Oxford and Cambridge MPhil/Msc Economics

Oxford doesn't offer a one year M.Sc in Economics although they do offer a two-year M.Phil. All Cambridge masters of that ilk are called M.Phil but are typically only one year. One of the reasons the Oxford course exists in its two-year form is because Oxford doesn't offer a straight economics degree- and indeed their two year degree is supposedly better at linking into the American system. I don't know where you found an Oxford or Cambridge M.Sc in Economics, unless it's new for this year, in which case I don't know about it. So either you've very heavily researched this or haven't done very much work.

If you're still in your teens and still over two years away from graduation, then I wouldn't worry yet. The most important thing is to have a good degree score and be toward the best in your class. Without that, work experience and ECs are entirely irrelevant. Assuming you want to have a shot at ESRC funding, then if you graduate in 2012 you'll need to have an application in by January 2012. That's a fair while away. A couple of internships if you can get them, some contacts with academics who will be well placed to know you and your work in order to write a stellar reference, and most importantly, some impressive exam results, are what you need to worry about in the next eighteen months. Until then, you're getting ahead of yourself.

Well, for Oxford you'll need three very strong references, and for Cambridge you'll need two. There really is no hard and fast answer of how to get one though- I was lucky in that I had someone that taught me for three consecutive years on something completely different to what I wanted to research, as well as having two people who both taught me for one year and then co-supervised a dissertation the following. I also had a 'special subject' which is an intensive final-year course (courses are four years in Scotland, so we have an extra year to get access to staff) which met for four-hours a week in a class of eight for 24 weeks, so my tutor in that knew me pretty well. I also had As under all of my referees, so I actually had four willing undergraduate referees who knew me well enough, which was saying something in a department of 50 staff and 800 students. That said, I also got involved in the running of the department and through the staff-student committee, as well as running tutoring for failing first years, so I got my name out there, and getting a first as well as the departmental prize helped get me the scholarship at Balliol, ultimately.

You'll get much more exposure to staff for a longer period of time in final year- in the first two we would often go through six lecturers in a 12 week term, and met for tutorials once every two weeks (so 12 times a year), and typically half of those were junior staff or PhD students- who could often be excellent teachers, although they hadn't yet got names as academics in their own right. I think again, that'll change in the next 18 months to two years. It sounds like you've made a good start to university life- but speaking from experience, I didn't win any academic prizes despite pretty good grades in years 1-3, but did in fourth year for the overall prize where it counted. I don't think getting involved within a department can harm your chances of impressing people that might be needed to write a reference though, but there's plenty of time for that. If you're heading for a first going into final year, then you'll be in a position to think about Oxford and Cambridge applications.

Again, many thanks for the replies that you have given, they have been most helpful.

One final question if i may. Even though you were predicted/awarded a first, what where the actual conditions of the offer you received, if you do not mind me asking?

Thanks.

To attain within the top 10% of a 2:1- so basically a near-miss. It really depends on how they're feeling though, depending on which academic you speak to in Oxford depends on which reply you get. Some say the better your application is and the more the university wants you, the more generous the offer is, but in general to gain an offer they'll have to be pretty sure you're first material and thus the offer is just there to give you a slight safety net and that not just anyone capable of getting high 2:1 has any chance. Others say that it varies by course- and some will be less picky on firsts than others, and others say that snobbery is still rife and if you're coming from a dept thats perceived as weaker, they'll set a higher barrier to get in. On my course (which is actually Economic History, although it's joint taught by both depts and we've had people move freely between it and the M.Phil Economics) all of the UK applicant's whose grades I know were set the same conditional, but they're all from well-established universities: Cambridge, LSE, Glasgow, Bristol, Edinburgh, Exeter- although most on the course are from North America and went to Yale, Princeton, Duke etc etc so weren't set conditionals on the same scale. I really don't know enough about the admissions process to comment on how the offer will vary, but it's best to bank on it being a pretty high 2:1 at the very least- Econ is very competitive.

Thanks again.

If I do happen to have any questions regarding applications or anything along that line, do you mind if I PM you in the future?

No problem. As mentioned though, I think the next 12 months should be all about working hard and networking within your department through going to seminars in the like. But if there's anything pressing, let me know.

Hi there,

I plan to apply to the above universities for postgraduate study and wanted to ask those who have been successful in the above mentioned course at those universities, what you had to offer in terms of work experience and EC's?