BRICT
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#1
Hey guys,
I need some advice on my MSc Economics choice, I am not sure where to go and need to make my choice really soon. I gradauted with a 2.1 in BSc Economics and received offers from:

- Warwick for (MSc Economics and Intn. Financial Economics & MSc Economics)
- Durham, Edinburgh, Bath, St. Andrews for (MSc Economics, Econometrics)

Career plans are not completely decided yet (i.e. I like the idea of strategic consultancy but also finance). I want to pursue a master that gives me a strong and broad background enabling most economics related career path.
Warwick obviously has the highest prestige and is ranked highest in terms of research and facilities, but appears to be the toughest degree in terms of structure and demands.
Considering I want to do a PhD after, is it better to opt for Durham or Edinburgh instead, which would guarantee better grades? Or is worth it to work my way through Warwick, purely because of its international reputation.

Thanks in advance guys.
0
reply
Tcannon
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#2
Report 6 years ago
#2
it is simple decisions analysis. What are your goals and identify the course that can help you develop specific skills to achieve them.

Warwick MS Econ is recognised as a better programme than the others. If you can afford higher tuition fee and willing to put in the work, go for it. As you mentioned, the course is analytical, academically rigorous and has a higher work load. If you can achieve distinction, your chances to enter a competitive PhD programme may improve.

Good luck
0
reply
BRICT
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#3
Yeah thanks for your reply! That's exactly what I am trying to figure out at the moment. Do you think a very good degree from Durham/Edinburgh is equilvant/better or worse than a mediocre degree from Warwick? Especially in terms of PhD placement and career advancement?
0
reply
Tcannon
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#4
Report 6 years ago
#4
I think a distinction from any MSc Econ is pre requirement (plus great research proposal and strong recommendations). A merit even from arguably stronger Warwick Econ would not offset it and it would be tough to compete with other applicants.
0
reply
.ACS.
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5
Report 6 years ago
#5
Do you definitely want to do a PhD in Economics? If so, where? Also, what are your particular research interests?

It is tricky… The MSc Economics programme at Warwick is better preparation for a PhD, as long as you undertake the harder econometric theory stream whilst there. The courses are more theoretical and more akin to the first year taught component at a US/European PhD programme.

Also, I would argue, for getting into a top European/US programme, a distinction is less important than a merit as long as your GRE score, research proposal and recommendation letters are strong. Ultimately, the most important part of the PhD application is your research proposal and your letters of recommendation. The GRE and your BSc/MSc grades are purely used as filters to getting a look-in.

In your case, I’d opt for Warwick because the preparation is better, and I don’t see why you can’t do equally well in the Warwick programme as you could at Bath/Edinburgh/etc. Will you need to work harder? Maybe, but if you want to do a PhD in a US/European university, rather you get an idea of the difficulty now than later on. It's important to realise how much hard work a PhD actually is; it is not just another four/five years of having fun. Additionally, if you want to do a PhD in the US/Europe, Warwick has more well-known academics.

If you’re interested in doing a PhD in the UK, then actually, any of these places would be fine.

Otherwise, if you want to go into the world of work, the question of which university you attend is less important.
0
reply
doomy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report 6 years ago
#6
(Original post by .ACS.)
Do you definitely want to do a PhD in Economics? If so, where? Also, what are your particular research interests?

It is tricky… The MSc Economics programme at Warwick is better preparation for a PhD, as long as you undertake the harder econometric theory stream whilst there. The courses are more theoretical and more akin to the first year taught component at a US/European PhD programme.

Also, I would argue, for getting into a top European/US programme, a distinction is less important than a merit as long as your GRE score, research proposal and recommendation letters are strong. Ultimately, the most important part of the PhD application is your research proposal and your letters of recommendation. The GRE and your BSc/MSc grades are purely used as filters to getting a look-in.

In your case, I’d opt for Warwick because the preparation is better, and I don’t see why you can’t do equally well in the Warwick programme as you could at Bath/Edinburgh/etc. Will you need to work harder? Maybe, but if you want to do a PhD in a US/European university, rather you get an idea of the difficulty now than later on. It's important to realise how much hard work a PhD actually is; it is not just another four/five years of having fun. Additionally, if you want to do a PhD in the US/Europe, Warwick has more well-known academics.

If you’re interested in doing a PhD in the UK, then actually, any of these places would be fine.

Otherwise, if you want to go into the world of work, the question of which university you attend is less important.
I agree 100% with what you said.

From what I've heard and read a Master's in a top European department can go a long way (and is the only way in the case of a 3 year BSc) if you're targeting universities in NA or continental Europe.

Actually I had a similar choice a couple of months ago - between Warwick, Nottingham, UCL, Bristol and Durham and I chose Warwick because of my current research interests being more on the macro, behavioural and financial side. Some people told me that I should have chosen UCL because of the slightly higher rankings, the international network and somewhat better research faculty but I felt like the programme was more micro-focused than I wanted and that there were less distractions at Warwick than in London.

Could you by the way elaborate a bit on the Econometrics B sequence at Warwick? I am 99% sure I'll go for it since I have covered almost all topics from A in my BSc but I have some slight doubts on whether I can handle such a great jump in the material covered. On the other hand, when looking at the past performance data it seems that higher marks were given to students taking the B sequence. I wonder how trustworthy such statistics are as probably the people who took B were more ambitious, confident and interested in econometrics in the first place.

Hope you have a couple of minutes to spare and sorry for hijacking the thread.
0
reply
.ACS.
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report 6 years ago
#7
(Original post by doomy)
I agree 100% with what you said.

From what I've heard and read a Master's in a top European department can go a long way (and is the only way in the case of a 3 year BSc) if you're targeting universities in NA or continental Europe.

Actually I had a similar choice a couple of months ago - between Warwick, Nottingham, UCL, Bristol and Durham and I chose Warwick because of my current research interests being more on the macro, behavioural and financial side. Some people told me that I should have chosen UCL because of the slightly higher rankings, the international network and somewhat better research faculty but I felt like the programme was more micro-focused than I wanted and that there were less distractions at Warwick than in London.

Could you by the way elaborate a bit on the Econometrics B sequence at Warwick? I am 99% sure I'll go for it since I have covered almost all topics from A in my BSc but I have some slight doubts on whether I can handle such a great jump in the material covered. On the other hand, when looking at the past performance data it seems that higher marks were given to students taking the B sequence. I wonder how trustworthy such statistics are as probably the people who took B were more ambitious, confident and interested in econometrics in the first place.

Hope you have a couple of minutes to spare and sorry for hijacking the thread.
You should opt for Econometrics B over Econometrics A purely because you shouldn’t close any doors. Even if you decide a PhD is not for you, why close doors now when you don’t need to?

In regard to the students typically getting higher marks in Econometrics B than Econometrics A, this does not surprise me, but it is equally true of any proof focused module. The questions in the exam are likely to ask you to prove statements, derive estimators, show the existence of consistency/inconsistency/bias/etc. It’s pretty much right or wrong. You either know it or you don’t. A course like Econometrics A, however, is more applied and more discursive, hence there is more leeway, and so one could argue is harder to do very well in.

You can find more about the module at:
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/ec...modules/ec910/

Regarding the core textbook, Econometric Analysis by Greene, it’s available for free here:
http://rum.prf.jcu.cz/public/mecirov...s-Prentice.pdf

The second semester says to use Econometric Theory and Methods by Davidson and MacKinnon… While a good text, I’d argue Econometrics by Hayashi is of a similar level (maybe slightly more advanced) but a lot better.

Anyway, although not the textbook, the instructor manual for Davidson/MacKinnon is here: http://down.cenet.org.cn/upfile/28/2...0194334120.pdf

I’m not sure where you studied before or what level of econometric theory you covered, but really, while the content may seem scary at the moment, it is purely because you haven’t covered it yet. Once the lecturer goes through the proof, and then you go through it yourself along with the exercises, etc., you’ll find it pretty easy. The content, in my view, isn’t all that difficult, you just have to familiarise yourself with it and the notation used if you’re not used to the terminology or letters or meanings, etc.

Hope this helps, and good luck your MSc at Warwick!
1
reply
doomy
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#8
Report 6 years ago
#8
I studied at a relatively low ranked UK university but achieved a high 1.1 with my best marks being on quantitative modules.

I've covered Gujarati's Basic Econometrics and 2-3 topics from Verbeek's Modern Econometrics. I quite enjoyed most of the stuff to be honest.

While this might sound strange at my high school I had an average of 22 hours of maths every week so I've done proofs, complex numbers and even some topology and mathematical linguistics (most of which against my will so I can't say I was at the top of my class ) but most of the material is a bit rusty. Right now I am going through Simon & Blume at a rather slow pace because of some major gaps in matrix theory.

Thank you very much for the textbook links and comments. I'm sure they'll come useful.
0
reply
EconomistJack
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#9
Report 6 years ago
#9
(Original post by BRICT)
Hey guys,
I need some advice on my MSc Economics choice, I am not sure where to go and need to make my choice really soon. I gradauted with a 2.1 in BSc Economics and received offers from:

- Warwick for (MSc Economics and Intn. Financial Economics & MSc Economics)
- Durham, Edinburgh, Bath, St. Andrews for (MSc Economics, Econometrics).
Hey congratulations on the offers! Would you mind sharing your profile/background? Where did you do undergrad? Have you done the GRE/GMAT?
0
reply
Aks1995
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 year ago
#10
(Original post by BRICT)
Hey guys,
I need some advice on my MSc Economics choice, I am not sure where to go and need to make my choice really soon. I gradauted with a 2.1 in BSc Economics and received offers from:

- Warwick for (MSc Economics and Intn. Financial Economics & MSc Economics)
- Durham, Edinburgh, Bath, St. Andrews for (MSc Economics, Econometrics)

Career plans are not completely decided yet (i.e. I like the idea of strategic consultancy but also finance). I want to pursue a master that gives me a strong and broad background enabling most economics related career path.
Warwick obviously has the highest prestige and is ranked highest in terms of research and facilities, but appears to be the toughest degree in terms of structure and demands.
Considering I want to do a PhD after, is it better to opt for Durham or Edinburgh instead, which would guarantee better grades? Or is worth it to work my way through Warwick, purely because of its international reputation.

Thanks in advance guys.
Hello Friend!
Even I am in a similar situation. I am confused which on to choose between Warwick and Edinburgh for MSc Economics and my target is also to do PhD after completion of the course.
Could you please throw some lights according to your experience? Which university did you choose? Was it worthy? Any other suggestion or point which you would like to mention.

Thanks in Advance.
0
reply
stella—
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 year ago
#11
(Original post by Aks1995)
Hello Friend!
Even I am in a similar situation. I am confused which on to choose between Warwick and Edinburgh for MSc Economics and my target is also to do PhD after completion of the course.
Could you please throw some lights according to your experience? Which university did you choose? Was it worthy? Any other suggestion or point which you would like to mention.

Thanks in Advance.
Hello and Congratulations!
Have you done the GRE examination? How long does it take to get your offers?
I apply for Warwick before taking the gre and I'm anxious that this will have a negative impact to my application. Please tell me your opinion about that, Thank you!
Last edited by stella—; 1 year ago
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Feeling behind at school/college? What is the best thing your teachers could to help you catch up?

Extra compulsory independent learning activities (eg, homework tasks) (2)
5.71%
Run extra compulsory lessons or workshops (7)
20%
Focus on making the normal lesson time with them as high quality as possible (4)
11.43%
Focus on making the normal learning resources as high quality/accessible as possible (3)
8.57%
Provide extra optional activities, lessons and/or workshops (11)
31.43%
Assess students, decide who needs extra support and focus on these students (8)
22.86%

Watched Threads

View All