krasotaimosgi

Hello everyone, Been reading lots of the collective wisdom, and am coming up with a question of my own. How would you guys evaluate Oxford Econ Dept.'s standing in terms of 1) research output (overall and by fields) 2) graduate education (PhD/DPhil) level in relation to both UK and US top departments? From my readings and informal information gathering it already appears to be Is historical prestige really what Oxford has got left at the graduate and research level? Cheers for your opinion!

Hello there fellow economists! Just a quick advice request. How would you rank UK PhDs in Econ based on 1) job market placement 2) how they are viewed in the US (how their PhDs are viewed in the US, not how their MSc's or their name brands are viewed in the US) 3) toughness to get in My interests lie broadly within applied micro. Please do bear in mind I do not intend to rank in terms of prestige ( If you wish to add a prestige ranking, go ahead!). Looking forward to your advice guys!

Thanks!

and sorry for the double posting!

Hi Cerealist, Thanks for your thorough and clear response. From the level of detail of your suggestion, I may gather that you did your MSc at LSE? Are you on your PhD? (Feel free to PM me if you do not feel to answer on the forum). Now that I have fulfilled the conditions of my offers (and ditched the Warwick option), I am undecided between UCL and LSE. I know rather clearly where my research interests stand : applied microeconomics and microeconometrics (I fairly like the relevant theoretical sides, however I am sure I can confirm this only after my MSc, whereas I have had a brief RA internship in applied micro, plus my dissertation in labour, and can definitely say I love them). My very first instinct is clearly LSE, for the following reasons: 1) the brand, the prestige etc.; 2) I live in London and I just prefer the LSE ambiance to the UCL ambiance (from visiting friends studying there). I come from a competitive, business upbringing, and perhaps the atmosphere at LSE, however academic, does have more of a competitive, proactive feel; 3) LSE MSc Econ does appear (to me) to be more "scary" in terms of challenge (ie. the difficulties in getting distinctions etc.). As a person I am driven by challenge, hence a "natural" tendency to accept the LSE offer. However, my doubts rise from the fact that UCL is extremely strong in my research interests (especially in labour, one of my first interests, and in microeconometrics - highly important to me since I am keen on equipping myself with the widest econometrics knowldege need for applied micro research). Taking only the departments' applied micro research strengths into account, you might agree that UCL and LSE are basically the same, perhaps UCL might be even better. Furthermore, your approach in finding out the paths of previous MSc students is indeed the best option - however finding this information from both LSE and UCL seems a bit hard. I believe it would not be too naive to assume LSE to have a (perhaps only slightly) higher record of placements into top 10-15 US PhD programmes overall, and that by accounting for placements by research interests, UCL and LSE might score similarly in placing applied micro -inclined students in the same US PhD programmes. All that said, and assuming (hypothetically, for now) that I would equally excel at both programs, and particularly excel in micro, labour and econometrics modules, which programme would give me that extra edge required for getting into a top US PhD programme? You might well agree with me that is a very hard answer, given my research interests!

Hi Cerealist, Thanks for your thorough and clear response. From the level of detail of your suggestion, I may gather that you did your MSc at LSE? Are you on your PhD? (Feel free to PM me if you do not feel to answer on the forum). Now that I have fulfilled the conditions of my offers (and ditched the Warwick option), I am undecided between UCL and LSE. I know rather clearly where my research interests stand : applied microeconomics and microeconometrics (I fairly like the relevant theoretical sides, however I am sure I can confirm this only after my MSc, whereas I have had a brief RA internship in applied micro, plus my dissertation in labour, and can definitely say I love them). My very first instinct is clearly LSE, for the following reasons: 1) the brand, the prestige etc.; 2) I live in London and I just prefer the LSE ambiance to the UCL ambiance (from visiting friends studying there). I come from a competitive, business upbringing, and perhaps the atmosphere at LSE, however academic, does have more of a competitive, proactive feel; 3) LSE MSc Econ does appear (to me) to be more "scary" in terms of challenge (ie. the difficulties in getting distinctions etc.). As a person I am driven by challenge, hence a "natural" tendency to accept the LSE offer. However, my doubts rise from the fact that UCL is extremely strong in my research interests (especially in labour, one of my first interests). Taking only the departments' applied micro research strengths into account, you might agree that UCL and LSE are basically the same, perhaps UCL might be even better. Furthermore, your approach in finding out the paths of previous MSc students is indeed the best option - however finding this information from both LSE and UCL seems a bit hard. Assuming (hypothetically, for now) that I would equally excel at both programs, and particularly excel in micro, labour and econometrics modules, which programme would give me that extra edge required for getting into a top US PhD programme? You might well agree with me that is a hard answer, given my research interests!

Hi fellow economists! I'm soon graduating from my BSc Economics in London (not Uni of London), and have three offers lined up for my MSc Economics: LSE, UCL and Warwick. My final goal is to enter a US top 10-15 Econ PhD programme. Any suggestions on why any of my offers could be better than the others with regards to maximising my chances of achieving my final goal, life-work balance, and any details that might come up to your minds are well welcome!

OK, so now I have two offers, one from Warwick and one from Lse. I'm looking forward to your well-argumented suggestions as to how I might prefer one or the other, keeping in mind my final goal (US top 10 PhD, applied micro/maybe some theoretical specialisation, too). I was wondering, apparently at Lse lectures are taught by PhD students or young researchers. Does anyone have a clue how hard it would be in practice to access those professors/researchers at Lse who would be the best names for my US application? Most US applications' deadlines are around early December, hence I would roughly have two months to get them to know me before I submit my applications.

Hi Tommaso, I have the same question as weirdwitch. Are you a UCL student? How would you rate the chance of getting good references from UCL, Warwick, Bocconi for a US top 10-5 PhD? Cheers

Hi Giova, and Hi Martina, I am pretty much in a similar situation as you guys were, and was wondering what did you decide in the end?

I agree with the reputation bit, as of scholar's reply, too. I'm not sure how doing very well in any program can make me well set for a top admit. My goal is US top 10. By looking at the faculty at Warwick and UCL I honestly do not see many US PhD's, and neither a proven track of US PhD placements (specifically, I couldn't find anyone from Warwick MSc to US PhD). At the end of the day those US top 10 departments get hundreds of applications. A striking majority of those have brilliant, if not stellar GPA's. Many have great research experience. Hence, as we all know, what makes the difference at the end of the day is who writes the reference for your PhD studies. I assume strong references would come from either: 1) former PhD students/lecturers/researchers in those top 10 US unis; 2) someone with a proven track of sending great students over to those unis in the past, or, ultimately, 3) someone who has a huge name in his field. Warwick is great, and I agree with UCL being an awesome place in terms of preparation, but do you think at the end of the day that I might get strong references over there (counting for the fact that I won't have enough time to get known by professors either)? Also, how would you rate the MSc Economics from Bocconi in this light?

Thanks for your clear-cut advice! I assume you're from LSE or very deeply acquainted with the environment over there. Are you a PhD student? I was thinking of Applicable Mathematics since I spoke to the course representatives at the LSE graduate open evening, and getting in does not seem very hard compared to MSc Economics. Would it be such a bad idea altogether to focus on Maths in preparation for my PhD, wherever it might be? On the other hand, distancing myself from econ research for one year wouldn't look good either. I have an offer from Warwick at present (still waiting from LSE and UCL), and was thinking that in terms of US top-PhD prospects, the MSc Applicable Mathematics at LSE might be better than the MSc Economics (Warwick). I was also considering the MSc Economics and Social Sciences in Bocconi, Milan. Given their US PhD placement records, it appears to me as standing well above Warwick and UCL.

Hi all, Been following the advice shared on this forum for a while and finally decided to step in and ask for some advice myself. I am completing my final year of a BSc Economics in a mid-tier UK university (not such a bad one, students have been continuing on to some LSE courses in the past and the like). I will hopefully graduate at the top of my class and am expecting a first-class degree. My final goal is to apply for a PhD in Economics at a top US institution - say top 10 (top 5 would be my dream, like any economist's I guess). My interest is in applied micro, however given that I really enjoy theoretical proofs and the like, I am open to concentrate on more theoretical/mathematical fields depending on how I will score on (and feel about) those at masters level. How would you guys, given your experience, rank the following options for maximising chances of getting into a top US PhD: MSc Economics (LSE); MSc Economics (UCL), MSc Economics (Warwick), MSc Applicable Mathematics (LSE). I am not a maths genius, but I do enjoy myself a lot in maths and stats modules and thought gearing up on maths in preparation for an econ PhD wouldn't be too bad an idea, given how much weight is put on maths at that level. Again, references from economists are, I guess, much more important than how much maths I did at my MSc, however applied to social sciences... Looking forward to your advice!