What would you guys say are the best undergraduate economics programs?
Pre-PhD or pre-professional?
Economics as an undergraduate major has a fairly standard set of core major courses (introductory economics, intermediate microeconomics, intermediate macroeconomics, econometrics), but different schools can vary on how math intensive their courses are (ranging from no calculus to multivariable calculus and/or linear algebra as prerequisites for these courses, plus statistics prerequisites that may be non-calculus-based or calculus-based). Elective economics courses can indicate what kind of topical emphasis each department has.
A good pre-PhD economics program will have more math-intensive core major courses and elective major courses, as well as good offerings in math and statistics (see https://www.econ.berkeley.edu/undergrad/current/preparing-for-grad-school for suggested preparation for PhD study). A good pre-professional economics program will be at a school that is well recruited for the type of employment you seek, and offer electives of your interest.
Williams
Wellesley
Middlebury
Wesleyan
Hamilton
Colgate
Claremont McKenna
Harvard
MIT
Princeton
UC-Berkeley
UChicago
Stanford
NYU
Additional schools with excellent programs might include Columbia, Yale, Northwestern, Cornell, Duke and Brandeis.
Michigan’s Economics department is stellar and unusually undergraduate friendly. Minnesota, UCLA, UCSD and Wisconsin are all excellent as well. If I had to distinguish between tier one departments (keeping in mind that this is just one person’s opinion, and that the distinctions are indeed infinitesimal), I would go with the following order:
Chicago
Harvard
MIT
Princeton
Stanford
Berkeley
Northwestern
Yale
Columbia
Penn
Brown
Carnegie Mellon
Cornell
Duke
Michigan-Ann Arbor
NYU
Johns Hopkins
Minnesota-Twin Cities
Rochester
UCLA
UCSD
Wisconsin-Madison
Boston University
Maryland-College Park
UNC-Chapel Hill
UT-Austin
UVa
WUSTL
As far as LACs go, there are many that have truly stellar departments. Among them:
Amherst
Bowdoin
Claremont McKenna
Colgate
Davidson
Hamilton
Haverford
Macalester
Middlebury
Richmond
Vassar
Wesleyan
Williams
Wellesley. And all the others mentioned too. In fact I’m trying to think of a top 50 or even top 100 school with a bad Econ department, recognizing that some are stronger in certain strains/subsections of that discipline.
Penn State and Florida State economics is math-light; the intermediate economics courses do not even use calculus (although Penn State has an honors version that does use single variable calculus), and calculus is not a requirement for the major at those schools. So they may not be particularly good choices for a pre-PhD economics major.
There are non-infinitesimal distinctions between the departments in curricula and courses. The variations that may matter to the student include the math intensity and what kinds of in-major elective economics courses are offered.
Totally agree with @ucbalumnus . It depends on your objectives. Some programs are great prep for PhDs, some are great prep for working in finance, some have formal ties to other departments making them ideal for someone interested in public policy, health care, etc. “Best” depends on your interest as well as how you like to learn. I would read the course catalog and major requirements carefully.
I was referring to the quality of the departments UCB, not to their respective curriculums. In other words, to the faculty and the depth and breadth of their undergraduate curriculums. You are quite correct in saying that different programs offer varying levels of quantitative intensity. That being said, most of the universities listed in my post above have the resources and curricular options to allow undergrads to make take as quantitative an approach as they please, which is what makes them the best…in my opinion. Undergrads pursuing a PhD track, which seldom numbers of 10 students per graduating class, are often allowed to take graduate level classes as well. I personally took a couple of graduate level classes when I was an undergrad.
Naturally, none of that applies to the LACs.
Re #6, the schools used as examples may not be within the top 100 nationally by objective standards:
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-610-smartest-colleges-in-america-2015-9
Only if your ranking is purely by students’ SAT scores.
The case, which wouldn’t be particularly my case, would not be based purely on scores. The estimation relies more on the range of where a school may fall when looked at through scores. So a school outside the top 200 by scores (as in post #6), would not be an obvious candidate as an example of a top 50-100 school.