This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- MFE Programs
- Oxford MSc in Financial Economics - honest admission chances
- LSE Finance or Cambridge MFE or Audit Graduate Programme
- Cancer Research Accelerate Scheme 2024
- Joint Maths And Economics - Enough maths for quant work/masters?
- Should I try LSE or not
- Btec applied science
- Btec business level 3
- Ocr resources
- Rejected from Ulster uni, BTEC not sufficient, mature student
- Can I get into uni?
- One cubic root is reciprocal of other question
- Health and social care
- Please complete my questionnaire!!!
- Grading
- Psychology: A Student Helps
- Btec grade calculator for University For DDD
- What Universities would accept BTEC grades?
- Level 3 Extended Diploma - please help!
- btec applied science grading help
Scroll to see replies
I dont know anything about graduate school programs at all so I'll refrain to comment. What I do know however, is that three of my friends are graduating this year from quite reputable unis and we were having a long discussion recently and they were all complaining about the level of bias towards oxbridge/LSE in in IB. Only one managed to secure something like an internship with prospects for full employment and he told me it was him and then something like 3 oxford, 4 cam, 3 lse. I dont know if this is merely coincidence or if this is representative of the industry, but this is what I keep hearing so perhaps you should ask around and get some opinions.. That said, Im sure that graduating from any of those schools will be fine, though perhaps someone better qualified should advise on that subject. Best of luck, all are excellent
Hey, Jamesbeton
I've got an interview pending for the MFE 2006. Could you please give me some insight on what to expect druing the interview. Was it technical or merely a general interview? What sort of questions did they ask? Were you interviewed by a panel? I am very nervous about it so I would appreciate any help. Congratulations on the offer!!! Hope to meet you in the spring (I need a lot of luck though!!)
I've got an interview pending for the MFE 2006. Could you please give me some insight on what to expect druing the interview. Was it technical or merely a general interview? What sort of questions did they ask? Were you interviewed by a panel? I am very nervous about it so I would appreciate any help. Congratulations on the offer!!! Hope to meet you in the spring (I need a lot of luck though!!)
I am currently an MFE student at Oxford, and for those considering the program, let me impart a few words of advice. First, the program is intensely theoretical and mathematical. You should have an intense mathematical background, in spite of the bull$%£& the program literature implies. In addition, you are expected to manipulate software dealing with econometrics and statistics, including coding some programs and models. Whether this is a valuable exercise in and of itself is beside the point - what you should consider is whether or not such a program will suit your interests and help you achieve your goals.
If what you are searching for is an applied finance course that will prepare you for a career in IB, this is not the program for you. A small handful of students, including myself, will be beginning careers in IB this summer, but we succeeded in the interview process largely by preparing for interviews at the expense of our academic work, not through it. I have found virtually nothing in the program that would prepare me to be conversant in finance, and have thus taken to reading all I can outside the scope of the course material in order to learn about the aspects of the marketplace that will be quintessential knowledge in the city.
Next, the program has suffered immensely due to failures on behalf of the administration to foresee and deal with problems as they arise. Although some issues have been effectively resolved, Said Business School's attitude seems to be that time will rectify the issues... in other words, if you attend the program in the first few years, you are treated more as a guinea pig than an important part of an incipient program.
Finally, if you attend the program, be prepared to experience little to nothing outside of life at the business school, especially if your background is not of a heavily quantitative nature. The material and the classes are immensely time-consuming, and often I find there is little value added by the lectures.
On the bright side of things, the name Oxford has and will undoubtedly continue to attract some of the best and brightest from around the world. The average GMAT in our initial MFE class is 730, which has hardly an equal anywhere in the world. Secondly, you will have the opportunity to meet several top industry experts, which has been a tremendously enriching part of the course. However, remember that Oxford is not a centre of business, and your lack of proximity to the finance centre is undoubtedly an obstacle rather than an advantage.
In sum, though the program has some highlights, essentially the benefit will be the brand-name Oxford on your resume. The course work is extremely theoretical and likely of very little value to someone interested in a career in IB. Much of your time is spent (read: wasted) dealing with side-issues, such as learning Matlab without any solid instruction on behalf of the university and analysing certain issues in theoretical finance until you are on the verge of insanity and intellectual stagnation. Unfortunately I am forced to honestly admit that I consider this program a grave mistake (I also got in to LSE). On the other hand, for those interested in heavily quantative careers, such as structuring, exotics, etc... this program may be of value, though one should keep in mind that such fields are even more competitive than IB.
Feel free to post specific questions - I would be happy to answer.
If what you are searching for is an applied finance course that will prepare you for a career in IB, this is not the program for you. A small handful of students, including myself, will be beginning careers in IB this summer, but we succeeded in the interview process largely by preparing for interviews at the expense of our academic work, not through it. I have found virtually nothing in the program that would prepare me to be conversant in finance, and have thus taken to reading all I can outside the scope of the course material in order to learn about the aspects of the marketplace that will be quintessential knowledge in the city.
Next, the program has suffered immensely due to failures on behalf of the administration to foresee and deal with problems as they arise. Although some issues have been effectively resolved, Said Business School's attitude seems to be that time will rectify the issues... in other words, if you attend the program in the first few years, you are treated more as a guinea pig than an important part of an incipient program.
Finally, if you attend the program, be prepared to experience little to nothing outside of life at the business school, especially if your background is not of a heavily quantitative nature. The material and the classes are immensely time-consuming, and often I find there is little value added by the lectures.
On the bright side of things, the name Oxford has and will undoubtedly continue to attract some of the best and brightest from around the world. The average GMAT in our initial MFE class is 730, which has hardly an equal anywhere in the world. Secondly, you will have the opportunity to meet several top industry experts, which has been a tremendously enriching part of the course. However, remember that Oxford is not a centre of business, and your lack of proximity to the finance centre is undoubtedly an obstacle rather than an advantage.
In sum, though the program has some highlights, essentially the benefit will be the brand-name Oxford on your resume. The course work is extremely theoretical and likely of very little value to someone interested in a career in IB. Much of your time is spent (read: wasted) dealing with side-issues, such as learning Matlab without any solid instruction on behalf of the university and analysing certain issues in theoretical finance until you are on the verge of insanity and intellectual stagnation. Unfortunately I am forced to honestly admit that I consider this program a grave mistake (I also got in to LSE). On the other hand, for those interested in heavily quantative careers, such as structuring, exotics, etc... this program may be of value, though one should keep in mind that such fields are even more competitive than IB.
Feel free to post specific questions - I would be happy to answer.
Holy Sh** straighforward student!
Are your fellow students of the same opinion?
I've been invited to an interview for MFE@Said.
I would like go into IB (or management consulting), too. You said that only a handful of your group is going into IB. Where's the rest heading?
What about the career support of Oxford? any good?
Have you heard any opinions of employers?
Thanks...
Are your fellow students of the same opinion?
I've been invited to an interview for MFE@Said.
I would like go into IB (or management consulting), too. You said that only a handful of your group is going into IB. Where's the rest heading?
What about the career support of Oxford? any good?
Have you heard any opinions of employers?
Thanks...
I must say, I am a bit surprised by the speed and instensity of the reaction. I suppose having dealt with many of these issues for a quite a while, I forget how surprising the information might be to those less familiar with the circumstances.
First, let me address the career situation: the program got off to a very rocky start in efforts to place students. Initially, only a very limited group of students obtained interviews in the IB recruiting process. This is undoubtedly due in large part to students' lack of understanding of the process, which extends from grammatical/spelling errors in applications, to meandering and often difficult-too understand essays. Furthermore, as the investment banks typically begin interviewing in late October/early November (before the application deadlines), many students were unaware of the necessity of beginning the application process BEFORE the program begins (at the start of October). The Career Services office is adapting to the needs of the new program, and certainly as the program matures banks will become more aware of its existence, giving students better opportunities, nonetheless, far more should have been done to clarify the competitveness of the application process and the best strategies for success in the application process.
Many, but not all, of those with current offers had prior experience in banking/finance, typically via an internship.
To some extent I believe there was a misperception that employers would see the program on a resume and come rushing in with offers flying... not the case. To get a position, one must put forth a significant amount of time and effort in the application process, do a substantial amount of personal preparation and research, and be prepared for and fully aware of the competition. The Career Services office has some good resources, especially in the form of the sector consultants, but the responsibility lies fully with the individual to make full use of the resources available and juggle the responsibilities of the job search with academic requirements (no small feat).
In regards to the quantative nature of the program: my comments are not meant to dissuade anyone from entering the program, only to clarify the nature of the academic demands and ensure that those applying are fully aware of the challenges. An engineering background is undoubtedly an excellent preparation for the quantative nature of the program, but one must also consider whether a more theoretical degree is preferable to one more based in applied finance. The opportunity to take classes with a more applied nature exists, but currently such opportunity remains available only in the final term, long after the job search has begun (and hopefully completed).
I would very much recommend to anyone that you contact the schools in which you are interested, or any contacts you might have, and try to initiate contact with a student currently in the program. The advertising materials are exactly that: advertising. Only by asking direct questions to frank individuals will you get a true feel for a program.
To everyone considering a program in finance, the most relevant questions to consider are: 1) am I prepared for the program, 2) will this program give me the tools I need to reach my own goals, and 3) does the program's focus coincide well with my interests, skills, experience, and goals. Unfortunately, in my case, I do not believe that the program is meant to offer the type of curriculum that I was searching for and that I was misled by the advertising put out by the university, and I believe it is in the interest of both prospective students and the university to be as honest and forthright about the program as possible. To succeed here without a quantitative background is possible, but at a rather large, bordering on unreasonable, cost. And if the heavy quantitative curriculum is not something that sparks your interest and intrigues you, look for something that will.
Thank you for your questions, and I hope to be of as much help as possible.
First, let me address the career situation: the program got off to a very rocky start in efforts to place students. Initially, only a very limited group of students obtained interviews in the IB recruiting process. This is undoubtedly due in large part to students' lack of understanding of the process, which extends from grammatical/spelling errors in applications, to meandering and often difficult-too understand essays. Furthermore, as the investment banks typically begin interviewing in late October/early November (before the application deadlines), many students were unaware of the necessity of beginning the application process BEFORE the program begins (at the start of October). The Career Services office is adapting to the needs of the new program, and certainly as the program matures banks will become more aware of its existence, giving students better opportunities, nonetheless, far more should have been done to clarify the competitveness of the application process and the best strategies for success in the application process.
Many, but not all, of those with current offers had prior experience in banking/finance, typically via an internship.
To some extent I believe there was a misperception that employers would see the program on a resume and come rushing in with offers flying... not the case. To get a position, one must put forth a significant amount of time and effort in the application process, do a substantial amount of personal preparation and research, and be prepared for and fully aware of the competition. The Career Services office has some good resources, especially in the form of the sector consultants, but the responsibility lies fully with the individual to make full use of the resources available and juggle the responsibilities of the job search with academic requirements (no small feat).
In regards to the quantative nature of the program: my comments are not meant to dissuade anyone from entering the program, only to clarify the nature of the academic demands and ensure that those applying are fully aware of the challenges. An engineering background is undoubtedly an excellent preparation for the quantative nature of the program, but one must also consider whether a more theoretical degree is preferable to one more based in applied finance. The opportunity to take classes with a more applied nature exists, but currently such opportunity remains available only in the final term, long after the job search has begun (and hopefully completed).
I would very much recommend to anyone that you contact the schools in which you are interested, or any contacts you might have, and try to initiate contact with a student currently in the program. The advertising materials are exactly that: advertising. Only by asking direct questions to frank individuals will you get a true feel for a program.
To everyone considering a program in finance, the most relevant questions to consider are: 1) am I prepared for the program, 2) will this program give me the tools I need to reach my own goals, and 3) does the program's focus coincide well with my interests, skills, experience, and goals. Unfortunately, in my case, I do not believe that the program is meant to offer the type of curriculum that I was searching for and that I was misled by the advertising put out by the university, and I believe it is in the interest of both prospective students and the university to be as honest and forthright about the program as possible. To succeed here without a quantitative background is possible, but at a rather large, bordering on unreasonable, cost. And if the heavy quantitative curriculum is not something that sparks your interest and intrigues you, look for something that will.
Thank you for your questions, and I hope to be of as much help as possible.
In response to a couple more specific questions:
Most of the employers with whom I have spoken have known little about the program. Thus, in my experience I have found it far more effective to refer to the program as a "Master's in Financial Economics at Oxford."
As for the students' directions:
Several students (10-20) are planning to pursue further studies, from law school to doctoral programs in finance. Largely I would say this program is best suited for those students hoping to study academic finance.
A small portion of the students successfully landed jobs at top-tier investment banks (5-10). However, prior experience in the industry, career or internship, is extremely important. Several more students are continuing to interview for more quantative positions, such as structuring, but in many cases these positions demand particular skills, such as PhD level qualifications in quantative subjects (physics, math, engineering) or advanced programming knowledge.
Several students have had no success in the job search and are considering further academic programs, alternate career choices, or returning to their home countries to search for jobs.
Finally, though most come with dreams of IB, several students have shown interest in consulting, and as far as I know, 5-10 have landed positions with top firms.
As for the feelings of other students: many students feel much like I do - that the program has strayed rather far from their initial expectations in terms of subject matter and academic support. In terms of exact numbers, it would be difficult to say, but I could say with certainty that satisfaction is far below what I would consider acceptable, in large part due to the unrealistic demands on students of different backgrounds and the excessive, unexpected importance placed on computer/programming skills.
Most of the employers with whom I have spoken have known little about the program. Thus, in my experience I have found it far more effective to refer to the program as a "Master's in Financial Economics at Oxford."
As for the students' directions:
Several students (10-20) are planning to pursue further studies, from law school to doctoral programs in finance. Largely I would say this program is best suited for those students hoping to study academic finance.
A small portion of the students successfully landed jobs at top-tier investment banks (5-10). However, prior experience in the industry, career or internship, is extremely important. Several more students are continuing to interview for more quantative positions, such as structuring, but in many cases these positions demand particular skills, such as PhD level qualifications in quantative subjects (physics, math, engineering) or advanced programming knowledge.
Several students have had no success in the job search and are considering further academic programs, alternate career choices, or returning to their home countries to search for jobs.
Finally, though most come with dreams of IB, several students have shown interest in consulting, and as far as I know, 5-10 have landed positions with top firms.
As for the feelings of other students: many students feel much like I do - that the program has strayed rather far from their initial expectations in terms of subject matter and academic support. In terms of exact numbers, it would be difficult to say, but I could say with certainty that satisfaction is far below what I would consider acceptable, in large part due to the unrealistic demands on students of different backgrounds and the excessive, unexpected importance placed on computer/programming skills.
Straightforward_student
As for the feelings of other students: many students feel much like I do - that the program has strayed rather far from their initial expectations in terms of subject matter and academic support.
As for the feelings of other students: many students feel much like I do - that the program has strayed rather far from their initial expectations in terms of subject matter and academic support.
hi!! it's relief to finally find the opinion of a student of the mfe programme!! like zerocool and svetlanka here, i have also been invited for the interview, and I've been trying to contact students of the programme from the past few days.
your review of the programme has been very useful to me as it had answered most of my questions!! i certainly don't want to go into a programme with so much uncertainty..
one last question straightforward_student....for an prospective international student like me that wants to go into consulting (and I assume most of the people coming to MFE want to get into IB), which programme is ideal - the MFE at Said or the MSc in Accounting and Finance at LSE? (without considering the cost of the programme)?
(I know my question is a little awkward because it would have been more correct to compare the MSc in Finance and Economics at LSE to the MFE programme...sorry for that..)
Flying Colours,
Judging from your choice of programs, I assume that you are considering whether the theoretical nature of the MFE would meet your needs as well as the accounting and finance program at LSE. I myself considered exactly the same two programs, only deciding on the MFE after having been accepted to and planning to attend the LSE program.
For consulting work, the exact nature of the graduate program you pursue will not, I imagine, be a major, deciding factor in the application and interview process. Certainly the ability to quickly navigate and analyse accounting information will be very useful, on the other hand, some firms do look for more quantitatively-oriented students. Oxford does have an extremely good recruiting relationship with McKinsey, though it is difficult to gauge the firm's interest in the MFE program because few students actively pursued careers in consulting. On the other hand, it seems that the success rate for MFE students interested in consulting is extremely high (though the numbers are relatively few).
It seems to me the best preparation for consulting would be a program that will prepare you directly for the type of quick-thinking, case-study analysis that is the essence of the interview process. Typically such a perspective is found in MBA programs. However, I believe that if consulting is your goal, then preparation for the interview process will be of greater importance than the exact nature of the program you attend. A book of case studies and a willing friend or colleague are the keys to solid preparation.
Again, I cannot stress enough that you should look for the program that will best fit your interest. I am certain that all of the programs you are considering will involve immense amounts of work - when that work is interesting and challenging to you, the time is easily spent. When you find the work uninteresting, the experience loses a great deal of its value.
Judging from your choice of programs, I assume that you are considering whether the theoretical nature of the MFE would meet your needs as well as the accounting and finance program at LSE. I myself considered exactly the same two programs, only deciding on the MFE after having been accepted to and planning to attend the LSE program.
For consulting work, the exact nature of the graduate program you pursue will not, I imagine, be a major, deciding factor in the application and interview process. Certainly the ability to quickly navigate and analyse accounting information will be very useful, on the other hand, some firms do look for more quantitatively-oriented students. Oxford does have an extremely good recruiting relationship with McKinsey, though it is difficult to gauge the firm's interest in the MFE program because few students actively pursued careers in consulting. On the other hand, it seems that the success rate for MFE students interested in consulting is extremely high (though the numbers are relatively few).
It seems to me the best preparation for consulting would be a program that will prepare you directly for the type of quick-thinking, case-study analysis that is the essence of the interview process. Typically such a perspective is found in MBA programs. However, I believe that if consulting is your goal, then preparation for the interview process will be of greater importance than the exact nature of the program you attend. A book of case studies and a willing friend or colleague are the keys to solid preparation.
Again, I cannot stress enough that you should look for the program that will best fit your interest. I am certain that all of the programs you are considering will involve immense amounts of work - when that work is interesting and challenging to you, the time is easily spent. When you find the work uninteresting, the experience loses a great deal of its value.
Yes, I am really relieved to finally find some insightful information about MFE at Said school. I have got an interview offer last week and am really worried about it now. Could people who had an interview already please give me some useful tips? I will really appreciate them. Thank you
Hello
Ive also applied for the MFE next year and ive got an interview in a couple of weeks. Just wondering what sort of things their likely to ask about. The last academic interview I had was 3 years ago now and that obviously didnt go too well as i didnt get in.
Also how long does it take to get there from the train station and roughly how long does the interview last as i need to sort out train tickets.
Thanks dex316
Ive also applied for the MFE next year and ive got an interview in a couple of weeks. Just wondering what sort of things their likely to ask about. The last academic interview I had was 3 years ago now and that obviously didnt go too well as i didnt get in.
Also how long does it take to get there from the train station and roughly how long does the interview last as i need to sort out train tickets.
Thanks dex316
I, too, am a current MFE student, and I must say that I do not entirely agree with Straightforward_student's opinions. While some of his criticisms are valid, I think most would find that the positive aspects of the course (such as the fantastic lecturers and facilities) far outweigh the negative aspects, most of which have resulted from administrative inexperience.
As for the job hunting problems that Straightforward_student referred to, you must keep in mind that those students who have not yet found permanent employment (myself included) either applied far too late in the recruitment process (guilty!) or simply did not have the right combination of experience and ability. I must stress that no course will help if you fall into latter category.
The MFE is an excellent choice if you want to get into global markets (i.e., sales, trading, structuring, or research) or corporate finance (i.e., investment banking). I would not recommend it specifically for private equity or consulting, although the MFE is an all-round great course for anyone interested in financial theory and practice.
Yes, I did say financial practice. You see, there were quite a few MFE students who complained during the first term that the course was too theoretical. Now they are complaining that the course relies too heavily on computer software, which is essentially a complaint that the course is too practical! I personally think the two software packages we use (Matlab and EViews) are intuitive and straightforward. The learning curve for me—and bear in mind I have never used anything remotely like these packages before in my life—was about four hours for Matlab and two hours for EViews.
As long as you know what are getting yourself into (one term with lots theory and a little practical work, followed by two terms with lots of practical work and a little more theory) then I strongly recommend this course. But do be prepared to work your butt off. I consider myself a strong student, but the weekly "eight-hour" assignments often take me upwards of 16 hours. Oh well. No pain, no gain.
Edit: Removed mention of real names.
As for the job hunting problems that Straightforward_student referred to, you must keep in mind that those students who have not yet found permanent employment (myself included) either applied far too late in the recruitment process (guilty!) or simply did not have the right combination of experience and ability. I must stress that no course will help if you fall into latter category.
The MFE is an excellent choice if you want to get into global markets (i.e., sales, trading, structuring, or research) or corporate finance (i.e., investment banking). I would not recommend it specifically for private equity or consulting, although the MFE is an all-round great course for anyone interested in financial theory and practice.
Yes, I did say financial practice. You see, there were quite a few MFE students who complained during the first term that the course was too theoretical. Now they are complaining that the course relies too heavily on computer software, which is essentially a complaint that the course is too practical! I personally think the two software packages we use (Matlab and EViews) are intuitive and straightforward. The learning curve for me—and bear in mind I have never used anything remotely like these packages before in my life—was about four hours for Matlab and two hours for EViews.
As long as you know what are getting yourself into (one term with lots theory and a little practical work, followed by two terms with lots of practical work and a little more theory) then I strongly recommend this course. But do be prepared to work your butt off. I consider myself a strong student, but the weekly "eight-hour" assignments often take me upwards of 16 hours. Oh well. No pain, no gain.
Edit: Removed mention of real names.
Interviews-
The interviews here at Said last about half an hour and vary widely from one interviewer to the next. My interview consisted of an interesting and interactive discussion about game theory and auction strategies, while other folks have had experiences ranging from very casual conversations (basically personality-based interviews) to conversations about quantitative topics (some have mentioned being asked to write out the chain rule or other similar fundamental mathematical concepts).
Most importantly the interviewers seem to be looking for students that display a great deal of interest in finance (whether through experience or through pure academic or extracurricular interest) and an outgoing and responsive personality. As I have mentioned, the dynamic among the students in the program is very amiable and, in my opinion, the highlight of the program. Try to relax as much as possible and view the interview as a learning opportunity - what the interviewer is keenly interested in is the way that you approach new ideas and your ability to interact with other students and professors.
In regards to others comments, I would agree that my interests are not geared toward the material presented in this course. The reason that I have chosen to express my views on the MFE program is that I feel that the course has been misrepresented in the course literature and that the quantitative demands are far more rigorous than described. I believe that it is in the best interest of both the program and prospective students considering the MFE to be fully aware of the nature of the material covered and the quantitative demands involved.
As in any course, there is a diverse range of personalities and teaching styles among the professors, the effectiveness of each often being heavily influenced by the student's personal preferences in terms of learning styles. In terms of the degree of preparation for the material presented, however, I believe that the quality of material presented to students has varied far too much, ranging from well-organized and clear to chaotic and replete with errors. In terms of the practicality of the material, I am forced to express my disagreement.
Coming from a non-quantitative background, I believed that the school would offer far more support in dealing with the quantitative demands of the program. Unfortunately, only a total of six one-hour math lectures were offered over the duration of the first term, which left much the of material presented in the first term far beyond the reach of my preparation.
Allow me to re-emphasize my overall point - what is most important in evaluating the course is the prospective student's level of quantitative experience, interest in quantitative subjects (in comparison with such applied concepts as the function of financial markets, specific financial instruments, etc), and willingness to endure the intense academic demands. Thus, I encourage individuals to not judge the objective quality of the program so much as the degree to which the program fits your individual skills, interests, goals, and background.
The interviews here at Said last about half an hour and vary widely from one interviewer to the next. My interview consisted of an interesting and interactive discussion about game theory and auction strategies, while other folks have had experiences ranging from very casual conversations (basically personality-based interviews) to conversations about quantitative topics (some have mentioned being asked to write out the chain rule or other similar fundamental mathematical concepts).
Most importantly the interviewers seem to be looking for students that display a great deal of interest in finance (whether through experience or through pure academic or extracurricular interest) and an outgoing and responsive personality. As I have mentioned, the dynamic among the students in the program is very amiable and, in my opinion, the highlight of the program. Try to relax as much as possible and view the interview as a learning opportunity - what the interviewer is keenly interested in is the way that you approach new ideas and your ability to interact with other students and professors.
In regards to others comments, I would agree that my interests are not geared toward the material presented in this course. The reason that I have chosen to express my views on the MFE program is that I feel that the course has been misrepresented in the course literature and that the quantitative demands are far more rigorous than described. I believe that it is in the best interest of both the program and prospective students considering the MFE to be fully aware of the nature of the material covered and the quantitative demands involved.
As in any course, there is a diverse range of personalities and teaching styles among the professors, the effectiveness of each often being heavily influenced by the student's personal preferences in terms of learning styles. In terms of the degree of preparation for the material presented, however, I believe that the quality of material presented to students has varied far too much, ranging from well-organized and clear to chaotic and replete with errors. In terms of the practicality of the material, I am forced to express my disagreement.
Coming from a non-quantitative background, I believed that the school would offer far more support in dealing with the quantitative demands of the program. Unfortunately, only a total of six one-hour math lectures were offered over the duration of the first term, which left much the of material presented in the first term far beyond the reach of my preparation.
Allow me to re-emphasize my overall point - what is most important in evaluating the course is the prospective student's level of quantitative experience, interest in quantitative subjects (in comparison with such applied concepts as the function of financial markets, specific financial instruments, etc), and willingness to endure the intense academic demands. Thus, I encourage individuals to not judge the objective quality of the program so much as the degree to which the program fits your individual skills, interests, goals, and background.
Some more comments from a current MFE student who PMed me:
Stander
Hey.
Sorry I didn't get your e-mail 'til today. I just heard about this thread from "Straightforward Student" today. I don't think I would have been of much help anyways - my interview had just been about my career goals and I have yet to hear of anyone else who has had a similar one. I think you will get in - I don't think they interview many more than they let in if they interview anymore than they let in at all. The most technical interview I've heard someone had involved explaining CAPM.
Beyond that, I can say that a lot of what "Straightforward Student" says is quite true. I wanted to go here because I came from a massive public school in the US and had no work experience whatsoever and thought this would really enhance my career prospects. I've come to grips with the fact that I failed on this end and I'm currently trying to get into a grad school, for which this program is rather good. Really, though, I want to end up in dental school, so maybe I'm not the best person to really listen to.
To be entirely honest, I think that this program is kind of strange. We've spent about four and a half months learning about CAPM (not conditional CAPM or consumption CAPM, just good old-fashioned CAPM). We haven't learned much beyond that; for instance, we haven't learned anything about Black-Scholes at all. I would consider this to be a bit of a worry - I think that a true finance program would probably develop more than a good handle on CAPM. You are kind of left to fend for yourself with odd programs like MATLAB and EViews and virtually forbidden from Excel - if you are okay with that, then no worries, but I'm not too savvy with computer technology.
If you are looking for something diehard quantitative, I think you should consider programs like Lehigh's MS Analytical Finance, Carnegie Mellon's MS Computational Finance, UChicago's MS in Financial Mathematics, or Berkeley's MS in Financial Engineering. They seem to be better alternatives for people with good programming and math backgrounds. Otherwise, programs like LBS' Masters in Finance, Princeton's Masters in Finance, or a Wharton or Columbia or UChicago MBA would be better than this, both for learning material and for career prospects. I think it is very important to underscore "Straightforward Student's" point about Oxford not being the UK's center of finance. A lot of companies are rather dismissive of the school because LBS is the gold standard here.
Also, I think he's a bit too buoyant on careers services here; I think they are rather idle and condescending. The big service they offer is to look at your resume and offer advice, which isn't that helpful. I think a few instances are rather telling: when we arrived, there was "A Welcome Reception from McKinsey". McKinsey didn't bother to show. When Bear Stearns came through, they finished the presentation with "We could probably stay for short questions before we have to go to Cambridge". ABN Amro gave a presentation saying that our programming backgrounds in C++ (applicable to maybe 5 people here) would make us good for their quant positions. I think careers services are not doing a decent job of making the program known - basically, you end up doing that, which is tough to do when there are established programs like LBS's Masters in Finance or London School of Economics' Masters in Economics and Finance. And if you are like me (I wanted to go back to the US, and I'm guessing you are from Germany) and want to work outside the UK, then you are entirely on your own. Though it claims to be an international business school, trying to get a job outside of the UK is immeasurably hard.
Of course, I can't say I'm not glad I'm here. Granted, I am bored out of my mind most of the day and want to to dental school, but I think that this is a good experience for me. I don't know if any of this is of interest to you, but I wanted to give my thoughts. And, by the way, "dacb1984's" comment about great facilities is a joke (probably not the most important thing in the world, but the building is incredibly boring and doesn't have wireless).
Sorry I didn't get your e-mail 'til today. I just heard about this thread from "Straightforward Student" today. I don't think I would have been of much help anyways - my interview had just been about my career goals and I have yet to hear of anyone else who has had a similar one. I think you will get in - I don't think they interview many more than they let in if they interview anymore than they let in at all. The most technical interview I've heard someone had involved explaining CAPM.
Beyond that, I can say that a lot of what "Straightforward Student" says is quite true. I wanted to go here because I came from a massive public school in the US and had no work experience whatsoever and thought this would really enhance my career prospects. I've come to grips with the fact that I failed on this end and I'm currently trying to get into a grad school, for which this program is rather good. Really, though, I want to end up in dental school, so maybe I'm not the best person to really listen to.
To be entirely honest, I think that this program is kind of strange. We've spent about four and a half months learning about CAPM (not conditional CAPM or consumption CAPM, just good old-fashioned CAPM). We haven't learned much beyond that; for instance, we haven't learned anything about Black-Scholes at all. I would consider this to be a bit of a worry - I think that a true finance program would probably develop more than a good handle on CAPM. You are kind of left to fend for yourself with odd programs like MATLAB and EViews and virtually forbidden from Excel - if you are okay with that, then no worries, but I'm not too savvy with computer technology.
If you are looking for something diehard quantitative, I think you should consider programs like Lehigh's MS Analytical Finance, Carnegie Mellon's MS Computational Finance, UChicago's MS in Financial Mathematics, or Berkeley's MS in Financial Engineering. They seem to be better alternatives for people with good programming and math backgrounds. Otherwise, programs like LBS' Masters in Finance, Princeton's Masters in Finance, or a Wharton or Columbia or UChicago MBA would be better than this, both for learning material and for career prospects. I think it is very important to underscore "Straightforward Student's" point about Oxford not being the UK's center of finance. A lot of companies are rather dismissive of the school because LBS is the gold standard here.
Also, I think he's a bit too buoyant on careers services here; I think they are rather idle and condescending. The big service they offer is to look at your resume and offer advice, which isn't that helpful. I think a few instances are rather telling: when we arrived, there was "A Welcome Reception from McKinsey". McKinsey didn't bother to show. When Bear Stearns came through, they finished the presentation with "We could probably stay for short questions before we have to go to Cambridge". ABN Amro gave a presentation saying that our programming backgrounds in C++ (applicable to maybe 5 people here) would make us good for their quant positions. I think careers services are not doing a decent job of making the program known - basically, you end up doing that, which is tough to do when there are established programs like LBS's Masters in Finance or London School of Economics' Masters in Economics and Finance. And if you are like me (I wanted to go back to the US, and I'm guessing you are from Germany) and want to work outside the UK, then you are entirely on your own. Though it claims to be an international business school, trying to get a job outside of the UK is immeasurably hard.
Of course, I can't say I'm not glad I'm here. Granted, I am bored out of my mind most of the day and want to to dental school, but I think that this is a good experience for me. I don't know if any of this is of interest to you, but I wanted to give my thoughts. And, by the way, "dacb1984's" comment about great facilities is a joke (probably not the most important thing in the world, but the building is incredibly boring and doesn't have wireless).
zerocool
Hi Stander,
I red in one of your posts that you're in the MFE program at SBS.
I am an applicant and have just received my interview invitation 2 days ago.
I will probably get an appointment on March 3rd in Oxford.
I was just wondering if you could give me some clues on what kinds of stuff they ask in the interview (wanna be prepared
). There is a thread on this, but nothing really specific.
Do they ask technical stuff? if yes, what sort?
How should I prepare?
What do you think chances are of getting in once you get an interview? Do you know how many applicants they invite for interviews relative to available places?
Thanks a lot!
I red in one of your posts that you're in the MFE program at SBS.
I am an applicant and have just received my interview invitation 2 days ago.
I will probably get an appointment on March 3rd in Oxford.I was just wondering if you could give me some clues on what kinds of stuff they ask in the interview (wanna be prepared
). There is a thread on this, but nothing really specific.Do they ask technical stuff? if yes, what sort?
How should I prepare?
What do you think chances are of getting in once you get an interview? Do you know how many applicants they invite for interviews relative to available places?
Thanks a lot!
more stuff
Stander
Hey.
Feel free to post whatever I say, since I don't think it's too incendiary. I just want to make sure that you definitely get a good idea of the program, since its pretty tough to get anything else than a rosy picture.
Actually, I had an interview with Oren Sussman myself. The impression I have been getting is that they tailor it to your background. If you haven't done economics before, it seems that they are looking to see that you can think in that way; to that effect, another student here said his interview (not with Prof. Sussman) was themed around game theory and just involved seeing how he thought through situations. Mine was, as I said, about my career goals, and Prof. Sussman did pose questions that had some underlying economic theme. It seems that they are going to make sure that future classes have a decent grip on math in future years. I heard from some applicants at a recent Open Day that their interviewer (not Prof. Sussman, I should note) asked them to write the Chain Rule down on the board. I'm not sure what you did before, but though I definitely had done the Chain Rule, I would say that I would have trouble jumping up to the board to write it down. If it helps in any way, I can tell you that Prof. Sussman doesn't teach any of the core courses, but does teach the Restructuring (formerly Mergers & Acquisitions) elective.
Also, I should add that I thought my interview was just terrible. I didn't think I was coherent in my responses or clear about my goals and was certain I wouldn't get an offer, especially since I was the only one there without a suit on (my luggage was lost on the way to New York). I think that Prof. Sussman is a really nice guy from the handful of times I've spoken with him - really quiet compared to some of the other interviewers. My interview lasted 20 minutes, but I'm not sure how long other interviews are. So, I guess that's the extent of my advice: refresh on basic calculus rules possibly, be ready for a little testing of your thought process maybe, and have some reasoning behind your careers goals (or, if you have significant work experience, they like to talk about that from what others have told me). I wish I could be more specific but hopefully that's enough to prepare you.
Congratulations on the LSE offer. Actually, "Straightforward Student" had gotten into that program, so if you send him a message, I'm sure he can give you some good thoughts on it. I'd seriously consider it (I'm looking into an accounting program next year as well). Hopefully, though, the Open Day will give you a feel for what it's like here. Since it's a Friday, if you happen to go to class, it will be Financial Econometrics. That is by far the most difficult of the lectures and I am expecting to not understand a bit of it, so don't necessarily think it is the standard level of difficulty. Of course, if you understand it, then you ought to do well. Hopefully I'll see you there.
Feel free to post whatever I say, since I don't think it's too incendiary. I just want to make sure that you definitely get a good idea of the program, since its pretty tough to get anything else than a rosy picture.
Actually, I had an interview with Oren Sussman myself. The impression I have been getting is that they tailor it to your background. If you haven't done economics before, it seems that they are looking to see that you can think in that way; to that effect, another student here said his interview (not with Prof. Sussman) was themed around game theory and just involved seeing how he thought through situations. Mine was, as I said, about my career goals, and Prof. Sussman did pose questions that had some underlying economic theme. It seems that they are going to make sure that future classes have a decent grip on math in future years. I heard from some applicants at a recent Open Day that their interviewer (not Prof. Sussman, I should note) asked them to write the Chain Rule down on the board. I'm not sure what you did before, but though I definitely had done the Chain Rule, I would say that I would have trouble jumping up to the board to write it down. If it helps in any way, I can tell you that Prof. Sussman doesn't teach any of the core courses, but does teach the Restructuring (formerly Mergers & Acquisitions) elective.
Also, I should add that I thought my interview was just terrible. I didn't think I was coherent in my responses or clear about my goals and was certain I wouldn't get an offer, especially since I was the only one there without a suit on (my luggage was lost on the way to New York). I think that Prof. Sussman is a really nice guy from the handful of times I've spoken with him - really quiet compared to some of the other interviewers. My interview lasted 20 minutes, but I'm not sure how long other interviews are. So, I guess that's the extent of my advice: refresh on basic calculus rules possibly, be ready for a little testing of your thought process maybe, and have some reasoning behind your careers goals (or, if you have significant work experience, they like to talk about that from what others have told me). I wish I could be more specific but hopefully that's enough to prepare you.
Congratulations on the LSE offer. Actually, "Straightforward Student" had gotten into that program, so if you send him a message, I'm sure he can give you some good thoughts on it. I'd seriously consider it (I'm looking into an accounting program next year as well). Hopefully, though, the Open Day will give you a feel for what it's like here. Since it's a Friday, if you happen to go to class, it will be Financial Econometrics. That is by far the most difficult of the lectures and I am expecting to not understand a bit of it, so don't necessarily think it is the standard level of difficulty. Of course, if you understand it, then you ought to do well. Hopefully I'll see you there.
zerocool
Stander,
thanks a lot for your message. I really appreciate your taking the time write that much.
Do you mind if I post your comments on the thread (to share it with the other applicants)?
It would be great if you guys could convince some more current MFE students to share their experiences on the thread (especially those who have already gotten a job either in IB or consulting).
On friday last week I did get a conditional for LSE's Accounting&Finance. However, my conditions are hilarious (sky-high - I'll probably ask them to reconsider). I'm really considering this offer, now that I've some opinions on the MFE.
Thanks for your answers...
Maybe I'll see you in Oxford next week. I have my interview on March 2nd with Oren Sussman (by the way: what do you think of this guy?) and will be attending the Open Day Event on March 3rd. They said that there will be a Happy Hour on March 3rd after the event in the Common Room with current students -> Maybe we can share a few more thoughts over a drink
thanks a lot for your message. I really appreciate your taking the time write that much.
Do you mind if I post your comments on the thread (to share it with the other applicants)?
It would be great if you guys could convince some more current MFE students to share their experiences on the thread (especially those who have already gotten a job either in IB or consulting).
On friday last week I did get a conditional for LSE's Accounting&Finance. However, my conditions are hilarious (sky-high - I'll probably ask them to reconsider). I'm really considering this offer, now that I've some opinions on the MFE.
Thanks for your answers...
Maybe I'll see you in Oxford next week. I have my interview on March 2nd with Oren Sussman (by the way: what do you think of this guy?) and will be attending the Open Day Event on March 3rd. They said that there will be a Happy Hour on March 3rd after the event in the Common Room with current students -> Maybe we can share a few more thoughts over a drink
Oh, for heaven's sake. The current MFE students simply adore complaining. I learned this the hard way as course representative during the first term.
By the way, I also got into LSE's MSc in Finance & Economics. The deciding factor for me was Oxford itself. The experience you will have at Oxford is unique and should only be traded off against your dislike of commuting to London for second-round interviews.
By the way, I also got into LSE's MSc in Finance & Economics. The deciding factor for me was Oxford itself. The experience you will have at Oxford is unique and should only be traded off against your dislike of commuting to London for second-round interviews.
Related discussions
- MFE Programs
- Oxford MSc in Financial Economics - honest admission chances
- LSE Finance or Cambridge MFE or Audit Graduate Programme
- Cancer Research Accelerate Scheme 2024
- Joint Maths And Economics - Enough maths for quant work/masters?
- Should I try LSE or not
- Btec applied science
- Btec business level 3
- Ocr resources
- Rejected from Ulster uni, BTEC not sufficient, mature student
- Can I get into uni?
- One cubic root is reciprocal of other question
- Health and social care
- Please complete my questionnaire!!!
- Grading
- Psychology: A Student Helps
- Btec grade calculator for University For DDD
- What Universities would accept BTEC grades?
- Level 3 Extended Diploma - please help!
- btec applied science grading help
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Oxbridge applicants for modern languages - 2025 entry (applying in 2024)Last reply 1 month ago
Year 12 Oxbridge hopefuls apply for Lucy Cavendish AAP.Last reply 1 month ago
How do youys feel about the TSA this year compared to the past papers?
