Econguy

I graduated from this program last spring and I'm entering my PhD this fall. Hopkins will give you some serious analytical economic “chops” as you would expect from the Krieger School. The MS program does have an alienated reputation online, but people working in academia, government, policy and finance inside the beltway know how exceptional the program is. Most of the more recent posts I could find were a better representation of what to expect. I admit, even I was skeptical of their standards because the publish requirements for admissions were low for a prestigious institution. However, an intern at my office (with a 3.7/4.0 from a good school) who we encouraged to apply was only conditionally accepted (we felt bad but she got into a PhD from her home’s state school) and other intern’s I’ve known with GPA’s around 3.2-3.4/4.0 were flat out rejected. So, the degree is not a "continuing education" program and should not be taken lightly. The Faculty is a Who’s Who list of DC econ/policy/think tank department heads looking to teach part-time because (a) they enjoy it and ( they miss it after they took their job running the country. Hopkins probably has, on paper, the best faculty for a program like this in the world and they are great for job contacts if you are working in DC. The MS in Applied Economics was designed to fill the gap for analytical jobs well above the understanding of an undergrad. My friends in the program at SAIS have a similar job target but their emphasis is geared much more towards international policy and leadership. The program is definitely tailored to working professional but It seemed that a lot of my classmates were using the program as a stopping point for pre-PhDs (mostly international) looking to get into a better school the second time around. It’s not a bad option if you land a good policy job in DC and want to get some real experience while you put off your PhD for a few years.

Hi Decaf, I asked myself the same question in undergrad and the answer I found from advisors was a resounding NO. First, there is nothing wrong with retaking a course but the ONLY reason to do this is if you did not understand what you were taught in the intro classes. Your grades in Intermediate Micro/Macro will tend to trump your intro grades and so the “upward sloping” trend is working in your favor. That being said, grades at the graduate level tend to be understood as an A=A, A-=B, B+=C, and anything lower means you passed by the skin of your teeth or that you failed. Still, I think you would probably be better served by taking another mathematics course (Statistics II?) or maybe trying to get some experience as an undergrad research assistant. Best of luck