jblsmith

In Econ it's better to major in Math...

They have such things? I had no idea. My mind is blown.

While the demography of economics is quite racially diverse it is absolutely dominated by men. I feel this is due more to the quantitative nature of the field than to bias or prejudice in the academe. It's well documented that men tend to be more inclinde towards quantitative subjects than women. And a large portion (if not the majority) of US graduate students are international because of the superior math and science training in other parts of the world. The only disadvantage international students have is that their first language may not be English. Adcomms due indeed consider this when making their admissions decisions because all too often brilliant international students wash out because they could not overcome language or cultural barriers. There are a number of factors that are correllated with race and gender that play into adcomms decisions, however admissions are not based on ethnicity or sex.

No grades?! Where did you go to school???

We need more information. The GRE and GPA are not the only aspects of your application that adcomms consider. Have you done any research? How do you feel about you LoRs. I can already tell that the English profficiency sections (the TOEFL and your SoP) of your application will be your weak points. Work on these sections and maybe post an SoP for us to consider.

State governments issue drivers' licenses, as such requirements may vary from state-to-state, but in general they are fairly similar across the country. I gather that you will be attending the University of Maine so the first place to check would be with the Maine Department of Transportation. Here is a link to the Maine Bereau of Motor Vehicles, this site should have all the pertinent information and contacts: http://www.state.me.us/sos/bmv/ States honor each other's drivers licenses so a license issued in California would be valid in New York. In most cases, if someone moves from California to New York, New York would allow that person to simple swap out their California license for a New York license (after paying a nominal administrative fee of course). I don't know if it works the same for an international driver's license, but if you currently have a driver's license issued from your home state it may be something to ask your newly adopted bureaucrats.

I would strongly suggest devoting all your time and energy to math. Do not worry about taking graduate micro, given your current math background you pry aren't ready for it anyway. My suggestion: 1. First and foremost, retake Calc II and get that F off your transcript. I suspect they would offer this class in the summer. 2. Finish out the sequence and take Calc III. If you tested out of Calc I you shouldn't have a problem with Calc III, they're basically the same course. 3. I would suggest taking Linear (Matrix) Algebra. If you think you can, just skip the Intro course and take the regular class. I respectfully disagree with kp12746; the Calc sequence, Linear Algebra, and Econometrics are veiwed (generally) as the core math classes for graduate econ. Real Analysis is another fundemental course but until you have the basics down I wouldn't go after higher level math or econ. These are just my suggestions. I was once like you, I had an Econ and Poli Sci double major as well and when I decided to go to grad school in Econ I was behind the 8-ball wrt my formal math background so I had to dive in head-first taking 300 and 400 level math classes. It was rough but it can be done. Hope this helps and good luck!

In any other case I would say your GRE might preclude you from getting into a top-20 program but the fact that you already have an MD and eventually an MS may trump the poor score. To your question, I don't think getting your MS in Europe (vs the US) will be any kind of a hinderance when applying to PhDs in the US. As long as the University of Nottingham is well respected an acredtied and all that good stuff then you should be good to go. If you could raise your GRE score to say 750Q 650V then I suspect you would have no problem walking into any PhD program you choose.

In all seriousness I really don't think you need to worry about retaking the GRE. I too got a 750Q and got a number of funded offers from Ph. D. econ programs (ranked 25-50). Granted, they weren't Harvard, but still they were Ph.D. econ not MPA programs. I've said it before and I'll say it again: the GRE is not the only metric adcomms look at when considering you application. It's well documented that GRE scores are not robust indicators of grad school performance and adcomms know this. My sense is that admissions committees use the GRE as a cut-off but after that the scores don't matter as much. They are more interested in the other parts of your application: Independent research, your SOP, LOR's and transcripts. IMHO you would be better served spending your time editing your SOP and doing research rather than studying for the GRE and stressing out over a couple quant points. Hope this helps.

IMHO don't worry about your GPA too much; GPA's (especially at the ivies) are notoriouslly over-inflated and adcomms know this. I suspect adcomms use GPA's only as a cut-off but after that they don't matter too much. I'm sure a 3.7 is above any cut-off even for a top-10 program. That being said, grades still matter. Therefore, if you think you can pass the advanced classes you would be better served spending your last two years taking upper-level math and econ courses and getting B's and C's rather than padding your GPA with Music Appreciation and Intro to Art. Taking these advanced courses signals to admissions committees that you will be able to survive these classes in graduate school and gives you a leg-up when you get there because you've already seen the material. Also, the research experience is a HUGE plus in your favor. The more research you can do, the better. The Ph.D. is a research degree, so do as much independent research as possible and try to defend an honors thesis before you graduate. Finally, being a female, US-citizen is another credit to your case. I'm sure universities have to comply with certain Federal guidlines that dictate the mix of male/female funded students. Also, being fluent in English is another huge advantage that is often overlooked. In graduate school you see so many brilliant Asian and European students who wash out because they can't overcome the cultural and language bariers. Chinese students for instance come from a communal society where everything is done in groups, even taking tests. They don't understand that when you come to America there is no passing notes or talking to one another in the middle of an exam.

When I took the GRE I nearly got the same exact scores as you and got funded offers from 4 different Ph. D. econ programs (Ranked 25-50). It's been said before, but the GRE is NOT THE ONLY metric adcomms look at. It's well documented that GRE scores are not robust indicators of grad school performance and adcoms know this. My sense is that adcomms use the GRE as an initial cut, that is they remove everyone who doesn't meet some minimum score but after that it doesn't matter much. I'm sure you are well above the minimum, I know people who've gotten in and gotten funding at Ph. D. programs with scores below 750Q. With economics, admissions committees are far more interested in the other aspects of your application: What, if any, research have you done? What do your transcripts look like? How did you do in your math classes and upper-level econ courses? How strong are your LORs and SOP. I think your GRE is more than acceptable and that you would be better served to spend your time editing your SOP and contacting prospective programs rather than stressing out over a couple points on the GRE Quant. As far as using your GRE score for an MBA I would advise against it. Econ adcomms are more concerned with the absolute score, i.e. the 760, whereas B-school adcomms are more worried about the percentile rank. Remember, you're taking the GRE with people who are trying to get there Ph.D's in Math, Statistics, and Theoretical Physics as such even your 760 puts you (I'm guessing) somewhere in th 85th-90th percentile. However, if you take the GMAT with a bunch of former business and music majors you may be able to score somewhere in the low 90's which is really what B-Schools want to see. Therefore, my suggestion would be to sit for the GMAT if you really want to get an MBA after your MA. Hope this helps.

Bump.

Haha, I know what you're saying but I wasn't making that mistake When I started working on this, that's what I did as well. I solved for x in terms of b1, b2, b3, and y but gave up before substituting again. Unfortunately I need the explicit solutions, they are a pretty significant part of the paper. Where's Matt W? He said this was supposed to be easy.

Thanks for the reply! I'm fairly certain the determinants are non-zero and that there is a unique solution. Earlier in the paper I solve a similar 2 equation system by simply reducing and substituting. I've been using (or at least trying) Gaussian elimination but I cant get it into reduced escelon form. Instead of 2 of the variables reducing they all reduce and I end up with shit like b3/(b1-b2)=b3/(b1-b2). That's what I mean by "1=1" My masters thesis is a study of how physical capital, education capital, and healthcare capital effect economic growth. A certain portion of growth can be attributed to each of these three forms of capital, these proportions are x, y, and z in the above system. These proportions are unobserved an must be estimated statistically. b1, b2, and b3 are the estimated coefficients from an econometric model and are know, If I can put x, y, and z in terms of b1, b2, and b3 I can then calculate x, y, and z as a non-linear combination of the estimated coefficients.

I'm sitting at over $100k in student loans, almost all from my private UG. I'm so very envious of those of you without any debt but then I look at all the Harvard/Cornell/MIT MBAs I work with and think that I'm not doing so bad.

Yeah I got that but matrix arithmatic keeps giving me shit like 1=1 and using Cramer's Rule gets quite messy when calculating the determinants. How would you solve it from here? There's gotta be something I'm missing.

Hi guys, Working on the math in my Master's Thesis and I'm stuck on one part. I was clicking around here and thought I'd offer it up to you guys for some fun: Solve the system, b1=(y+z)/(1-x-y-z) b2=(x+z)/(1-x-y-z) b3=(x+y)/(1-x-y-z) for x, y, and z in terms of b1, b2, and b3. I'm sure there's some easy, self-evident step that makes everything reduce nicely but after staring at it for a couple hours I can't come up with it. Let me know if you guys out there figure it out. Enjoy!

Just an update: I DID decide to go to UH for my Ph. D. in economics. I recently visited the campus and met with professors, administrators, and students and everything seems to be legit. This could all be a facade, however, and they are all really conspiring to wait until I move down there before they revoke my funding. Only time will tell. I will keep you all posted.

Agreed. The 800score.com quant tests were nothing like the real thing. Your best bet is to get an actual GRE study book and work through those problems as they are updated every year with a new edition. I recommend Barrons. I also bought the Kaplan "Guide to an 800: Advanced Math" but found Barrons to be much more useful. Best of luck!

You might be able to get in as MA admissions are not super rigorous, however I would strongly suggest taking more math to be successful. At least Calc III and Linear (matrix) algebra.

Agreed. As an engineer you'll do fine in an MA Econ program. Just know that most schools don't offer a dedicated or "Terminal" masters program and those that do seldom don't have funding. I did a terminal MA at UNLV and got funding (full tuition waiver plus $10k stipend). You can finish the program in 12 months if you bust your ass. Here's a link to the program's website: http://business.unlv.edu/economics/

I too scored a 750Q and got funded offers from 4 schools ranked 35-50ish without any publications. I also have a friend who scored a 740Q and got into a similarly ranked program. The point being that the GRE is not the only section of the application that adcomms look at. It's well documented that GRE scores are not a robust indicator of grad school performance and adcomms know this. They use them more as a guidline, not so much as a rule. As the saying goes: "A good GRE score wont get you in anywhere but a bad one will keep you out." Based on the little information you've given I feel that you have a strong application and should get some hits. My only concern is the lack of math coursework. It would have been better if you took more classes as an undergrad or did you masters in econ, statistics, or math. Because of this I would suggest also applying to some programs in that 35-50ish range as well and maybe one or two lower. Better safe than sorry.

Any other future Cougars out there? Heading to UH for Ph. D. Econ.

As an Econ student I've taken a fair number of math courses in High School, College, and Grad School and I can tell you that you can never go wrong with more rigor. That being said you must also consider the requirements of your field. I don't feel that high-order, abstract classes like real analysis or differential equations would be appropriate for psychology but I would STRONGLY suggest taking all the statistics you can get your hands on. I know that rigorous statistical analysis is vital to publishing in a respected medical journal. Take the AP stats class then when you get to college continue to take statistics and even econometrics (if they'll allow it). If you do decide to take calculus you probably only need Calc I. I can't see a psychologist needend needing Calc II or III. Hope this helps. Good Luck!

I'm fairly familiar with George Mason as I thought of applying there and have met some of the faculty at conferences. George Mason is indeed a strange department becasue, as you point out, they study Austrian economics. Austrian economics is on the fringe as it largely rejects the use of quantitative methods in favor of a more heterodox methodology. This to be expected as the school is located in Washington, D.C. and they are more interested in political economy and policy making. This makes it hard for Austrian economist to publish in Tier 1 journals and explains why they are more active in the blogosphere. I'm lead to believe that the department would have largely been discounted by the mainstream except for Profs. Buchanan and Smith. In sum, an usual admission policy would be in keeping with their unusual department.