Search the Community

Please delete thread.

Decision day is a little bit over a month away. Unfortunately, I did not get into my top choice so the decision about where to attend is not a clear-cut one. Thus, I'm seeking advice. What do you think are important factors, general or specific, to consider when choosing the school you want to attend? What should I ask during Virtual Visit Days and meetings with faculty? Do you recommend I speak to anyone besides the faculty? As an undergrad, I might overestimate/underestimate the importance of certain factors or entirely missing them, so I would love to hear others' thoughts and personal experiences about what they think is relevant. Many thanks!

I have been accepted to both, and as my name suggests, I am interested in macro-labor. I know that Wisconsin is higher ranked overall, but I have a sense that UT-Austin is improving (recent hires) and has strong macro-labor faculty as well. Thoughts on which program is better for PhD students (faculty, culture, placement, etc)? Or is Wisconsin clearly the better choice because it is closer to the top 10? This is a very new experience for me, so any insight is helpful. Thanks!

BC has strong empirical faculty but its accounting PhD program is relatively new. Minnesota has strong faculty in analytical and its empirical strength has improved a lot. How to choose between these three programs? Any comments will be much appreciated!

Hi all! I'm applying to econ phd this cycle and here's a question I have regarding sop: Should I mention faculty members that I want to work with in sop? It seems people do this all the time but My professor told me this usually wouldn't do much good as anyone can just google for 5 min and drop down some names GS Lab RA manual also recommend against this (PhD Application * gslab-econ/ra-manual Wiki * GitHub)

Hello Friends, I am from India and below are the required details. Requesting you to check and give a feedback. Thanking you in Advance. Test Scores (GMAT/GRE): GMAT Yet to Appear but i am Confident of Scoring between minimum 600 to 660 Points i.e between 70 to 80 % percentile. Undegrad GPA: 04 ,Engineering in Production From India Graduate GPA: 04 ,MBA in Marketing From India Research Experience: 0 Teaching Experience: 01 Articles,Whitepapers Published related to strategy & Marketing- 08 Nos Work Experience: 11.5 Years in Oil & Gas,Power & Automobile Sector in functions like B2B Sales & Marketing,Strategy & Supply Chain.also from last 9 months self employed, entrepreneur. Concentration Applying to: PHD in Strategy, Entrepreneurship or Marketing. Number of programs planned to apply to: 5 to 10. Dream Schools: Rank Between 50th to 150 th Fully funded in English language anywhere in the world. Other Questions: What made you want to pursue a PhD? My rick works experience has made me inclined to carry out research work, proof is my original work articles published. PHD will help me understand, study how to carry out research & other PHD subjects under guidance of expert faculty, subsequently to be eligible as a faculty to teach management subjects & also to carry out research related to Strategy by working closely with the industry specially Small Scale Industry. Questions or concerns you have about your profile? Yes Yes i have a very strong statement of purpose & also will get strong letter of recommendation from my Faculty & Industry professionals Any additional specific questions you may have: Yes Pls provide 3-4 colleges names ? which i can target and improve my chances of getting admitted considering my above profile & gmat score. Thanking you in Advance. Regards, Sandesh Musale

The table can be read column-wise and row-wise. For each of the top 25 U.S. agricultural economics departments, each column counts the number of enlisted faculty by doctoral alma mater corresponding to the department listed in a given row. Each row, inversely, counts where the doctoral alumni of each department are affiliated to as tenured/tenure-track faculty within the top 25 U.S. agricultural economics departments. [ATTACH=CONFIG]7264[/ATTACH] (Open in a new tab for a larger view) Notes: 1. The ranking is based on REPEC's agricultural economics department rankings, as of April 2020. 2. The figures are based on the faculty listing in the respective department's website, as of May 26, 2020. 3. The figures only count the number of tenured/tenure-track professors in each department, excluding non-tenure-track faculty (visiting professors, research professors, clinical professors, professors of practice, adjunct professors, lecturers, and instructors). In addition, emeritus professors are also counted. 4. "General Econ" counts faculty who have a (general/non agricultural) economics Ph.D. degree. Environmental (and natural resource) economics degrees, traditionally not lumped together with agricultural economics departments (Yale, Duke, U Mass) are provided their own rows. "Canadian Ag Econ" counts faculty who have a Ph.D. degree from a Canadian agricultural economics department. "Other U.S. Ag Econ" counts faculty whose Ph.D. alma mater is other than the 25 listed. "Non-Econ" counts faculty who have a Ph.D. degree in a discipline other than economics (most commonly, law, public policy, statistics, engineering, and environmental science, among others). 5. All tenured/tenure-track faculty are counted for Cornell's Department of Applied Economics and Management. Only agricultural economics faculty are counted for Iowa State's Department of Economics. Similarly, only agricultural economics faculty are counted for Penn State's Department of Agricultural Economics, Sociology, and Education. 6. Washington State University graduates are counted under "Other U.S. Ag Econ". 7. A crucial limitation of the statistics is that they do not account for the temporal variation of the alumni graduation years. Some departments were at their peak in certain years in the past, and their figures are over-represented by their graduates from those specific years, despite their graduates not landing tenure-track faculty positions in recent years, and vice-versa.

Throughout the past few years, I've used this forum a lot for advice on what I needed to do to get into a top accounting PhD program. As the application season is coming to a close, I thought I would share some of my insights going through this process. A lot of the information on this forum is very useful and informative, but a lot of the content (as far as I saw) may not reflect what the process is like today, as the forum was more active before. If you want detailed statistics from my profile, you can probably find them on one of my older posts. I am from a school in Canada (for the sake of anonymity, I won't say which one, but it's one that is considered one of the better schools in Canada). I was accepted into 2 schools that are typically considered to be in the T-10, 3 additional ones that fall within T-20 and 2 safety schools. Overall, I felt that I did quite well this application season, all things considered. Here are some takeaways that I had from the application process, and things that I might have changed: I ended up getting reference letters from people who knew me really well, and who I had worked with. If I had known earlier just how important references were, I would have tried to get to know senior faculty at my school better. I knew that references were important, but I didn't know that these would be so important. Some of the interviews that I landed were largely because some references knew people in the faculty at those schools. I would have worked at an accounting firm for a few years before I applied. I know that a lot of schools tell you this doesn't matter, but throughout my experience this cycle and talking with other applicants, it seems that there does seem to be some preference for prior work experience. It may not matter as much as other things like research experience, grades, references, etc., but I was asked very often about why I chose not to work before going into a PhD program. I would not have worried as much about math courses or rigorous econ training. A lot of programs don't have this as a requirement. To an extent, it seemed like they cared more that I was passionate about the field than they did about the specifics of my training. I was really worried that my quant preparation would be too weak, and I spent a lot of time trying to correct this issue. I think some of that time may have been better spent gaining work experience or getting to know faculty a bit better. My biggest piece of advice for people who are in undergrad/master's programs that are looking to do an accounting phd is to go out and meet faculty. Not only because they can write you references, but also because they're usually the best sources of information for the application process. I can't understate how important and useful faculty members have been in helping me with the whole process. If you have any more specific questions, I'm happy to answer them through inbox!

Hello everyone, You may be interested in this that has been circulating around: Management (STRAT-ENT-ORG) UTD Rankings Per Capita | Leeds School of Business | University of Colorado Boulder UTD rankings "per capita," that is, productivity per faculty member. While no ranking is representative, it is an interesting perspective.

Do management/OB/strategy faculty in T50 departments have opportunities to consult on the side? Economics professors often serve as expert witnesses for litigation consulting firms. What are comparable options on the management side?

This forum has a long tradition of asking applicants to post their profiles in a standardized format, for ease of evaluation. I propose that those evaluating candidates do the same, to make it easy for readers to understand their perspective and qualifications. This proposal is grounded in a generic reason (asymmetric information is bad and experience informs judgement) and a specific one (I've read some advice with which I sharply disagree, and I happen to know that some of it comes from junior faculty members at institutions without PhD programs). I read a thread today in which a poster suggested disregarding some common advice about retaking math classes and wondered how someone should know how to evaluate the difference of opinions without more context about who offered them. I note that some regular posters have chosen to make themselves easy to identify, and knowing their credentials helps me interpret and trust their advice. Current status (tenure track faculty, non tenure track faculty, post-PhD non academic, upper year PhD candidate, pre-candidacy PhD student, prospective PhD student): If faculty, type of institution (PhD granting/R1, masters granting, BA/BS granting, LAC): If faculty, are you tenured? (yes/no): If faculty, have you served on a PhD admissions committee? (yes/no): If faculty, have you served on an MA admissions committee? (yes/no): If faculty, approximately how many students have you written LORs for as part of their PhD applications: If faculty, what is the approximate rank of school to which students you recommended have been admitted? What is the approximate rank of the school where you received your PhD/where you are currently enrolled? For students, what type of undergraduate institution did/do you attend? I've tried to come up with a format that preserves anonymity but provides relevant information about the reference points and experience of the people giving advice. Since people take advice and profile evaluations here seriously, it would be valuable to have more information to use to judge it, especially if it is different from the advice you get from people "in real life." I am not trying to shame anyone or suggest that people at higher ranked places know more, just to provide context to the advice people give. Someone with 20 years of experience admitting applicants to a top 10 department and writing LORs for undergrads from that same department will have a different perspective than a relatively new AP at a school without a graduate program. Both will have experience or information outside their personal employment, but it's hard to argue that it wouldn't be useful to know which of these people was providing the feedback you were reading. I welcome suggestions for changes to this format. If your first instinct is to oppose it entirely or dismiss the idea that knowing something of the experience or qualifications of the person offering advice, I encourage you to ask yourself why you believe that the information is unnecessary or bad. Once a format is established, I will be happy to post my own profile, though I will maintain my anonymity.

I had 2 questions I wanted to ask current/former PhD students 1. What was Math Camp at your school like? What topics did you cover and how relevant did you find them in your coursework? 2. I also wanted to ask current and former PhD students how relevant PhD coursework grades are to your departments. Would faculty members decide to work against a student solely on the basis of bad grades even if they would be otherwise perfectly suited with working with that said student? I'm at a school with a reputation for a strict econ department which is known to be tough when it coming to grading so I am a bit worried how important PhD grades are for nurturing future faculty relationships. Also in your own experience how correlated are PhD grades and future research potential?

PROFILE: Type of Undergrad: Top 30 Public Economics University in the U.S Undergrad Major: Economics Minor(s): Informatics and Statistics Undergrad GPA: 3.59/4.00 GRE: Haven't officially taken the GRE yet, but practice scores have usually been around 165-167 (Q) and 164-166 (V) COURSES: Kind of got off to a rough start my first few years (~3.55/4.00), but there is a very strong upward trend in my last two years. Math Courses: Calculus I-III (C, B+, B), Differential Equations (C+) Linear Algebra (A+), Mathematical Proofs (B) Econ Courses: Intro. Micro/Macro (A,A), Inter. Micro/Macro (A-, A), Environmental Economics (A), Applied Econometrics (B+), Game Theory (B-), Economic Forecasting (A), Financial Econometrics (A), Macroeconomic Policy (A) Other Courses: Probability & Statistics (A-), Applied Multivariate Statistics (A-), Advanced Data Science (A) Letters of Recommendation: 1). Mathematics Faculty member that I did research under for ~6 months 2). Mathematics Faculty member that I worked as a TA under for the past year. 3). Economics Faculty member who supervised an independent study that I did as an undergraduate. Research Experience: I worked as an RA with a mathematics faculty member for ~6 months while I was in school. I am listed as a co-author in our final published work Teaching Experience: I have been a TA for a course on Linear Algebra for the past year. Research Interests: Macroeconomics, Health Economics, Econometrics, Computational Economics Other: I am spending the next year as a gap year doing data engineering at a leading ad-tech company, if that counts for anything. In an ideal world, I think I would like to go to a top 50 school, but I'm really not sure where to shoot or what ranges to even shoot for in my applications. That being said, I am open to any and all feedback/suggestions! http://www.www.urch.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.png

Hi, I'm interested in development and applied micro economics, and need to choose between these two options. Historically, Michigan has had much better placement. But, they lack of senior faculty in development in particular now. They do have a lot of interesting APs joining this fall though. Brown has incredible senior faculty - some of whom have joined in the past few years, but I don't think that their placements have quite caught up yet. Brown is a riskier option (don't know if the placements will catch up) - so not sure whether I should go for the place with more interesting senior people or the program that has a higher median placement.

If a school that you have an offer from, but haven't decided whether to attend or not (I certainly haven't decided against it--in which case I'd decline, but I am still waiting for higher-ranked programs to get back to me) offers to fly you out to meet faculty and visit with students, is there anything wrong with agreeing to visit, as long as you are up front about having not made your mind up, and don't make any promises you can't keep? That is kind of the point right? They are flying you out because they know you're unsure and they want to convince you? I don't want to waste their time or money if I get something better, but on the other hand, this is a program that isn't extremely highly ranked, but has some (on paper) really good research and faculty that I'd like to meet.

How much do you think program-specific admission matters in regards to whose "turn" it is on the faculty to get grad students? If this is the case, then is trying to target specific researchers somewhat of a crapshoot? Demands kind of a lot of an applicant to be ready for a particular application/matriculation cycle, or have to wait around an extra year or two to get with the "right" advisors.

Hey Y'all, After I've received such prompt and nice feedback on my last post I thought I'd try one more time. I have a visiting day coming up and am wondering what to expect. I was told I'll get a schedule shortly before and generally will meet with a bunch of faculty, the grad-students, and get a campus tour. Now this is a pre-offer visit and there'll be more applicants than spots. I'm wondering what to prepare for...I guess I'll be ready for the standard questions that might be asked/might come up (although I was told that the faculty meetings wouldn't be real interviews). Otherwise I'm just going to read up a little bit on the research that the people I'm meeting with are doing. Is there anything I'm missing here? Also I'm trying to come up with a list of questions to ask both faculty and grad students over there to figure out whether I'd be a good fit. What kind of questions would be good to ask? What questions do you wish you had asked back when you were in my situation? Any help is highly appreciated. I'm very excited. Thanks so much y'all P.S.: I couldn't find a major thread in which all of this information is gathered, but if there is one it might be good to link it on the "important past threads" post.

Hello everyone! I am an upcoming senior trying to apply Econ PhD programs this fall. I have some doubt regarding contacting professors prior to application: 1) I know from old threads that it's frowned upon especially in the US, not so much in UK/Europe; 2) Would only write to professors whose research interests are really linked to mine (eg: professor whose work I replicated in assignment paper/ whose work I know really well) 3) Have noticed that certain US universities really stress the importance of the "fit" and indirectly encourage contact: UMinnesota states "Current students and alumni can be great sources of information, and staff or faculty are sometimes available to answer your questions." So: should I do it? Is it too risky? Thanks in advance!

Guys, as finishing up my sop, I find this "why school" question a tough one. I read the post "Mentioning professors in SOP good/bad/neutral?" by TaxGal, and seems like it's a neutral for this question. I used to think the strongest reason for why school is the specific faculty you wanna work with. However, if it's just neutral to put specific faculty research here, what would be some good answers for "why school"?