anonecon

Does this need to be a scan of an official? Or can it be completely unofficial? Thanks!

Why hasn't anyone mentioned Harvard?

Anyone who tells you that Adcoms are going to know the specific course naming and numbering is wrong:

Lies, damn lies. Chapter 2 is easily the books strongest and most important chapter. It lays the foundation for truly grasping everything that follows. Read chapter 2, breathe chapter 2, live chapter 2. I recommend skimming the Problems at the end of the chapter for questions that interest you and trying them yourself. If you can't solve them, look for a solution manual online.

Learnstream Rudinium This is even better. You can skim through theorems and definitions as well as choose to view a lecture starting at the point when that theorem or definition is discussed.

Find a set of good online lectures. Youtube, for example, has these (which look to be pretty good): And Walter Rudin's Mathematical Analysis.

Nobody is going to lie to you if you just ask them straight out.

You're not important enough for anyone on the admissions committee to remember you or care. If you're really worried about it, put a small note in your SOP about how taking the time to work in industry really helped you develop research ideas and allowed you to be certain that you wanted to devote your life to research. Don't mention declining their offer in the past.

For example: Ask them in person. Then, after they cut you off, say: "Thank you! I am thinking of applying to X,Y, and Z. Are there any other programs you recommend adding? And, are there any programs that to which you would not feel comfortable giving me your enthusiastic endorsement. I will certainly understand if this is the case." (You can also send this via email later, if you're uncomfortable with such conversations in person). Two things are particularly nice about this approach. (1) It gives the hesitant writer a way out. I suspect sometimes professors agree instinctively to avoid awkwardness and then immediately realize that they have made a mistake. This gives them a chance to back out in a non-awkward fashion. (2) It helps professors who would be willing to recommend you to "any program except the top X programs" write you the strongest letter possible. I imagine one challenge that writers run into is that they have applicants apply that they feel belong at X rank school but who apply to a number of programs better ranked than X and are then struggling to write a letter that is good enough to get the applicant into X but not so good as to over-place the applicant and make them look bad. If they know they are only recommending you to programs they think you would succeed at, they are less likely to say very positive things about you because there is no fear that they will be responsible for over-placing you. I can't, of course, verify that professors think this way. But it's the way that I would think if I were a professor writing recommendations. Also, Chateau, your letter writers cut you off because they clearly all planned to write that you can walk on water.

My advice: Be straightforward and ask your letter writer if they are willing to write you a compelling letter for X, Y, and Z - level grad programs. Also, you don't need to take classes with professors to have them write letters for you. As long as your job was not literally data entry, they can certainly say enough about you.

Now kiss.

I think you're supposed to fill in the proof part ;-).

Very sad.

You keep it to yourself unless you think that you're such a superstar that you can be successful in the academic world while making enemies. If you do intend to publish a correction, you try not to word it as a correction. Instead, you "modify" their model to "account for other important factors." Or something like that which won't make you enemies.

Honestly, I would find a different program. Assuming this is not a misunderstanding, it seems unethical. But if you want to stay, Humanomics is right. Act swiftly in (1) directly addressing the new coordinator and (2) the old coordinator. Be polite but firm in that you expect the graduate school to honor what it told you during its admit day. If you can, have as many students as possible send similar emails to demonstrate that you really were promised something. Either way, though, you should be looking to see if other programs will take you. If you and your cohort really want the program to listen, the best action is to turn around and tell the program that if they do not honor their agreement, you will be leaving for another program.

It can be done. I know someone who did it this year (after being rejected) from a top program. Some tips: (1) You have to be a viable candidate in the first place. There is a lot of noise so it is not only possible but probable that if you are a good candidate that you will get overlooked. One way to signal this is to be admitted to other top programs. E.g. Yale might be willing to hear an appeal if you got into every other T10 program. This is not something you do to get a substantial rank boost. (2) You have to be willing to attend the program. The person pulling strings for you may look bad if they influence your decision and you do not attend. (3) You shouldn't ask (IMO). If someone is willing to go to bat for you, they will offer. Asking is only likely to make you look like a real entitled jerk. (4) Do not "reach out" to people about admissions. If you are going to reach out to them, reach out to them about doing summer research or something. That will give them a way to (a) review your credentials and (b) learn more intimately if you're a worthwhile candidate. (5) Don't bet on it. The success stories from networking your way into a top grad school are few and far between. In general, just be yourself. Don't "network" like a machine. If you want to work with professors, work with them. If someone decides they want to help you, they will decide to. It's probably not going to happen, and is almost certainly not going to happen if you go in with the intention of using people.

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad: Economics + Mathematics at Top 5 US Liberal Arts College Undergrad GPA: 3.96 GRE: 168Q, 167V, 4.5 AWA Math Courses: Measure Theoretic Probability (A) Real Analysis II (A), Real Analysis I (A), Intro Analysis (A), Probability Theory (A), Abstract Algebra (A+), Operations Research (A), Combinatorics (A), Linear Algebra (A). Econ Courses: Grad Micro II (A), Grad Micro I (A+), Grad Behavioral II (A+) Grad Behavioral I (A+), Advanced Econometrics (A+), Econometrics (A+), Economic Statistics (A+), Undergrad Advanced Micro (A-), Game Theory (A), Intermediate Micro (A), Intermediate Macro (A), Independent Research (A, x5) Other Courses: 1 Semester Computer Science. Letters of Recommendation: Four professors who knew me pretty well. Three LAC profs and one R1 professor. Research Experience: One publication (low tier journal) and one working paper. Two unrelated summer RAships. Two theses. Teaching Experience: Assorted math and economics courses. Research Interests: Micro and Behavioral. SOP: Decently written and not at all risky. Concerns: Mostly unknown professors. Imperfect GRE Q and low AWA. Lack of anything truly stellar to stand out. Applied to: MIT, Harvard, HBS Bus-Ec, Stanford, Stanford GSB, Princeton, Chicago, Berkeley, Yale, Northwestern, NYU, NYU-Stern, Columbia, Columbia GSB, UCLA, UCSD, Caltech. RESULTS: Accepted to: MIT, Harvard ($), Yale ($), Northwestern ($), NYU ($), UCLA ($), UCSD ($). Waitlisted: Princeton (admitted w/ $ off WL), Chicago. Rejected: HBS Bus-Ec, Stanford, Stanford GSB, Berkeley, NYU-Stern, Columbia, Columbia GSB, Caltech. Attending: Harvard. Comments: My results were much better than I could have ever expected. I got very, very lucky. Some lessons to be learned from my experience: (1) Apply lots of places. There is tons of noise in the process. (2) Professor's connections on the admissions committees matter. At the very-top places I was admitted, invariably there were professors on the admissions committees who mentioned knowing one or more of my letter writers. It also helps if someone on the admissions committee is interested in something similar to what you have been working on. (3) It is possible to succeed in the admissions process as an LAC student straight from undergrad. This, however, requires a lot of determination and luck. Most LAC students I met at fly-outs spent at least a year working at a Fed or for a top researcher. That generally seems to be a more effective path.

Keep your fingers crossed. I'm declining tonight/tomorrow morning. +1 spot for you.

Do you mean the funding waitlist or the waitlist-waitlist?

Important: quit waiting to do so. While you won't be a jerk just for declining B to go to A, you definitely will be if you wait until the last second to do so. These people will understand. Do them a favor by letting them know they have one more spot to fill by April 15.

If you're not 90+% interested in finance, I would do NWU. Consumption smoothing is perfectly reasonable. Your expected lifetime income is higher from NWU. Also, I would wait a few days and have an honest phone conversation with Igal in which the two of you try to figure out how to make it financially feasible for you to attend. You have to remember that these people are human, and a human conversation goes a long way.

What's the dress code for flyouts?

I'm going to disagree with everyone here an say: 1. Claremont McKenna 2. Northwestern 3. Nothing. There is no reason to go to any of the other programs. There are tremendous advantages to a rich LAC like Claremont McKenna over all of the other programs you mention: individual attention, better undergrad resources, etc. The only reason it might be worth going to Northwestern over Claremont McKenna is if you were 110% certain you wanted to pursue a PhD in economics---which, let's face it, you're not---because the connections NWU professors have will be better than those of Claremont McKenna professors (though, as far as LACs go, Claremont McKenna has a very strong and well-connected economics department). Also, a number of these faculty have held policy positions, and unlike at a large institution, you will actually be able to interact with them. I go to an LAC with less of a focus on economics than Claremont McKenna, and I was admitted to a few top economics PhD programs. Unless you're someone who really wouldn't be happy at a small school, this seems like a no-brainer to me. Oh, yea... and check out the average yearly temperature!

*deleted*

*deleted*