Economics MSc's

Hiya,

I have just finished my undergrad degree from Leicester and currently applying for masters in Econ with the idea to potentially go on to further PhD study.

I'm just interested in hearing peoples opinions on these unis (specifically on academics and student life).

I've applied for Loughborough, Exeter, Bath, Bristol, St Andrews and Durham.

I'm are of the positions on the league tables but if I've learnt anything it's that they are not always the best indication of student satisfaction.

This is just my opinion but I'd rank them in this order:

1. Bristol
2. Durham
3. Bath
4. Exeter
5. St Andrew's
6. Loughborough

This is especially for MSc Economics rankings (i.e. St Andrews is good for UG but not really for PG). I'm sure you know that these unis are the tier below the elites but I would personally apply to Nottingham, Edinburgh and Manchester because while they still aren't the 'elites', they are better than the 6 mentioned.

I'd be interested to know what specific courses you plan on taking (i.e. Exeter also does economics and econometrics, Bristol offers various pathways etc).

It would be interesting to hear you background beyond just your uni so course, grades, any internships?

Hi thanks for your reply,

Funny you mention Nottingham I have just sent off an application to there to study their pure econ masters with potential to move to their Behaviour Economics pathway. I've taken a liking to Notts due to its Econ School and proximity to my current uni (hopefully I can get an offer). I assumed St Andrews would be a top one to apply for but obviously I stand corrected!

My undergrad is at Leicester (BA Economics track) and am on track to achieve a solid 2:1 if not a 1st so my grades are not an issue. I've had experience with working with school professors as an intern as that is ultimately where I want to go career wise.

I am aware of the elite tier (Oxbride, LSE, Warwick) but cost is a prohibitive factor and unis just below that offer a more reasonable price (in my opinion).

I agree that many of the top ones are overpriced with the slight exception perhaps being UCL because it's cheaper than the other and offers very advanced optional modules if you choose to take them.

I think a lot of your decision should rest on which area of economics each uni specialises in and how that relates to your interests. For example Nottingham is specialises in econometrics, Bristol in macro and metrics, Durham is financial Econ, bath for business school type classes, Manchester for econometrics and environmental etc.

Your decision should also be based on how the course and university set you up for a PhD. Both in terms of how advanced the courses are and the opportunities for masters students to get on PhD programs. At UK universities you have to do an MSc then an MRes and then a 3-year PhD so it's worth looking at which institution has the best path for this.

I've received offers from Notts and St Andrews so now it is just a question between the two. I just need to weigh up the potential paths available to me at both unis.

I've received offers from Notts and St Andrews so now it is just a question between the two. I just need to weigh up the potential paths available to me at both unis.

Hiya,

I have just finished my undergrad degree from Leicester and currently applying for masters in Econ with the idea to potentially go on to further PhD study.

I'm just interested in hearing peoples opinions on these unis (specifically on academics and student life).

I've applied for Loughborough, Exeter, Bath, Bristol, St Andrews and Durham.

I'm aware of the positions on the league tables but if I've learnt anything it's that they are not always the best indication of student satisfaction.

I agree that many of the top ones are overpriced with the slight exception perhaps being UCL because it's cheaper than the other and offers very advanced optional modules if you choose to take them.

I think a lot of your decision should rest on which area of economics each uni specialises in and how that relates to your interests. For example Nottingham is specialises in econometrics, Bristol in macro and metrics, Durham is financial Econ, bath for business school type classes, Manchester for econometrics and environmental etc.

Your decision should also be based on how the course and university set you up for a PhD. Both in terms of how advanced the courses are and the opportunities for masters students to get on PhD programs. At UK universities you have to do an MSc then an MRes and then a 3-year PhD so it's worth looking at which institution has the best path for this.

Sorry to thread start, I cannot offer advice as I am not in a position to do so.

How ever BenRyan99, where have you sourced the information that "You have to do and MSc then an MRes and then PhD"

I'm interested in following the same path as thread starter however my research is telling me an MA/MSc/MRes are all individually perfectly capable of landing a PhD? Only in certain institutions have I seen that they recommend the idea that their MSc/MA be done and then their MRes. This is mostly a marketing ploy as far as I can see?

Hi there, thanks for your question, it's definitely an important one.

It's worth noting that the answer definitely on the institutions you have in mind. That being said, as far as I can tell most decent UK universities are slowly switching to the US model where you do two years of PhD prep and then a 3 year PhD. This is largely because UK masters courses aren't very advanced compared to top 30 US universities as we don't teach the proof writing skills needed to do a PhD in just an MSc Economics. At a lot of UK unis now you need to do two years of postgraduate study before commencing a 3 year PhD. This can be in the form of an MSc then MRes then PhD or just a two year MRes straight out of undergrad or a two year MPhil straight out of undergrad, so however they dress it up, most decent unis require two years of postgrad before a 3 year PhD.

You asked for my sources which I'm happy to provide if useful:

Cambridge:
The below link clearly states out of undergrad their 1-year masters is for people who want to be economists and their 2-year masters is for people who want to do PhDs, it also states on their website that the one year course isn't sufficient.
http://www.econ.cam.ac.uk/graduate/mphil/which-mphil.pdf

Oxford:
The below is the link to their only straight econ masters, this is a two year MPhil, which again proves the point you need two years of pre-PhD prep.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/graduate/courses/mphil-economics

LSE: This appears to be one of the only top unis where you can go straight from undergrad into a one year MRes and then a 3-year PhD and because of this and other factors, this course is popular but I don't think you can go straight from MSc Economics to PhD economics there.

I've listed a few links below from other top economics institutions in the UK which show that they do a 1-year MRes and then a 3-year PhD and you need a masters to get onto the MRes, or a 2-year masters then 3-year PhD or a 1-year masters then a 4-year PhD where the first year is a teaching year. So to summarise, it'll take at least 5 years to get a PhD after undergrad at most UK institutions where it's actually worth getting a PhD from.

Nottingham:
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/pgstudy/course/research/economics-phd

Manchester:
https://www.manchester.ac.uk/study/postgraduate-research/programmes/list/02976/phd-economics/entry-requirements/#course-profile

Bristol:
http://www.bristol.ac.uk/efm/courses/phd-economics/#phd-economics

Warwick (this is two-year mres and then 4-year phd):
https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/prospective/mres-phd-programmes/mres-programme

Exeter:
https://www.exeter.ac.uk/postgraduate/courses/economics/mres_economics-phd/

Glasgow:
https://www.gla.ac.uk/postgraduate/taught/economics/

Edinburgh:
https://www.ed.ac.uk/studying/postgraduate/degrees/index.php?r=site/view&id=278

Thanks BenRyan. This is helpful. Though I'm going to have to hope for the best now.

Unfortunate they are doing this , shuts out a lot of people inc those who may have ability/ethic to pursue PhD level studies

EDIT: Im reading through the websites and the first three are perfectly okay with a one yr course before the PhD. So I'm not too sure what you're suggesting is happening is becoming a standard practice at all tbh

Which top 3 are you referring to? Oxbridge links clearly show they do a 2-year masters pre-PhD. If you're referring to Nottingham, Manchester and Bristol then I think you might be getting a bit confused.

For these MRes courses you need an MSc already so you have to do MSc, then MRes then PhD. Even Manchester clearly state they're postgraduate system is 1+1+3. Bristol say the MRes course is they're path to PhD, to do the MRes you need an MSc so I'm not quite sure what you're inferring? Nottingham you can do MSc, MRes then PhD so 1+1+3 or you can do an integrated PhD so MSc then PhD which is 1+4 so is actually the same as the first year is a teaching year.

In terms of why they're doing this, it's starting to show that they favour quality over quantity of students which is good, even if the funding situation is difficult for some.

They're doing it because we're just so far behind the US in terms of PhD quality. Have to remember that in the US they do 4+2+3 compared to what we've traditionally done which is 3+1+3. Means our PhD candidates lose two years which is a lot. That's why even though we've got historical prestige, Oxford and LSE don't rank too well against top US places. European unis aren't that internationally known but they also have some really good institutions like BGSE, TSE, SSE etc that are really catching up to our unis.

I think a lot of the problem is that because of the changes to unis in the last 20 years in the UK, the teaching quality has declined massively. So the knowledge graduates have isn't great compared globally so that's why they're changing to the US system.

Which top 3 are you referring to? Oxbridge links clearly show they do a 2-year masters pre-PhD. If you're referring to Nottingham, Manchester and Bristol then I think you might be getting a bit confused.

For these MRes courses you need an MSc already so you have to do MSc, then MRes then PhD. Even Manchester clearly state they're postgraduate system is 1+1+3. Bristol say the MRes course is they're path to PhD, to do the MRes you need an MSc so I'm not quite sure what you're inferring? Nottingham you can do MSc, MRes then PhD so 1+1+3 or you can do an integrated PhD so MSc then PhD which is 1+4 so is actually the same as the first year is a teaching year.

In terms of why they're doing this, it's starting to show that they favour quality over quantity of students which is good, even if the funding situation is difficult for some.

They're doing it because we're just so far behind the US in terms of PhD quality. Have to remember that in the US they do 4+2+3 compared to what we've traditionally done which is 3+1+3. Means our PhD candidates lose two years which is a lot. That's why even though we've got historical prestige, Oxford and LSE don't rank too well against top US places. European unis aren't that internationally known but they also have some really good institutions like BGSE, TSE, SSE etc that are really catching up to our unis.

I think a lot of the problem is that because of the changes to unis in the last 20 years in the UK, the teaching quality has declined massively. So the knowledge graduates have isn't great compared globally so that's why they're changing to the US system.