eirikkss

I am curious as well. I thought this course looked very attractive (as a math-econ euro undergrad). In particular if you are interested in micro theory/game theory or finance. It also serves as a good escape to industry if you decide not to go for a PhD. I applied and hoping for the best.

^ To add to that; what I have learned recently is that you should focus more on previous placements out of the program, and the connections your profs have--rather than academic rigor for instance. If the adcoms know that students form your program have been successful in previous cohorts, they are more likely to admit you. This seems to be the case for UK MSc grads, even though they often lack the formal real analysis courses etc.

I am curious about this as well. All I know is that the MS in Finance and MS in Economics grads are weighted equally for admission to the MRes at UPF (source: the program director for MS in Finance), which makes sense since they lead to the same degree ("Masters in Economics and Finance"). I'm sure someone at BGSE has the answers to these questions

....................

Hi, Some background: I am a European student looking to apply for PhD in Economics. I have a European three year BSc in economics and mathematics, which is why I am applying for a masters program. I have (very) solid LOR's and good research experience. I'm open to PhD either in Europe or in the US (prefer US or UK). Interests: Microeconomics (public econ, pol econ, theory) and Finance (macro finance), but subject to change obviously. I have these choices for MSc so far: - Warwick MSc Economics (https://warwick.ac.uk/study/postgraduate/courses-2018/econmsc/) - Barcelona GSE MSc Finance (2nd choice, was rejected for Econ--though they are basically the same program) (Finance Program | Barcelona Graduate School of Economics) - Sciences Po Masters in Economics (http://www.sciencespo.fr/ecole-doctorale/en/content/master-s-economics) - Manchester MSc Financial econ (was a safety) Waiting for: - Paris School of Economics (APE Masters) - Dual degree QEM (Quantitative Economics) at Paris and Sciences-Po http://econ.sciences-po.fr/dual-degree-economics-and-quantitative-economics - Bologna LMEC I haven't taken the GRE, which is why I didn't apply to LSE and US masters. The GRE is only given once per year where I live, so I am planning to take it this summer/fall when I have moved to a bigger city for my MSc (where it's hopefully given more often). I asked my letter writers, and one recommended Sciences Po due to it being two years (I'd reach a higher level in the micro sequence), and they have some good names in micro (Robin etc.) The other one recommended Warwick. Cost of tuition is not an issue. I am a bit concerned about the one-year length, I would prefer the two-year courses but I'm open for feedback.

You need to specify what math courses you have taken. You seem to be a better candidate for a PhD in Business tbh.

Just jumping in here; I actually emailed a few US universities about this a few months ago, because my university does the same thing, it has very vague names on their courses. The response I got was that they are familiar with foreign course material, additionally, it was expected that (especially if you are from a less known institution) you would attach some sort of list of the textbooks being used and the material covered. That being said, US universities do seem to prefer math courses being taken in the math department.

I would be taking the math courses at the math department though, so that might change things(?) Mine is ranked 300-400 on QS Math and unranked everywhere else. I have spoken with the department several times, and it is a very small department. Most students go to other Scandinavian schools, some go to Europe (rare). I feel like I'm underselling my school right now, but I am just worried that I'll miss out on good potential admissions.

Thank you. It's not on the QS World Rankings subject list for economics anyways. Ranked

Hi, What would be more beneficial for me (applying to US PhD program in Economics, hopefully starting fall 2018): 1) Taking missing math courses (Real Analysis, Differential Equations, Probability Theory) at a small (say top 200 World ranking university) 2) Taking those courses at say Columbia`s post baccalaureate program Postbaccalaureate Studies | Courses | Mathematics | Columbia University School of Professional Studies or GWU https://math.columbian.gwu.edu/graduate-certificate-financial-mathematics (I know it says financial, but it contains the right courses). - The local university has no tuition (Scandinavian country) and I wouldn't incur the cost of moving right away. - Columbia (or other US uni's that offer post-bacc) are obviously more stronger in terms of signalling, more RA opportunities, better LOR's, more expensive. I can afford the post-bacc, but it would be nice to hear some views. My personal preference is US, since I am itching to move there. However, I have no idea how admissions offices would view these two potential applications. TLDR: is the additional signal from high ranked schools worth the money, in terms of PhD admissions? Cheers.

I am no expert, but given your concern (and from what I've heard about the math rigour of the EME), I would do the Cambridge MPhil and apply for RA after. Additionally, you could take some sort of Real analysis course during the same year. This would be a great foundation for US PhD. RA's give good opportunities for recommendation letters as well; something which will be difficult to get if you attend two different universities in such a short time.

Yes, for sure. I already know a lot of this already. I was just thinking in terms of the "signalling". I'm taking both linear algebra and a third calc course next spring. Might even do a "gap year" where I'll take some more, we'll see. I am really enjoying maths and stats at the moment. Anyways, thank you guys. Edit: I have made up my mind. I would've taken the additional math courses anyway (even I had to take another year after m BSc). So the core of my question was more about the usefulness of such finance courses. They seem quite unimportant to me at the ugrad level (if you're planning to go to grad school).

I think I have decided to go for calc, as I believe I will be more flexible if I change my career / educational plans in the next year. But here are the courses (I am still open for input, my decision is not final) Finance course: - Perform investment analysis - Calculate optimal portfolios - Financial markets - Accounting for risks - Securities - Basic elements of capital tax and how this affects valuation - Book: Corporate Finance (Berk & DeMarzo) Calc Course (it's not exactly calc II per se I think) - Real and complex number systems, limits, continuity, logarithmic, exponential and trigonometric functions and their inverse functions, Taylor expansion with remainder, sequences, series and introductory differential equations - Book: Calculus: A complete course (Adams) - Chapters 1 - 7 Edit, some overview of my maths background: - Btw, I already took maths for econ; differentiation, partial differentiation, integration, optimization several variables, Lagrange multipliers, implicit differentiation, intro to limits, basic financial math (interest, geometric series etc.). - I have taken a basic stats course - Taking Mathematical Statistics (Mathematical Statistics by Devore and Berk) this fall - And I am taking econometrics (grad-level) this summer.

lol:glee: I took an intro to corporate finance course, but that's the only finance-related course I have. I'll stick to maths and stats as well.

Thank you for your your input. Yes my impression is also that a lot of fin econ masters (and pure finance) do not require undergrad finance courses. I would also imagine that math and stat knowledge is more "widely" applicable to both fields and sends a better signal.

Hi I have one available spot for an elective this upcoming fall semester, and I am considering: 1) another math course, equivalent to Calculus II I think (I have calc already, and this will overlap somewhat, but will contain more proofs and complex numbers) I will also take more math in my final semester of spring 17, but probably won't count in my application. 2) A course in Investment and financing I am applying to financial economics masters starting Fall 2017 (and a few econ and one pure finance... broad I know). After reading other posts I am getting the impression that; math > most intro courses. I should also note that the masters I am applying to do not require any "advanced" finance courses, so this leads me to believe that math is appreciated more. However, I am lacking some finance courses (I only have one) so I am not really sure. Thanks

Hi I have one available spot for an elective this upcoming fall semester, and I am considering: 1) another math course, equivalent to Calculus II I think (I have calc already, and this will overlap somewhat, but will contain more proofs and complex numbers) I will also take more math in my final semester of spring 17, but probably won't count in my application. 2) A course in Investment and financing I am applying to financial economics masters starting Fall 2017 (and a few econ and one pure finance... broad I know). After reading other posts I am getting the impression that math > most intro courses. I should also note that the masters I am applying to do not require any "advanced" finance courses, so this leads me to believe that math is appreciated more. However, I am lacking some finance courses (I only have one) so I am not really sure. Thanks

I am in a similar position, and decided to take another year at my Uni to take only "pure" math and stats courses - i.e. from the math dept. I think it will be worth it in the long run. But to answer your question - given that you do not want to take another year, you should take both. It is doable, as there is some overlap between them it seems. Also, the jump to first year PhD will be more difficult (as chateauheart pointed out to me in an older thread). I am not qualified to answer which one is better though.

Mathematics for Economists by Simon & Blume is a good one.

Sorry for hijacking the thread, but does that also imply that the classes listed as "planned" do not count? Ex; I apply fall/winter 2016, and I'm taking an important math class spring 2017, that math class "does not count" ?

Would love some info on this as well...

Hi, I would advise you to check out these articles. They helped me out a lot in deciding, and they are very honest; https://www.pdx.edu/sites/www.pdx.edu.econ/files/Econ%20PhD%20Straight%20Talk.pdf http://www.econ.umn.edu/graduate/so_you_want_to_be_a_phd.pdf The complete guide to getting into an economics PhD program - Quartz

I had a chat with one of the supervisors at our department, and we agreed on that the best path would be to take (a "pure", math department) Calc 1 this fall, and calc 2 intro to real analysis (one course) next spring along with the advanced math course listed on page 1. I as mentioned, already have a math for econ course this semester - so the calc 1 course will overlap 5 ECTS-points, but that is okay, since I'll be well above the limit to graduate. The calc 1 and 2 courses are quite advanced - according to some math and physics majors I know. The book used is (Calculus: Complete Course by Robert A. Adams). However, I am still wondering about the impact it will have on my application for this fall (2016) - since I won't have any grades in the "pure" calc courses - only in the math for econ from this semester. As I mentioned in another thread, I might be better off doing a masters (at BGSE etc.) Another possibility is to do another semester (or two) at my current school - taking pure math courses, since we have no tuition. Although I am getting a bit sick of living here:torn: The university is also very small, so the research possibilities are basically non-existent.

I agree with this.

In my opinion, I think your specialization in development and dedication to that specific field will help you a lot - if you target the right departments . That would be departments with a primary research focus on economic development. I'm sure there are plenty of lists of this on the web. I am on the student council at my institution, and at the department meetings, the staff and faculty put a lot of emphasis on hiring and recruiting people that will strengthen their main field of research.