kinzaman

I would strongly recommend taking a year off before grad school and RA'ing for a year. First year is really tough and the year of research experience really helps to give you some perspective during first year. Getting into a top-5 program is a big accomplishment, so you can't really go wrong here, but I RA'ed for 3 years before grad school and it was one of the better decisions I've made

I'll be at UWM next year. Feel free to PM me

Thanks. I agree that it is, in some sense, a better program. It allows me a great deal of flexibility in the classes I take and research I pursue. And if I decide to go pure econ or pure finance, I can simply drop out of one of the programs. I also get all the benefits of being in the business school (bigger stipends, more funds for traveling to conferences, etc). And they started up the program this year, though they didn't (to my knowledge) accept any official applications for the program. I was fortunate to have a letter writer who is very good friends with the DGS of the business school who hooked me up.

It's the joint econ/finance program. The way I understand it, the program was "offered" by both schools. I was admitted to both the econ and finance PhD's, and sent signed offer letters to both departments.

There's a HUGE amount of variation in the quality (and effort level) of reviewers. An average quality applicant could most likely win the NSF with the right reviewers, while a much better applicant might not be awarded the NSF because he has bad reviewers. Even if you don't have the time to work on your proposal, you should just re-submit it the next two years, since the MC is approximately 0 and there's a chance you'll get better reviewers.

Obviously, they can pick whatever criteria they want for awarding the NSF. I just think it's kind of ridiculous that they place so much emphasis on diversity. For example, my proposal outlined a project which could potentially give rise to some new policy tools which could be used to reduce the volatility of unemployment around the natural rate. This doesn't address any "diversity" issues, but it would benefit workers of all ethnicities and backgrounds. I just think it's silly that my proposal should be discounted for potentially benefiting everyone instead of a select group relative to the rest of the population.

I accepted their offer today. Anyone else definitely attending?

Maybe. I did quite well on the intellectual merit criterion though. I think the trick to winning the NSF might be to come up with some feel-good empirical research proposal which will show how giving minorities free bag lunches in high school will increase their chances of graduating or some crap like that. At least that is the impression I get from the "broader impacts" comments I received.

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad: Top 3 Liberal Arts Undergrad GPA: 3.73 Type of Grad: supplemental math courses Grad GPA: 4.0 GRE: 800Q/630V/4AWA Math Courses: Diff Eq (A-), Linear Algebra (A), Multivariate Calc (A-), Real Analysis (B), Analysis on Manifolds (B+), Discrete (A), Numerical Analysis I/II (A/A), MathStat I/II (A/A), Topology (A) Econ Courses (grad-level): Econ Courses (undergrad-level): Intro (Cr), Intermediate Macro (B+), Intermediate Micro (A-), Developmental (A), International (A), Advanced Micro I/II (A/A-), Advanced Macro I/II (A-/A-), Behavioral Econ I/II (B+/A), Econometrics I (A-) Other Courses: Some psych courses, random humanities courses and intro physics Letters of Recommendation: one from my undergrad advanced micro prof, two from research economists at a regional Fed (one junior economist, one sernior), both should be strong letters highlighting my research ability. Research Experience: 2.5 years as an RA at a regional Fed. Two minor publications, with a third in progress. Research mostly in macro-labor, consumer finance and macro. Teaching Experience: Some tutoring in college. Nothing really worth mentioning. Research Interests: macro-labor, macro, search and matching SOP: Discussed my research experience with the Fed, how my experience as an RA shaped my research interests. Highlighted the research skills I acquired over the course of the job Concerns: B/B+ in my real analysis courses. Hoping my A in topology will help make up for these low-ish grades. Other: Second year applying to PhD programs. Aimed very high last year and missed (was wait listed at UMN). Hoping that another year of research experience, an A in topology, applying to the NSF and an improved letter of recommendation will get me into the top 20. Applying to: Yale, Northwestern, UPenn, Minnesota, Wisconsin-Madison, Penn State, Rochester, Ohio State, Georgetown, Arizona State, Western Ontario, Carnegie Mellon, Pitt, Boston University RESULTS: Acceptances: UW-Madison($), Ohio State ($), ASU($), Pitt($) WL: UPenn (withdrawn), Minnesota (withdrawn), Penn State (withdrawn) Rejections: Yale, NWU, Rochester, Georgetown, CMU, BU Pending: Western Ontario Attending: UW-Madison Econ/Finance joint PhD Comments: Very happy to be attending UW-Madison. Great fit for me and a very strong program. I owe a lot to my letter writers who really went to bat for me. What would you have done differently? I had no idea that I wanted to pursue an econ PhD during my undergrad and as a result, my RA grades were not as good as they could have been. I partially offset this with an A in topology at a lower ranked institution, but the damage was done. I think that if I had A's in RA1 and RA2 I could have cracked the top 10. I also would have studied for the AW of the GRE. I naively assumed that, being a native English speaker and a pretty good writer, I would ace this section. Turns out they are looking for something very specific in your essays, which I apparently did not have.

Does anyone else think the NSF "broader impact" criterion is bullshit? I explained how my research could benefit society (and it clearly can, depending on the results), but the reviewers were hung up on my "dissemination/communication strategies" and "encouraging diversity with science and research"... seriously? Do I really need to explain that the research gets disseminated by publishing a paper and presenting the results? And as for "encouraging diversity with science and research"... what? How the hell is economics research supposed to encourage diversity? /rant

Nah, but I think other people (i.e. current Fellows) use the site as well

Well, generally you want to do "site maintenance" at weird hours so that it doesn't inconvenience people. That's the only reason I can think of.

They always release them at night

Nah, they're releasing the results. If you go to the results page, it says "2013 Offered Awards List", it just doesn't have the names yet. It's also right around the time (of year) that results are usually released.

Looks like NSF results are probably coming out tonight. Site is down for maintenance.