Measure theory?

[creed_the_third]

I'm thinking about taking a graduate level course in real analysis (measure theory). I took undergrad analysis during the fall and did well, but I still feel intimidated by the thought of taking a grad level course in math. Would it look bad/neutral/good on an application to a stat phd program if I got lets say a B in the course? How much does the difficulty level vary between upper level undergraduate courses and grad courses (stupid question since it depends on school and the specific course but what has been your experience)? The alternative to taking measure theory would be to take more stat courses or maybe some other undergrad course in math such as abstract algebra or complex analysis. Thanks

 

Also, regardless if I'm taking the course or not I plan on reading up a bit on my own on measure theory

Edited December 31, 2012 by creed_the_third

[superbean]

Could you audit the course? Or do a pass/no-pass? If you are worried about the grade, this might be a way to learn the material without a grade showing up on your transcript.

[creed_the_third]

The thing is that there is another course, a grad course in mathematical statistics, that is in the same section as this one. So if I don't take measure theory I'd take that one instead I think. 

[cyberwulf]

The answer to your question depends a lot on the type of departments you are/will be targeting, and the rest of your mathematical record. Top departments won't be blown away merely because you took a course in measure theory as an undergrad, though a good grade in such a course (eg. A- or A) could certainly help you substantially. If the rest of your math record is a bit sketchy, then a good grade could also help alleviate any concerns about your ability to handle the type of graduate-level math you'll be doing.

It's also worth keeping in mind that grading in graduate courses is often more generous than in undergraduate ones, because most programs require their students to maintain a GPA of 3 or above to stay (some programs even require a B or greater in all required courses). So, a merely "solid", class-median performance could net you a grade substantially higher than a 'B'.

[creed_the_third]

Thanks for the input

My math grades are good. One of my interests is in stochastic processes so I guess this course would help in that area? I don't know if I'm gonna apply to super theoretical departments like Chicago though... Looked at the syllabus of previous years for the course and it does not seem like the grade cutoffs are that much different than any other course... also the final is worth 50% which does seem like a lot for a course here (though in Sweden most course grades are only based off the final exam heh, I'm an exchange student).

 

Also, is it a "waste of time" taking a lot of stat courses in stuff like anova and regression since you'd still have to retake them in a PhD program? Or could you skip over them if you've already taken them?

Edited January 3, 2013 by creed_the_third

[cyberwulf]

Most schools want to teach you topics like regression and ANOVA themselves. You are far more likely to get credit for having taken math courses than stat courses elsewhere.