remusane

Is it really that unclear for top 5 programs (where @worldrecordgaz is hoping to place)? Anecdotally, I do know an international student at a top 5 program who got in without a master's, so I'm not claiming a master's is strictly necessary for international students, but this person ranked top of their cohort in a more competitive/higher ranking undergrad program than Warwick's. It seems to me very likely that @worldrecordgaz will need a master's for this kind of placement. Very happy to be corrected though.

This mathematical background looks good. I still think you'd probably be better off sticking with your current course and doing a predoc (full-time RA work) for two years. I imagine letters of recommendation that can speak to your research potential (obtained through RA work) will be much more important for your PhD admissions than additional maths. You'll also very likely need a master's if you're aiming high, so you're potentially looking at several years of study and RA work before starting your PhD, especially if you switch to MMORSE.

A lot of online advice is tailored to US students, whose economics classes are often not sufficiently mathematical. The UK system is different and the best undergrad econ programmes provide a good mathematical background, so this advice might not apply to you. I'm not familiar with Warwick's courses though – how much maths are you able to cover? I'd strongly recommend studying some proof-based maths, ideally including real analysis. You should also be very comfortable with calculus and linear algebra. For top PhD programmes, you'll need to do a master's and probably also a predoc. I would focus on continuing to do very well in your studies, getting into a very good master's programme with a strong PhD placement record, and getting research experience through research assistance and/or a supervised thesis. Letters of recommendation that can speak to your research potential are key for PhD admissions. Based on what you've written, my guess is that switching to MMORSE won't help that much and probably isn't worth the additional years, but I'm not familiar with the programme. With strong performance in a rigorous master's programme, your mathematical background won't be doubted. However, you might struggle to perform well in such a master's without sufficient mathematical preparation in your undergrad. Warwick is a very good university, so I would have thought you'd get that, but again, I'm not familiar with the programme. The maths I mentioned above will help you prepare for master's study.

Also, you might be overestimating the significance of having a social sciences bachelor's vs economics bachelor's. Admissions committees don't usually care so much about what your major is but care more about which classes you've taken. So your econ background might be fine. This cuts both ways though: they also expect relatively high mathematical preparation (very high for PhDs but I think more lenient and more variable for master's). So if you haven't taken many maths classes and your econ classes weren't sufficiently rigorous, this could be held against you, in which case taking maths classes (e.g. through NetMath) could improve your application quite a lot.

LSE's applicable maths MSc is designed for mathematicians/highly mathematical graduates who want to learn to apply their maths background to social sciences. It's not designed for social scientists who want to learn more maths, and without a strong background in maths, I imagine it would be very challenging. I'm not sure about other maths master's programmes, but I would have thought they're similar. If you want a stronger maths background, you could take online classes at NetMath at UIUC or at a local university. I think a full maths master's would be both very challenging and overkill. You could also consider applying straight to econ master's. Without knowing more about your profile, it's hard to say where you'd likely be competitive, but I get the impression that below the top programmes, many aren't that hard to get into. Whether it's better to go straight to an econ master's or to take maths classes and then have a shot at getting into a stronger master's programme will depend on your longer term goals (e.g. programme ranking is more important if you're aiming for a PhD/academia).

You should look at the PhD placements of the programs you're interested in, e.g. https://www.newschool.edu/nssr/economics-outcomes/

Thanks to @Academic Econ Discord for starting the results thread. I think this can be a really useful resource for future applicants, so please consider adding your profile and results!

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad: Maths and philosophy integrated bachelor's and master's from top 2 UK undergrad. Undergrad GPA: First class. Type of Undergrad 2: Economics graduate diploma (undergrad level) from uni that's unknown internationally (studied in evening classes while working). Undergrad 2 GPA: Distinction. Type of Grad: Very good UK master's. Grad GPA: No grades at time of application. GRE: 170 Q / 164V / 5.5 AW. Math Courses: Linear algebra, Analysis, Calculus, Probability, Groups and group actions, Linear algebra II, Metric spaces and complex analysis, Topology, Rings and modules, Logic, Set theory, Representation theory, Galois theory, Extended essay in mathematics; marks in the 60s-80s -- good but not stellar, first class overall; mainly studied irrelevant pure maths; all proof-based. Econ Courses: Intermediate micro, Intermediate macro, Intermediate econometrics; marks in the 80s-90s (from much lower ranking uni than maths courses). Currently taking advanced courses in micro, macro, econometrics, growth and development in historical perspective. Other Courses: Several philosophy courses; marks in the 60s-80s -- very high mark overall, won an award. Letters of Recommendation: (1) Maths professor who taught me several courses and supervised summer research project and extended essay; should be strong and detailed, but they're not an economist; (2) Master's micro professor and academic mentor (young AP); discussed my writing sample with them but they only knew me for ~3 months at the time of writing the letter, so can't have been that strong/credible; (3) Master's programme director (full professor); must have been very generic and not detailed as they barely know me. Research Experience: No RA; I wrote a decision theory paper last year to discuss with letter writers so they could comment on research potential in their letters and to submit as a writing sample. Maths summer research project, which developed into maths extended essay. Econometrics research project for graduate diploma. Master's philosophy thesis in decision theory and ethics. Teaching Experience: None. Research Interests: Mainly micro theory, maybe economic growth. SOP: I got good feedback on it but I don't think it was anything special. One paragraph tailored to each program. Some regrets (see below). Other: Worked for a couple of years in an unrelated field between undergrad 1 and master's (did undergrad 2 during my first year of work). RESULTS: Acceptances: Northwestern (waitlist), Bonn, UT Austin. Waitlists: Northwestern, Brown. Rejections: MIT, Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, Yale, Chicago, Columbia, Brown (waitlist). Attending: Northwestern. Comments: Very happy with this outcome! My master's sends a small number of students straight to top 10 programs without predocs, so I figured it was worth a shot. I didn't have time to do 20+ applications while doing my master's and I expected that my profile might be significantly improved after completing the master's and doing a predoc (as I'd have more detailed letters and master's grades on my transcript). So I applied to a relatively small number of programs, with the intention of doing a predoc and reapplying more broadly if things didn't work out. Given I had no super strong, credible letters from economists and not a lot of relevant research experience, I feel lucky to have these acceptances! What would you have done differently? I'm very happy with how things turned out but it's potentially useful to reflect on what I could have done differently. My letters were probably the weakest part of my application so if there were things I could have done to improve them, they might have made a big difference. I don't think there's a lot I could have done to improve them for this cycle though (e.g. I couldn't take econ courses during my undergrad, so it would have been difficult to build a relationship with an econ prof during my undergrad and a letter from my economics graduate diploma would have carried very little weight outside the UK unfortunately). I think I did a good job with the 3 months I had before application deadlines to get a relatively good letter from my master's, and I expect the strength/credibility of my letters from my master's would always be limited by the short time between starting the master's and applying to PhD programs. If I'd been really organised and proactive, maybe I could have done some RA work before starting my master's to replace letter (3). I think it would have been really difficult to make this happen though, especially during covid. My maths grades were very good overall but somewhat inconsistent. I worked hard but probably could have done better by using better studying techniques and by managing exam anxiety better. I didn't really try to get off the waitlist for Brown because I was pretty sure I preferred other options, but I should have made more of an effort so that I had a higher chance of having that option too. My SoP focused on two completely unrelated ideas/literatures (decision theory and growth theory) because I'm really not sure where I want to specialise yet. To some extent, this is fine -- I don't think having a set research agenda is at all necessary for admission (e.g. several professors I spoke to at visit days encouraged incoming students to keep an open mind regarding research directions). But I think it's easier to create a coherent narrative by focusing on one area, or on related areas, and this might be better for application purposes. Given my background and research experience, I can write much more credibly about decision theory, so maybe I should have focused there. I highly doubt my SoP was decisive for any of my rejections though and I doubt it helped my acceptances (beyond not being disqualifyingly bad). I don't think this matters much for many programs.

It's a slow and painful process, I'm sorry 😞 but at least the uncertainty will be resolved soon. Good luck!

From their perspective, they're likely to be wanting to fill seats before (or shortly after) the deadline, so they'll be looking for people who are likely accept. It can't hurt to let a program know that you'd accept an offer if they made one to you (if true), and it might help. If they didn't respond to your earlier email, then it seems unlikely that they're going to make you an offer unfortunately, but I think it's worth a try. Personally, in your situation, I would reach out and explain that I'm very likely to accept an offer.