newcomer09

What do they mean by "placed, but not on the market"?

Sweet, I hope IO stays that way when I'm a second year :) It'll be awesome.

There has been a lot of debate over opinions here, so let me add a bit of data. I compiled this list based on data given to me directly by the departments, because I was struggling to decide between UChicago and Northwestern. The UChicago data is from academic years 04/05 to 08/09. The Northwestern data is for academic years 03/04 to 07/08. Both cover 5 years, so adjusting for the size of the program, they will be comparable. Also, NW's placement this year was average or slightly above average, given the negative demand shock. http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/378/chicago.gif http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/2086/northwestern.gif P.S. I've highlighted a few placements which I liked, so it should be clear that they are based on my subjective ranking and preferences, especially when it comes to the "decent US" category. These do not include post-doc and visiting professor positions. Also, I am not sure if all the academic placements from NW are tenure-track. Chicago's raw data clearly marked Post-doc positions and Visiting Professor positions, which I then grouped under the category "Visiting". On the flipside, NW guarantees that they reported all placements, whereas it seems Chicago's placements are to some extent self-reported. Some of the positions had comments like "rumored to be at Bank of Canada", which I would mark as "Bank of Canada", and some were "unknown", which I did not mark.

Good luck :) Maybe we'll meet at a seminar sometime over the next few years. Part of me still regrets not taking up Chicago's offer, so I'm hoping I won't be completely out of touch with their department. There are some great people there I would love to work with.

Congrats :) Out of curiosity, did they offer you a Presidential? :)

That sounds more likely. Note that I wasn't trying to say that TI is not a good place. Rather, I was trying to tell the OP that he shouldn't go to a university because he expects to have a lot more free time there. In fact, I would see that as a bad sign (if it were true).

Decisionmaker, you seem to think that life would be easier at Tinbergen in terms of studying, because US universities are generally said to be tougher on students. Don't you think that this reflects the quality of the training you'll get? If you're not working a lot, then you're not learning a lot. ;) I'm willing to sacrifice a year of not living "a normal life" (especially if this means watching television, partying 3 times a week and wasting a lot of time), if it will mean that I actually get something out of the PhD programme.

It's 5:40am and I cannot sleep tonight. As soon as I lie down on the bed, I start thinking about the decision I'm supposed to make. Congratulations to those who have already made up their mind. ;)

This is the study I mentioned. It's basically useless because of the time frame. As I said, I'm sure there's one other, but I can't find it...

Someone recently showed me an interesting and very recent ranking based on placements. I forgot the title/authors, so when I look for it online, the only one I find is this: Ranking economics departments worldwide on the basis of PhD placement That seems pretty useless because it goes too far back in time, but I'm pretty sure it's not the one I was shown. So do you know of any other such recent rankings?

I'm from a European country too, though I did my undergrad in the US. I don't think it's a big deal to live that far away, provided you go home for a bit every summer and/or winter break. I imagine it'll be even easier at the grad level, because there will be so many other international students in your programme. There are of course a number of academic considerations as well: NW is much better for theory and IO, so if you're very confident that this is what you'll do, it'll be a good match. I also don't think the LSE's placements are as good. I was under the impression that most top 10 American programmes trump any European programme. (BTW, the MRes/PhD track 1 was one of my other options too, but I already turned it down.)

I think I'm closer to deciding in favour of NW now. On one hand, there are a few people I think I would really like having as advisors (Hortacsu, Heckman, maybe List) at Chicago. And overall there are about 10-15 whose work I'm interested in. At the same time, there are about 20 at NW and a gazillion more at Kellogg. I think my advisor will kill me when I tell him this on Monday. :hmm:

This was Becker's last year. And even if it weren't, he's 80... I don't count on him at all :)

Honestly, I feel as confused as ever. I still appreciate everyone's advice :) Something that might be relevant here is that I've already done a bit of research in education and empirical labour, and my advisor thinks that it would be great for me to go to Chicago, because of Heckman, Murphy and Neal. On the other hand, I am also interested in theory and IO, though I haven't done any work there on my own, so I am a bit worried that I might not be stellarly good at it. It seems like if I go to NW, I'll be forced to stick to theory and IO, whereas at UChicago, I could definitely see myself working on labour and education in the future. I'm sorry I'm rambling again... I do this all the time in my head. Imagine having to be myself and have this major decision that you have to make by Wednesday!