redrose27

I went through a pretty long process of applying to grad schools, waiting for decisions, deciding between my options, feeling like i wasn't ready for grad school/didn't deserve to go (imposter syndrome, yo), re-sparking my interest, realizing i was capable after all, getting ready to go, and then after all that was over i ended up falling sick. Sick as in something i have been to the hospital for, and not sick as in a prolonged flu. I'm working on managing the illness with my doc but it's a bit unsure now whether i'll be well enough to start school in the fall. In either scenario (being well enough to start or too ill to even attend), i certainly won't be at 100% starting off grad school and now i'm starting to panic about what i should do. On the one hand, I'm reluctant to postpone my program, having to go through applications all over again and feeling like i'll be wasting not only next year by delaying, but also feeling like the entire struggle of this year was for nothing. On the other hand i'm scared of starting when still ill, or when i'm still in the process of recovering (this sort of thing takes a few months to clear up at minimum usually), and then trying the program but having to leave partway through because it makes my illness worse or my illness would obstruct me from being able to do full time work (part time isn't an option for this program). You hear about people falling sick during their grad programs due to stress and other issues, and if i'm starting off ill i can only imagine having it go downhill from there. I'm being advised by the doc to take some time off, but it's not like i can just start in a later semester, i'd have to postpone by a whole year. Has anyone been in a position like this before, where they'll potentially have to delay/cancel grad school before even starting? I don't even know how i'd approach my profs about getting reference letters all over again for reapplying...

Hi, so I was accepted to a number of top canadian economics programs this year (the top 3) but i've decided to defer by a year. I'm beginning to wonder whether it might be wiser for me to go for an applied economics program instead of the pure economics streams given my interests and strengths. At the time of application i hadn't realized how much the top three programs focus on theory/mathematical econ, and my interests had never been in those streams as much as they had been on things like policy and applied economic research. I no longer intend to pursue a PhD in Economics, so the relative ranking of the different programs doesn't matter so much anymore. I am not sure which schools offer a more applied economics program and aside from a few schools with explicit "applied econ" named programs (regina, etc.) I am a bit directionless on this. Would McGill be an applied econ school, for example? I know that Mcmaster offers an MA in Applied Economic Policy specifically which seems interesting, and that Dalhousie offers a Master in Development Economics which I imagine would be more on the applied side. I guess I'm wondering 1) what schools in Canada would be good for more applied economic programs (I have strong grades and was admitted to the "top 3" canadian schools for regular MA so i think i'd get in to the others) 2) what exactly I could expect as the difference between the programs---would it just mean that the micro and macro courses would be less proofs based and more calculation based?

which program?

unfortunately now i'm begining to thinking that i don't have the math background to do any of the three any longer :(

My contingency plans are to go into alternative programs. I've had two policy programs (one economic policy, one public admin) say that they'll look at my profile and offer me a spot if someone declines. I've also got the possibility of transferring into one development studies program, and one acceptance to a dev studies program already (at a very expensive UK school, so not a likely possibility). I'd like to continue with economic policy, but at this time the theory based masters programs seem unwise to enter. I actually have never been sure about going into PhD. I applied to these programs because they were the best way to make sure a phd was still in the cards (they're masters programs) but i've realized that is not at all what i want to do with my life. I'm much more interested in policy now---policy analysis, policy creation, with an economics background. My last option is to just take one of these programs and pursue it very slowly, part time over two years.

I didn't discuss with them how ill prepared I am. To be honest I didn't realize until much too late that my math background is so weak. My undergraduate economics program does a much poorer job of mathematically training us than I had realized---it's a high ranked school but clearly it doesn't translate to the quality of the undergraduate education, which is quite applied. It's only after sitting in on classes for another school in January that i have realized how different the math preparation is. The other school did linear algebra, mathematical economics, proofs, advanced micro, advanced macro, etc. all as required components of the degree. My undergrad was just 1 intermediate micro/macro/metrics, and 2 intro calculus courses. Because i had done well in my program I had thought i was prepared but i have realized how untrue that is, long after the deadlines have passed. None of my letter writers taught me in empirical or mathematical classes---they all taught me relatively social policy/social sciencey economics classes, in which i excelled. so they probably are very unaware of my difficulties with quantitative analysis. i don't know whether i should tell them this. None of my programs include electives in real analysis---they're all really structured programs and they assume you are entering the micro, macro, and metrics courses with a strong existing background in all of these, linear algebra and metrics especially. the programs i've been accepted to actually have pretty high attrition rates. one of them is 20% (or was, last year) though i don't know how many are part time. If I go, i will have invested a ton of money and time and stress and then ruin my chances for ever doing any other form of grad school later in another field, both in terms of the failure and the money lost (70 grand) I don't want to do a PhD anymore. That had been my long time goal because i had foolishly thought that my background in this area was indicative of what was to come, until I realized how incredibly untrue this is. I would want to work in policy, and in that case an applied econ masters would have been a much better choice. unfortunately none of these are applied economics schools; they're all theory schools. For a phd, generally you'd have to be one of the top 3 students in the MSc program (UK, no grade inflation, so most people get low 60s/high 50s) or an A student (so top 5 or 4 out of 50?) in the MA programs. I think I might not even be able to pass these courses. I'd lose 1-2 years of my life, plus tens of thousands of dollars, all my savings, loans, my dignity, and my ability to ever apply to a graduate program again since they all require complete records of your education. If I ever decided to pursue another route (public policy, law, development studies) this would seriously jeopardize my ability to do so. **** i'm so lost.

I've been accepted to some fine schools in canada and the uk, canadian schools with full or 75% funding, for masters in econ programs (MA and MSc). I think i got in on the weight of my professor's letters (tenured faculty, prominent in field) but i am realizing that i am very, very ill prepared for the mathematical content of these very theory-heavy and phd-track programs. My math profile: - 1 econometrics (did poorly, a B, but that was after the class average was scaled since almost everyone failed the exam. Although there were 3 people in the 100 person class who got A+ or high As so it was possible) - 1 econ stats class (pre req for metrics, A-, but it was 4 years ago) - 2 intro calc classes (differential vs integral, high A+ in one, high A in other, but 6 years ago) - 1 multivariable calculus class (did terribly, low B-, almost a C, although some of that can be chalked up to hard life circumstances at the time including illness) and that's it. I did the GRE once and got only a 163 quant (extremely high verbal and analytical though). - No linear algebra - No real analysis - No set theory - None proofs-based I honestly don't know how these programs could have accepted me, but they did. And at first i was confident because i got in, but then i realized, looking at the course material for the core courses, that i have absolutely no preparation for even beginning to understand these. I borrowed Mas Collel for two weeks and couldn't grasp any of the material except for memorization. None of my classes were proofs based. Even my micro and macro classes were quite applied in their math. no proofs, we only had to be able to use lagrange method. I'm scared that i'm in over my head. These are all phd-feeder programs and thus rely quite heavily on the advanced theory. I knew that i was already weak given that my math classes were 4-6 years ago and that econometrics never really "clicked" for me, but i'm genuinely worried now that I cannot handle these programs. People keep telling me "oh people go in to these programs with just as little math as you" but i doubt those people stay in these programs. Do I defer for a year? or do i switch into a different field? applied math always made sense to me (just optimize something and then you're done, etc.) but the theory/sets/analysis just never really was emphasized in my education and i never had an easy time (or even doable time) with them. Do I try to learn EVERYTHING and refresh everything else in 2 months? Or do I own up to my lack of preparation and defer?

speaking with other people who have done similar programs though, my math background is supremely lacking. 1 stats course, 1 econometrics course (in which i did poorly), 2 intro calculus courses (in which i did great), 1 multivariable calc course (in which i did terribly). no linear algebra, no real analysis, no set theory, and i don't think i retained anything from my metrics class. i just don't want to set myself up for failure

I only have a calculus background...no linear algebra, weak econometrics, no real analysis. I don't think I can handle that. The Toronto one would be more expensive because I would stay 4 months longer spreading out the degree (mostly cost of living and also tuition)

they're no longer offering either of those courses next year :( if they offered even one i might have re-considered, but at this point i'd be stuck taking finance and other courses that i would have no interest or motivation in learning. Question: how intense was the math/theory at queens, especially for micro/macro/metrics?

So i'm freaking out. I applied and was accepted to masters programs in five schools (top 3 canadian schools, 2 top UK schools), along with full or near full funding at three. i've come to realize over the last month and especially the last week that i really don't want to do these programs anymore. i don't think i have the requisite mathematical background for any of these programs. they're all very intense in their theory and methods and the part of the field that interests me (social, human implications) are really left out of the equation. I don't think i could handle the programs---not a matter of workload but of the inherent difficulty of taking concurrent courses in areas that i was always quite weak in. To be honest i don't know why they accepted me when i'm so ill prepared in terms of the skills and mathematical analysis. I'm a great writer and my strengths are in the social/policy/political side of things, but i didn't realize until much too late that these programs focus almost exclusively on the mathematics, so it's not like i could even bring up my performance by doing well in other subfields. I don't know what to do. I think i need to switch fields into something i'm better suited towards (law, public policy). it isn't the workload, but just the feasibility of some of these things for me. I don't want to just waste a year, though. i would feel terrible having asked my profs for all these letters of reference (some of them writing up to 10) and securing all this great funding, and then letting them know that i decided to not do the programs at all. I also have concurrent health problems that i'm worried will flare up and make life difficult, but it's more that i've just lost the will to continue in this field. I've been told to just go into one, try it, and if i fail then apply elsewhere. But I think that failing out of a program is a worse sign than never entering it in the first place---that a gap year (well, it'll be my third) will be better on my record than a failed and incomplete program. My other option is to switch into a master's program at one of my schools with funding that are better suited to my interests and abilities. Problem is that i didn't apply to any of these. does anyone know how possible it is to switch into a department at the same school you're accepted at, into a different but related field without having applied in the first place? Does this even happen?

thank you for the reply! I think that i would do the 3-3-1 structure, especially since one of the courses i'd want to take (cost benefit) seems to be only offered in the spring terms. I'm considering the research faculty aspect of it less and less, but the one thing detracting from queen's right now for me is that they don't offer many courses in the areas i'd like. they're not offering development, labour, environment, etc. next year from what i've heard and that leaves me with very few courses to choose from that actually interest me. Public econ seems interesting, cost benefit would be relevant, maybe law would be useful, but i honestly don't know which 4th elective course i could take that would hold my interest. i worry that i would lose my motivation if i took classes which aren't in my fields of interest. Queen's would be the cheapest option for me by far (all costs covered so i'd finish with 0$ of debt, compared to 14K for toronto, 28K UBC, and 65K Oxford), and i love the smaller class sizes and chance to interact with profs, but all the same if the profs aren't even in the area i'd want to work in, would that matter much? To be honest, it was the essay that really attracted me to Queen's. Until i realized that no one in the faculty even studies/researches what i'd like to do. I really wish the school would offer a few more "progressive" economics courses (development, health, environment, even labour)...i would accept them for sure if they did. P.S. is Queens' congenial reputation really true? I hear it all the time but i wasn't sure if it applied to all faculties. The econ graduate assistant there is an absolute gem though, I don't think any of the other schools had someone as helpful and friendly as her and honestly that makes a big difference

thank you for the reply! I do worry though since my econometrics is my weakest of my core courses and the class seems to require quite a bit of familiarity with both micro and metrics. i intend to work on preparing for metrics (and math, generally) before september no matter where i go, but for toronto specifically do you think that taking a course like that in term 1 might be a bit of a heavy weight for someone who has never felt too comfortable with metrics? I will most likely do a part time degree (return in the following fall) so i might have a chance to take it again with him in that case

UBC is probably off my list now, but Toronto and Queen's are still in consideration. If this ends up being my terminal degree though, would you say that Oxford would be the better choice? If I was 100% sure i was going to continue to a phd i'd probably go with the most affordable canadian school, but i'm reconsidering that route more and more each day (especialyl after speaking with current phds in the field) so i'm wondering whether the Oxford degree might end up opening more doors for me than the canadian degrees would, especially for a position with an international organization (WHO, etc.) I'm also wondering how much instruction/supervision support I'd receive in the MSc. with oxford i hear mixed reviews---some people had very supportive departments whereas others thought that they were "abandoned" in their master's programs depending on the field.

thank you, good to know!

Unfortunately the MPhil is not currently one of my options :( Would a very specific MSc from Oxford (in Development Econ) be a better signal then, than a broad masters from UBC, Toronto, or Queen's?

by 2 years of research experience, do you mean that you did work after the MSc, or prior to it? Looking on the DPhil website they seem to state that specific economics masters (e.g. development econ) are not necessarily sufficient and that we'd have to establish why we have enough rigour in our master's....I worry that Canadian schools which require masters in economics as prerequisites for admission (vs us schools which can admit straight from undergrad) might view this as not being broad enough. PS did you find the program to be worth the money? My choices are the MSc straight out of pocket (costs about $70,000 CAD) or a free or nearly free Canadian degree ($0 to $20,000 for total costs). Did most of your classmates get good placements (jobs or education) after? Have you found the "Oxford brand" has helped you?

thank you for the reply. My only worry is that the degree might be too specialized for a phd---we would be taking only courses on development (as well as micro, macro, and metrics), and wouldn't be taking any on labour, IO, etc. I know that UK and US programs let you go straight from bachelor's to phd so they wouldn't see that as a problem, but many canadian schools require an MA in economics so i'm worried that they might see this as too focused/specialized to consider for admission

http://www.qeh.ox.ac.uk/pdf/study/msc-econ-dev-course-guide If this helps anyone in offering advice, this is the course guide for the program. it's a mixture of core courses in quantitative methods, micro, macro, trade/international economics, and then elective modules in institutions, macro policy, risk, stabilization, and political economy

I got a chance to meet Bobonis and he seemed like a really excellent professor! Did you find there were many/any regular stream master's students in the course that year? Most of the electives i am interested in are the phd/doctoral stream eligible ones and i don't know if it is realistic for me to take them all (in the same semester especially for term 2)

Hello, I've been accepted to Oxford's MSc Economics for Development program and am very tempted to take the offer over my other pure economics admissions (Canadian schools--UBC, Toronto, Queen's). The problem is that I don't know whether the program is economically rigourous enough for admission to good PhD programs (in Canada or USA) or if it is well regarded. I know that the 2 year MPhil is generally highly regarded, but the one year MSc is split between the development and economics departments at Oxford---we'd take year long courses in micro, macro, and econometrics as well as courses in related development fields (poverty, inequality, health, environment, etc.). I don't know whether a PhD program would view thee other courses as being insufficiently theoretical or empirically based. I know the program does place graduates into Oxford's own DPhil program, but I believe you can enter the DPhil straight from BA so that's not a great indicator. I worry about schools (e.g. in Canada) that require economics Master's for admission to PhDs---would they view this as more of a development degree than an economics degree? Moreover, would the lack of courses in other areas of economics (labour, public, IO, etc.) hurt me in my preparation?

i would have picked queen's (especially since i've been advised that my SSHRC application has been successful, so that's huge funding---$22.5K) if not for the fact that their faculty doesn't have anyone teaching dev, enviro, or labour econ next year and i'd really like to be able to take courses in my areas of interest. i've also been offered oxford (no word on funding) and it's killing me to think i might have to turn it down :(

wait, so you're doing a phd at wyoming and you want to switch to barcelona or SFU? or you're doing a second Master's program?

Hello, I've been given offers to three Canadian programs and one UK program (I was also accepted to a different program at Cambridge at Christ's College but will be turning it down). I am trying to figure out which program will give me the best chance to get into a top PhD program, but would also perhaps stand well as a terminal degree if I do not end up pursuing a PhD (personal health problems might make that difficult or delayed). I would appreciate insight from any fellow applicants, alum, or even people within the field. My offers: 1) Oxford MSc Economics for Development - No funding, quite pricey - Structure: courses in economic theory (micro/macro split) and econometrics, tutorials in related areas like poverty, development, inequality, etc. with a final 10,000 page extended essay 2) UBC MA Economics - 12K TAship offered and 1K fellowship/RA - Structure: first semester of intense core theory (micro, macro, metrics, mathematics), second semester electives (e.g. labour, environment, etc.). Third semester of research seminar (project for a class rather than independent research, no individual supervision). Probably the most intense program of the 4 3) UofT MA Economics - Regular (non-doctoral) stream, 8K TAship and 10K award - Structure: 8 months of courses, 3 core (micro, macro, metrics) and 5 electives. No research option 4) Queen's MA Economics - 8K TAship and 11K award offered, been advised that my SSHRC application ($22,500) will likely be approved (in that case I would have to turn down the 11K award) - Structure: first semester micro, metrics, and two others, second semester macro and three others. Option to take a spring course instead of 4 in first term. Summer research essay, supervision by professor - Problem: Does not offer courses in my fields of interest (development, labour, environment, health) My details: - Canadian undergrad from a top Canadian school - GRE: 170/163/6.0 - Interest in development economics and looking at the labour, environment, health, gender, technology side of economic analysis (not interested in finance, banking, etc.) - Unsure about pursuing a PhD in Economics but definitely want to keep it in the cards. Possiblity that this might be a terminal degree, however, and I have to account for that. - Might need to take a reduced course load (2 or 3 classes/term rather than 4) due to medical issues Oxford's program had until now been my top choice for its blending of economics and development, connections with development institutions, and Oxford's good name (which would be more important if this will be my terminal degree, which might be the case). My main concerns with the program is that 1) it might not be considered rigorous enough for an Econ PhD in Canada if it only covers micro/macro/metrics and the rest is more political economy rather than economic analysis, and 2) the price, of course. I would have to entirely self-fund through savings, loans, lines of credit, etc. In Canada, UBC and UofT seem to be the most reputable in economics (Queens in third), though all three seem to focus very little on applied econ and focus almost entirely on core theory. This would be great for PhD programs (though i have been advised that the non-doctoral stream at Toronto is not considered rigorous enough), but for a terminal degree I wonder if a more applied one from a bigger name school (Oxford) would be more valuable, especially if i intend to work or study internationally. I've been told varying advice on which program is considered better/the best. UofT Doctoral stream gets high praise but its regular stream doesn't (though the only difference would be two courses out of eight). UBC's program is generally well regarded, but the course structure is so rigid that if i were to take extra time it would take me 24 months to complete (compared with Queens' 12 months, Oxford's 9 months, UofT's 16 months). I've also been told it is very theoretical and wouldn't be the most useful for an applied degree. Queen's would be great in terms of its flexibility, its funding, the research grant, the individual supervision, etc. but it is the least reputable school out of all of these (Oxford obviously a top 3 international school and Toronto and UBC top 30. Queen's is in the top 300) which wouldn't matter as much in Canada but might make a difference internationally, I worry. I would have selected it normally but i found out that they won't even offer electives in the areas i am interested in and so potential connections to development work (JPAL, development placements, etc.) would be quite low. I also don't know how many of their faculty are research faculty, which could make a big difference for PhD placements in terms of LoRs If you were in my shoes, which option would you pick? I'm inclined towards the Oxford MSc but I'm worrying that because it is a more applied degree rather than a core theory degree it may jeopardize my PhD options. But having the Oxford name would only help, I imagine, in pursuing work if that is what I choose to do. For American and UK schools it may not matter as much since they do direct admits from bachelor's degrees, but for Canadian PhD programs (UofT, UBC) which only accept candidates with a masters in economics, i don't know if the MSc would have enough economic analysis/rigour as the others would. But it would be the most interesting program for me, most relevant to my interests, and is very well connected to industry from what I hear (but if you have heard otherwise please correct me, i don't want to operate on incorrect assumptions!) Thank you

Hey, I'm actually in a very similar boat! I'm accepted to Toronto (regular stream, didn't apply to doctoral but am regretting it), Queen's, and UBC. Queen's and Toronto gave me great funding + TA ships, UBC gave me a TA ship and a small award. I've also been accepted to Oxford's MSC Economics for Development program (no funding) and am struggling with which option to choose. I'm strongly considering a PhD in the future, but given life circumstances my Master's might end up as my terminal degree so that makes it hard to choose between the programs. @Setsanto, I would be interested more in hearing about your experiences with UofT. What made it "cold"? The administration? Or the students? Queen's seems to have the best work-life balance of the schools for the students from what i've seen (probably because they offer spring courses so you don't have to do 4 and 4 and they keep a core theory course in the winter term instead of all four in the first term like UBC), but it seems to have less research faculty and fewer course offerings than the other two, substantially fewer than UofT. For Toronto, one area I am confused about is that there are PhD courses that seem to be also available to MA students. Is this risky for an MA student to take? I'm especially interested in courses like applied empirical micro (2803), labour (2800, 2801), Public (2600, 2601) but they're all identified as dual MA/PhD courses and i'm scared i'd end up overloading myself if i enrolled in them.