters) and 2 years doing an MA. Where I come from, most applicants are in this age region because of military service and because people usually take a year or two to save money and travel the world once they're released (I am an exception to this).

Thanks. Can I assume that refers to pounds, or is it 14K dollars?

Sorry for being so straightforward, but what is full-funding at the LSE? (for MRes/PhD economics)

Thanks!

Thanks j1j2, floplo and all the others who replied. As I wrote, I'm going with my gutt, which means Berkeley (although I'm still waiting for a response from one of the Cambridge schools - but at this point I honestly think I'd rather be rejected ;)). As I see it (and as j1j2 wrote before me), rankings and placement records may be useful at categorizing schools, but they're not really fine enough to tell apart the three schools I was deliberating between. The three are close enough that what will really make a difference in the end is the quality of what one writes (and one's choice of advisor). While Berkeley may have a somewhat less rigorous program (as the rumor has it - but does the rumor have substance?) it also offers many more options of the kind that appeal to me - which means economics applied to people, be it through micro or econometrics. I know from experience that the most satisfying, fun and in the end important type of learning is the kind you do on your own rather than through coursework, and I believe this strengthens Berkeley's case. Apart from that I think enjoying life a little is called for, and bubbling Berkeley seems to offer just that, especially in comparison with all these wintery places. I mean, whoever's talented and motivated enough will most likely become a professor and enjoy a lifetime of self-motivated research even if he doesn't attend one of the two Cambridge schools, so we might as well live a little on the way. Cheers again!

Tatonnement, What do you think about economics at Berkeley? On another thread one user mentioned that their program is less rigorous than other, parallel schools. Do you think this is the case? How would you compare Berkeley with Yale and/or Northwestern? Thanks.

Thanks for the tips, people. I've pretty much made up my mind. It's time to enjoy life, and I'm going with my gutt. Cheers!

I'm sure you can guess what I'm about to ask from the title, but just to be clear, I'll give you something to read before asking you which is the best option. I'm an international student from Israel and I've been admitted to both Northwestern, Berkeley and Yale with the standard funding packages (23K at Berkeley, ~20K at Northwestern and ~29K at Yale). I'm still waiting for responses from the Cambridge schools, but I've most likely been rejected seeing as I haven't heard from them yet. From what a few professors have told me, Northwestern offers the most both academically and placement-wise out of this group, despite Berkeley's faculty having more "big names" and Yale's ivy-league status. In fact, one professor who did his PhD at Berkeley about 10-15 years ago said he breezed through the coursework there (but he also completed his PhD in 3 years, so he's probably just naturally blessed). Northwestern, I'm sure, makes you sweat despite the snow. On the other hand, I have a feeling that Israeli professors seem to know Northwestern much better than they do Berkeley, because Israeli economics departments tend to be strong in micro theory and related fields (and in econometrics) so their opinions may be commonly biased. I'll also add that I have a strong interest in cities (I gradually switched to economics around the third year of architecture school, and never took it too seriously. My MA grades make up for so-so BA grades, as I felt I was simply on a break from architecture). Cities can be related to many fields in economics, ranging from econometrics (panel, time series, spatial), labor and applied micro to international trade and growth theory (the title "urban economics" is rather outdated, and refers only to a certain angle of understanding cities). In light of this, I have remained flexible in my choice of field so far, i.e. undecided - have been working for an applied econometrics professor, TAed for a macro professor (whose name one of the users on this website has adopted as his username) and am writing a game-theoretic MA thesis. However, it seems to me that in spite of this flexibility, Berkeley offers the most promising prospects of actually researching anything that has to do with cities (apart from which it's just so much more exciting!). All that said, my dilemma boils down to my head voting Northwestern and my gutt voting Berkeley, but as I've explained there is more to this than just climate and aura. Where would you go? What kind of responses do you think I'll get if I politely email professors from these places with my wonderings? Any advice will be appreciated.

Genius!

Chptlk, please see further details in email. Economicus, note that because of what you and others perceive, Israeli game theory professors can afford their PhD students a great deal more time and attention than they could otherwise, even though "being engaged in wars" is virtually without consequence (sort of like getting higher returns when you're willing to face the risk).

Perhaps the foremost centers for the study of game theory are in Israel. You will find that Tel-Aviv University's economics department leads the econphd ranking in decision theory, and is second in micro theory in general. It is the highest ranked department "in Europe" measured by papers published in the leading journals - see in link. The Hebrew University in Jerusalem is not far behind, and is home to both Nobel laureate prof. Robert Aumann and to the Center for the study of Rationality, which brings together researchers from several fields, including economics, mathematics, psychology, education, law, computer science and biology. I study at the Hebrew University. If you are interested, I know a German PhD student who began his doctorate here this year precisely because he wanted to be at the frontier of game theory research, and can ask him for his email. Also, next year the two universities are probably going to open a joint PhD program in economics - though this is not final yet.

Stata has everything, so why re-invent stuff? Regardless, if you're using weighted regressions because you have weighted survey data - as opposed to heteroskedasticity motivated weighting - you might find this survey data primer helpful.

Hi all, If you had to take each of the top ten schools (as you perceive them) and label every one with a single sub-field that you consider their forte, what would it be? (It would be nice if you let us know what school you go to.)

Hi, I'm planning on taking the GRE in about three weeks and plan on beginning to study for it next week (intended for econ PhD). Can anyone suggest the best book to use? (I think a book has a great psychological advantage over any website) Thanks - I'm sure this'll be helpful for a lot of people besides me.

asquare: "Just make sure that instead of describing only how good you are at being an RA, you describe how being an RA has prepared you to do your own research, and to come up with your own ideas." I think this is a point worth noting (am definitely noting it for myself).