Isaacn18

Hey everyone! Does anyone know if there is any benefit to getting applications in earlier than the deadline?

Optimization will be much more useful to help prepare you for graduate micro and the MWG material. My school had an optimization course in the econ department that was specifically for this purpose and it covered similar topics. The title of (2) is Real Analysis but as pulsars says, it's more measure theory than analysis. It reminds me of the second course in the analysis sequence at my undergrad school. Not super useful other than for signalling that you like tough math and can do well in it. The third option seems like stuff you would already know based on your "Basic Real Analysis" course. Do you need to take 2? Are you sure you'll do well if you take 2? If you're certain of getting an A in all 3, then take (1) & (2) in my opinion. If it'll be harder to juggle, I'd take (1) and find a more rigorous course than (3) that interests you.

Sorry, I should add that I'm not telling them in the hopes that they will either tell me "yes, you can do it" or "no, my recommendation won't help you get in there." I'm instead hoping to ask them their advice if they think that taking another RA stint is useful (I am currently at the Fed) for this goal. And if the conversation happened to go in a way where they said they don't believe I could get into a Top X school, then I think that information would be beneficial. It may be a tough pill to swallow, but one that is useful in the end.

Hi everyone, it's been a while since I've posted on here but I have a peculiar question and I wasn't sure who to ask about it. For whatever the reasons may be, I am pretty set on doing what it takes to make it into one of the Top X schools. In the past, when I have talked to professors about my desire to go to grad school, they always seemed to offer general comments such as "as long as you end up in the Top X+15, it doesn't make a difference." I have also been told the exact opposite by another economist, for what it's worth. I am now hoping to go back to that former set of professors to pick their brain about graduate school after having been out of undergrad for a year. I am worried it may come off as brash or overly ambitious to say to them that I would like to end up at a Top X school. Is revealing this 'ambition' okay to do? Or should I ask for advice in a general way (eg "I want to strengthen my profile")? Thanks in advance!

I think with your described math background, it won't disadvantage you too much in your RA search. I had a poor intermediate level statistics grade (a B-) and I asked many advisers in undergrad if it was worth re-taking the class and doing well. They said no, just take further classes and do better. So I took Probability Theory, and still didn't do much better (B) though I did do well in my analysis sequence. Somehow I still ended up at the Fed as an RA. Grades are only a foot in the door, it takes an interest in research and knowledge of coding/research skills to be competitive for an RA position. As for how it will look for PhD admissions, from what I've gathered it seems like people outside of the Top 10-15 don't have perfect transcripts.

I want to add my 2 cents in here in agreeing with the above quotes. I am currently an RA at the Fed after coming from a Top 30 PhD institution and from my understanding your profile is similar to mine. I think RA-ing is a good idea for you, but I would agree that non-Fed RA positions are mostly better, especially the NBER ones. If you have questions about the Fed, feel free to reach out.

Hey Everyone, Is there a good place other than amazon to purchase a like new copy of Microeconomic Theory by MWG? I think, for once, I'm going to forego the international versions since I'll be using the book for a while (summer prep, micro as an undergrad, then as a PhD student hopefully). If anyone has one in good condition they'd be interested in selling, shoot me a PM. Thanks, Isaac

Agreeing with your assumptions, not a single job I applied for asked about my work with R, even though I had Stata, R, SAS, Python, and Java listed on my resume. Instead, they asked me to explain some of my projects with Python and Stata. While my situation may not be exhaustive, it is still a relevant first-hand account.

I'll chime in since I'm also a junior and I'm working at a think tank this summer and have some overlap with you. My advice is based on what got me my job at a think tank and what qualifications seem important to get an RA job after college. I took differential equations but I feel like anything you'll learn at an intro diff eq level won't be too useful. I felt the course was useless because it was aimed at engineers. So maybe take it, maybe don't. I don't think its totally necessary but of course more math doesn't hurt. You mention you're experienced with Stata. Make sure you've taken the highest level undergrad econometrics course so you know Stata well. Personally I don't know R well and don't like it, but it does look good on a resume when it comes time to apply for RA jobs. How I got my think tank job and got very far in other interviews was my capabilities with Stata and my familiarity with Python. I've tried self-studying Python in the past but never got far with it, so I found a night college class that I'm now in and learning a huge amount. See if there's anything like that near you. If not, self-studying could work. I don't do well with that so I opted for the night course. So with the aim of an RA job, I'd say Stata and Python are huge and worth getting to know the best. Overall, for grad school though, I think more math seems best.

Hi Everyone, I was wondering if there is a standard time when prospective Econ PhDs take the GRE? I am planning on applying this fall and would rather have it done before the fall semester starts. Also, if you take the GRE twice but only want to send the second score, does the first score get sent as well? Thanks, Isaac

If you're planning on doing an RA after, then definitely take as many classes and do your thesis the Spring 2017 semester. As startz said "you need math classes." So spend the semester getting them. Especially since the spring semester courses will show up on a grad school application if you do an RA after.

What would be considered first year grad level training? I think my economics department says Optimization and Game Theory are needed for PhD Micro whereas applied Econometrics is needed for PhD Metrics. Would those be the requirements?

I'm not sure but wouldn't anything done after you apply to PhD programs be moot? So taking the extra classes in the 2nd year Spring wouldn't do anything for you in terms of your application, right? Then you'd also have to consider when you do the thesis and if you want it to be finished by the time you apply.

Hi Everyone, It's been a while since I've posted anything here but I'm in a tough spot regarding my classes for the fall (and beyond). Therefore, I have a quick question that should help me out. Two options: Take a 400 level elective with a full professor (ex Game Theory, Optimization, etc.) Take a PhD level elective with a full professor Assuming that you'd get the same level of acquaintance with (and possibly a letter from) each professor. Assuming effort would be maximized between the two. The first would probably be easier to get a better grade in, I'm assuming, since the workload won't be as tough or constant. But let's say you were to get an A in each. Is there an advantage to one over the other? My considerations: The elective gives you the ability to learn about a specific area of economics and perhaps narrow down a path for grad school The elective gives you a better chance to stand out. Being the one future PhD student in a class of 40 vs the one undergrad in a class of 10-20 means you'll be more impressive in the former. PhD level As mean more than undergrad level As though Level of difficulty of getting to know a professor in option 1 seems like it could be harder than in the PhD class. My feeling here is that professors are more interested in their PhD-level students (so you could use that to get your foot in the door). I'm sure I'm missing something but I tried to jot some ideas down to help an answer. Basically I'm trying to maximize my exposure to better professors (scheming, as my bschool friends call it) while still being able to take interesting economics courses. Thanks, Isaac

Hm, so yankeefan, you're saying that reading these authors isn't worth it since they're so far outdated and that earlier economists have superceded their work and included whatever arguments are strong/sound. Do you (or others) have recommendations then for a book(s) to start one's reading on the topic of economics? History/theory/whatever it may be, I'd like to read a few books that can help me in the long run in a quest to get into grad school. When you mentioned Varian's Microeconomic Analysis, are you talking about the textbook used in intermediate microeconomics? If so, I used the book this past semester and it's helpful but never ends up explaining how to do the math problems associated with the ideas.

Hi everyone, i'm looking to start a new book and am looking for econ-related suggestions. Last summer I read The Alchemists by Neil Irwin and loved it as I enjoy learning about central banking. I was hoping to read some of the works of the likes of Adam Smith, Marx, Keynes, Hayek, Friedman, etc. but would like to parse through their longwinded (especially Smith) writing. Is there a good book out there that has some of the more famous excerpts? I guess I'm either lazy or excited to read more current books but can't imagine skipping the foundations. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks everyone for the input! Is it acceptable to approach other professors besides the ones I have class with? Integral, hopefully you'll reply to my PM if you see this! It would be really appreciated.

Hi everyone, I'm in my first semester of college and trying to figure out what courses to take next semester. I'm looking for guidance about how to maximize my courses to put me on a path towards a top-tier phd program (as cliche as that sounds). I'm currently in an introductory class where we're learning Java, and I plan on continuing that. Is that a smart move? There's an engineering course called Intro to Engineering Tools: Matlab and Simulink. I've seen Matlab get tossed around a little bit on here and was wondering if it might be a good class to look into? Or should I stick with Java for now and take other classes? Also, when it comes to math courses, what is the best sequence of classes to take? Calc I-III then what? Can/should I be taking other classes with Calc 3? Thanks so much!

Thanks for the advice! I’ll look into the calculus book. There really should be a place all you graduates can rank your favorite textbooks and write reviews on them, more intensely than just on Amazon. What do you mean by intro to proofs books? Can you possibly link me to one you prefer?

Thanks, I guess I misunderstood the use of the book. I know it’s used as a refresher before grad school, but I guess that’s different than using it to learn things for the first time. I’m gonna pretend like I know what “compute eigenvalues or invert a martrix… or take a langrangian” means yikes. I just added the Feynman book to my to-read list on goodreads.com! Thanks for the suggestion. When you say calculus sequence, does this mean only Cal I-III? Or other types? If it’s the latter (as in, I will be using it for more than 2 semesters – I’m skipping Calc I) then is there a book you recommend? I’ll take this as a compliment…. I guess all I can say is that I’m very excited to study economics. After meeting with Fed Governor Duke and one of her Economists, James Clouse as well as Secretary Lew this past May, I really want to jumpstart my economics education. Thanks again to everyone for the input, it is appreciated!

Hi Everyone, I was wondering if anyone recommends any good books for an aspiring economist. I'm currently reading The Alchemists and next up is Lords of Finance (just met Ahamed on Wednesday). Any other suggestions? I was told by a family member who is an economist at the Bank of Israel that reading the foundations of economics (such as Keynes and Hayek) would be a good idea. Thoughts on that? Also I was reading about this textbook by Simon and Blume and had a few questions. -Is it worth getting it before I start my undergrad to have it as another reference? I probably would peak at it before school starts and over the next 4 years. -If I do get it, which edition is the best to get? I see there is a 1994 and 2006 -Lastly, any good places to purchase a cheap copy? Where do you guys buy your textbooks from? Thanks so much, this forum is so useful and helpful. I think I've spent more time on here than on ESPN over the last week! Isaac

Wow - can't believe I forgot to reply to you all! I feel bad, but better late than never. Thanks everyone for the advice. I used to want to be a Biology major, and hearing from my friends about all the great opportunities to work in labs once in college, I thought that was the only real option in Econ too. Guess I'm wrong! Thanks everyone for your advice, it's so useful!

Hi Again Everyone, I recently posted asking for advice regarding a few undergraduate institutions and which ones you guys thought were best. Of those, I am currently choosing between attending WUSTL (Wash U in St Louis) or attempting to get off of the waitlist at Claremont McKenna College in California. I recently met with the undergraduate academic coordinator at WashU and she said that research positions with faculty are basically nonexistent for undergrads. Her reasons were that technology has allowed professors to do things on their own and that graduate students take all the available positions. She did assure me that research does not matter when applying to PhD programs, and that it is more important to do well in math and economics courses. I was just wondering what everyone's view about that is here. Is she telling me it wont matter truthful? I was pretty shocked because I thought research was very important for PhD admissions, but I'm certainly not one to question her so that's why I'm here. Thanks, Isaac

Thank you everyone for the continued help! Unfortunately last night I was rejected by Northwestern, so that is now out of the equation. :( I guess it comes down to WUSTL and Claremont Mckenna, if I get in there

Thank you. I certainly am not set in stone with my interests, but as of now this is where I see my undergraduate studies taking me. As for Claremont McKenna, I know they are a very good institution mainly focusing on economics and government. As someone who may one day want to get into government economics, wouldn't going there be a good idea?