Costard

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad: US regional university affiliated with a top 75 PhD program Undergrad GPA: 3.9 (4.0 Math and Econ) Type of Grad: NA Grad GPA: NA GRE: 170Q, 170V, 4.5AW Math Courses: Calculus 1-3, Real Analysis, Linear Algebra, Differential Equations, Intro Probability, Math Stats Econ Courses: Grad Micro 1; Undergrad Macro 1-2, Micro 1-2, Business Stats, Econometrics, Experimental Econ, Auction Theory, Money/Banking Other Courses: Prior degree in Music and English Letters of Recommendation: three non-famous, tenured research professors at my undergrad institution. I was/am a research assistant for two of them, and the third taught my grad micro course Research Experience: RA for two professors ( Teaching Experience: none Research Interests: macro, finance, decision theory SOP: Explained my unusual past, my interests, and my reason for applying to each school RESULTS: Acceptances: CMU ($$$), UCSD ($$) Waitlists: Minnesota, UVA (declined both) Rejections: MIT, Stanford, Princeton, Northwestern, Yale, NYU, Columbia, Wisconsin, UCLA, Duke, BU, UNC, NSF Pending: --- Attending: CMU Comments: I aimed high (and knew it) given my lack of pedigree, limited research experience, and unusual background. I'm a second-degree student making a career change; virtually my entire profile was assembled over the past two years. I'd have benefitted from post-grad Fed/RA work, but I didn't want to put off graduate study, and the schools that accepted me are great fits. What would you have done differently: Nothing substantive. My admissions season would have been much worse had I not done many things right, such as reaching out to faculty and completing an honors thesis. I owe much of the credit to this forum, and I'm very happy to provide a data point for future applicants.

I know nothing firsthand, but I will note that the university's top line has done well in recent years: BFA Budget Information If they're stretched for money, it's not a supply-side problem.

I agree it's painful, but try to keep a sense of perspective. You have offers and can move forward. The hard decision - going to grad school - has been made. You're going to be an economist, if that's what you want. Any program you attend will have its strengths and weaknesses, but they will all offer a rewarding experience and a rigorous education if done right. Speaking with no grad school experience (I'm in the same boat as you) but a fair amount of life experience, I would argue that the more important decisions will be the ones you make after beginning studies. The choice of a grad program is largely outside of your control: too few options, too little information and too much unpredictability. What you can control are decisions about how to handle setbacks, how to make the best of a given situation, and how to respond to problems creatively and with initiative. The next five years (and the fifty after that) are a blank canvas, and what you start with is far less important than what you do with it.

Has anyone gone (/is anyone going) to Minnesota's open house? If so, I would be curious to hear impressions.

Thanks for this information - it definitely softens my outlook.

It nevertheless creates problems for the department whose offer you accepted, and in discussing these situations I've been told by one program head that "it's a small world." Whether this view is common, I do not know. However, I would be surprised if it was considered kosher in academia to engage in a behavior - accepting an offer and then reneging - that is pretty universally regarded as unethical in business. Bottom line is that breaking your commitment creates negative externalities and can be viewed negatively. If you're OK with that, great - but don't assume that others will be.

I think it's fairer to say that no program will force you to attend (nor could they legally). 'Convention' implies that breaking your commitment is ok, which is not so clear to me.

It could be, and I would certainly like to believe this, however the waitlist email I received was verbatim the same as the 'bad' one from years past. But who knows? The admissions cycle has its mysteries. I respect it but I've (almost) given up trying to understand it.

http://www.www.urch.com/forums/phd-economics/116724-minnesota-wait-list.html

I suspect you're right. As far as I know I was not on the 'good' waitlist, so an admittance seems unlikely to me.

Did anyone else on the MN waiting list receive an email about "your interest in remaining on our waiting list for admission"? I'm unsure whether to interpret this as a positive sign, or merely as them ensuring that they have a motivated waiting list.

I've got the same package as you. I checked on-campus housing and rates are pretty reasonable,

Institution: UCSD Program: PhD Decision: Accepted Funding: 19k + 4k summer Notification date: 3/8/16 Notified through: email Comments: Thrilled!

Well they did do one thing about it - they moved the application deadline back a month. Doesn't seem to have helped much, though.

Same here. Bad news travels slowly, I guess.

I have a waitlist at a safety, and an admit at a target - so don't blame your competitiveness for the utter randomness of the process. Maybe today's your day?

Maybe, but my dramatic response reflects my priorities; my worry would be that UT's blasé response reflects theirs. Just because discourtesy wasn't intended doesn't mean that it's not a choice.

If I had applied to UT (I didn't) and been accepted, this would raise questions for me. It would not surprise me if there were correlation between how a department treats rejected applicants, and how it treats the people it admits. Definitely a question to ask current students, if the opportunity arises.

Welllll ... it's not really a hypothesis test if you already know the conclusion (e.g. you've read Acemoglu's book), and nearly all of the undergrad theses I've seen involved data collection/analysis. Some departments post their theses online, and you can see what other students are doing. For instance, Stanford: https://economics.stanford.edu/undergraduate/honors/honors-theses . If you don't intend to apply to graduate programs, then none of this matters - you should do whatever want, so long as your economics department is ok with it. But if you do plan on going to graduate school, then you would benefit from attempting something meatier. Perhaps reading Acemoglu's papers will give you an idea that you could test using publicly available data (e.g. from the World Bank) or resources available through your school library.

Yeah, an economics thesis is generally in the form of a hypothesis test. I'm unsure what you mean by 'analysis,' but if you're thinking of the kind of critical essay done in the humanities/arts, then you may have the wrong idea (with the caveat that every economics department is different). Acemoglu's papers are linked on his website - MIT Economics : Daron Acemoglu - and they seem very readable to me. If you don't understand anything, check out his citations. Academic articles are typically pretty good about giving context, and telling you where to look if you want to know more.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States_by_state.

Anyone else find Princeton's rejection letter amusing? To paraphrase: 'we have a very thorough review process and can assure you that your rejection was not a mistake.' I look forward to comparing it with UW-Madison's.

Congrats guys! I haven't heard from Princeton either, which I assume implies a rejection.

Institution: Carnegie Mellon Program: PhD Economics Decision: Accepted Funding: Tuition + Fellowship Notification date: Feb 16 Notified through: Email Comments: Thrilled!

Institution: University of Minnesota Program: Economics PhD Decision: Waitlisted Funding: NA Notification date: Feb 8 Notified through: Email Comments: So you're telling me there's a chance?