Jump to content
Urch Forums

Preparatory Masters in Economics (Pure & Applied) for Economics PhD


fylgja

Recommended Posts

The level of insulation from reality is mind-boggling. You two are really disconcertingly uncomfortable with anything that challenges your way of thinking. I would really challenge you to be a lot less confrontational with people you don't know. Am I prepared to do an econ phd right now? Obviously not. Does that mean I couldn't prepare myself or should be prevented from learning about it? No, and I really think the preparation process doesn't have to be as intense as you believe. A field that values conformity above all else is a field in decline, and I'm sure that the powers that be who control these things are aware of that. I understand that a lot of you have been insulated from failure for your entire lives and have very little life experience outside of academic institutions. But seriously get a grip.

 

One aspect that you seem to be missing is that we don't just make recommendations based on what we see in profiles and results, but also what professors actively recommend. There are several active users that are faculty members at various institutions. Then there are also several professors, such as Dr. John List, that log in periodically to answer questions. I don't possibly understand how your completely unfounded view could possibly trump word from the horses mouth. -Even in your own mind when every single fact and detail points to the shortcomings of your viewpoint and (bad) advice. This isn't just irrational, it's crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gentleman and gentlewomen, please, enough. Let us please return to assisting the OP.

 

I believe the best program is one that is mathematically rigorous, and that centers on theory. Also, try to attend a program that would allow you to talk to excellent faculty. In words, when you explore a master program, make sure to see who teaches the courses and whether they would be someone you would like to talk to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You all have yourselves so worked up you can't even parse out what I say or think. I acknowledge theres a baseline of preparation and qualification that it takes for admissions. I don't doubt that. It seems the disagreement is on whether or not its possible to develop this if you don't do it between ages 18-22.

 

To the OP

 

There are quite a few late bloomers here, so nobody is discounting you. If you look at the profiles and results, you would see many people who had bad grades in undergrad remedy it by taking math and do a masters and then get admitted.

 

So again, nobody is discounting OP. What Chateauheart was saying, or what I think he is saying, is that your interests may fit well with a policy school better than economics.

 

Think about this way. Someone with an MBA with good grades, but little math comes here saying he wants to study economics because he is interested in studying multinational firms and strategy. So someone says “instead of doing economics, why not try a business school where your MBA would send a signal.”

 

It's different from someone with the same background but wants to study economics because he is interested in econometrics. They wouldn't tell him to consider business school. They would just tell him to buckle up and spend the next two years with Spivak and Rudin.

 

I think publicaffairsny may have come in with the best of intentions but interpreted it differently which may be what is causing the debate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been particularly active lately, but there's certainly a lot of conflict happening. So that's a thing.

 

Here's some advice, from someone who's arguably a success story from similar circumstances (I had a pretty bad undergrad career, but did an MA at an obscure state school, and managed to get into a top 50-ish place, where I've done quite well, although we'll see how well when I go on the market next year.)

 

- Making good connections (hopefully with some pull) is very important. Even at an obscure school, the strength of your letter writers is arguably the most important thing.

 

- Doing really well in a Master's program is important. The idea is that you need to prove you can excel at graduate level work. If you can't excel, you're hosed.

 

- Know what you're in for. A master's degree + PhD is 7 years. 7 years is a long time. You will want to give up many (most) days. Can you commit now to fighting that for more than a half decade?

 

Other stuff that's not directly related, but I feel like I should weigh in on:

 

- Having interdisciplinary interests is not an automatic mark against you, nor is it a mark in your favor. It will make you a weirdo. If you can produce good research, people will come around. Gary Becker is a great example - his family economics stuff was initially met with skepticism, but now is regarded as pretty much standard theory.

 

- Economics probably is a bit too conformist (high variance candidates probably fall through the cracks), but honestly so is pretty much any field with lots of competition, tenure requirements, etc. Pitching a fit about it isn't going to change that though. Getting into a good school (through some degree of conformity) and then getting a job where you can incrementally move the needle in one direction does have the chance to change things.

 

- Everyone thinks they are a special flower who's the exception to the rule. Almost everyone is wrong. Nobody really cares about excuses. Nobody cares about you. Life sucks. Get over it. Get off my lawn. (Grabs shotgun, takes a swig of beer and shakes fist)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been particularly active lately, but there's certainly a lot of conflict happening. So that's a thing.

 

Here's some advice, from someone who's arguably a success story from similar circumstances (I had a pretty bad undergrad career, but did an MA at an obscure state school, and managed to get into a top 50-ish place, where I've done quite well, although we'll see how well when I go on the market next year.)

 

- Making good connections (hopefully with some pull) is very important. Even at an obscure school, the strength of your letter writers is arguably the most important thing.

 

- Doing really well in a Master's program is important. The idea is that you need to prove you can excel at graduate level work. If you can't excel, you're hosed.

 

- Know what you're in for. A master's degree + PhD is 7 years. 7 years is a long time. You will want to give up many (most) days. Can you commit now to fighting that for more than a half decade?

 

Other stuff that's not directly related, but I feel like I should weigh in on:

 

- Having interdisciplinary interests is not an automatic mark against you, nor is it a mark in your favor. It will make you a weirdo. If you can produce good research, people will come around. Gary Becker is a great example - his family economics stuff was initially met with skepticism, but now is regarded as pretty much standard theory.

 

- Economics probably is a bit too conformist (high variance candidates probably fall through the cracks), but honestly so is pretty much any field with lots of competition, tenure requirements, etc. Pitching a fit about it isn't going to change that though. Getting into a good school (through some degree of conformity) and then getting a job where you can incrementally move the needle in one direction does have the chance to change things.

 

- Everyone thinks they are a special flower who's the exception to the rule. Almost everyone is wrong. Nobody really cares about excuses. Nobody cares about you. Life sucks. Get over it. Get off my lawn. (Grabs shotgun, takes a swig of beer and shakes fist)

 

Great advice and your story is inspiring. I am actually meeting with someone on the adcomm at a top school tomorrow to discuss policy phds, but also the possibility of transferring to the school to finish my mpa and pursue a concurrent ma in econ. Their econ is not as good as their policy, and doesn't list math requirements for the ma so I think my GRE's can get me in. Anyways, that option is a secondary focus of the meeting, but I have an in at this school so they are taking a look at me. Wish me luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fear we will keep having this discussion unless it's resolved now. publicaffairsny, why don't you respond whether or not you agree with the following statements:

 

1) It is important that the advice given on this board be reliable.

 

2) Consistently delivering reliable advice requires that the person giving advice understands what they're talking about.

 

3) If someone who is uninformed disagrees with many people who are informed, then most likely the informed people are correct.

 

4) The advice given on this board generally relates to either forecasting the probability that someone will be admitted to a PhD program given some profile, or helping someone forecast whether or not they would be happy pursuing a PhD in economics.

 

5) People who are unfamiliar with the intellectual requirements of a PhD program in economics, the typical skills and qualifications of an admitted PhD student, and who have had no direct interactions with the admissions process are fundamentally not well-informed about probabilities of admission relative to people with these sources of knowledge.

 

6) People who do not have experience within a PhD program in economics are fundamentally not well-informed about who would enjoy a PhD in economics relative to people who have such experience. People who have not taken undergraduate courses in economics are even less well-informed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great advice and your story is inspiring. I am actually meeting with someone on the adcomm at a top school tomorrow to discuss policy phds, but also the possibility of transferring to the school to finish my mpa and pursue a concurrent ma in econ. Their econ is not as good as their policy, and doesn't list math requirements for the ma so I think my GRE's can get me in. Anyways, that option is a secondary focus of the meeting, but I have an in at this school so they are taking a look at me. Wish me luck.

 

Wow, the situation here has really turned into a mess. Being new to these forums, I am ignorant of past history and have therefore refrained from (nor had any appetite to do so) commenting in the argument that has developed here. However, publicaffairsny, I must say this statement rather rudely affirms that what yankeefan and others have said bears repeating: the advice in this thread is not directed at you nor, it seems, your situation.

 

I would like to thank everyone else who has taken the time to write so far. It seems many of your comments address in part apparent misconceptions and deliberate vagueness in my original post. I am feeling a little more comfortable with giving out a little further detail and would be happy to clarify things for better advice, although I am hesitant to do that in this thread given how it has so spectacularly derailed.

Edited by fylgja
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fear we will keep having this discussion unless it's resolved now. publicaffairsny, why don't you respond whether or not you agree with the following statements:

 

1) It is important that the advice given on this board be reliable.

 

2) Consistently delivering reliable advice requires that the person giving advice understands what they're talking about.

 

3) If someone who is uninformed disagrees with many people who are informed, then most likely the informed people are correct.

 

4) The advice given on this board generally relates to either forecasting the probability that someone will be admitted to a PhD program given some profile, or helping someone forecast whether or not they would be happy pursuing a PhD in economics.

 

5) People who are unfamiliar with the intellectual requirements of a PhD program in economics, the typical skills and qualifications of an admitted PhD student, and who have had no direct interactions with the admissions process are fundamentally not well-informed about probabilities of admission relative to people with these sources of knowledge.

 

6) People who do not have experience within a PhD program in economics are fundamentally not well-informed about who would enjoy a PhD in economics relative to people who have such experience. People who have not taken undergraduate courses in economics are even less well-informed.

 

I don't think I've ever given an indication that I disagree with any of that. However, another function of informational forums is for people to learn actively by talking about a subject. That's all I'm truing to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I've ever given an indication that I disagree with any of that. However, another function of informational forums is for people to learn actively by talking about a subject. That's all I'm truing to do.

If your purpose is just to learn, may I make a few suggestions?

 

1) Someone who is new to this forum may not realize which posters are more or less knowledgeable. Therefore, if you are posting to learn rather than to give advice, it's best to make it clear in each such post that the person seeking advice should treat your stated opinion as highly speculative.

 

2) Avoid criticizing or fighting with people who are giving reliable advice. This forum does not suffer from an excess supply of such people. The people who know the most have other things to do with our time and post here purely out of generosity. Nobody wants to get pestered for being nice.

 

3) Related to #2, try to limit the number of your posts which knowledgeable people will feel they need to respond to or correct. To this end, it's better to ask questions than to make statements which someone will feel the need to correct, and it's even better if you just read. I understand that you may feel that your goal is to generate responses, but you have to understand that most of us would actually prefer to spend as little time as possible responding to posts in this forum and will resent it (and stop responding to your questions) if we feel that our generosity is being abused.

 

I hope this clarifies for you why you've attracted a negative response from posters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your purpose is just to learn, may I make a few suggestions?

 

1) Someone who is new to this forum may not realize which posters are more or less knowledgeable. Therefore, if you are posting to learn rather than to give advice, it's best to make it clear in each such post that the person seeking advice should treat your stated opinion as highly speculative.

 

2) Avoid criticizing or fighting with people who are giving reliable advice. This forum does not suffer from an excess supply of such people. The people who know the most have other things to do with our time and post here purely out of generosity. Nobody wants to get pestered for being nice.

 

3) Related to #2, try to limit the number of your posts which knowledgeable people will feel they need to respond to or correct. To this end, it's better to ask questions than to make statements which someone will feel the need to correct, and it's even better if you just read. I understand that you may feel that your goal is to generate responses, but you have to understand that most of us would actually prefer to spend as little time as possible responding to posts in this forum and will resent it (and stop responding to your questions) if we feel that our generosity is being abused.

 

I hope this clarifies for you why you've attracted a negative response from posters.

 

I'm comfortable putting a disclaimer on my posts. If you read them recently, they usually have something like "this is speculation" or "more experienced posters may confirm."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming that the train-wreck has settled for the moment, then, let me try to put this thread back on track by recapping and clarifying where I am at so far:

 

  • My undergraduate degree is in economics. Unfortunately, things messed up. I recognize there is no way my present profile would be considered for an economics PhD. I have been hoping Masters adcoms would consider my generally poor economics and mathematics results in the general context that when they went wrong, so did everything else (in other words, not because I am incapable of higher-level work in economics and mathematics). If I understand the advice here, however, this is unlikely to matter.
  • I need to make up for my poor quantitative undergraduate grades if my ultimate goal is a theoretically-oriented PhD. I realize my qualitative Masters cannot help me in this regard.
    • I am presently looking into taking courses during this gap year as an independent student.
    • I would also like to try applying to research-based Masters for admission in 2015. My thinking is that the technical training will enhance my opportunities for employment and allow me to experience proper academic research, which would also help me decide if I want to continue onwards. To me, these advantages look like they justify the two-year opportunity cost.
      • In economics, I am aware of only one preparatory MA in the US at Duke. Judging from the forums, however, American MAs in economics do not place students into PhDs as well. I am open to studying elsewhere but it seems frequently-mentioned programs such as the Canadian "Big Four", Oxbridge and LSE would be far too competitive for someone in my situation.
      • It appears I should target Masters in less quantitative and more applied fields, during which I should still have the opportunity to retake the core signals of competency. So far, I am now considering agricultural and resource/environmental economics and public policy.

       

     

Questions

 

  1. If I apply for Masters to improve my quantitative standing, would doing distance learning courses in mathematics (or economics) this year be necessary or worth it, given that the results will not affect the outcome of my Masters applications? I am internationally-based and cannot do so at home, so this will have to be through distance learning. I am strongly leaning towards the University of London's Diplomas for Graduates. Based on previous threads I have also looked at Illinois Netmath and Stanford EPGY, but they require an outside proctor for the final exams which is not necessary for the UoL DipGrad.
  2. Also while browsing past posts, I saw one or two cases where students were admitted to Masters conditional on completing preparatory courses in the summer. Would it hurt to inquire about this to Directors of Graduate Studies?
  3. Apart from ARE and PP, have I missed any other Masters fields which might serve as preparation for an Economics PhD, should I wish to pursue one on completion, that could be appropriate for me?

 

Any other advice is of course welcome!

Edited by fylgja
Link to comment
Share on other sites

students were admitted to Masters conditional on completing preparatory courses in the summer. Would it hurt to inquire about this to Directors of Graduate Studies?

 

The only posts related to this that I am familiar with are the few like Oxford, LSE, etc. This is something that, to my understanding, is unique to the British or European system (i think I also recall seeing this, perhaps, on a few other European results?). You shouldn't need to contact them. They generally tell you what the absolute minimum is (e.g. multivariate calculus, linear algebra, advanced statistics) and also indicate what you should have (maybe additionally Diff EQ, Real Analysis, proofs, etc.). Although Georgetown is the only university that I have seen specifically indicate that they do NOT want you to contact them at all, it seems unnecessary. If you have to inquire, that would tend to suggest that you don't understand the required level of math needed for graduate economics.

 

If I apply for Masters to improve my quantitative standing, would doing distance learning courses in mathematics (or economics) this year be necessary or worth it, given that the results will not affect the outcome of my Masters applications?

 

I haven't, personally, seen any profiles on Urch that have specifically indicated that anyone completed math or core/graduate econ courses distant. I also can't think of any (reputable) universities that offer graduate econ courses remotely, and only perhaps 1 or 2 (duke?) reputable universities that offer graduate math remotely. I don't think that distance courses-since they are set up as cash-cows anyway, would send a very positive signal, but I am honestly not sure. With regard to whether it would help for the current cycle, I'm learning to no, but I'm not sure given that I don't recall seeing anything posted regarding the type of signal this sends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Another bump, but with new questions! These are still pertinent to the thread title, so I did not feel it necessary to open a new one yet.

 

1. Apart from Duke, which other universities offer respected preparatory Masters in Econ. in the US, Canada (any outside the Big Four?) and Europe? I understand it is unlikely I will be competitive for these, but would still like a list to look into.

 

2. There are so many departments affiliated with the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association! Given increasing opportunity cost and diminishing returns, how should I construct my list of programs to apply to?

 

(Although this is a simple question, as far as I can tell it has never been directly addressed here. Most suggestions are given as part of a profile evaluation; before making that request, I would like to try winnowing for candidate schools myself. However, I have no idea what factors I should consider to judge whether a school might be a good fit for me, aside from an interest in environmental and resource over agricultural economics).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
It's not always the best departments that run the best master's programs for PhD prep. For example, any PhD-granting department will try to run its terminal master's as a money maker with large classes where professors won't get to know you well enough. You could pay 30K and get nowhere at Duke, or 10K (in-state) at a decent California State campus and get into a top ten. You really have to talk to professors and find out whether they have a strategy for placing master's students in PhD programs. If they're not willing to answer e-mails from admitted students, they probably don't care enough to help you later.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not always the best departments that run the best master's programs for PhD prep. For example, any PhD-granting department will try to run its terminal master's as a money maker with large classes where professors won't get to know you well enough. You could pay 30K and get nowhere at Duke, or 10K (in-state) at a decent California State campus and get into a top ten. You really have to talk to professors and find out whether they have a strategy for placing master's students in PhD programs. If they're not willing to answer e-mails from admitted students, they probably don't care enough to help you later.

 

While there is certainly some merit to this advice, I would suggest checking out the placement record of the Duke program, Duke University | Economics: Placement, and comparing it to the posted placements at California State schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...