Advice for Prospective Graduate Students

This guide is available in pdf form.  

I have written this guide as a result of my experiences in applying to US PhD programs following undergraduate studies at the University of Melbourne. The internet is full of advice for prospective applicants to economics PhD programs, so in addition to some comments from my own experience, I hope to give some insight that is useful specifically to applicants from the University of Melbourne. There are two extremely useful resources that I'll mention up front since they are, in my opinion, the best places to go for advice about graduate school in economics:

  • The web site http://www.econphd.net was set up by a former University of Melbourne PhD student, and is widely regarded as the top resource for prospective PhD applicants. It has great resources, links to a lot of other helpful sites, and some of the most comprehensive rankings of economics departments available. While such rankings are at best a guide, they are a possible starting point for deciding where to apply. [Note: this has been relocated here: http://econphd.econwiki.com/]
  • The TestMagic forums, at http://www.urch.com/forums/phd-economics. These are invaluable as a source of advice and information about every aspect of graduate school in economics, both in terms of applying and otherwise. There are a lot of people applying to PhDs in economics, currently completing PhDs, and contemplating PhDs there who are ready to help.

    Also, the web sites of the economics departments you may be considering applying to usually have FAQ sections that may be very useful in answering any questions you have about the process.

The US PhD

    The one thing that distinguishes US PhD programs from those offered elsewhere is, primarily, that they are 5 year (as opposed to 3 year) programs.
    The first year is generally comprised of year-long sequences in microeconomic theory, macroeconomic theory, and econometrics. Usually (but not always) there are comprehensive exams covering all the year's material at the end of the first year.
    The second year involves courses in several fields. You will usually have two primary fields requiring a written and/or oral examination. So, these might be fields such as development economics, labour economics, industrial organisation, and so on.
    The final three years are spent planning and writing up the dissertation. In the final year candidates are usually on the job market looking for placements in universities, research institutions, etc.
    In my view, the US system provides far more rigorous training than is offered anywhere else. Also, because of this, along with the fact that a majority of the world's best academic economists are in US universities, studying over there provides the best possible environment for becoming a great researcher yourself.

Making Yourself an Attractive Applicant


    I will emphasise up front here that I only speak from my own experience, which in general is a `conventional' background for PhD applicants. While, arguably, such a background makes admission easier, it is certainly not a pre-requisite. People with all sorts of backgrounds end up doing PhDs in economics. Really, the only basic requirement is that you have some mathematical training and enough exposure to economics to make it believable that you want to spend 5 years of your life studying it!

What are Departments Looking for?


    Ultimately, the goal of any economics department that awards PhDs will be to produce top quality researchers in economics. This is something that should always be borne in mind, especially when making choices with respect to course work and how to best use your time in preparation for applications. There are a few implications of this:

  • Research experience is extremely useful.
  • Extracurricular activities are not going to affect your chances of admission.
  • Poor marks in early years are not fatal if you show commitment to being a researcher in economics.
  • You will almost certainly not be admitted to any department if you do not show that your priority is to become a researcher in economics. If your primary goal is to become a business high-flyer, either this is not for you, or you should do all you can to hide that fact.

    I will cover more related points below. However, if you are not sure whether taking on a certain job, or whether some unique aspect of your application will matter to the departments you apply to, ask yourself "does this say anything about my abilities as a researcher in economics?" If the answer is no, chances are they won't care.

Honours in Economics

    This is arguably the most important year for someone at the University of Melbourne considering a PhD in economics. The reasons for this go well beyond simply covering more advanced course work than previously available. Obviously, being exposed to advanced economic theory is important not just as preparation for a PhD, but also to be in a better position to decide whether advanced study in economics is really for you. Advanced economics is highly quantitative and can seem very different to the sort of things you might do in first or second year especially. Because the US departments know this, they therefore value advanced economics classes very highly. The more technical, the better, in most cases.
    One not-so-obvious reason to do honours is to experience a year at university that approaches the intensity of a PhD. The workload in honours is a big step up from 3rd year Commerce. Certainly, this is not to scare you away from doing honours; it is a fantastic experience. You are put in a situation where you have to work closely with your peers to get by, and learn a tremendous amount in the process. Moreover, it is an experience that only a minority of PhD applicants will have. One could rightly argue that the very strong placement record of the University of Melbourne comes as a result of the honours program.

Mathematics


    For better or worse, graduate level economics has become extremely technical. This means that it's a very good idea to have done at least a minimum level of mathematics preparation prior to applying to PhD programs. As I understand it, not having done any maths will make it hard to even get a look-in at many top schools. And conversely, having a solid maths background makes getting into top programs much easier. It is my opinion that advice floating around the department -- at least when I was applying -- definitely underestimated the impact of a solid maths background on the chances of admission to good schools. Of course, none of this maths would be required if it wasn't extremely useful for becoming a researcher in economics, or, in the short term, for helping you pass the first and second year exams! Some of the maths courses at Melbourne have just recently changed with the Melbourne Model, however the most relevant subjects are:

  • All the first year subjects, at the most advanced level you can take them
  • In second year (taking all of these is advised): Real and Complex Analysis, Vector Analysis (Advanced), Probability, Statistics
  • In third year (not essential, but useful and will impress admissions committees): Linear Analysis, Topology, Metric Spaces

    If these subjects don't exist at the time that you are reading this document, then find out what is currently offered that is closest to these older subjects. If you have more room/time, then you may also like to take subjects in (partial) differential equations (Mathematical Methods in second year I believe is the starting point), as well as in more advanced probability/statistics subjects should econometrics or stochastic processes be something you want to look at. While taking the advanced streams of subjects, where available, may seem masochistic, you really will get more out of the subjects, and will also get much better at constructing proofs -- a skill admissions committees love their prospective students to have.
    Obviously if you come from a double-degree background with something like engineering or computer science, you may be able to substitute some of the subjects you have done there for the ones I name above. However, you should check that you cover the essential areas

My Course Plan
    At the end of my honours year I had absolutely no formal maths training at university. What I did in order to prepare for my PhD may provide a useful guide for people in my position.

  • In the year immediately following honours, I undertook all the first year subjects, as well as Probability and Statistics. I was able to skip the prerequisites for these second year subjects because I had done well in advanced-level econometrics subjects, and had taken quite technical subjects during honours. If you are able to do this, then you should, but of course you will need to talk to the subject coordinators about this.
  • In the second year after honours, first semester (with the second semester being when I am to start my PhD), I undertook Real and Complex Analysis and Vector Analysis (Advanced). It was never really a possibility to skip the pre-requisites/do them at the same time for these subjects since the lecturers wouldn't waive the requirements for me, and in hindsight they were totally right.

I will not have the time to complete the other subjects I described above. As it is, my course plan basically covers all the essential subjects required by US programs. So, overall I had to spend an extra year at Melbourne doing these subjects compared to if I'd applied during honours, and I think it was definitely worthwhile. Not only do you get your (hopefully good) honours marks on your transcript as you apply, which may not be the case if you apply during your honours year, but you don't have to apply during honours in the first place, which I imagine would be pretty tough given the time that it takes up.

GRE

This is a universally required aptitude-type exam that all US universities will require you to take prior to applying, comprised of three sections: quantitative (maths), verbal (how big is your vocabulary?), and analytical writing assessment (make an argument based on a statement; analyse an argument in a passage). There is not much for me to say on this that you can't find elsewhere. So, a couple of things to note:

  1. You can definitely improve your scores with study, and it would be extremely foolish to leave study to cramming at the last moment. There are a number of study guides available which are, in my opinion, very useful. I used Barron's and Kaplan's, and thought both were great.
  2. In economics, only the quantitative section is really relevant. You should be looking to get ≥780 (out of 800) if you are targeting top 10 schools, ≥760 for top 20, and ideally ≥720 for top 50. There are a lot of people that get a perfect score of 800 (I got 4 questions wrong on my exam and got 800 -- don't think you need to `ace' it in the traditional sense), so the closer to that score you get, the better. This is not to say that doing well in the verbal and analytical writing assessment sections won't help your application, but it's far less important (and fatal) if you do poorly. Remember that many applicants will becoming from a non-english speaking background and so do poorly on these sections.
Other Preparation

Research Experience
    Having some research experience is extremely useful. This could be in the form of your research essay from honours, as well as research assistant work for lecturers in the department. As I will return to shortly, this is a great way to get to know lecturers better, and also ensure that they are able to write informative (and therefore, better) letters of recommendation for you. And, most importantly, what demonstrates your ability to be a great economic researcher better than having the enthusiasm and ability to do research, and have people vouch for that? At the far end of the scale you have applicants who have published papers in the top journals prior to applying, and if you can do that, then you have a ticket to nearly everywhere. However, very few people ever have anything published when they apply, so do not feel at a disadvantage if you do not either. Every little bit of experience is a bonus.

Teaching Experience
    In general I don't think schools care about this very much. Cornell is the only department I've ever heard of that puts an emphasis on teaching in their applications. Otherwise, it can be useful just for your own personal benefit since you'll almost certainly be tutoring when you're a PhD student, and I assume that tutoring advanced courses shows a mastery of that material. Otherwise, if you have to choose between research assistant or tutoring work, research assistant work should have the priority.

The Application Process

    In general, applications are due in December/January for the academic year starting the following August/September. I would recommend allowing as much time as possible to go through them, just because making sure all relevant documentation is submitted is easier when you have more time to play with (and in case something goes wrong!) and because it will be kinder to your recommenders if you let them know a long way before the deadline what is due when. The actual applications will take a few hours each, assuming you have everything else in order, and virtually all of them are completely online -- though some that I completed still had a number of printed-out forms to be filled out, signed, and sent in.

Letters of Recommendation

    Many people argue that letters of recommendation are the single most important component of your application. These are letters written by academics, preferably from the Department of Economics, attesting to your potential abilities as a researcher in economics. The reason that these are so important is because while grades and class ranking are all well and good, if one of your recommenders does not have confidence that you will be able to apply these skills to economic research, then stating so will all but put an end to your chances of admission. But, to be more positive about it, if you have had a few hiccups along the way in your courses, and you have letters all claiming that you have the originality and insight to make a fantastic economist, you are well on your way.
    It can be frustrating and even stressful that the most important part of the application is in many ways beyond your control. But it is not entirely so. Knowing that you will need to call upon at least 3 academics to write letters of recommendation for you, it is important to cultivate relationships with members of the department. If I may return again to the merits of honours: this is a big one. It gives you the opportunity to become closely acquainted with your lecturers, opens up opportunities for research assistant work, and establishes the relationships that are invaluable for getting good letters of recommendation. This is one advantage that I think University of Melbourne students have over the average US applicant from a big university: in later years there are more opportunities to get to know lecturers, and less of a need to get a letter of recommendation from someone who may only know you as a random student in their class.

Statement of Purpose

    This is a statement outlining your research interests and basically why you want to do a PhD in economics. Every application will require one, though specific demands may vary. You will find many conflicting statements about what this should include, and how important it is. Within the top 15 or so schools, its importance is limited, and based on where I did and did not get admitted/good offers, it is clear that some read it closely and others must have ignored it. The admissions director at one very highly respected school told me in no uncertain terms that they don't pay much attention to it at all. At lower ranked schools, it becomes more important as departments try to do a better job of targeting students who would be a good match for their department. Either way, I think it is not worth stressing over too much. The biggest thing that I would do is make sure that you write something that you are comfortable with.
    One thing that is often said is that you should mention professors you are interested in working with. I did this a few times, but largely regretted it. There isn't much chance of fooling admissions committees if you're not genuine. So, if you really have read someone's research and worked on related issues, and have a passion for what they've been doing lately, that's great. If not, I think there is absolutely no problem not mentioning anyone in your statement of purpose -- I can see no correlation between mentioning people and admissions in my case, nor in the cases of people that I know.
    Otherwise, there are many online resources for writing statements of purpose, so they are likely to be of better guidance than I can. Ultimately, so long as your statement follows the instructions given by each particular school (obviously this means your statement will tend to differ from school to school, if only a little), and you don't say anything stupid, then you should be fine.

Writing Sample

    A few schools -- but not many -- will require a writing sample, and others will give you the option of submitting one. They all usually give quite good instructions as to what they're after in any case. Something that my advisor told me when I was thinking about whether or not to submit my writing sample (in my case, my honours thesis) I think is useful to repeat: if you don't submit it when it's an option, it may be a signal that you have nothing worthy of submission! I don't know whether this is true or not, and it really is up to you. I was personally worried about submitting my honours thesis as I had worked on it since the end of honours with my advisor, and knew there were some major weaknesses. Note that I didn't submit the updated version since that was co-authored, and hence provided a worse signal about what I was capable of. Anyway, two of the schools that seemed most enthusiastic about me joining them once I was admitted had requested (or strongly suggested) that applicants submit a writing sample, so perhaps there is some positive relationship there. What I am saying is don't stress too much about submitting something that is not perfect, it's probably not going to be read closely enough to matter anyway, and showing some ability to do independent research is always going to help.

How Many Applications, and to Where?

    This is a difficult question to answer for a number of reasons. The first thing to note is that each application carries with it a cost of time and money -- the average application fee is around $US60, with extra costs involved in getting transcripts and GRE scores sent also. With that said, my opinion after having gone through the process is that the more the better. I applied to 14 places, and in my case that was probably the right amount, but I have heard of people applying to 30. Why is there a need to apply to so many places? There are a number of reasons:

Funding
    There is not a school that I know of that does not offer at least some funded places. Typically this will involve covering tuition, health insurance, fees, and a living allowance which can vary from not much over $10,000 p.a. at some schools to $36,000 p.a. for 5 years at Yale starting in 2008.
    Hence, obtaining admission is not the only goal in this process -- ideally you will be looking to have all your expenses covered too. It is definitely possible to be admitted but not receive any form of funding for a year or more (until you prove yourself by passing the first and possibly second year exams!) -- or funding to cover tuition but not living expenses. Hence, the more schools you apply to, the better your chances of being admitted and funded at one of your choices.

Difficulty of Admission
    It is very easy to under-estimate the strength of the applicants against which you are competing. When I applied, 4 of those 14 schools were what I considered `safety' schools -- in other words, schools that I thought I will be pretty sure of getting into with funding, in case things went badly with my higher preferences. You should always have a few of these. As it turned out, I was rejected by 2 of these schools, and of the 2 at which I was admitted, only one provided me with funding. Nothing is certain!
    Another thing to bear in mind is that there is nothing to guarantee admission to at least one school if you apply to a lot of them. Every year there are people who get rejected from every single school they apply to. This is simply meant to emphasise the point that it's good to have a fair spread of schools, rankings wise, if you're sure that you want to do a PhD in the coming year.

Randomness
    This is tied into the above point. I had heard many times that the application process was `random' and that I should apply to a lot of schools since you never know where you will and won't get in. I think until you see this in action, it doesn't quite sink in how true that is. You are extremely likely to get rejected from safety schools (as I was), and get into places that you didn't expect to get into (as I did). This seems to happen to everyone, so definitely allow for it. This is especially the case coming from an international university like the University of Melbourne. If we were at Princeton, there would be no risk for the admissions committee admitting strong students, because they know that top Princeton students are likely to excel anywhere. As it is, admissions committees are less familiar with Australian students, so there is a greater degree of risk for them in admitting someone coming from a program with which they are far less acquainted. This higher risk leads to a higher variance of results.

Where to Apply

    Because of the randomness element described above, it's always worth aiming for a few places ranked a little higher than you think you can get into. Alternatively, if you think you can get into the top places, then apply to all of them unless you think you won't go to one of them under any circumstances. It's easy to reject schools once you have your admissions, so leave that filtering to afterwards.
    With that said, one must also be reasonable with their expectations. Looking at resources such as past profiles of applicants on the TestMagic forums, and where they got in, is invaluable for getting a good gauge on where you should be aiming. And I will say it again: do not overlook the importance of `pedigree' -- that is, the advantage of coming from say a top 30 economics department as an undergraduate. Someone with a relatively mediocre profile, but for their great undergraduate university, will do just as well or better than a seemingly flawless applicant from an unknown university.

How to Choose between All Your Offers?

    I would have guessed, before this process started, that once you figure out a rough preference ordering of places when deciding where to apply, choosing a department once you get offers should be easy. Unless you are lucky enough to get into Harvard and nowhere else, the decision becomes infinitely tougher when you have actual offers on the table that you need to consider. For me, the choice was made based on the quality of the training provided (as evidenced by the quality of universities who have hired recent PhD graduates, amongst other things), my impression of the academic environment, and perhaps most importantly, the department's strength in my interests. Every department has strengths and weaknesses when compared to just about any other department you might care to name. What it should come down to is weighing up the benefits (and drawbacks) of each department, focussing on what you feel is most important to you. A lot of people prefer NYU and Columbia because they are in New York City, and would happily chose them over a better `academic' program for that fact. I think there is nothing wrong with this (though some people may scoff at the thought).

Flyouts

    One point which I wish I'd thought about before admissions decisions is whether to fly to the United States to visit prospective departments after I got my offers. All departments have a `visit day' where prospective students can come and talk to current graduate students and faculty about the program, have a look around, and get a general feel for the atmosphere of the place. Virtually all students in the United States will visit the departments they are strongly considering. I think there are good reasons to do that as an Australian student also: you're spending the next 5 years of your life at the department you choose, and it's worth it to visit on that basis, even if it is an expensive trip. Note that most departments will reimburse you between $300 and $600 for your effort if you come to their official visit day. If you have the time and money, and a few schools you cannot clearly decide between, I would say: do it.
    However, I did not visit any schools before deciding, perhaps only because I hadn't carefully considered this first and planned ahead. Even if you do think about this issue in advance, you may elect to do what I did. As a substitute to visiting in person I spoke over the phone to a number of faculty members and graduate students from the universities that I was considering. Schools should be happy to provide you with people to speak to, and indeed a number of very senior academics from various places I was admitted wrote to me voluntarily to see if I had questions and wanted to talk. On the other hand, one of the departments that I was considering made virtually no effort to get in touch or respond to my emails and calls, and it left a very poor impression -- if they can't respond to students they're trying to attract, how will they deal with students once they're in the program and require no more persuasion? Of course, it would be wrong to make a decision purely on this basis. In general, I felt that I was able to get a feel for the atmosphere of the places, as well as get all my questions answered, over the phone rather than in person. I am happy with the information I had available to me to make a final decision, and at least it's unlikely I'll ever have any way of knowing if I chose the wrong place!

Conclusion

    I won't lie: the application process is quite draining, and you will be extremely happy once it's over. Similarly, waiting for admissions decisions and subsequently trying to decide where to go may cause you to sleep a little less soundly for a couple of months. But the result at the end will hopefully make it all worthwhile! Good luck!