Mark Appleyard

Hi all, BU's website states that they only accept GRE scores less than 2 years old. I took my GRE at the end of November in 2011. Do you think they would accept these scores for a January 2015 application deadline (i.e. scores ~3 years old at time of application)? Does anyone have experience dealing with BU in this regard? This is the only program I'm applying to where this is an issue and my original scores were good so I'm not going to retake. Thanks in advance and good luck to everyone who is busy submitting applications!

It's a pleasure :)

Krehb, thanks for the compliments. I looked at the magoosh material that was available for free and did actually find it useful. Humanomics, you make a very good point which I hadn't really thought of.

Please ignore - This is a duplicate that I can't work out how to delete!

I took the revised GRE and scored 169Q, 168V, 5.5 AWA. I started studying at the beginning of a semester during which I was taking a full-credit load of maths courses, and I wrote the GRE a few days after I finished my college exams. I essentially treated the GRE like an extra course and spent a little more than three months preparing for the test. I think I studied for an average of one or two hours a day, but my efforts were a little less consistent than I would have liked. I also studied very inefficiently and could have achieved the same results in much less time. Although this advice is aimed at individuals writing the computer-based test, much of it is transferable to the paper-based test too. The most important thing to remember is that the GRE is not as big a deal as some people make it out to be – just get stuck in! As a native English speaker, I do not think the GRE is all that hard if you study efficiently and you have a decent background (that is, if you can read and write fairly well and you are comfortable with numbers). It is also worth remembering that the GRE is not going to determine your future. So, relax and don’t be afraid to take the GRE on! I think one of my biggest problems was that I kept putting off the test because I was so intimidated; however, once I actually began studying for it, I couldn’t believe how much my results exceeded my very low expectations. It’s better to start with even fifteen minutes of studying a day ratehr than putting off your studying for the day that you have hours to spare – that day could take months to arrive. Have a target score. Look at the websites of programmes you are applying to and find out what scores they expect from their applicants. Bear in mind that the scores quoted are often the minimum scores they expect for your application to be considered, so it is also useful to use other sources of information to find out what sorts of scores successful applicants tend to have. After gathering this information, you should have a target score in mind. Unless you feel very confident or have a lot of time, you should not be aiming for a perfect score in all three sections. Setting out a target score allows you to work within your limits and allocate your time efficiently. Time needed to prepare. When preparing for the GRE, remember that the time you need to prepare will depend very much on your current aptitude and how efficient your study routine is. Some people can ace the test with almost no preparation while others need months of rigorous preparation. Whatever you do, don’t let the people who claim to have studied for five hours a day for eight months stress you out and don’t let the people who aced the test after two weeks make you lazy. You need to find the pace that is right for you. To put my score into perspective, I would say that I was in pretty good shape across all fronts (probably around the 90% percentile across the board) before I even picked up a book but I had a very inefficient study routine. If you monitor your progress closely, you should soon have a fairly good idea of how much time you need to prepare. Some aspects of the test – in my case, vocabulary – can take much longer to learn for than others, so you might want to just focus on this one aspect well in advance before starting your main preparation period. Efficiency – Study smart! Do not dive straight into your books and start studying like a mad person! Studying smart is at least as important as studying hard. Having a target score is the starting point for studying smart. To make a target score useful, however, you also need to monitor your progress. Keep spreadsheets of all the practice tests and exercises you complete and cram as much relevant information as possible into them (e.g. a score sheet, answer choices for incorrect questions, a personal difficulty rating for each question, time taken to complete each exercise, etc). You will probably find that patterns begin to appear and that even within the three main sections there are certain question types that you find especially hard. Once you have this information collected, you can then compare it to your target score and work out which areas you need to focus on. In terms of your actual study plan, I would begin by going through the official ETS material. Remember that ETS make the test (unlike the other publishers of GRE prep material) so they have the most accurate information. Familiarise yourself with the test format before moving on to the background material provided by ETS. Do not underrate the usefulness of familiarising yourself with the test format – understanding the mechanics of the test and how marks are allocated will allow you build a more efficient study programme. Once you have gone through the ETS background material, take the ETS practice test on paper (you want to save the one on the CD for the end as this test is the closest you can get to the real thing). Make sure you take the test under appropriate conditions (see below for more information) and pay careful attention to your scores, as these scores are the data upon which your initial study plan will be built. Once you have worked out a study plan based on the results of this test and your target score, you can then move on to the supplementary preparation materials (Barron’s, Princeton, Kaplan, etc.). Start by reading and memorising all the strategies and content that you need to know. Follow each study unit with revision questions and once you have enough units under your belt (maybe at the end of each week depending on how many tests you have available), take a revision test. Repeat this process and adjust your study plan after each practice test, paying close attention to the data that you have gathered and your target score. Once you get into the home straight (maybe a week or two before your test depending on whether you are studying part-time or full-time), you should ideally have covered most of the material you need to achieve your target score. Now it is time to focus more on test simulation and revision. Take as many full-length, computer-based tests as you can in this period. Remember to incorporate all the study techniques that work for you, such as flash cards (these did wonders for my vocab), mnemonics, etc. There are lots of resources on the net to give you ideas. An important trap that I fell into was that I initially focused on those sections that I found the easiest because it was satisfying and easy yet I still felt like I was achieving something. This is a big mistake that should be avoided. You must begin your preparation by focusing on those areas where you are below your target score and these areas will typically be your weakest. I also think that shorter and more consistent study periods (for example, thirty minutes a day) are much better than infrequent monster periods. This is where you need to be disciplined. Train for the test as well as the content Come test day, you can have all the knowledge you need and still flop the test. The key to doing well on the GRE is speed and accuracy; the questions themselves are not particularly hard. Unfortunately, the GRE is very long and the conditions you write the test in are not the most natural. You need to build up your stamina so that your speed and accuracy do not dip too much towards the end of your test. Focus on developing your concentration so that the little mistakes don’t escape you. I think it is silly mistakes more than ability that separate individuals at the top end of the spectrum. You also need to be comfortable answering questions on a computer. Staring at a computer screen for hours can be very difficult; not being able to write on the screen is another issue; and having to use the on-screen calculator can be very cumbersome. This is why it is best to use computer-based practice materials where possible as you will be much more comfortable with the computer format come test day. Hydration and nutrition are also very important. The GRE is long enough that you can easily become dehydrated and hungry during your test and this will significantly affect your concentration. The catch is that if you drink too much at the wrong time, you’ll either be distracted by the urge to use the bathroom or lose precious minutes actually going to the bathroom. You should learn how to time your liquid intake so that you stay hydrated and only need to go to the bathroom during your break. You’ll also want to ensure that you do not run out of paper in the middle of a section as you will waste some time waiting to get more; remember to always stock up on paper at the end of each section. The only way to develop all of these skills is to take a bunch of practice tests under closely simulated test-taking conditions: only write timed tests and religiously stick to the timing of the actual test; do not refer to any materials you won’t have at your disposal on the day of your test; focus on computer-based tests; limit your paper to the amount that will be available at the testing centre; etc. Your practice tests are going to be much more effectively if you write them like this. I’ll give you an example of a mistake I made. Instead of writing the whole practice test, I would often skip the essays at the start because I couldn’t be bothered spending an hour writing them out before getting to the other sections. Even if you don’t care about your AWA score, it makes no sense to skip these essays when you are practicing if you are not going to skip them on the test day. It saps your concentration and energy to write the essays which makes the subsequent sections all the more challenging, and you need practice tackling the sections you care about when you are slightly tired and worn-out. These might sound like trivial concerns, but I think they are what separate a good score from a great score. Aside from simulating test-taking conditions, there are lots of other training exercises I would suggest. Most importantly, I think some form of meditation (I use this term very broadly) is great for building concentration and calming the nerves. I cannot stress this point enough: no matter what you know, being calm and focused on the day of your test will significantly improve your score. The earlier you can start this meditation routine the better. Meditating every day, even for just ten or fifteen minutes a day, will really improve your mental strength. I would also recommend regular exercise as I find this keeps me sharp and I study much more effectively when I am physically fit. Finally, remember to relax! Take time off and don’t study too much as this can be counter-productive. Counter-intuitively, I think that the need to take breaks actually becomes more important right before you take the test. If you have prepared in advance, do not keep studying just because you are nervous right up until the test; try not to do any studying the day or morning before your test. Of course, if you have left your learning to the last minute, it is probably better to cram something than to go in without knowing some of the essentials. Study Materials. Before discussing the particular merits of the different study guides that I used, I would like to make some general points. First, revision questions and practice tests become far less useful after you have used them once so do not ‘waste’ them. Wherever possible, you should always tackle practise questions in simulated test-taking conditions, as mentioned above. It can be difficult to have the discipline to use the materials correctly when one is tired and studying late at night after work or school, and sometimes it is better to rest than to waste a test under poor conditions. Second, I think that computer-based materials are far more useful than paper-based materials for reasons mentioned already. With regards to the different study guides available, I used four: the ETS book; and the general revised GRE guides written by Kaplan, Princeton Review, and Barron’s. As stated above, the ETS material is special because it is made by the people who make the GRE. This accuracy is particularly useful when it comes to taking practice tests, as these tests are likely to be the most accurate predictors of your performance on the test day. You only get two of these tests (one on paper and one on CD) and a limited number of revision questions, so do not waste them! I have outlined how I recommend using these tests in the study smart section. I found the Kaplan book to be useful for two reasons – a) because it had the most challenging questions and b) because it had lots of computer-based questions and tests that closely simulated the actual test you take. The difficulty level was great because I found that I did at least as well on the ETS questions as I did on the Kaplan ones, so focusing on these tests was a good way of overpreparing for the test. I did not find the strategies in the Kaplan book to be particularly useful. I found the strategies and test-taking advice outlined in the Princeton book to be very useful but the questions were not challenging enough. I barely read the Barron’s book and mostly used it to supplement my practice questions when I ran out of them. There was nothing that really stood out to me during this brief usage of the book and the questions were also quite easy. There are lots of free resources on the internet but I would advise you to stay away from these as it is very difficult to get a sense of how well designed they are. Learning Vocab. For those of you who are interested in building up your vocabulary for the test, I do not advise learning the Latin and Greek roots of words. This strategy was very appealing to me because I like to learn in a systematic manner, but I eventually stopped learning the roots as I think this is more suited to a long-term learning strategy. I found flash cards and ‘brute force’ memorisation coupled with targeted reading, speaking and writing exercises to be very effective. In sum, I would like to emphasise three key points: 1) The GRE is all about speed and accuracy – it is silly mistakes that will cost you most of your marks; 2) Study smart – do not just dive straight in to your books, even if you feel like you have very little time; 3) Training for the test is as important as learning the content.

Given LSE's rolling admissions policy, I was very worried that I had submitted my application too late to be competitive (my application was noted as complete on the 26th of January as it takes some time to process all the documents after you submit them). After browsing the forums, I see that this is a question that has come up many times before. In the end, it seems like I was well within the regular time period for applications as the course availability only changed to ‘closed’ quite a while after I received my offer on the second of March. I also don’t consider myself to be a particularly strong applicant so I would say the competition is still not too fierce at this stage of applications. It is worth noting that this information only applies to the MSc Econ; the EME and two year programmes have far more limited availability. To those people applying to LSE, I would highly recommend registering with the application system and sending a request to your referees before you do anything else. Because you don’t have to submit your application to send out the reference request, you can work on all the other pieces of your application while waiting for your referees to respond. This could save you some stress.

Hi TM/URCHers, I’d like to start off by thanking everyone who has contributed to making this forum the amazing resource that it is. Now that I have a little more time, I have managed to write some long overdue posts. The primary aim of this post is to provide additional information that I did not include in my Profile and Results 2012 and Admissions and Rejections 2012 posts. That said, my thoughts did meander a little and I have provided some opinions on economics and the forum more generally. Please note that my opinions are mostly speculative (I have no insider connection in adcoms and have just started my master's) and are primarily informed by my individual experience and feelings as an applicant. You do not have to have an amazing profile to succeed I think some of the profiles and advice posted on the forum create the perception that you need to be a math major from an Ivy League school with a 4.0 GPA, buckets of research experience and world famous referees to have any shot of a meaningful career in economics. While it is essential to enter a career with realistic expectations and adequate preparation, it is also important not to be overly pessimistic about one’s prospects. I got the shock of my life when I found this forum – I had no maths background (well, I had a C in the introductory calculus course), I had no stats background, I went to a relatively unknown school way out in South Africa, I did not know of any students who had placed well from my programme, and I was barely able to find referees with a PhD let alone famous referees. Reading the profile evaluations and results on this site made me think my dream was over. While this feeling did push me to fix some of those gaps, my confidence was also severely undermined which I found to be counter-productive. Finding the right balance between realism and optimism can be difficult, but I think that people on the forum can overestimate what it takes to get into a good master’s programme. I find Antonio Gramsci’s quote particularly apt in this regard: we should have "pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will". People place too much weight on maths and stats and not enough emphasis on economics Linked to the above point is the overemphasis on quantitative subjects on this forum. Regarding master’s admissions, I think the maths requirements can be exaggerated. I had little beyond the calculus and LA sequence and I did fine in terms of admits, and feel perfectly well prepared for my courses. The flip side of this push towards maths and stats is a neglect of economics. I think the starting point of good economics research is an interesting question, and if one does not have a solid intuitive understanding of economics, one will not be able to ask interesting questions. Sure, you can probably get into a great Master’s/PhD programme without really understanding economics, but that does not mean you will become a great researcher. And while you can certainly pick up economics intuition along the way, I think that people seriously underestimate how hard the thorough development of such intuition really is. I also think an over-reliance on quantitative subjects has implications for how we express our ideas as economists. While I am slowly coming to appreciate the usefulness of mathematics as a language through which ideas can be expressed, I cannot see why one language would always be favoured over another. There is a mind-blowing array of different questions, theories, methods and data within economics and it makes no sense to me that one language should always be seen as the most effective medium of expression for an economist. Different languages have different comparative advantages and a great researcher is able to use the language that is most appropriate for the topic at hand. Generally speaking, I think this forum encourages too much conformity; your individual creativity will be stifled if you try and follow a blueprint for success laid out by others and you will then be just another face in an already crowded subject. Institution Prestige/Rankings Although I cannot be certain, I don’t think the ranking of your UG institution/department matters that much. At the very least, going to a highly-ranked school during UG is not necessary to get into a good master’s programme. I went to two universities in South Africa that are barely even ranked internationally (note that I did not go to UCT, which is the one university in South Africa that does seem to be on the international radar). While there are some people who value prestige for prestige’s sake, I think pedigree really matters because it means adcoms are able to verify what they are getting. In this regard, placement history, particularly one built up over time, seems to be at least as good an assurance of quality. Of course, placement history can backfire if the receiving department believes that your UG institution implicitly overrated a pervious student they accepted. Either way, I think placement history is a very important issue to consider that could be given more emphasis on the forum. Each profile should have a section dedicated to the placement history between an OP’s UG institution and the programmes to which they applied. Referees This point is very closely linked to the one above. From my rather uneducated perspective, there are two crucial elements to a winning LOR. First, the letter needs to clearly establish that you have the necessary qualities to excel in the programme to which you are applying; second, the letter must seem credible. People on this forum seem to focus a lot on the credentials of their letter writers, such as their ‘fame’ and where they got their PhD.While I am sure that credibility is partly a function of these factors, these credentials are not an end in themselves. In my opinion, a factor that is probably more closely correlated with credibility is a letter writer’s previous history of referring students. If a certain prof has a long history of sending his students to a given institution and has accurately ranked these students in the eyes of the adcoms, I am sure said prof’s letters will be seriously considered. Some schools can be tough to crack for internationals I applied to Queen’s as a safety school in case I was rejected from my higher ranked and more prestigious top choices. In the end, I got into my top choices but not Queen’s. Part of the reason I think I was rejected from Queen’s is because I am an international student (of course, it's possible that I simply wasn't good enough in the adcoms eyes). Definitely bear these 'quotas' in mind as they might lead to some surprising results. Happiness Getting into a top ranked programme is neither necessary nor sufficient if one wants to become a great economist and being a great economist is neither necessary nor sufficient for living a happy and fulfilled life. Work hard towards your goals within economics and give it your all but also keep an eye on the bigger picture! Best of luck to all of those applying in the coming cycle. At the end of it all, remember to "enjoy the life, geezers" :) [i've also uploaded my thoughts on the GRE and the LSE MSc economics timeline for those who are interested.]

BACKGROUND INFORMATION: I apologize in advance for the length of this reply. My intention is to provide as much relevant information as possible to future applicants, particularly those from South Africa. Given that many of you are probably unfamiliar with the South African tertiary education system, here is some background that will help you better understand my profile. The first university degree that people typically obtain is a three year bachelor’s degree in which students are required to major in two subjects. This three year degree is then followed by a separate one year honours degree, which tends to be entirely focused on one subject. Normally, this subject will be one of the two subjects that a student majored in during their first degree. The honours year is considered to be a post-graduate degree in South Africa (and I see many people listing it as grad school here on URCH), but it is really equivalent to the senior year of a typical four year undergrad degree in the US. As an example, having a bachelor’s in economics and history and an honours degree in economics seems roughly equivalent to having a bachelor’s degree with a major in econ and a minor in history in the US. After an honours degree, students proceed to a master’s degree and then a PhD. Aside from our different degree structure, South Africa also has a very different scoring scale to the US and a slightly different scale to the UK (I’m not sure about how it compares to other places). Our grading scale ranges from 0-100% and I think the main difference between our system and the one in the US is that there is much more room to differentiate candidates at the top end of the scale. In terms of individual courses, 50% is a pass, and 75% is an A; regarding overall degree classification, a 75% average is required for cum laude and an 80% average is required for summa cum laude. Thus, there is a whole 20%/25% band within which the absolute top bracket of students can still fall, and there is a huge difference between even 80% and 100%. The point of this whole spiel is that 4.0 GPA conversions can be difficult to interpret alone as information is lost in the conversion process. In my case, despite having a sub-4.0 GPA, my percentage average in my econ degree was exceptional and was probably amongst the best in the country. (I’m really sorry if this sounds arrogant. It makes me cringe to write it but I am trying to provide as complete a picture as possible). Thus, I have included both the original percentage scores/degree classification along with the GPA conversions according to this site: GPA Calculator. A last point I would like to make is that I was a terrible student in my first two years of college. I had a 2.73 GPA in first year after taking only ‘soft’ subjects (philosophy, psychology, politics, ethics, media studies), and I scraped a C in calculus A in second year. I ended up graduating with a very mediocre three year degree in philosophy and psychology that had no economics element and practically no quantitative element. Luckily, the overall trajectory was distinctly positive and my third year marks were actually pretty good. These results allowed me to continue to honours degrees in economic history and then economics in which I performed very well. Moral of the story: poor performances early on do not mean that all hope is lost! PROFILE: Type of Undergrad (1): Bachelor of Social Science – Philosophy and Psychology Undergrad GPA: Lower second class pass; 69% Average; GPA: 3.19 Type of Undergrad (2): Bachelor of Social Science (Honours) – Economic History Undergrad GPA: Cum Laude; 78% average; GPA: 4.0 Type of Undergrad (3): Bachelor of Commerce (Honours) – Economics Undergrad GPA: Summa Cum Laude; 87% average; GPA: 3.91 Type of Grad: N/A Grad GPA: N/A GRE: 169Q; 168V; 5.5AWA Math Courses: Calculus A (first time: 58% – C; second time: 100% – A+) [smith’ and Minton’s ‘Calculus: Early Transcendental Functions, Single Variable’]; Calculus B (90% – A+) [smith’ and Minton’s ‘Calculus: Early Transcendental Functions, Single Variable’]; Calculus in Higher Dimensions (98% – A+) [smith’ and Minton’s ‘Calculus: Early Transcendental Functions, Multivariable’]; Linear Algebra 1 (98% – A+) [Anton’ and Rorres’ ‘Elementary LA’]; Linear Algebra 2 (96% – A+) [Anton’ and Rorres’ ‘Elementary LA’]; Intro to Discrete Math (100% – A+) [Kolman et al. ‘Discrete Mathematical Structures’. ]. Econ Courses: Micro 1 – Principles (98% – A+) [Parkin et al. ‘Economics’]; Macro 1 – Principles (92% – A+) [Parkin et al. ‘Economics’]; Micro 2 – Intermediate (100% – A+) [Perloff ‘Microeconomics’]; Macro 2 – Intermediate (89% – A+) [blanchard ‘Macroeconomics’]; Honours Micro (93% – A+) [baby Varian; Snyder and Nicholson]; Honours Macro (76% – A) [A selection of books and articles]; Intro to Econometrics (90% – A+) [Gujarati ‘Essentials of Econometrics’]; Intermediate Econometrics (84% – A+) [Kennedy; Cater et al. ‘Principles of Econometrics’]; Math for Econ (96% – A+) [Chiang]; Macroeconomic Policy (85% – A+); Public Economics (87% – A+); HET (86% – A+); Environmental Economics (93% – A+); International Economics (70% – B+). Other Courses: Descriptive Stats and Probability (84% – A+) [Keller ‘Stats for Management and Economics’]; lots of other courses in economic history (all A/A+), philosophy and psychology (mixed grades). Letters of Recommendation: All of my primary referees (1,2, & 3) are economists who have taught me for at least one semester. To my knowledge, none of them have any connections to the departments to which I was applying and none of them are well known internationally. Referees are listed in order of importance (i.e. I used referees 1 & 2 where only two references were required; SOAS was the one exception, in which case I used referees 1 & 4). 1) PhD Purdue. ‘Best student in the last 15 years’ type letter. 2) PhD Simon Fraser. Extremely positive without going so far as to make comparisons with students from previous cohorts. 3) PhD from relatively unknown South African university. Certainly positive but I’m not sure to what extent. Probably less so than the two above. 4) Economic Historian. PhD Yale. Internationally recognised expert in his field with many close connections at SOAS (where I used his letter). Very positive but not as positive as (1). Research Experience: Two senior theses (Economic History and Economics) – economics thesis nominated by university for a national thesis prize. At the time of application, I had worked for one month as a RA to an economist from the Harvard School of Public Health. Teaching Experience: Tutored one semester of Logic and Reason (Philosophy), Micro 1, and Macro 1. Research Interests: Many, but primarily development, environmental, and international. SOP: I worked very hard on the SOP and it was well written. Aside from what I think was a catchy and different opening ‘hook’, the content was probably fairly standard. Writing Samples (for Oxford): I submitted two pieces to Oxford, neither of which was technical at all. The first piece was an excerpt from my economics honours thesis that included an intuitive discussion of some relatively innovative (for the scope of the piece) extensions of a basic model. The second piece was a report written for my intermediate econometrics class. The report was based on a simulation I ran in Shazam verifying that the t values of a multiple regression model decrease as the R2 value of one independent variable regressed on the other increases. Once again, not very technical, but I think I put some small innovative elements into the simulation code and showed a strong intuitive understanding of the theory underlying the application. Other: I was the recipient of numerous awards from my universities and an external economics society for being a top performing economics student. I have UK Citizenship but not residence (i.e. I am classified as a foreign student in the UK for fee purposes), and SA citizenship and residence. I’m not sure how much nationality and residence matter in terms of gaining entry to a program but they seemed to matter quite a lot for Queen’s and possibly U of T. My program, university and South Africa more generally seem to have an OK history of sending students to most, if not all, of the British Universities/programmes that I applied to. As far as I could tell, this placement history was particularly strong in the case of oxford. I personally know of one student from my programme who completed the MPhil Econ and then the DPhil, and two others who are enrolling in the Development Econ and Financial Econ programs this year. I know my programme also sent a couple people to LSE in recent years but possibly to departments other than econ (e.g. stats). I’m pretty sure the links with the Canadian programmes are much weaker. I am also a reserve list candidate for the commonwealth scholarship. This information had not been released at the time of my application so it had no impact on the results below but it does give you an idea of how difficult/easy it is for South Africans to receive such funding. RESULTS: Acceptances: SOAS (MSc Econ), LSE (MSc Econ), Warwick (MSc Econ), Oxford (MPhil Econ), UBC (MA Econ) Waitlists: Queen’s (MA Econ) seemed to put me on a waitlist of sorts before I was rejected. Rejections: Cambridge (MPhil Econ), Queen’s (MA Econ), Toronto (DSMA and MA Econ) Pending: None Attending: LSE MSc Econ What would you have done differently? All in all, I am very pleased with my results and I got accepted into my top choices. In retrospect, there are many, many things that I would have done differently if I could go back in time, but I’ll limit this to the more obvious and easily remedied mistakes. First, I would have done my senior thesis work with one of my letter writers so that they could have commented on my research potential. Second, I would have planned my course load so that I could have taken a rigorous stats course. Third, I would have applied to one or two continental European schools (Toulouse, BGSE, Tilburg, etc.) instead of Queen’s and maybe U of T. In know it is easy to make claims about where one should have applied in retrospect, but I get a genuine sense that as an international, these schools (especially Queen’s) are harder to crack that their ranking suggests. This seemingly low success rate for internationals coupled with the high application fees and hassle (they require hard copies of all your documents, and U of T wanted a few supplementary documents) make me think that it might have been more sensible to have applied elsewhere. Of course, if you have a good profile, I am sure you can get in to both Queen’s and U of T as an international, so don’t let me discourage you too much! Finally, I think I should have given a couple of lower ranked PhD programmes a shot.

Institution: SOAS Program: MSc in Economics with Reference to Africa Decision: Accepted Funding: Offer was declined before I heard about funding Notification date: 23 Feb (Application forwarded to the faculty: 31 Jan) Notified through: Email Posted on GC: No Comments: Very much expected given previous interaction with faculty at SOAS and the contacts that one of my referees had at their department. Institution: LSE Program: MSc Econ Decision: Accepted Funding: Did not receive Graduate Support Scheme (GSS) award; others pending Notification date: 2 March (Application submitted: 21 Dec; Documentation complete: 26 Jan) Notified through: Email Posted on GC: No Comments: Although I was worried that my application was completed late, it seems that I got it in well within the normal time frame. Institution: Warwick Program: MSc Econ Decision: Accepted Funding: Offer was declined before I heard about funding Notification date: 12 March (Application submitted: 13 Jan; personal confirmation that documents were received - actual receipt could have been earlier: 31 Jan) Notified through: Email Posted on GC: No Comments: Institution: Cambridge Program: MPhil Economic Research Decision: Rejected Funding: I guess not :) Notification date: 12 March (Application submitted: 15 January; references complete: 17 Jan; other documentation complete: end of Jan) Notified through: Email Posted on GC: No Comments: Institution: Oxford Program: MPhil Econ Decision: Accepted Funding: Pending Notification date: 16 March (Application submitted: 20 Jan; considered under first deadline) Notified through: Email Posted on GC: No Comments: Institution: UBC Program: MA Econ Decision: Accepted Funding: $11,000 TA position; partial tuition waiver of $3,000 was pending until I declined the offer Notification date: 19 March (Application submitted: 12 Jan; no idea when documentation was complete) Notified through: Email Posted on GC: No Comments: I was given exactly two weeks to respond to this offer which felt very rushed, particularly in comparison to LSE, Oxford and Warwick who all gave me at least four months to decide. Institution: Queen’s Program: MA Econ Decision: Rejected after being on some sort of waitlist (it seems this happened to a number of people on this thread, see comments for more details) Funding: N/A Notification date: 2 April (Application submitted: 11 Jan; no idea when documentation was complete) Notified through: Email Posted on GC: No Comments: “Our Admissions Committee originally decided to defer a final decision on your application too see if a place would become available. However, our graduate programs are now full for the 2012-2013 academic year, and so we are unable to offer you admission” (from rejection letter). Institution: Toronto Program: DSMA and MA Econ Decision: Rejected Funding: N/A Notification date: 6 May (Application submitted: 5 Jan; no idea when documentation was complete) Notified through: Email Posted on GC: No Comments: Toronto were very particular regarding my application. In addition to asking for two hard-copy transcripts to be sent to them from both of my universities, they asked me for hard-copy documentation proving that the language of instruction and examination at both of my universities was in English. I also got an email from Professor Osborne (who I found to be very helpful and responsive) asking if I could provide an additional reference because the two letters they had received were “not very informative (one letter is not informative at all)”. For a number of reasons, I was unable to provide them with this extra letter which may have affected the outcome of my application.