bpbirch

^^ Sorry for the double post. I wasn't aware of the delay.

Hi Chateauheart - thanks for the feedback. I guess what I left out of my profile is as important as what I included, regarding my academic path and career interests. It was actually the subject matter itself, and not methodology, that led me away from political science, and towards economics during my masters. I already had some economics training when I first began writing my thesis, and basically all of my research ideas were purely economic, which was problematic, as I was doing a political science masters, not economics. Luckily, the guy who ended up being my committee chair has very broad research interests, and he's a comparative political scientist who specializes in Mexican and Cuban politics. I already had some background on Cuban economics and politics, hence why I chose the topic I did. And he was flexible enough to compromise with me: "include some political aspects in your thesis, and I'll give you the go ahead to include some economic - albeit qualitative - chapters in your thesis." All of the topics that really interested me in my thesis pertained to Cuba's economics: their currency system and its different exchange rates, and the distortions this arrangement causes in their economy; their wages and labor (and concomitant distortions), etc. I've spent the last 3 years or so discussing the pros and cons of economics vs. policy PhDs with different professors and colleagues, so it's not a decision I made over night. I know that I'm not interested in a political science program - I found myself audibly groaning when I read Harvard's PEG program summary and saw that you had to take multiple political science courses. And I know that I'm interested in all things economic, especially theory. I just haven't had much access to assessments of which programs I'll realistically be admitted to, because most students at my LAC don't go on to PhDs in econ, hence why I asked for a profile review. Hopefully this clarifies my interests and the path I want to take going forward. Thanks once again for the feedback!

Thanks a lot for the reply, chateauheart. I guess what I didn’t include in my profile is just as important as what I did include. It was actually the subject matter itself, rather than the methodology, that led me to economics, and away from political science. While I was doing my masters, I actually had a hard time with my original adviser because all of my thesis ideas were almost purely economic in nature and neglected politics. He ultimately said, “you should be doing an economics masters, not political science,” and we parted ways. And he was completely right, both in assessing that I wanted to study pure economics, and in deciding that there was no intersection in our interests. Luckily, the guy who ultimately ended up agreeing to be my committee chair had much broader interests, and he agreed to compromise with me: “include some political aspects in your thesis, and I’ll give you the go ahead to include some economic - albeit qualitatively - chapters.” He’s a comparative political scientist who focuses on Mexico and Cuba, hence why I wrote on Cuba. It was a topic that I already had quite a bit of background on, and it was a good topic for finding the overlap between our interests that would allow me to finish my masters and write my thesis. I absolutely loved working with him, and thoroughly enjoyed the thesis writing process - even as it ballooned to ~250 pages. The parts of my thesis that I really enjoyed dealt with Cuba’s currency, their exchange rate system, wages. But I had to include political facets because, well, I was in fact in a political science program. The upshot being, it’s the economic subject matter that interests me. The political? Not so much. In fact, I heard myself audibly groan when I looked at Harvard’s PEG program summary and saw that you had to take multiple political science courses - I couldn’t imagine sitting through another graduate political science course. It’s just not for me. I didn’t come to this conclusion overnight. I’ve spent years discussing the different pros and cons with econ and political science faculty. I just haven’t had much insight regarding which programs I would be competitive at, because I am at a small LAC where most students are not pursuing graduate school. I really do appreciate the feedback, and I hope this gives a clarifies representation of my interests (and more importantly lack of interest in political science).

And just one other question: do you think it would be worth it to re-take Analysis? I took it with a prof who is notoriously rigorous in our dept. Awesome prof, I loved the class, but she's definitely more demanding than other people in the dept. I could re-take this semester and get an A, no problem. Do you think that would make any impact on admissions?

This is very good information to have. I took a look at Harvard's PEG program placements, and they're impressive. I was not aware that economics departments hired people with non-economics degrees as economics professors. I'll spend some time looking into these programs more. I am still more inclined towards a pure economics program, given that my interest in the political aspect of things has waned over time, as my interest in economics has grown. I'll probably apply to two or three of these programs, though, in addition to the econ programs I apply to. Thanks!

Thank you very much for the feedback! From my limited information, it has also seemed to me that ~30-50 ranked programs are my best bet, so I'll realistically plan on the top end of that, and cross my fingers for the middle. I looked at public policy programs in the past, as well as political economy programs, but ultimately decided against them, because my interests always gravitated toward the economic, rather than the political, facets of whatever I was studying / researching. Regarding research interests, when I wrote macro / econometrics, I just meant that I want those to be my two main subfields. I take it from your advice that I should plan on having my third letter come from a mathematics professor, rather than my political science MA chair? Thank you so much once again for your advice - it helps a lot. I'll do my best to get my quant score up to 166.

Bump. I was also hoping for feedback regarding letter of recommendation writers. My masters thesis adviser, who made my masters thesis required reading in one of his classes, and for his honors students, wants to write one of my letters. I know you're only supposed to use letters of rec from economists and occasionally mathematicians, but would a thesis adviser letter from a political scientist be of value, since he's seen my graduate research? I'm also going to try to get my GRE up to 165.

Hi all - I was hoping to get a little feedback/insight regarding my profile, since mine seems to be the kind of background that will produce highly variable results, in terms of admissions/rejections. A little info on me, I originally received my political science BA and then MA at a large state school. I realized while doing my MA that I wanted to do my PhD in economics, so I went back to school at a small liberal arts school to obtain my economics and mathematics degrees. I will be applying this Fall for Fall 2019. I have concerns about 1) coming from an unknown liberal arts school, 2) having so-so grades in my calc sequence and analysis; 3) having a mediocre GRE score; and 4) not having economic internship / RA experience in academia or with a fed branch. I've seen profiles similar to mine get into good programs, while I've also seen them receive a large proportion of rejections. As such, I'll be casting a wide net - 15-50 rankings, and am hoping to get into ~30-40 ranked programs. I was just hoping I could get some feedback from you guys - all feedback is welcome. Thanks! Type of Undergrad: Large state school (Political Science); unranked liberal arts school (Economics, Mathematics, ) Undergrad GPA: 3.75 Type of Grad: State School (Political Science) Grad GPA: 3.9 Math Courses: Calc I/II/III (A-/B+/A-), Linear Algebra (A-), Statistics & Probability (A), Advanced Engineering Stats & Probability (A), Diff EQ (A), Number Theory (A), Combinatorics (A), Modern College Geometry (A), Linear Dynamical Systems (A-), Real Analysis (B-), Group Theory (A) Computer Engineering Courses: C++ Progamming (A), Advanced C++ Programming (A) Econ Courses: All A's - Intermediate Macroeconomics, Microeconomic Theory (Intermediate Microeconomics), Introduction to Econometrics, Applied Econometrics, International Economics II, History of Economic Institutions and Thought, Game Theory and Behavioral Economics, Managerial Economics, Money and Financial Institutions, Independent Study - Focus on Building Econometric Models Letters of Recommendation: Two from economics professors, one from mathematics professor. These will be very solid - I have very good relationships with them. Research Experience: Master’s Thesis on Cuban Political Economy (275 pages). My MA committee chair made four chapters of my thesis reading in an upper division political science course at my alma mater that focuses on the Cuban political economy. These chapters pertain to monetary duality in Cuba, Cuba’s integration into the world economy, Cuba’s recent economic reforms, and US-Cuba relations. My thesis is also required reading for honors students at my alma mater studying US-Cuban relations. GRE: 163 Q, 162 V, 5.5 AW Teaching Experience: TA'd during Masters Degree Research Interests: Econometrics, Macroeconomics SOP: Working on

Just for empathy's sake, I found myself in the same boat regarding the GRE. I'm finishing my math degree, econ degree, and have political science BA and political science Masters (the latter two being irrelevant to my point here), with a 3.8 GPA. I've taken Calc I/II/III (A-/B+/A-), Linear Algebra (A-), Stats (A), Advanced Engineering Stats & Probability (A), Diff EQ (A), Number Theory (A), Combinatorics (A), Modern College Geometry (A), Dynamical Systems (A-), Real Analysis (B-), Group Theory (A). I don't consider myself to be a great mathematician. I'm pretty good, but nothing special (as my grade in Analysis indicates). My first go around with the GRE I got a 158, which was a huge bummer for me. And similar to you, it wasn't that I didn't know how to do the problems, it's that I ran out of time (I don't think I came across a single problem where I said, "I don't know how to do this." So I've had to go back and learn how to do problems much quicker (plugging in answers, plugging in values). I was too stubborn to do this at first. But for problems that have variables in the question and the answer (e.g. what was the proportion of a/b, in terms of x), and for problems in which the algebra ends up getting messy (getting third-degree terms), I've learned that this is the quickest way. The problem for me / root of my stubbornness, has to do with the fact that just plugging in values and seeing if they work goes against everything I've learned in math, vis-a-vis being taught that showing something works with specific values does not mean your solution works in general. In no way am I excusing my score - it was bad. Just explaining that I had the same problem as you with time management, and have been able to get better since then. Not sure if that helps, but just thought I'd make the suggestion: ditch your normal / upper level math training and learn to just plug in values/answers for more complicated problems. It has really helped my speed.