chrishacker

Haven't been here for a while. Well, I am that kind of person that will be ranked maybe upper 30% in every school that could possibly admit me. I don't know about you, but don't ever underestimate the power of laziness...

I used to contact a professor in order to clarify a formula in his paper. However, if it is for admission purposes, don't send out 'I am interested in your article XXX and want to work with you' which is basically useless or even harmful. But if you, say, have solved an open problem in his paper, you can ask him to provide a recommendation or so. But this is very difficult, as can be expected.

B+ in calc III, A in linear algebra, B in intro to proofs (ouch), A in differential equations, A in abstract algebra. Well, I think you are at the stage in which the marginal effect of real analysis reaches its maximum. Be careful. For those get 10 As in math, a B or A in RA won't affect much, I guess. On the contrary if you get a few more Bs, your math will be considered 'poor' regardless of your RA grade. That being said, If you get an A, that means 'this guy can get As in upper-level math'. If you get a B...probably people will think 'probably the abstract algebra prof gives everyone an A' Good luck.

Wow, I never had such an experience here: I return to the forum after one week, only to find that the topics are still so familiar...

No one plans to be in an administration position in this forum, though some might end up with it.

Economists are more of a group of people who share the same methodology than a group of people who study the same object. So the conformity exists and are valued very highly for a long time, and it is not declining as you might think.

Well, I don't actually think that any individual is purposefully misleading anyone. I am just saying that the whole picture provided is a little...misleading in some sense that it seems acing the graduate course/math is the best way to make up with 'relatively' weak undergrad profile. So there is nothing a master degree can do. After all, what we can do is to get an A, which just means 'better than the median'. Anyway, why I never met such a course? :victorious:

Well, many people are told that bunch of math and grad micro/macro/metrics with at least an A- are the key to a top 20-30 (let alone top 5), only to find that now the adcoms' taste have changed that an A+ in intermediate micro> an A- in grad micro. If they know earlier, they might decide to give up earlier, which is better for everyone. And we are repeatedly told that 'you can't do anything important without courses in advanced theory, or at least have equivalent knowledge', yet there are people who have a solid research experience despite their insufficient knowledge, though I think it really is 'everyone says to the public that this is insufficient knowledge in order to mislead future applicants'. OP: I have nothing personal towards you and I But a person like you should really listen to your rec letter writers ONLY instead of posting here. What you do is typically called BSO, though I admire your achievement and wish (and I think) that you'll be accepted in one of the best schools you apply for. Not serious: I want to re-apply to be an undergraduate. Seriously: I will make politics and behavior of economists as my second field.

OP: we don't care how much you (or cheatau) should be blamed in this incident. Please talk about something ACADEMIC from now on, instead of throwing 'It is not my fault' around, if you still want to post.

OP: Just take first-year PhD courses to ensure that you know what the mainstream idea is, and after you pass the prelim, if you still want to do critical theory, go ahead. Although I don't study that critical theory, I think some common sense in science philosophy (the stuff that some heterodox scholars seem to know nothing about) also helps. Here is an quick introduction. https://www.coursera.org/course/solidsciencemethods

It seems that the more serious problem is...Is Krugman so busy writing in media that he doesn't spend enough time evaluating his RAs? And my guess is that macro guys care ideological issues more than others, lol...

Why? (I seriously doubt that Nash has ever sent out a RL these years, lol).

Well, if it is just for admission, it's not necessary or encouraged. But if you are really interested in one's work, it's fine to contact them to get more info. Maybe that helps in application and maybe not (in most circumstances). Anyway, are we really ready to start to think that economists are no longer clever enough to see whether you talk to him for application or for real interest? For Shalom Ichthys's case: I seem to do the same (but not exactly in the same way...I just see whether there are experiemental&behavioral /game theory guys and if there are, I read their paper and state that I am interested in their work) in my econ (master) application and I add some stat programs as well. In my stat application I just admit that I know nothing about current stat research and I am curious about stat problems met in my research project. Now I am in a stat program. Hope that helps.

I guess the more serious problem is your school and your Bs in linear algebra and differential equations. BTW, before applying I would probably ask 'does my grade in algebraic topology count?' If the answer is yes, I will simply not apply to that crazy program (I haven't taken it, actually, lol).

I guess that even a course in cal-based probability won't send significant signals because it is highly correlated with your calculus and linear algebra scores. So if you get As in calculus, the marginal benefit is limited. If you don't do it well, probably you should do it again or take an analysis course instead of a probability course. Either way it wouldn't help much.

My guess is that it wouldn't help in most circumstances. But since it wouldn't hurt you at all, my advice is to put it in your CV/Resume using a single sentence. Don't spend time explaining how fit you are in your PS, though.

If you are Asian, you are expected to have higher grades in all quantitative sciences including economics. However, probably econ departments are among those which are least willing to lean towards 'minorities' or female, although this does exist.

There are many resources of self-learning in Calculus. If you are confident, and if you have a lot of time in this and the next month, just learn Cal II now and directly go to Cal III in the next semester. And you can register for Cal I just to get a grade on it at the same time. BTW, I believe that there are schools which only offer 2 semester of calculus but succeed in covering all materials needed. I oppose ideas like 'to take course XXX (especially topology) in order to send a signal' in general, but your circumstance (too little formal training) is an exception for sure.

If your writer is a faculty member and he says positive of you, the letter is at least not destructive.

I can't understand anyone who take graduate-level topology in order to apply for econ PhDs. Or more precisely, if sequences of analysis---real analysis---graduate probability and stochastic processes are still not enough for you, why not study mathematics instead?

From your post it seems to imply that economists can't test theoretical results empirically, which is wrong. Why do we have econometrics? Even if there is something very fundamental that can't be tested, this applies to hard sciences, too. You indicate that hard sciences has little room for controversy, which is also wrong. There are huge controversies in math actually, especially in 20th century for the foundations. Another example: Before complex analysis was widely applied in physics, some mathematicians even thought that complex numbers are wrong, artificial concepts in order to validate fundamental theorem of algebra...

Statisticians can stay in stat/math departments and work with economists if they wish. And there are many econometricians graduated from econ programs every year who can fill all the positions available. So there are neither demand nor supply, thus it won't happen.

I don't know a single science guy who wants to read books written by Newton or other ancient people. Knowing the history of your subject is important, but reading these texts is simply not the most efficient way for that purpose. Using other people's (I mean, historians who actually read the text) wisdom is far better.

I am just curious how much time students are allowed to finish the final......seems a lot of work to do.

If I were you, I will not consider BU or Columbia if I have BGSE...I agree with everything coffeehouse says except for one thing...75% acceptance rate is clearly not a joke. You have to make it larger than 100%