bookworm510

Please, please please, take some time off this summer to relax. You're about to start a 6 year stint of your life where you will always, always feel like there is something you "could" or "should" be doing: studying for quals, working on research, applying to jobs. Reward yourself for the huge accomplishment of getting into a PhD program with some well-earned downtime! Maybe, maybe, review some math like in the 2 weeks before math camp, but don't spend your summer self-studying stuff that you might not even use in the first year or might go over during math camp anyway. In my personal opinion it is very hard to teach yourself a programming language from scratch on your own, you'll likely have better success debugging and figuring things out with peers with the defined goal of problem set... and programming in Matlab is unlikely to be the hardest part of the first year. Actually, if I could recommend something... read! Read interesting journal articles, read books by sociologists and historians, read the Economist and the New Yorker, read whatever you find compelling! What makes a good economist is not proving fixed-point theorems, but rather having an interesting question to ask about the way the world works that economic tools can answer. Exposure to diverse perspectives is the key to coming up with original research ideas.

I realize that you've already made your decision, but just to make this information available as a public good: BU PhD students get a "Masters in Political Economy" along the way to the PhD once they have completed coursework and the 2nd year paper. It is only called "Political Economy" to distinguish it from the terminal Master's in Economics also offered by BU. That is, and MAPE from BU denotes 2 years of PhD level coursework and an MA in Econ denotes 1 year of master's coursework. There are no special political economy courses in the first two years (in fact, it isn't even an official field at BU, although there are many faculty doing work in this space who have placed students well so it's still a great place if you're interested in the field). So basically just ignore the Master's in Political Economy thing when you're applying or making a decision.

BU is a solid top 20-25 program. While the US news rankings are imperfect, they're a decent proxy for the "tiers" of US programs, and BU has consistently been in the top 25 for as long as I've been in the field. The applied micro faculty are strong, especially in labor/history. (Incidentally, they are also a very nice and supportive group of people). The development side has gone through some changes in recent years with departures and hirings but there's still plenty of support for students. Also there really isn't anyone right now doing development RCTs or experiments in the econ department (though some in Pardee do) so just be aware of that. ... for your own well-being and the good of the profession, stay away from the website that talks about programs like this.

Just to respond to this point: even if your school is more known for political economy, if you attend an R1 University with a reputable PhD program admissions committees will be confident your math coursework is rigorous. You have a strong math background in terms of courses and good grades, so there is probably not any utility from having a recommendation from a math professor vs an economics professor who can speak to your research potential directly.

While I agree with both of these points, I think that these are really reasons not to get a PhD at all, not just to attend a top-10 school. Even among graduates of top schools, very few people have the ability to have complete control of location, and it's true that with the exception of super-superstars, academic salaries don't match private industry. Anyone whose career goals include strong location preferences and high salaries would be best served by attending a top MBA and going into the private sector, even when compared to a top-5 PhD admit.

I worked at one of the firms you mentioned for about three years, I'm now in the first year of my PhD in Econ at a top 30 school. The short answer is yes, analysts/research assistants do go on to top PhDs. I know personally other people I worked with are at other top 30 econ and finance programs and know of others at top 10 programs. My general impression is that working in econ consulting certainly won't hurt your application, and may marginally help (others can correct me if they have information otherwise). Pros of working in economics consulting: -You will gain a ton of empirical research experience, and get used to working with large, complicated datasets. -Depending on where you work, you may get to work on high profile cases, always fun when your job is in the news. -Pays more (in some cases, a lot more) than comparable jobs like being an academic or Fed RA. May be worth considering if you anticipate money being an issue (like if you have a large amount of undergraduate loans). Starting a PhD with some savings and no debt can make even a low stipend a lot more livable. -Gain soft skills like presenting, managing a team, interviewing. -If you're unsure between a PhD, and some other route, like a JD or MBA, these companies will only open doors for you in that regard, so you're leaving your options open, which may be attractive to some. -Especially for those leaning towards financial economics, may provide you with some research topics. -Depending on the firm, you may get to work directly with academic "experts", and you will gain exposure to what options are available to PhDs outside of academia. And working with a lot of PhDs can only help you to decide if it's the right route for you. Some cons: -Generally, less academically oriented than other RA positions. -If your main goal in seeking an RA-type position is to get a helpful recommendation for graduate school, this is probably not the ideal route. A recommendation from someone at one of these firms, even which a highly ranked PhD, won't be viewed as favorably as an academic or a Fed recommendation. -Some positions may involve quite long hours, making it difficult to take post-bacc classes if this is part of your plan. As far as how the firms differ for one another, places like Glassdoor or Vault with overviews of consulting firms and the cultures can be helpful. If you have access, asking employees directly in information sessions or interviews is your best bet for accurate information (of course, everyone is biased, and it's hard because most people have only worked for one firm). More general info like what types of projects the firms specialize in can be found on company websites usually. Unrelated comment about working for one of these firms: as far as I know, these firms generally operate through "on-campus" recruiting, where each office of each firm has a set of schools that they primarily target and hire from, and they primarily solicit applications through the school directly (similar to how banking and management consulting hire). Also, firms are probably going through their main push for recruiting right now (hiring expected 2016 grads to start next summer).

OP, I agree with all the advice that's been given so far, but I also want to implore you to NOT apply to grad school of ANY kind immediately after undergrad. Get a job, take a break from academia, see the world, figure out what you want out of life. Maybe even consider taking a semester off now to give yourself a break and gain some perspective.

Agreed, and also you should give yourself enough time to retake if you get much lower scores that you expect.

I feel obliged to put my two cents, since chateauhart called out my profile. I actually think that our profiles are quite different in a lot of ways, and you have the advantage of still being in school so you have some more options on ways to improve your profile, and a lot more math coursework that I didn’t have. But, I think the point that you should include multiple “safeties” still stands, and grades alone won’t break you into the top 10. Don’t apply top-15 only unless you’re ok with not getting any offers and waiting to re-apply. And yes, I think you should try to apply to as many schools as you can, I wish I had applied to more. If you’re intent on going to school next year, I think it makes sense to apply to BU and UT Austin, and other school ranked 15-30 (Penn State maybe?); I think those are appropriate safeties for your profile. All of these schools have a record of placing students into tenure-track academic positions. Another thing that you might consider, that no one's mentioned, is that you also might apply for research positions like the Fed alongside applying to schools. If you get such a position and don't get a great offer from a school, it may be worth getting some more research experience and perhaps another strong recommendation, and applying again in a couple years. I think more people should consider this path. Besides just research experience, there’s a lot to be personally gained by taking a break from school for a while. Also just for the sake of putting out a contrary opinion to thagzone's comments regarding significant others, I personally don't think it's totally insane to turn down a higher ranked program to attend a lower ranked one (within reason) for the sake of a very serious relationship. This is going to be 5-7 very stressful years of your life, and being in a long distance relationship for years or breaking up with someone you care about is only going to make things more difficult. For someone you’re planning on being with long-term, I think it’s completely fair to take their locational constraints into account. Plus, if you’re living with a working partner, it can make meager stipends a lot more livable.

If you haven't read it already, Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow seems like a logical choice.

Seems like you're asking two different questions. For the vast majority of Econ PhD programs, you'll need more math than just Calc II. Competitive US applicants will have taken "Calc III"/Multivariable Calc and Linear Algebra at the very least, and the vast majority will have taken more advanced math including Proofs courses, Real Analysis, Advanced Calculus, Differential Equations, etc. However, this advice may not apply to heterodox programs such as George Mason. I don't have personal experience with these programs, but my understanding is that these programs have less stringent technical/mathematical requirements for applicants, but their curriculum (and after-graduation job market) are also quite different from so-called "orthodox" programs. Calc II may be enough for some of these schools. You may have trouble getting advice on heterodox programs on this board, as I think posters are overwhelmingly those attending or applying to top-50 ish orthodox programs.

If you do decide to buy supplemental books, get the Manhattan ones. Don't waste your time with Kaplan, the math practice in there isn't hard enough to improve scores at the level you'd need to be competitive for Econ programs. (Likely also true for Princeton Review, but I've never worked with that book personally)

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad: Economics major at private research university (T25 undergrad, T50 econ) Undergrad GPA: 3.8 overall/4.0 econ and math Type of Grad: none Grad GPA: N/A GRE: 170V/169Q/6.0AW Math Courses: Calc II, Multivariable Calc, Linear Algebra, Introduction to Proofs, Ordinary Differential Equations (all As) Econ Courses: Intro Micro/Macro, Intermediate Micro/Macro, International Finance, International Trade, Economic Statistics, Introduction to Econometrics, Topics in Applied Econometrics, Development Economics, Labor Economics, Program Evaluation, Senior Thesis Seminar (all As) Other Courses: Lots of random language, international relations, and area studies courses Letters of Recommendation: (1) Professor I TA’d for, knew me well for most of undergrad (2) Professor for Dev econ classes, active researcher in the field (3) Math professor/chair of undergrad department (4) current supervisor at econ consulting firm (T25 PhD) Research Experience: Senior thesis (received honors), presented at an undergraduate conference. Analyst at economic consulting firm for three years. Teaching Experience: TA for International Finance for three semesters Research Interests: Development, Labor, Applied Micro and metrics SOP: Pretty good I think. Covered undergrad background/thesis, research skills I’ve gain from current position, and described some potential topics I might want to research. Added a short paragraph to the end listing professors, research centers, etc. specific to the school. Other: RESULTS: Acceptances: Boston University ($$), University of Pittsburgh ($$) Waitlists: Rejections: MIT, Berkeley, Stanford, Yale, Columbia, NYU, Brown Pending: Attending: BU Comments: Overall, I’m satisfied with the outcome. The rejections hurt a lot, but at least I was spared any waitlist/unfunded offer drama. I’m accepting a funded offer, from a solid program, in a great city, so I can’t really complain! What would you have done differently? Short Term: Applied to more schools ranked 15-30 instead of targeting mostly 1-15. Although, I may still have ended up at the same place given my field and location preferences. Otherwise, I think I did the best I could in terms of GRE, SOP, and other things I could control. Long Term: So many things. I didn’t realize I wanted to pursue this path until second semester junior year, which left me cramming 4 math classes into senior year just to have a shot. If I’d known I wanted to do this freshman or sophomore year, I would have chosen a much different set of courses (way more math instead of 18 credits of Arabic…). I also wish I’d taken more advantage of research opportunities at my undergrad school. What I would not have done differently: worked for a few years. I’ve gained so much in terms of practical research skills, professional confidence, and personal clarity as to what I want out of grad school and a career.

I attended the visit day and it really seemed like this was the case! I will probably ultimately end up choosing another program, but I was really impressed with the department overall.

It seems like they're trying to clear their outstanding offers and wait lists. I got a similar email today (I already had funding, they were asking where I was in my decision process).