pch

I don't have any up-to-date info, but my 2 cents: - It would be surprising that they'd kick out people after the Research Master - what would be the point of getting them in the first place? I know that 2 years ago they were actually trying to make sure that people don't leave but rather stay in their PhD and this is when they introduced basically a "guarantee" that you can go to PhD phase conditional on good progress - and they expanded the number of PhD spots to something like 15, if I remember correctly. Has this changed? - Funding in PhD phase should be 100% certain, because by Dutch law PhD students are actually treated as employees of the university. So this is surprising news that some people would not get funded in PhD phase?

One major advantage of Duke is that you can actually take courses in the Sanford School and work as a TA/RA for professors there. They are eager to hire Econ MA students.

I am in a similar position this year, admitted but waitlisted for funding. I also applied to Bocconi 2 years ago and I was rejected. However, 2 years ago they still published the names of all the accepted and rejected applicants. I actually checked the list with every accepted applicants and as far as I remember, in the end every applicant who took the offer got funding as well (every Bocconi PhD student has their CV online and they always list the fellowship if they have it). Anyway, I'm just really worried that even with the scholarship a 1000 EUR in Milan is hard to survive on comfortably. I have 2 well funded offers from US schools but Bocconi has the strongest faculty in my field of interest, so I have quite a dilemma right now.

Duke is probably the best program of the 3 you got into. Anyway, why don't you just wait with accepting the offer? You have until April 15th, there is no reason to do it before accepting the offer. I don't think accepting the offer would improve your chances. If something, it might reduce your chances. Duke waiver depends on a lot of things. You might not get anything, but I think the highest possible is like 75 or 80%.

You can get into these programs with very light math prep that will not get you admitted into a top 40 program in the US. However, to do well in these programs, you will be better off having more math. For instance, in Bocconi's ESS your first semester would have this course: Course - Universita' Bocconi It would be an overkill with a very light math background.

At this point you should probably just sit back and wait for the results.

Do not try to edit and improve this letter. You should find another professor who will be willing to write a letter for you. Make sure they get to know you, make sure you do work that will impress them. Only then can a letter be informative and speak of your ability to do a PhD.

Torsten Persson is NOT at SSE but at SU. Also, he is not at the Department of Economics but at IIES. As a master's student, you are unlikely to have any contact with him. Both schools (SU and Bocconi) are strong for political economy but for a Master's program, this should be far from a deciding factor! In that sense, LSE EME is a much better choice then Stockholm. Also, if you really care about political economists in the department, then LSE has this guy called Timothy Besley, among others, who, well, happens to be one of the top political economists in the world. Since you are already at Bocconi, see if you can switch to ESS. This program is an excellent preparation for a phd in economics.

The problem with this reasoning is that you have no guarantee that you will be closer to the top of your cohort in a lower ranked program (whatever you mean by lower ranked). It is also not necessarily true that quals are harder at higher-ranked schools. Also, consider the fact that your results in coursework may not reflect your results in research. You may be on the weaker side in coursework but still write a decent JMP.

It's likely that job postings do not hang on the website for 1 year, but much shorter. Thus, at any given time there will be less postings than the aggregate number of postings in any particular year.

I feel like your math background should not be an issue. You took the important courses, you have taken grad econ courses and also a grad course in functional analysis, which would be a strong signal regarding your math abilities. The more crucial part of your app is getting strong letters.

First of all, what are your research interests? If you can do well in the math courses that you are planning to take, you will be set math-wise. You may want to inquire about the people from your school who have gone to top 20 schools. Was their coursework significantly different, did they have particular professors write their letters? One things that you may be missing is research experience. Are there any opportunities to work as an RA at your school? Are there any professors active in research?

It is not uncommon for top public policy programs to require students to take microeconomics and econometrics core courses at the economics department.

Just my 2 cents - I feel like there is one problem with depending on rankings: there isn't really one agreed upon ranking. I have met so many people who use absolutely different criteria for personally ranking schools. Even when it comes to formal rankings, you would be surprised but not everyone uses US News. And once you consider field preferences, rankings may seem a little different too. And yes, sure, some things everybody will agree on - like, say, MIT dominates Idaho State. But once you get closer in "ranking", heterogeneity of preferences plays a big role. To give some examples: would you go to Chicago (unfunded) or Rochester (funded)? Would you go to a school where your spouse got accepted too or to some other school? Would you go to Minnesota do applied micro or somewhere like, I dunno, JHU?

There are still many unknowns about your profile, but I think you would have a shot at MA programs. Which programs in particular are you considering? Anyway, people really underestimate the difficulty of MA programs. For an MA program to help you, you would need to do reasonably well in those technical courses. If you already struggle, it may be the same when in a MA program. Unless you know that something will change, I would think twice.

I would omit stuff that's irrelevant. Nobody's interested in that and it only distracts from what's really the essence of your CV.

I would not address it in my SOP. If somebody is actually reading your SOP, that means they were fine with your GRE. If something, see if one of your letter writers can mention it.

What country is your degree from? That matters a lot. But generally I do not think there is a point to attend a lower ranked Master's program in your case.

For that reason, if you do mention professors, do not mention less than 3. Do not mention professors without tenure and do not mention very senior professors who are likely not to advise grad students anymore or even retire soon.

My two cents: 1. Don't worry about your A-, it doesn't matter. 2. Look into Agricultural and Resource Economics programs too. 3. You need good letters. You don't have to have letters from people with top 10 phds. More important is to get letters from people who publish in top journals and who know you very well. 4. You really need RA experience, also to get a letter. Consider getting an RA job after graduation for a year or two. Corollary: invest some time and effort into econometrics and perhaps some programming to make yourself more attractive as a potential RA. 5. Since you are international, see if you have time to do some TA. Some lower ranked departments may look at this favorably as often they will want you to teach. 6. Do not worry about trying to get your work published. 7. Focus on getting good grades in your math courses. 8. Your GRE is OK, but if you can get it higher, that's always nicer. But don't do it at the cost of math or research experience.

I think it would be a good idea to talk to your LOR writers. Perhaps they can make some phone calls to make sure that your application will not be desk rejected. Standards change every year with whoever is on the admission committee that particular year. GRE is high school math but if you know your math, that shouldn't be difficult to get a top score. I think there are too reasons why people score low: either they suck at math or they haven't done their homework on GRE prep. Either way, it's not a good signal but definitely something that can be mitigated by other parts of your application package.

OP, what I've heard from a number of professors who were on admission committees is that "it depends". My AW is also 3.5 and I feel that writing is probably one of my strengths, although I am not as good at doing it under time pressure, or so it seems. I was advised by professors that whether this score is good enough or not depends not on the school itself but on who's on the admission committee that particular year. Schools/departments having cutoffs for AW score are extremely rare, but particular admission committees may impose those at their own discretion. So the point is - you can't know whether this score is good enough or not and so you should retake the GRE if you can (but not at the cost of, say, hurting your exam preparation).

I think you have a shot at Duke. Not sure about other programs. Just make sure you treat the supplementary part of the application and personal statement seriously.

I think the best way to learn math is to do tens of problems. It is all about practice. With practice will come a better understanding.

Kevin, at this point you have no chance of getting admitted into an economics phd program. I am not sure if doing a Master's in economics would be helpful because courses will only get more difficult. Other than that, there are many unknowns regarding your profile, i.e. you are yet to take some more difficult classes such as real analysis or linear algebra, you haven't taken GRE. I think it is a good idea to consider less quantitatively oriented programs because these may still allow you to do what you like.