EconBest

Anyone?

Hi there! I just read through all the previous posts on the issue of the Diploma and MPhil at Cambridge and it looks like the MPhil is very very requiring so I was thinking that I could use the Diploma as a way to lay better foundations, as I am an International Student who is graduating in Economics, but unfortunately we didn't do much Maths (only Calculus/Multivariable Calculus/Linear Algebra) and, having terms rather than semesters, Intermediate Micro and Macro courses were shorter than usual, leaving untouched some things like Asymmetry of Information, Growth theory ecc. I did well in those courses, got both A and in Maths A,A-,A-. I also did Statistics and I will have completed another course in Applied Statistics and one in Econometrics by graduation but still, I don't think I am ready enough for the MPhil. However, I read on this forum how only a bunch of people manage to get to the 65 mark and pass on to the MPhil and that I would be competing with engineers and mathematicians who would likely outclass me. What should I do about Cambridge? I am also considering LSE Economics 2 years, UCL, University of British Columbia (which obviously wouldn't have a diploma-like course before), Pompeu Fabra and Warwick (again, the 2 years route). Thanks a bunch!

Thank you for the inputs! I do appreciate them! I am in a tough spot here, as the point I would like to make (Institutions matter for long-run development and growth) has been already demonstrated. I could probably do a particular case/country but how am I going to come up with a model of institutions and their incidence on development and growth? I have taken courses in standard Stats and Econometrics, but this seems to me like quite a leap. Not to mention, databases about "Institutions"...I would not know where to find them...it is not like searching for Income databases. Thank you again everybody!

This post is turning out to be a very interesting one even if you are not interested in going to Chicago. Keep it going!

Thanks for the infos! And by the way, your offer does look legitimate, considering your achievements! I guess what it really comes down to is: do you want to work in the US later? If the answer is positive yeah, I guess that the US programs are better but I guess in either Europe or rest of the World, the "Cambridge Brand" is still the Cambridge brand. I would be happy to work in the UK, so I would take Cambridge or Oxford or LSE over any US program that is not Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Stanford, Berkeley, NYU, Brown...particularly considering my fields of interest, that are political economy, economic development and macro. Maybe I could do a Post-Doc in the US, but, as I said, those 3 UK institutions would suit me very well. I guess that you can get your PhD in the UK and still end up well in the US: Acemoglu and Poterba, just to name two MIT professors, got their PhD at LSE and Oxford respectively so... If you want to elaborate more on your preferences, write here and I will read them for sure. Cheers!

I am further narrowing down the topic and I have talked about this with a professor who holds me in high regard: this would probably turn out to be a "literature review thesis", as I would read those papers by Acemoglu and also by other economists who have worked on the role of institutions and development, like Rodrik or Tim Besley. This, is quite different from using "data" to prove something. Could you expand on that? Thanks!

As far as prestige goes and networks, I guess Cambridge is better. I don't know enough about the US universities to say something about them. Moreover, I have been to Cambridge once for a couple of weeks and it is quite an awesome place to live in...so quiet, so picturesque, so full of history everywhere. I guess the living experience would be more memorable in Cambridge. As I am also considering Cambridge, would you share some data about your application like GPA and GRE scores?

Costard, yeah...I wouldn't frame them in an essay form but something along the lines of: "My hypothesis is that geography is not sufficient to explain why some nations prosper and why others fail. Going through Acemoglu's work on Development and Institutions I think I can prove my point". I would basically use his papers and his research in general to test the validity of my hypothesis. Indeed, a while ago, my Micro professor and I talked a little but about the thesis and he told that, as un undergrad, no one expects you to come up with something like Arrow's Impossibility Theorem. One can, for example, read 3 or 4 heavy papers and write what he understood and why that may be relevant. I am glad you think they are readable. I will try to skip through them asap to see whether I can agree with the statement! Thanks!

Infinite jest, I am well in advance with the schedule. I still have plenty of time to decide, months actually, so I don't even have a professor in mind with whom I may want to work: also because this is a subject I would have to write with a Political Economy Professor. Say I change the topic and I want to do Asymmetry of Information: I would look like a fool in telling him: "no wait, I don't wanna work with you". Before asking some professor to supervise my work, I want to be more or less sure about the content. If you tell me: "No way, Acemoglu is too difficult for an undergrad" I can already throw the idea in the bin. Mine was just an informative question, not an "operative" (yet). Thank for the prompt response though!

Hello there! I have been talking with some friends about the possible topics of the Honors thesis and I came up with the idea of doing a sort of analysis of Daron Acemoglu's work on Development, Growth and Institutions, as I read Why Nations Fail and found it to be an absolutely terrific book. Writing the thesis on this, would imply reading Acemoglu's original papers. Do you think an undergrad can understand what is written in the papers or am I diving into a mess? Thank you so much!

Hi everybody! I am currently in the second year of my Bachelor and I am preparing my application for Masters in Economics early next year and I wondered where, given my situation, you think I would be able to land Type of Undergrad: Bachelor Degree In Economics Undergrad GPA: 3.65 (Due to Two Law Courses) Type of Grad: None Grad GPA: N/A GRE: I can realistically crack around 160/161 Math Courses: Mathematics (an year long course where we dealt with Calculus, Multivariable Calculus and Linear Algebra) A-, Statistics A-, Applied Statistics A- Econ Courses:Microeconomics A, Macroeconomics A, Economic Policy A+, Economic History A+, Financial Markets A Other Courses: Management A+, Organisation Theory A-, Financial Accounting A+, Two Law Courses which I hated and got a B- in both Letters of Recommendation: Econ Phd from Stanford, Econ Phd from Northwestern. The last one is on the rise pretty fast from an academic standpoint and he also holds me in very high regard for my intellectual abilities and thirst of new knowledge and for our never-ending chats about economic issues, not to mention that I got the highest mark in the class. He adores me, basically. In general they are no Nobel Laureates but these should be glowing letters. Research Experience: None Teaching Experience: None Research Interests: Probably Macro/International but is too early to tell SOP: Should be good Concerns: Professors not internationally renowned, law courses marks hinder GPA, GRE may be too low Targeting: LSE, Barcelona GSE, Paris School Of Economics, UCL, Warwick, Amsterdam. Further suggestions given what I wrote above? Thank you all very much in advance for everything!

Frankly, I wish I could help more but the best advise I feel I can give is to go through all the top 10 departments (that are usually strong in everything) and see who is in the Macro/Monetary Policy/Central Banking Group. It is not reasonable to read every work so maybe you can Google them or find them on YT. If you see they say something relevant to you...you stick with them!

Thanks to all for the answers! Glad to see that everyone seems to agree that AW & Verbal Writing are not considered to be extremely important. I wondered: considering I am no native English speaker, may it be the case that considering I'll give them a IELTS in the 8.5 range or so, the verbal section may be considered even lower because my English knowledge is being tested in a "proper" english exam? That being said, even if Verbal is not really important, aiming at a Top 10-20 PhD, what should be a grade in the Verbal that they may consider too bad to actually influence the application? Thanks!

Yeah, sure. 9 months is useless. The point I was trying to make is that I have been told, considering I haven't done any geometry or things like that for 6 years or so, that in 3 months I should be able to have gone through all the things again without too much stress or rushing (or spending on the GRE 10 hours a day). If I were to prepare the other parts dedicating to them as much time as I am supposed to dedicate to the Q part, well that would be 9 months but I am glad to know that that will not be the case. I am no English native speaker but I was a European C1 level, corresponding to a 7.25 Ielts, when I was 17 so...how much time should I dedicate to the Verbal part given this level of knowledge of english? Also, going back to the topic of the thread, do you feel that doing two one-year masters at Barcelona, first year doing standard-track because of the bad choices my University did setting up the Econ Degree, which ended up being 50% or so Managerial stuff rather than some more Maths exams or some thorough Econ courses, and second year doing the advanced track should be a good way to aim to a top-20 PhD? Thanks a bunch to everyone!

Well, I'd say Oxford but for Macro stuff why not Barcelona? Oxford is an awesome place, though.

Well, I would consider Oxford a better option: in two years you will gain a deeper knowledge, you will work more closely with the faculty and you will have the opportunity to do a thesis, which seems a great thing to me. Not to mention, Oxford is a lovely city. I spent a week there once and I found it really a beauty. Having the possibility to study in a peaceful place, where everything is in a 5-mins bike ride radius is better than London, which I found to be too messy. Hope this was helpful in any way, shape or form

Hello everyone, sorry to bother but I have two very important questions 1) Do Universities care about the GRE's Verb & Analytical? If I have to study for Verb e Analytical as much as I will have to study for the GRE I have to study for 9 months or so which seems crazy to me 2) which are the best books to study on? Cause on the web everyone has his own favorite and well...that is not helpful! I would say Manhattan 8 books for the Theory and the massive 6 Lb Practice Tests but I don't know...let me know Thanks in advance to all the ones who will take the time to answer! Truly appreciate it.

Thanks to everybody! You are awesome, folks! I know that I have to do the "easy" master before going trying to get into a Top PhD but hey...I have to deal with the fact that my Bachelor is pretty ****** as far as material covered is concerned (excellent grades, though). Now I'll set up another question about the GRE which I'll have to take next year and I still have to understand 1) if these programs care only about the Maths section or if also other parts are considered: if I have to study for Verb e Analytical as much as I will have to study for the GRE I have to study for 9 months or so which seems crazy to me 2) which are the best books to study on Thanks!

@Okun: what do you think about the idea of doing two one-year Masters at BGSE? First year I fill the gap withe standard, second year I take wing with the advanced @fakeo: do you think that Oxford first year can be compared to Barcelona standard track? The problem with LSE master, if I understood correctly, is that PhD students teach so who the hell is going to reference me? Thanks to you both

First of all, thank you for taking the time to answer me! Appreciate it! Then, thank you for showing me CEMFI 'cause I had totally missed the place ;) It looks promising indeed! As far as BGSE is concerned, let me tell you what a very good friend of mine told me: he went there after doing another MSc in Economics graduating with the maximum. He said that there he saw multiple people having nervous breakdowns because of stress & study, many who cried out of desperation, some who gave up, they did only two things: study and sleep, professors who made exams who were as difficult as it can get. He usually managed to go only half-way through them...Yes, some of his classmates ended up in Berkeley, Stanford or MIT but these were natural geniuses so...you know... What I would like to do is a MSc which can bring my knowledge to a end-of-a-top20-bachelor-degree-in-Economics, not something that goes beyond that because I am positive I don't have enough basis to put up to that. I mean, I'll graduate without even having done a course in Econometrics (two in Statistics, one in Maths covering anything from Calculus to some basics of Linear Algebra and the standard things in Multivariable Calculus, one in Financial Maths, one in Intermediate Micro and one Intermediate Macro. That is the core stuff I have done/will do)...I cannot go to places which start off with Advanced Econometrics and Barcelona is one of them. I will surely consider it after a 2 years Master who will allow me to cover the missing ground! My feeling is that CEMFI does exactly that... Well, I hope I made myself more clear now! Looking forward to other opinions or to what, Okun, you might have to say now!

Hello to everyone I am mulling over the idea of enrolling to a MSc in Economics in Europe order to strenghten my knowledge because my Bachelor was only 3 years and I want to apply to a Top 10-20 PhD in the USA. Now, I have come up with these options and I would like you to, first, notify if I missed something important and, second, to tell me if your ranking would be different. I have excluded MPhils because I seriously doubt I would be able to pass directly to that level from a 3 years undergraduate and MSc like Pompeu Fabra because I have been told that it is a program extremely difficult even after a MSc, let alone a Bachelor. I am also not considering one-year Masters, because it is difficult to get references. I am however opened to the idea of doing a one year master after a two year master or, try to do some research in a think-tank or a Central Bank. Without further do, here we go... Consider: Stockholm School Of Economics, Mannheim, PSE, Bocconi, Tilburg, Zurich, UCIII Ranking: Tilburg, SSE, Bocconi, Mannheim, PSE, Zurich, UCIII Thank you so much!