adam12

I think the reason you didn't get any responses upon first posting is you already have everything planned out and geographical limitation means you only have a few options, anyway, so opportunities for feedback or suggestion is rather limited. Your profile has some idiosyncrasies that will probably provoke different reactions from the adcoms, but provided you do well enough on the GRE there's no reason to think any of the programs you listed are necessarily out of reach. Regardless, pretty much all you can do now is work on completing your thesis and apply to all the programs in SoCal you might have any interest in attending.

There was an accumulation of minor reasons why I chose Evans rather than a single overarching explanation. I applied to the program based on the recommendation of a former professor who had an econ PhD from UW, and I thought it would give me a better opportunity to focus on environment/natural resources with an interdisciplinary perspective than most other programs. They seem to take care to provide research opportunities for PhD students, and while there haven't been many PhD graduates yet the few they’ve had placed fairly well. Its MPA program is highly-ranked and the students and faculty have a lot of justifiable pride in the school (unlike some of the other programs I was accepted into). Location was a motivating factor, too, since I was constrained to stay in the Western U.S., and Seattle works out far better for my spouse. Evans was the only public policy program I applied to; it was the only one in a location that would work for me that was also strong in my areas of interest – the rest of my applications were a mix of ARE, econ, and cross-disciplinary. The application process (including the funding offer and the timeline for application and admission decision) at Evans was typical of the other programs I applied to. The only difference was, in addition to the SOP and personal history statement, I also had to submit a longer writing sample that included something related to policy analysis – I just used an old paper I wrote for a grad school econ class. They seem to like applicants with an econ background, and I’m able to take the micro and metrics core sequences in the econ department my first year, plus field courses in econ and other departments thereafter.

Besides Harvard KSG, obviously, here are a few programs you may want to consider: Duke - either Sanford for Public Policy/Econ or UPEP in Nicholas School of the Environment Columbia SIPA - they have the Earth Institute and students have easily focused on energy/ag/env policy Indiana Bloomington - their public policy PhD students matriculate at the School of Public and Environmental Affairs University of Washington Evans School - I'm starting there next month. UW has a lot of faculty in several departments focused on social science aspects of resource/ag/env

The usual rule is: don't. If they really want you to contact faculty, the program website usually tells you explicitly (common for interdisciplinary programs like Duke UPEP, Bren, etc.). Don't count yourself out of any program too soon. I had a 3.1 undergraduate GPA, a barely-acceptable GRE-Q score, and no research experience, but Davis still considered me one of their top PhD applicants. Plus, I think ag/applied programs value applicants who already have a graduate degree more than econ programs do. Doing very well in your MS and getting good LORs might mitigate whatever modest detriment your undergrad GPA caused.

A switch from mechanical engineering to environmental econ seems like a big change this late in your academic career. Why do you want to get a PhD in econ? That's a question you're going to have to provide a very good answer for in your SOP if you're going to get accepted anywhere. In answer to your questions (as best I can), I think there are less than 30 applied/ag/ARE programs in the US, so breaking into the top-20 wouldn't be too difficult. Certainly easier than top-40 econ. It's hard to say what your upper limit would be since it depends almost entirely on information not provided here - rank of grad institution ("regular state school" isn't very informative), which math/econ courses you're planning to take and what those grades will be, and, most importantly, what sort of LORs you can get. I had a 3.1 undergrad GPA from a top-70 state school before getting a masters in applied econ from a small unranked program with a 3.8 GPA, and my application was competitive at ranked ~40 and lower econ and at top-5 ARE programs. Not sure how much your engineering background will count against you - it will probably vary from committee to committee, though I would guess ARE programs would count it against you far less than econ programs would. Based on the information you've provided it's not impossible for you to get into a top-50 econ program, but it would be unlikely. I wouldn't think a top-10 ARE program would be out of reach, though.

I wasn't able to intern or do any RA work - funding at the program was limited and I needed to keep working (at an unrelated job) while I attended classes. I finished my masters having taken courses that very specifically focused on my areas of interest - a lot of optimization and energy/environmental/minerals econ. I even worked on a couple of class projects that professors and PhD students incorporated into private- and public-sector industry-specific presentations. Most of the masters students already had industry jobs they worked at part-time during the program- they tended to be engineers or geologists that were getting a masters to move up to managerial level positions. Students who didn't come in with a job tended to be successful if they interned somewhere during their second year - if they did a decent job they could usually secure a position where they interned or a something similar. My problem was I didn't have the first and couldn't afford the second.

I was in a somewhat similar situation. I got my masters in applied econ because, initially, I wanted to change careers and do private-sector energy and land-use research. I went on the job market with just a masters and no directly relevant experience, and employers weren't sure what to make of my résumé. I was overqualified for entry-level jobs, didn't have the work experience for advanced/managerial positions, and didn't have the academic credentials for serious high-level research. Basically, after a year of interviews and no offers I decided to get my PhD for the career potential and research flexibility it would provide. Of course, everyone's experience is different. I'm sure a master's degree works out great for some people, and it was even worthwhile for me because none of my PhD applications would have been accepted without it, but I seriously overestimated its value in achieving my initial goals.

I think OP is talking about SMU and UT-Dallas, though where OP's rankings came from I have no idea - it's not the econphd.net overall rankings. I would say ranking still matters though it has decreasing marginal importance the farther one is from the top. Strength in particular fields becomes increasingly important - at least that's my perception. If you look at top placements from lower-ranked programs the students' primary fields more often corresponded to their departments' comparative advantage. But, the key thing about your situation seems to be funding. If funding isn't available first year and not guaranteed thereafter, that's a difference between the two programs of around $50K per year for four to six years. If the department won't invest in you they obviously don't think you can succeed in the program and won't go out of their way to help you do so. Generally speaking, I don't think it's ever a smart idea to accept an offer without a guarantee of funding at some point.

How cunning of you. And here I thought by inflating CU's rankings you were just exhibiting an endowment effect after becoming a student there.

I hate to break it to you sn0skier, but Rice isn't significantly behind CU-Boulder. CU-Boulder>Rice according to NRC R- & S-Rankings, RePEc, and Tilburg. Rice>CU-Boulder according to US News econ grad rank, NRC Student Support/Outcomes, econphdnet, and the testmagic admissions difficulty. Rice is difficult to rank because it's a much smaller program (which is why is why it's ranked lower by Tilburg, and part of why it's ranked lower at RePEc). Sure, just about every ranking puts Ohio State well above Rice, but ultimately it's not just about rankings. More subjective measures like geography, program fit, and expected outcomes should be strongly considered as well if anyone is going to be happy at the program they select.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6952[/ATTACH] Catrina, of course. But honorable mention for moneyandcredit.

That's an unusual situation. At the universities I've attended - and there have been half-dozen of them by now - upper division econ courses, especially game theory, were nearly always open to math and computer science students. Often the pre-reqs was waived in their case or in the case of anyone with demonstrably adequate math prep. First thing, I would put together a list of texts and topics covered in the pre-req courses - that usually gives any professor a good idea of what you've already covered, plus a detailed list of your math prep. If she still won't accept your pre-reqs, email the professor teaching the course to explain the situation. In most cases they have some latitude in enrolling students. If all else fails, enroll in the course and see if they kick you out. In my experience, not completing the pre-reqs means an automatic drop only if there's a long waitlist for the course.

I have a similar situation, and I had to turn down a very good financial offer from my clear top choice to accept a more typical offer from my next choice. The way I see it - I would be fairly happy at any of the programs I applied to, that's why I chose them in the first place. Choosing between my offers is a process of applying multiple selection criteria and sorting them. For me, how well the location will work for my spouse just happens to be one of the top criteria. But it's a difficult choice - optimization problems are relatively easy when there's only a single objective function.

Type of Undergrad: BA in Econ, PoliSci, Intl Relations from large, mid-rank state university Undergrad GPA: 3.1 Type of Grad: MS in applied econ from small, unranked, but regionally highly-regarded program Grad GPA: 3.8 GRE: 169V/162Q/5.0 Math Courses: Undergrad: Calc I/II(A/A), Multivariate Calc(B), Economic Statistics©, Linear Algebra(A), DiffEq(A), Grad: Mathematical Economics(A-), Operations Research(B+), Linear Programming(A), Integer Programming(A), Data Analysis(A+) Econ Courses (grad): Micro I(A-), Macro I(A-), Metrics I/II(A/W), Environmental(A), Energy(A), Topics(A), Resource I/II(B+/A-) Econ Courses (undergrad): Micro(A-), Macro(B+), Metrics(B+), Intl Finance(A-), Intl Policy(A), Intl Trade(W/B), Development(C+), History(B) Other Courses: too many poli-sci courses, some basic science leftover from aborted engineering studies Letters of Recommendation: All econ professors from grad school. None extremely well-known, but all are active. Research Experience: Very little; projects and papers for grad classes, some private sector stats research Teaching Experience: Not really; a little tutoring a long time ago Research Interests: Environmental and resource, political economy, development SOP: I customized it for each school and tried to be both brief and informative while remaining inoffensively bland. It probably seemed boring and vague if anyone bothered to read it. Other: Self-studying real analysis and probability theory. I’m a little older –nearly thirty, married – don’t know if or how that affected my application though it constrained where I applied and which offers I’m willing to accept. RESULTS: Acceptances: UC-Davis ARE($$), Oregon St AE($$), UC-Riverside($$), Oregon, Colorado($$), UW PPM($), Arizona, Wyoming($) Waitlists: Rejections: Berkeley ARE, Arizona St, UCSB Bren Attending: U-Dub, probably Comments: I really wanted to choose Davis, but outside circumstances prevented it. Based on my results, it seems my target schools were a little low. What would you have done differently? Maybe included a couple more reaches in my applications list and fewer safeties, but, overall, I’m pretty happy with my results. I should have planned ahead more – I didn’t even consider applying to PhD programs until last May. If I had thought seriously about getting a graduate degree as an undergrad, or about a PhD while getting a master’s, I could’ve taken pains to improve my profile. Should have prepared more for the GRE and taken it earlier – my mediocre quant score didn’t help my application.

I was told there are about 30 applicants they're keeping on an unofficial waiting list who they haven't contacted yet. Wisconsin AAE has a better reputation, in general, than Oregon State's Applied Econ program. I applied to Oregon State (and not Wisconsin) due to geographical limitations and research interests, but I think it's been a little tumultuous for them recently - losing Plantinga, changing their program name, etc.