Search the Community

Hi! I do research at a university so I get tuition benefits for classes here, but I'm not allowed to count them towards a degree. I am planning to apply for an econ PhD in the next 2-3 years. Because I made a career shift after undergrad, I am missing the following classes: Real Analysis, Econometrics, Stochastic Processes in Statistics, and upper level Econ classes. I prefer to take these classes using my tuition benefits because it is much, much cheaper for me. However, I also want to have a strong application. Can anyone please advise me if it would look better on my application to go for a full masters in econ, even though it would be expensive? Thank you!

Hello all First time poster here. This forum has been crushing my dreams for the past month, so I figured I should at least post something as well. I am currently a sophomore double majoring in math and economics at a mid sized, un-ranked, non-econ-PhD, public university. Lately, I have been considering obtaining a PhD after graduation (ideally at a T10 to T30). Also, given the fact that my school is un-ranked, I've been considering transferring (to CU Boulder to be specific). I'm wondering if this is worth it or not. I'll list some pros and cons just to give an idea of how I currently feel about doing this. Pros: -Better ranking -Tuition is likely the same as where I'm at right now -Better connections/ opportunity for research Cons: -Throw away the relationships I have with my current professors (which are all very good) -Dealing with the bullshit of transferring -CU Boulder's undergrad program still isn't ranked that high. Not sure if it would really impact my profile that much. -CU Boulder is much larger than my current school. I probably wouldn't have close relations with my professors as I do now. I don't want to get into my current profile, but I am qualified for much more selective schools and was accepted to a couple decent colleges out of high school; I just have a hard time justifying paying the amount they were asking for tuition (I think undergrad degrees are currently very over valued), even after some substantial scholarships. Obviously, there is no way to value these pros and cons, so its hard for me to judge this decision. I guess this comes down to how much institution rank is weighted in the application process relative to other factors. Any advice would be very helpful.

Hello everyone. I got accepted in both programs with full funding, specifically Mannheim with tuition waver and monthly stipend of 1200 and UC3M tuition waver and monthly stipend of 900. I'm interested to both the programs, given that my research interests are towards econometrics and macroeconomics and my final goal is to work in Europe. The UC3M program is allegedly be more difficult than Mannheim' one, because it need to pass 3 qual exams to access the second year, however looking at the alumni' placements, it do not seems to worth the excessive effort. I'm stuck up by the choice since a week, every opinion is welcome.

Hi all, it seems that after looking at the websites for both UCLA's and UC Berkeley's Econ PhD admissions criteria, they don't fund all of their students and they mention getting CA residency after the first year for lower tuition rates. First of all, do you recommend becoming a resident of the state where your school is at if you're only there for 9 out of 12 months? What are the drawbacks of not having resident status in your home state? Does it affect driver's license or voting rights, or anything else? But where I'm going with this thread is, is the quality of education much different at UCLA or UC Berkeley than at UC Santa Barbara, which admits approximately 20% of applicants and pays both tuition and stipend for all students? Which would you prefer of these schools, if you wanted a great experience throughout the PhD program?

Hi all, I am interested in the field of Development economics and macroeconomics and want to pursue a Ph.D. post, my masters. I have received admission offers from the following universities for fall 2018. 1. Boston University (MA Economics, 1 year) - $57,000 (tuition) 2. University of Minnesota (MS Applied economics, 2 years) - $50,000 (tuition) 3. UT Austin (MA Economics, 1 year) - $21,750 (tuition after scholarship) 4. Vanderbilt University (MA Economics, 16-24 months) - nearly $30,000 (tuition after scholarship) Kindly advice me on which university should I opt for masters. I want to know about the following - 1. How are the job placements post masters, i.e., what is the average salary? 2. How easy/difficult it is to go from the master's programs of the above universities to their Ph.D. program? 3. How are the Ph.D. placements of the above universities - where do students go? Thanks!

It's that time again! Institution: Program: Decision: Funding: Date: Notified through: Comments: For funding, please report the type of funding, tuition waiver, stipend, time period, and work duties. You can list actual stipends in dollars or use the following rough guides - anything around $15k is one "$", anything over $20k is "$$", anything closer to $30k is "$$$." Example; Institution: Podunk State University Program: Econ Decision: Accepted Funding: Tuition waiver + 4 years stipend ($$), first year no TA responsibilities. Date: 1/13/2018 Notified through: Phone call from DGS Comments: Podunk State has always been my dream school! Woohoo! NOTE: Absolutely no "comments" allowed. If you have a question for someone PM them. If you think it would be of interest to the community, start a thread.