Oxford/LSE MSc Economic History-Australian Applicant

Original post by ellie.rew

I'll disagree with the above and say that it could be worth it, and seen as an investment a for your future career, but only if you're clear to what you're going to get out of it. If there's a particular academic at LSE/Oxford you'd like to work with a PhD

I said that - I don't think we're in disagreement.

Original post by ellie.rew

you know that a high grade and brilliant international referees will impress funding bodies back home

High grades and leading academics aren't exclusive to LSE/Oxford though. E.g., an influential lecturer in the OP's subject taught me at undergrad and before he came to our university he spent his entire career at an ex-poly.

Original post by ellie.rew

if there are sources/archives in London/Oxford which are central to your research

He's doing a taught master's - no archives will be central to his work.

You would have to be mentally unstable to take out a £30-40k loan for a masters (which I doubt any graduate could secure anyway, least of all an international one). LSE has acquired a reputation of turning taught masters into a cash cow and when you see threads like this you can't blame them - like taking candy from a baby.

Reply 3

ellie.rew

9

Original post by maskofsanity

High grades and leading academics aren't exclusive to LSE/Oxford though E.g., an influential lecturer in the OP's subject taught me at undergrad and before he came to our university he spent his entire career at an ex-poly.

Of course not, not what I was suggesting at all, but Oxford/LSE will undoubtedly have at least one influential lecturer each, who could well be a specialist in OP's particular research area or who OP aspires to work with at doctoral level. In that case, making that connection and gaining that reference at Master's level is valuable.

Original post by maskofsanity

He's doing a taught master's - no archives will be central to his work.

In Oxford at least (I'm not familiar with the course in LSE), the Econ and Soc History Masters has a substantial dissertation element (50% IIRC). Archives can be central to Masters level dissertations in History, particularly the more modern one gets. We don't know for sure, but, again especially if OP is looking ahead to doctoral work, familiarity and experience with an important archive for their work could be very valuable.

Original post by maskofsanity

You would have to be mentally unstable to take out a £30-40k loan for a masters (which I doubt any graduate could secure anyway, least of all an international one). LSE has acquired a reputation of turning taught masters into a cash cow and when you see threads like this you can't blame them - like taking candy from a baby.

It's hard to argue with this, particularly when, as you say, no sensible bank would grant a loan that big for a masters. I've heard similar things about LSE too - their base fees for their Masters are nearly double Oxford's and then you have to live in/around London! :eek:

I would, however, say that if this is what OP wants to do with their life, and (s)he is willing to make the sacrifices (to do a masters part-time, to work for a few more years to save up for it), then it's worth going for it anyway.

Reply 4

poohat

18

If I was spending £35k on an economics degree then I'd make sure it was in a subfield which had good employment opportunities, and that sure as hell wouldn't be Economics History

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 5

Original post by poohat

If I was spending £35k on an economics degree then I'd make sure it was in a subfield which had good employment opportunities, and that sure as hell wouldn't be Economics History

But they are not spending the money on an economics degree, those are history degrees. Your argument would perhaps be sensible if economics grads were transitioning that way but I think few enough of them are.

The large majority of the people taking these courses will have undergraduate backgrounds in history and for them it could represent quite a canny career move in terms of acquiring saleable skills relative to those they presently have. Both of these are degrees open to humanities graduates but which offer as part of the course a training in quantitative economic methods.

Now, a history graduate who can roll up for job interviews and say "oh yeah, I can handle panel data and regression analysis",... that lad has the jump on some others, and certainly on those in the position he had been after getting only his BA.

*And it doesn't cost £35k for the degree, that's an estimated cost for the year and surely is based on going to the LSE (higher course fees and living expenses) and not Oxford.

Reply 6

poohat

18

Original post by cambio wechsel

But they are not spending the money on an economics degree, those are history degrees. Your argument would perhaps be sensible if economics grads were transitioning that way but I think few enough of them are.

Yeah sorry my mistake, I completely misunderstood what they were studying, I thought they was going for Econ.

£30k for a history degree is comically absurd, unless you are independently wealthy.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 7

Original post by poohat

Yeah sorry my mistake, I completely misunderstood what he was studying, I thought he was going for Econ.

£30k for a history degree is comically absurd, unless you are independently wealthy.

the Oxford degree would cost him about £16000, the overseas fee, the rest of his calculation is living costs that have to be met wherever you are and whatever you're doing.

As I say, the argument you were originally making would be sensible if someone were doing as you supposed it and transitioning hard to soft (economics to history) but most people doing this course will be transitioning soft to a bit harder, and re-meeting quantitative methods for the first time since completing GCSE maths. They couldn't get onto a degree in Economics so that's not for them an option anyway.

What has now to be asked with regard to future prospects is whether it is for a person with a BA in the humanities worth spending the money for a course that offers some quantitative training and as well puts "Oxford" on the CV. And I think there's at least room to think it might be.

Reply 8

ellie.rew

9

Original post by cambio wechsel

the Oxford degree would cost him about £16000, the overseas fee, the rest of his calculation is living costs that have to be met wherever you are and whatever you're doing.

As I say, the argument you were originally making would be sensible if someone were doing as you supposed it and transitioning hard to soft (economics to history) but most people doing this course will be transitioning soft to a bit harder, and re-meeting quantitative methods for the first time since completing GCSE maths. They couldn't get onto a degree in Economics so that's not for them an option anyway.

What has now to be asked with regard to future prospects is whether it is for a person with a BA in the humanities worth spending the money for a course that offers some quantitative training and as well puts "Oxford" on the CV. And I think there's at least room to think it might be.

I agree on most points, but given that the OP wants to go into academia after the masters, it seems a bit moot to be discussing job prospects/employability. There are a lot easier and cheaper ways to add quantitative skills to one's CV than an Economic history masters and it would take a very long time to see a return in salary on that kind of investment.

Reply 9

Original post by ellie.rew

...given that the OP wants to go into academia after the masters, it seems a bit moot to be discussing job prospects/employability.

Given that his facility to do so is contingent on his getting a PhD and that on getting funding to do one, it seems prudent in the present funding climate for anyone, whatever the Plan A, to have a viable exit route.

But this was anyway a digression, yes.

Reply 10

returnmigrant

21

What is your residency status in Spain? If you have legal residency you may qualify for funding as an EU applicant.

Reply 11

Original post by cambio wechsel

Given that his facility to do so is contingent on his getting a PhD and that on getting funding to do one, it seems prudent in the present funding climate for anyone, whatever the Plan A, to have a viable exit route.

Even more so for someone taking out a loan for the masters which will have demanding repayments upon graduation. If you can't get a PhD stipend to pay these then you will need a decent job.

Reply 12

Original post by cambio wechsel

the Oxford degree would cost him about £16000, the overseas fee, the rest of his calculation is living costs that have to be met wherever you are and whatever you're doing.

Not really.

Oxford have a college fee which is an extra £2.7k and tuition is £16.5k - that's not far off £20k just for fees. You also have to include long haul flights (another £1.5-2k return), the difficulty in getting part-time employment as an international student, no option to live at home or go home at the weekends to save money, and all the other one-off costs associated with living in a new country (i.e. you will not be able to bring much from home).

Living costs have to always be met, yes, but they are vastly different depending on location and situation so I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that.

Reply 13

Original post by maskofsanity

Not really.

Oxford have a college fee which is an extra £2.7k and tuition is £16.5k - that's not far off £20k just for fees. You also have to include long haul flights (another £1.5-2k return), the difficulty in getting part-time employment as an international student, no option to live at home or go home at the weekends to save money, and all the other one-off costs associated with living in a new country (i.e. you will not be able to bring much from home).

You're rght on the college fee.
No full-time students at Oxford are allowed to work.
Dude lives in Spain.

Reply 14