Search the Community

Im looking at two PhD offers, and I don't know how to approach making a decision. I am aware of this forum's view toward schools ranked >20, but if you feel there is something worth reiterating, please share. In particular I am looking for insight to the programs listed below, but I would be grateful for any general comments. Accepted: University of Colorado Boulder (Ph.D, Waitlisted for funding) Pittsburgh (Ph.D, Waitlisted for funding) Penn State (MA, no funding) UMASS Amherst (MA, no funding) My biggest issue is that I haven't the slightest idea what I want to study. I spend most of my time reading Experimental and Behavioral economics, and lately Resource/Environmental so I suppose these are my "interests", but I have no experience in any of these fields, not even coursework, coming from a very small, poorly regarded undergrad. Honestly I have loved everything related to economics that I have been exposed to so far (really anything involving humanities and/or mathematics). I am drawn to Pittsburgh for their behavioral Lab, but I suspect that my lack of a funded offer implies that I am not expected to perform highly enough to take advantage of it anyway. Obviously this doesn't mean I can't perform above expectations, but I want to be as realistic as possible. A graduate director recently told me my chances at funding are "Slightly better than 50/50". In terms of Boulder I am very much attached to the location. In addition their strong natural science programs makes me inclined to believe their environmental program is likely worth while, but I may be wrong. As of last week I was told I was second on the wait list for funding. How should I approach these choices in the event neither offers me funding? If one does? If both do?

People posting here have profiles that amaze me, I'm basically an average guy. My undergrad GPA in Econ was 3.3 (partly due to my depression because I was in America while my country was in civil unrest, so I was worried about my family and lost focus), and my Grad GPA from my MPP program is currently a 3.6 (could have better, because the unrest was still happening until until early this year). Both my undergrad and MPP are from MSU. My math background is weak. I failed calc 1 as a 16 year old freshman, I retook it again and got a 3.5, I got a 3.5 in calc 2. I take calc 3 in the fall, and differential equations/linear algebra in the spring. Maybe analysis is the summer, but that's the maximum I can do, because I intend to start in the fall of 2012. I got a 2.5 in business statistics in undergrad, a 3.5 in intro stats at the MPP level, 3.0 in intro econometrics 1, 2.0 in intro econometrics at the MPP level, but a 4.0 in intermediate econometrics. I'm clearly lacking in grades and in math, but by summer, I should be better off but not the ideal. I helped do research for the Michigan government and I have an independent project/thesis this spring. I don't plan to apply to a top 50 school because of that, but what are the implications of going to a 75-200 program. I ask this because my MSU econ profs came from top 25 schools, so it's clear that many professors move a notch lower to teach, so at rank 150, where would you teach then? Academia is not my main goal, but I can't say I have not thought about it.