Norfrost

Congratulations, Jeeves. I hope you are very successful at MIT, you must be absolutely thrilled :)

You aren't, Milton :whistle:

Isn't George Mason more into Austrian school and Virgina school (political economy) than Chicago school?

I think the most formal way to do it is referring the full name of the institution the first time you use it, followed by the acronym/initialism in brackets. On the following paragraphs, each time you intend to mention the institution, use only the initialism. For example: Line 1: "I studied at the Washington University in St. Louis (WUSTL)" [blah blah blah] Line 5234: "While I attended WUSTL..." I don't think I read this in any manual of style but I've noticed this is somewhat common practice, even among news agencies.

Thanks for posting the list, nikopol. Those placements are not bad at all.

I am currently considering the option of finishing my degree in economics and then, eventually, doing the new diploma in mathematics for graduates, which essentially covers the mathematics courses from the math & econ programme. The reason I'm undecided about this is that I'm not sure I want to do a master's degree yet. Or, for that matter, that I somehow manage to get funded to do one at some decent institution. If I decide I don't want to do it (or in the event that I decide I want to but don't manage to get any funding and need to secure a job), I think I prefer to study subjects which give me a broader knowledge of economics. Besides perhaps signalling a good numerical ability to the first couple of employers, I don't think there's too much of a point doing it if you are not particularly interested in mathematics. At least I don't think I have the necessary motivation to be studying maths and practically no economics at this point, so it probably wouldn't be such a great idea. Thanks a lot for your input anyway. It's difficult to make any final decisions :)

I'm studying for an economics degree, but I've wondered for some time whether I should try to transfer to maths & econ precisely due to the presence of more mathematically rigorous courses. I haven't made a final decision yet. Do you mean that an LSE external degree is regarded as special, in a positive and advantageous way, concerning applications to master's degrees at LSE? Or were you just referring to maths & econ? :hmm:In any case, do you have any relevant information on how other schools see it?

I'm also an LSE external student at the moment and I can assure you there is nothing done online (especially in the sense of the rather ill-famed "online degrees" :)). It's all about studying on your own using books everyone else is using and writing supervised examinations at locations predetermined by the University of London. To the OP: I don't know if this helps you but there are some recent cases (known to me) of people from the LSE external programme - BSc Economics and BSc Mathematics and Economics specifically - who were admitted at Cambridge, LSE and Warwick for master's degrees in economics and related fields such as finance. Of course, if you intend to apply directly to PhD programs this information might not be of any use but in any case, I believe a UK bachelor's degree, or, for that matter, any European bachelor's degree after the Bolgona process, wouldn't be good enough to apply directly to a PhD, unless you went for slightly more rigorous courses which are closer to graduate level. This option exists for internal students at LSE but, unfortunately, as far as I know, it is not available to external students. It might be different if your other college is in the US though because you might already have the chance to take courses at graduate level (apart from the problem of the lack of math).

I think you are referring to the econphd admission guide (under the section "How difficult is admission to a good program?") which quotes physics, math and computer science programs as being the toughest to get into. The conclusions seem to be entirely based on GRE scores though.

Thank you, that was very helpful. Yes, I was referring to Varian's undergraduate text. I didn't think any of those I mentioned could actually be at the level of Varian's Micro Analysis (which I suppose I will probably buy sooner or later anyway).

Yes, it does answer my question. Thank you :) I guess I might end up trying to get a copy of Varian's intermediate micro as well. After I posted here I thought of taking a look at MIT's OCW website to see if any of the books I mentioned were listed there but I saw MWG and Varian's Analysis instead, among other postgraduate textbooks. The same happens for intermediate macro, the recommended book there is Romer's :crazy:

I also have a question and I apologise beforehand because I already feel like hijacking the thread. I will be taking intermediate micro next year and my university is recommending we buy one or two of the following books: Katz/Rosen, Cowell, Estrin/Laidler, Pindyck/Rubinfeld, Eaton/Allen and Perloff. Surprisingly, Varian is not mentioned. Is any of these textbooks at least comparable to the level of Varian? I don't mind using a more mathematically rigorous text, in fact I suppose that's what I'm looking for (having graduate school in mind). Thanks for the advice.

No data for the 1-year MSc Econ? Thanks for posting.

I think nagger probably means that you would be overqualified for most of the jobs in the investment banking industry. Not so certain if that is how it works though. Anyway, your original question is almost bizarre, I can't see how you fear that recruiters who only care about a university's name will somehow disregard Cambridge :rolleyes:

I think 780 is for the MSc in EME.