economicsbro

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad: LAC ranked somewhere between 10 and 20 Undergrad GPA: 3.8 Type of Grad: None Grad GPA: N/A GRE: 170Q, 160V, 4.5A Math Courses: Calculus I&II, Linear Algebra, Math Stats I&II, Stats, ODE, PDE, Real Analysis I&II (All As, except B+ in both Real Analyses) Econ Courses: The usual suspects (All As) Other Courses: Nothing noteworthy Letters of Recommendation: (1) Undergrad Thesis Advisor (AP – Top 20 PhD) (2) Undergrad Econ Professor (AP – Top 40 PhD) (3) Fed Boss (Top 5 PhD; Top 10% IDEAS/RePEc) All three know me very well. Ex-post, I’m sure they were all very strong letters and that I owe a lot of my success to these people. Research Experience: Undergrad Thesis, Fed RA Experience Teaching Experience: TA’d a couple times Research Interests: Applied Micro SOP: Well written. Explained research experience and what I’d like to work on in future. Tailored somewhat to each program, often mentioning specific work that faculty had done that I found interesting and related to what I want to do. Concerns: Applied to the top 20 in an earlier cycle and got shut out. B+’s in Analysis. Not as much math as some of the crazies. Other: Applying for the second time, after spending time as a Fed RA and with different recommendations. RESULTS: Acceptances: Berkeley ($$$), Duke ($$), Michigan ($$), NYU ($$$), UCSD ($$), Wisconsin ($$), Yale ($$$) Rejections: Cornell, Columbia, Harvard, MIT, Stanford Comments: I am very happy with the results. Can’t wait to start! What would you have done differently? Applied for the NSF for sure. Studied more for, and done better in real analysis. Taken one or two more math classes.

The amount of "randomness" or "noise" in the phd admissions process is completely overblown on this forum. "Randomness" and "noise" imply that adcoms are interpreting the same signal differently (w.r.t. quality and potential), when for the most part they are not. Once you control for fit within the department (i.e. interests), being rejected because you are "too good", and personal connections of your recommenders, there is very little noise. In the first two cases, they are interpreting the same signal the same way. If you're interests are better suited to another department or you are "too good" it makes sense to reject you. Departments have limited funding and want to give people likely to come the chance to consider it thoroughly. Some universities also explicitly limited the total amount of funding offers that can be extended in a given year regardless of whether or not they are accepted. Thus, departments dont want to waste offers on people that are going to get strictly dominant offers (likely ucsd's reason to reject 2iron). In the third case (personal connections), departments receive a different (better) signal. Differences because of signal quality should not be interpreted as noise.

_____

.....

The one heading to Minnesota reportedly had an offer from UPenn as well

This seems like bad advice. granted, I dont know what the metrics placements look like at any of these schools, but ucsd is universally renowned for its econometrics (time series in particular), and Brown and Cornell are not. There could be good reasons to choose Brown or Cornell over UCSD, but thisn't

Institution: UC Berkeley Program: Economics PhD Decision: Accepted Notification Date: 3/10/14 Notification Through: Email Posted on GC: No Comments: Happy, Naturally

[duplicate post]

From Berkeley GC Reject Comment: "845 applicants, 70 admission slots." I'm somewhat surprised they have 70 admits, considering that stanford only accepted 40. Wonder if this include waitlist...

anybody not receive anything from berkeley yet? are they sending out emails slowly?

to anyone who knows somebody who received one of the early berkeley offers, does berkeley actually not have a visit day as noted in one of the gc comments? seems odd...

Page 10 of this: http://web.mit.edu/ir/rankings/USNews_Grad_Rankings_1994-2013.pdf shows historical us news rankings. It's a little interesting.

As visit days approach... asking professors if they are likely to stay put, or alternatively are eager to switch departments, or are likely to retire in the near future. Is this fine or inappropriate?

Frankly, I'm a little surprised you haven't received a better offer. I think you have a solid 10 - 20 (rank) profile. Here are my two cents. (1) The problem could be your letters (or one of them). Remember, with so many applicants all of your letters need to be really strong. With a profile like yours and the decisions you're getting, my first reaction is that your letters may not be as strong as they need to be. (2) I think if you added more schools in the 10 - 20 range you would do better (maybe you're still waiting on a few results). (3) Your SOP comments are a little concerning. You don't want to apologize in an SOP. Perhaps you mention a glaring scar, but 95%-99% of it should be positive, and forward looking. (4) If you aren't happy with your options this year go talk to the professor whose opinion you trust most (Note: This might not mean the one that is the most optimistic). Ask them if you think you got "under-placed". If they are very adamant that they feel you should have been accepted at a better place, then I would suggest you try to RA somewhere for a year or two. Fed positions are competitive, but your resume is plenty-qualified enough to get looked at, and so long as you interview well, you have a decent chance. If you can RA for somebody good, you can get a great letter from them down the road, which, like i said above something that im guessing could push you to the next level. An MA has little or no value, and many RA positions will let you take a class or two if you want--though you're math looks fine for 10 - 20 rank schools. (5) Can't tell if you actually have been out of school for a bit to pursue your career as an actuary, but if so, and you haven't been in a economics research position, your other career could be hurting your chances as it indicates a lack of seriousness and/or you don't know what you're getting into. Again an RAship would help mitigate this signal.

.....

CMU Tepper or CMU SDS? If SDS, my friend applied there said they invited 10 or so people to flyout a couple weeks ago for some sort of visit day / interview combo. I would say its safe to say that if you haven't heard from them yet, you wont. Their target class is usually like 3-4 people.

.....

UCSD has yet to release anything. Wouldn't be surprised if they send some notifications out this week. Last year I believe they sent out the majority of their acceptances and about half of their rejections in the beginning third of march, and sent out the rest of their decisions about two weeks later.

I have fully-funded offers to all three schools and I would like to hear your opinions as to which is the best offer. What do you see as the strengths and weaknesses of each school compared with each other? Which school will position me best five years down the line on the job market? My interests are in applied micro. Let the debate begin!

Institution: NYU Decision: Accepted Funding: full funding Notification date: 2/27 Notified through: email Posted on GC: no Comments: !!!

Institution: University of Michigan Program: Economics PhD Decision: Accepted Funding: Full funding Notification date: 2/26/14 Notified through: ​email Posted on GC: No

.....

.....

Institution: Duke Program: PhD in Economics Decision: Accepted Funding: First year fellowship Notification date: 02/20/14 Notified through: Email to check website. Posted on GC: Yes Comments: Did not have an interview.