Miss Economist

As a current 2nd year student, I can vouch that CEMFI is an extraordinary program and that it delivers what it promises: rigorous courses, dedicated professors, tailored attention. Learning some basic Spanish is not such a great cost. I believe that the placement outcome is not just the product of the institution but also that of your own overall profile, GRE/TOEFL results, SOP, luck etc. I doubt that CEMFI has a particular support policy towards Chinese, but then again, this is my view.

If Serena Ng is not serious about econometrics, I don´t know who is hehe

Is it too late? Basically introduce yourself, explain why Toronto, why a PhD, your research interests. Nothing to fear. Be genuine.

I would also be grateful to find out some numbers on class size at different schools (Columbia in particular) and attrition rates. I imagine this must have been compiled somewhere sometime in the past of TM. If someone knows a link, please do share.

These results seem to have the impact of a wrecking ball :excited: For 2m44s of self-irony:

Wharton AE interviews are not trolls, at least not mine. Good luck everyone, just a bit of patience for all of us. It will work out somehow. Have a nice day/evening!

Congratulations for the UC Irvine results! :encouragement: Catrina, you rock. You will have a hard time choosing where to go but maybe this will justify some fun trips around the US for the visiting days :)

To welostim, I don´t think there is a clearcut comparison between the selectivity of US and European MAs, it depends on which programs you are referring to, both in the US and Europe. I would imagine programs like that of BGSE are less selective than a Top20, for instance, but this is just own speculation. Among the programs with late deadlines, I guess the French (PSE, TSE) and Spanish ones (BGSE, UC3M, CEMFI) are options to consider. Good luck!

I share the views of this blog: The Copenhagen Consensus 2012: reflections on impact evaluation

I share the views of this blog on the matter: The Copenhagen Consensus 2012: reflections on impact evaluation

Dear Vengeance (sounds funny :excited:), thank you for adding several sensible arguments. I expect myself to act rationally, but as you well point out, it is not necessarily obvious to do so. Sigh for the joint UCL-LSE development seminars ... as one of the opportunities I will miss by choosing CEMFI...:sorrow: Thank you all enormously for taking the time to share your views with me. I had mixed feelings about putting my doubts out there but I guess we are all in search of confirmation when at crossroads.

No divergence in this voting exercise? I have to admit I am slightly surprised, even if reassured that my instinct is correct :eager:

Herewegoagain and Oleador, thank you so much for your votes. You put forward very persuasive arguments. If I would put aside all other arguments (which of course is difficult to do) and focus on the "brand" issue, I do have to admit that this is a worry regarding CEMFI. As I currently live in the US surrounded my economists (with both US and EU PhDs), I am somehow dissapointed to always have to explain what CEMFI is, where it is, which are its advantages etc. Most of my colleagues immediately recommend UCL as the choice I should rest upon without doubt, as UCL does have in the development world an established position, particularly among the impact evaluation researchers. If the PhD plan does not materialize as I hope now, the marketability of the CEMFI MSc diploma (outside Spain) is what makes me doubt the most, to be frank. Even if I do have a preference for CEMFI already, I cannot "shut down" my dissapointment when soooo few of my colleagues have heard of the institution and program. Any other thoughts you think could be useful are welcome! Thank you again

Thank you very much ssch for taking the time to write such a detailed and valuable response. You confirm several of my own instincts. Anyone else willing to add their "2 cents" on the topic? Thank you in advance for your time!

Dear fellow econ colleagues, I am in a deep dilemma concerning the final decision for my future MSc, decision which I need to make in the next week. The finalists are UCL (MSc Economics) and CEMFI (MSc Economics and Finance). My background is in engineering and my hopes post-MSc concern an econ PhD in the US (most likely at the intersection between development economics/economic geography) As much as I have dug for as much information on both programs as possible, I feel I still need some further external views. My dillema arises from: Being an engineer with limited academic exposure to economics, would a 1-year program (UCL) be enough for me to catch up with my colleagues with econ background and in addition have a performance that would recommend me for a PhD in the US? CEMFI being 2 years, I feel it would provide me with a more gradual / build-up training. UCL is unfunded (14.000 pounds) + living expenses on my charge vs. CEMFI totally funded with living stipend for both years UCL class size is 3 times bigger than CEMFIs (approx 75 vs 25), I am concerned about the level of interaction with professors at UCL and indirectly on the opportunities of establishing a collaboration leading to a good LOR However, UCL is more known outside UK than CEMFI is known outside Spain and as my hopes tend towards an US PhD, how would this influence my application? Last but not least, the strength of UCL in development economics and its proximity (at least geographical) to LSE (where economic geography is strong ) makes me wonder if this could matter in my PhD application. Knowing that what I need is the foundation in economics and that with rigor, how important is for a MSc level the research strength of a school? Any thoughts you could share with me would be golden. Thank you in advance and good luck to all in your respective enterprises! :encouragement: