anothereconguy

Fair enough, that makes perfect sense. Wisconsin's program is $36k a year for 2 years, so maybe you want to look into that.

We have extremely similar profiles in terms of grades in undergrad. I think the problem with RA positions actually worth doing is that they are super competitive and mostly are given to people who already have top-20 profiles looking to step up a level to top-10 or top-5 PhD programs. Honestly, your profile does not seem to be top-40/50 level at the moment. The best thing to do right now is to focus on research in the summer and then apply to Masters programs. You should certainly try applying to Duke, Wisconsin, BU, UT-Austin, Columbia, etc. who have masters programs that lead to decent PhD placements, and then try taking an advanced Math course or two in your masters and of course maintain a high GPA in your econ coursework as well as work under a professor there to get a great letter. Why are you only looking at programs in Canade/Europe? For the record, I came out of undergrad with a 3.3 GPA, pretty sucky, then got my Masters and recently got into a T15.

First of all, take a few deep breaths. You say you have a perfect Econ GPA and a strong masters GPA AND you are going for a Masters. If you really were, as you claim, a perfect or near perfect student, then indeed 1 average semester for you will be treated as an anomaly, especially if you explain it later on and have valid personal reasons for what happened (it seems like you do). Your most recent academic performance is what matters the most, and I am sure that your grades in your masters program, and perhaps even taking one or two advanced math classes in the masters program and doing well, will help immensely. Also (and this might be because you are going through things in your personal life) stay calm and do not overreact. The purpose of economics or PhD admissions is not to punish you for an occasional blip. Admissions committees really are looking for good researchers. There really is nothing that needs fixing. Just do well in your masters program, perhaps take Analysis or Probability Theory. Talk to your professors when you are in your Masters program. But above all, try and enjoy economics. That last sentence is flowery, but holds true nevertheless.

Many more on this forum who can answer this better than I can, but I honestly don't think a B would matter, especially if you get an A in more advanced courses (Linear Algebra, Differential Eqns, Real Analysis) and Calc-3. There are far more important and honestly better signals of ability to do research in Economics than a poxy B grade in a course which you probably take in the first year of college.

I'm not arriving until the 15th, but would definitely be up for meeting at some point that week - not to study for Math camp, though! Also, yes, cohort size would be interesting information if anyone has it!

I think it used to be common, but as the median/average length to complete a PhD has increased, most decent programs offer 5 years of funding.

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad: US Top 15 Econ Program Undergrad GPA: 3.3 Type of Grad: US Top 15 Econ Program Grad GPA: 3.8 GRE: 166Q, 163V, 5.0AW Math Courses: Analysis (AB), Calc I/II/III, Linear Algebra and Diff. Eqs. (B). Econ Courses: UG: Intermediate Micro, Intermediate Macro, Econometrics, Game Theory, Honors Thesis + a bunch of electives; Grad: Micro sequence (A/AB), Macro (A), Metrics sequence (A/A/A), PhD Micro I (AB), PhD Macro I (AB). Other Courses: Physics/Econ double major in undergrad, so a bunch of physics courses. Letters of Recommendation: Grad research advisor (brand name, very strong letter), PhD course professor (generic letter on performance in class, aced his test, etc - star prof.), Grad research professor (star professor, strong letter, wrote a paper for his course). Research Experience: 2 projects in my masters; RA-ship under a brand name in the department; honors thesis in undergrad; Summer internship in my country involving fieldwork. Teaching Experience: None Research Interests: Labor, Public SOP: Heavily focused on research experience, and outlined clear goals as to research. Basically, tried to convey that I knew what real economics research was and that I can do it. RESULTS: Acceptances: Michigan Waitlists: Maryland (Priority Waitlist) Rejections: NWU, NYU, Penn, Columbia, Wisconsin, UCSD, UCLA, UT-Austin, Penn State, etc. etc. Pending: Not really pending, but I had an interview with Rice, who knew I was into Michigan and didn't make an offer. Also received an email from Michigan State asking if I would accept an offer should they make one, and I declined. Attending: Michigan Comments: I only add the "pending" because I feel it is important to take into account counterfactuals. It ended up so that I only had one solid offer on the table (ie Michigan), but if I didn't have that, I would have had at least two others. I didn't know this was how the market for PhD admissions worked. What would you have done differently? For my interests, I think I applied to the wrong reach schools. NWU, Penn, Columbia are not exactly the strongest for labor and public, or at least do extremely structural work. Should have chosen my reach-reach schools more carefully, but even so I doubt it would have made a big difference to my outcomes. Same for the slightly lower ranked schools, actually - it didn't make sense to apply to Penn State, Arizona with the kind of interests I have.

A thread in a similar vein as the others. Just a place where people starting (or already at) at University of Michigan can discuss housing, faculty, interests, etc.

Chateauheart

FWIW, even as someone who is not joining Rice (I will be joining Michigan), I would highly recommend Rice esp if you are interested in applied micro or IO. I agree with other people on here that Rice is a slightly risky program, but as Prof. Eraslan pointed out, the risk is not as great as it seems. It is also a very positive signal to have someone (actually multiple people if you count Catrina) on Urch trying to answer queries and doubts that prospective students might have. The recent faculty members who have joined really are quite awesome (personally I am in awe of FC's and KW's work), and I know that the current faculty have spent time emailing and talking to prospective students. Again, this is a major signal of commitment to the program, since of course these are extremely busy people. If I had a competing offer in the 20-30 range (as it turns out I got luckier than that - but say I had competing offers from Michigan State, BC, UT Austin, etc.), I think the case for Rice is very very strong, and I would have chosen Rice without a doubt. It would be ideal if your interests happen to coincide with any one of the recent faculty hires. I can say from personal experience that the faculty at Madison (where I am) were very positive about the program at Rice, so I suppose that is also a signal that the word is getting out about Rice's program. If you are >50% sure about applied micro, there wouldn't be any doubt in my mind as to the choice I would suggest to you. HOWEVER, it also depends on how sure you are about Macro - if indeed that is what you need to do, perhaps BC might be a slightly better option, just because the focus at Rice does not seem to be macro (an outsider's POV). I have no clue either way about applied macro, to be completely honest. I agree with others on here that the US News rankings are a little useless as far as Rice is concerned. If people are turning down UT Austin for the department, then as student quality goes up (faculty quality has obviously gone up), you would expect the "real" ranking to rise rapidly. Keep in mind also that Rice University in general has a lot of money, so you will probably be able to indulge yourself a bit every now and then, esp. if RA opportunities open up :)

Your decision to join or not join a program should really not be based on one faculty member. From what I've heard and seen, interests shift a lot even if at this point you feel they won't. Also, faculty moves are more common than you might think, so even if this person does not move now, they might move in the future. Go for the best department, not for one person. Even given all that, it might seem impertinent at this point to ask. The faculty member himself/herself might not have decided.

Even as someone who is over the moon about joining Michigan in the Fall, I would say this year's placement has to be discounted. They clearly had an insane batch (perhaps their best cohort in history), and their median placement this time is top 25-30. That's the median. I don't think we can expect them to do this every year, or even once every 4-5 years. However, Michigan's median placement has always been great (this year their placement is comparable to top 7 IMO). But even after discounting this year, Michigan would win over UCSD for your interests.

This thread will be relevant. http://www.www.urch.com/forums/phd-economics/157170-master-ut-austin.html

There is already a discussion on Texas vs Wisconsin masters here: http://www.www.urch.com/forums/phd-economics/157170-master-ut-austin.html I don't know much about the program at Tufts.

If you haven't heard from NYU, write to them. You will have an official rejection within a day. Speaking from experience, obviously.