econchef

For signal value: grad mathematical statistics is probably better For knowledge/research value: it depends on what your interests are... If you really like theoretical econometrics then grad mathematical statistics is ideal and will likely mean that you can waive out of at least the first half of graduate metrics. It will also help you a lot if you plan to take field courses in econometrics. If your interests lie in macroeconomics or in convergence/stability of equilibrium in either GE or game theoretic models (more Micro Theory topics) then the course you suggest could give you some of the tools and basic understanding in how to approach these types of problems. The course probably won't add a whole lot of signal value over and above doing well in say real analysis but it could help you in your own research pursuits.

Also look into the computing resources offered by your department. While you may need Stata SE to work with large micro datasets in the future, it may be possible to connect to your department's computing servers and run any analysis using their servers and software which would make having your own license for SE or MP irrelevant so long as you can remotely connect to the server. For any coursework in your first or second year, Stata IC will be more than sufficient.

I felt obliged to bring some Can-Con into the suggestion pool. Don't let the title fool you: this is not a book aimed at Naomi Klein zealots. The author is a professor of philosophy and public policy at the University of Toronto. Filthy Lucre: Economics for People who Hate Capitalism by Joesph Heath (Note: in the United States it is published by Random House under the title Economics without Illusions)

Every school might be different. For example: Berkeley specifies no later than April 15, which probably translates to COB April 15th while Princeton gave an exact time: 5pm EST April 15th.

it's official--I accepted UC Berkeley's Offer.

The earliest deadlines for Canadian MA programs are mid-to-late January, so in that sense you would definitely have time to submit results from your fall semester course work. However, I would say that PhD level courses are definitely not necessary for getting into an MA. Taking grad sequences may result in there being a lot of repetition in the MA course sequences for you unless you are able to take PhD courses at the school instead. The value-added of PhD courses would be much higher if you were aiming for PhD programs as opposed to MA programs.

Institution: MIT Program: Ph.D. in Economics Decision: Rejected from waitlist Funding: NA Notification date: 04/07 Notified through: E-mail Posted on GC: No Comments: Makes the deciding easier.

well-deserved. congrats ellie!

I'm fairly certain that is the maximum amount they will fund at the MA level. However, this does not include those applicants who go on to win SSHRC as they get their award + Queen's TAship + Queen's Tri Council Award.

"I hope that this feedback is informative"

I hope to offer some advice for those Canadian students from small schools thinking about pursuing a master's degree before trying for admission at a top-10 econ program. I made of few comments regarding things I would have done differently in the Profiles and Results 2011 thread. So, I will try to offer more general advice here. GREs: get 800 or very close to it on Quant. Studying makes a difference here. It's more an effort in speed and mindfulness than raw ability. I really don't think verbal matters if you get above 500 I wouldn't think on it any longer. For AWA, try for 5.0 but again I don't think many schools sort on AWA scores (this may all change with the new GRE). Although I don't think these test results matter for much more than screening; write them early and try again if your quant score is too low. Reference letters, IMO, are the most important element of the application process. The largest hurdle to climb coming from a small school is not having access to well-known referees. I would disagree with thesparky here and say the principle advantage of a top Canadian school is not their honours program coursework but in fact the access you get to well-known professors for four years. At the top Canadian econ program I attended for my MA, I found that the course work (in their honours program) was not as rigorous as the honours program at the small liberal arts university I attended. When you're in classes of 4 or 5 people the professor has much more freedom to teach harder material because it's easier to coach a small group of students through graduate level work. A master's program can bridge some of this gap for applicants by giving you access to well-known profs and also improving your coursework signals. However, one of the disadvantages of a master's program is that after 3-4 months it's hard to have stand-out reference letters so be prepared to wait a cycle out while you solidify referees from your MA program unless you are sure that you can get a quality letter from one of your profs after the first semester. Finding referees: Choose your field courses in your MA based on the topics you're interested in but also be sure that some of the profs from your field courses would make good referees. Field courses tend to be smaller so they offer a real opportunity to stand out from the crowd. Same goes, for your MA essay (if your program has one); if you can find a professor who can supervise your research that would also make a good referee then this will really help you come application time. I thought I would second the notion that you should choose references that have sent people to top programs in the past. Ask the phd students in the program about this or talk to the professors themselves if you feel comfortable. A history of sending students to top schools makes a professor a top-notch referee (provided those students did well). Don't underestimate (misunderestimate in bushspeak) the randomness of admissions. This is why it's important to cast a wide application net (at least 10-15 schools). I was rejected from most schools in the top 10-5 range and received waitlists from those that didn't reject me and then got 3 top 5ish admission offers (two with full funding). After all it's human beings reading the applications so things like the weather and their mood can unfortunately play into decisions (there is a good study on the effect of the weather on medical school admissions at McMaster in Canada). Real analysis: I'm another data point showing that you don't need real analysis to get into a top-5 school but if you started taking math early there's no reason not to. Talk to your referees: they will normally be honest with you about where you should apply and where you will stand a chance to get an admission offer. Also find out where students have gotten in from your school in the past. As both ellie and thesparky mentioned, this really matters. One of my top offers came from a school where a number of graduates from my MA program have gone. However, as Ellie has so eloquently detailed, a master's is not necessary. If you are convinced that you want to do an Econ PhD, then apply in your last year of undergrad but also apply to top MA programs. That way if things work out, you're already in but if not then you have a great fallback option to attend a top MA program. Best of luck and enjoy the ride. School is awesome; economics equally so. Again, the above is just one applicant's opinion; gather as much data as possible.

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad: Small Liberal Arts University, Atlantic Canada (Honors Econ, Minor Math) Undergrad GPA: 3.95 (4.0 Econ) (4.0 Math) (Converted) (top graduate in Econ) Type of Grad: MA Econ, Queen's University Grad GPA: 4.0 (Converted) (top graduate) GRE: 800Q 570V 5.5AW Math Courses: calculus (I,II,III), linear algebra, ODE, Discrete, Intro Stats, History of Math, Intro to Game Theory (All A or higher) Econ Courses (grad): Micro, Macro , Econometrics, Resource, Applied Econometrics, Research Problems and Methodology, Empirical Micro (All 90%+) Econ Courses (u/g): Adv Micro, Adv Macro, Uncertainty and Strategy (Adv Micro II), Econometrics (full-year), All intermediates and Intros, a bunch field courses (All A or Higher) Letters of Recommendation: All positive, 2 full professors (1 resource econ, very well established; 1 applied time series), 1 associate professor (gaining a big rep in time series), I supplement with three other profs who know me well at universities where they have contacts. Research Experience: master's essay, summer research paper in u/g, Internship at Inter-American Development Bank (Poverty Research / HH Exp'd Surveys), 3 applied metrics courses in Grad, very strong STATA programming skills and LATEX knowledge Teaching Experience: Taught tutorials for principles (Micro and Macro) for 2 years in u/g; environmental econ and principles macro at Queen's Research Interests: Econometrics, Labor, Education Concerns: Could have taken more math; Small unknown undergrad RESULTS: Acceptances: Berkeley ($$$), Princeton ($$$), BU ($$), U Toronto ($$$), Queen's ($$$), Chicago (3rd year) Waitlists: MIT, U Penn, U Mich Rejections: Harvard, Northwestern, Stanford, NYU, Yale, Columbia What would you have done differently? Well if I had a time machine, I would have gone back to the start of first year and convinced myself not to take any political science courses in second year and instead replace them all with math courses. I also might have convinced myself that I should have taken more math in fourth year instead of taking basic sciences for med school (I applied and got in but decided to continue with econ grad school). The only other thing I might have changed regarding my record with said time machine would have been to write my MA essay on a time series theory topic as opposed to one in applied micro but I'll be honest these wouldn't be the first things I would do with a time machine. Perhaps with those changes I might have had a better shot at Harvard but there's always some noise in the dgp so who knows. Overall, I'm very excited by my results and can't wait to visit my top two offers.

definitely could be neher. I was copying from my old lecture notes.

In my resource econ grad course, our prof wasn't too fond of textbooks per se but he did recommend the following readings (apologies for the incomplete bibliographic info): Monographs: Dasgupta & Heal (1979) Cambridge University Press Clark, Colin (1979) Math Bioeconomics (First Canadian Resource Econ book our prof allegedly claimed) Aronsson, Lofgren, & Backlund. "Welfare Measurement in Imperfect Markets." Heal, Geoff. "Valuing the Future" Necher, Philip (1990). "Natural Resource Economics" Weitzman, Martin. "Income, Wealth, and the Maximum Principle" Papers: Gray, L.C. (1914). "Rent Under the Assumption of Exhaustibility." QJE Hotelling, Harold (1931). "The Economics of Exhaustible Resources." The Journal of Political Economy. Samuelson, Paul A. (1964) "Tax Deductibility of Economic Depreciation to Insure Invariant Valuations." The Journal of Political Economy. Stiglitz (1975). AER. (Counter Example to Hotelling Rule) Levhari & Levitan (1977). CJE Livernois & Martin (1999) CJE (Update of Levhari & Levitan) Solow, Robert (1976). Hetergeneous Ore Maskin & Newbery (1990). "Disadvantageous Oil Tariffs and Dynamic Consistency." AER Gaudet & Lohoues (2007). "On Limits to the Use of Linear Markov Strategies in Common Property Natural Resource Games." Levhari & Mirman (1980). "The Great Fish War: An Example Using a Dynamic Cournot-Nash Solution." The Bell Journal of Economics. That ought to keep you busy for awhile.

Great Decision! All the best next fall.