<p>^he's comparing the quality of Cornell econ to Dartmouth econ. i would say that the quality of education would be very close.</p>
<p>Cayugared2005. A top 20 econ department is still very good considering there are many hundreds of econ departments throughout the country.</p>
<p>kwu,</p>
<p>Having advanced/graduate level courses available to you is part of what "quality" is about.</p>
<p>
[quote]
For instance, UChicago is known to be a relatively easy program to get into. Much easier than Harvard or MIT or Berkeley. But that doesn't change the perceived quality of the graduate program at Chicago.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I am not so sure about this in terms of Chicago's desirability to students. Chicago has specifically adopted a policy of being easier to get into and then weeding out. I can only speak anecdotally, but friends who got in there and other top programs like Berkeley and Stanford chose to avoid Chicago because of its weeder philosophy.</p>
<p>Now, overall, we know Chicago has been a Nobel factory and all that. I wonder, though, how its professor placement record fares for graduates. I guess maybe if you make it that far, you must be good. And it must be hell to get there, not that the other programs are walks in the park.</p>
<p>I never suggested that Chicago was a more desirable program for prospective graduate students, I was just stating that it is indisputably a top ten program yet it has a much lower selectivity than other top graduate programs.</p>
<p>I was simply challenging lgellar's assertion that selectivity is the end-all, be-all of assessing a program.</p>
<p>you should be obsessed with the subject of economics if you want to go to UChicago (more geared towards hands on research)... if you want to learn economics and hop aboard the business train, HYPS and MIT will give you the education, the connections, and without a doubt- the name</p>
<p>
[quote]
So at the end of the day, for a student who is interested in exploring the field of economics, where might they be better off going?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>...Into Math.</p>
<p>OH JUST DROPPED SOME KNOWLEDGE ON YOU.</p>
<p>Any serious Economist interested in grad school takes rigorous Math courses in college. Hence, an Economics degree itself, can only help for industry related aspirations.</p>
<p>But then again, Economics at the UG level is all so trivial anyways that any differences in the quality of the material between different departments are virtually minute (unless you're like...at Caltech or something). Here, the brand name of the school matters (if you're looking to sell out).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Having advanced/graduate level courses available to you is part of what "quality" is about.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uh no...that hardly matters if you're looking at industry. Even if you're looking at grad school, having advanced Econ classes doesn't really matter all that much either (see above).</p>
<p>^having advanced classes can help you see what you're getting into.</p>
<p>they don't matter for grad school??
I'm pretty sure that econ grad schools look at the classes you take and the grades you get in them... am i missing something?</p>
<p>
[quote]
...Into Math.</p>
<p>OH JUST DROPPED SOME KNOWLEDGE ON YOU.</p>
<p>Any serious Economist interested in grad school takes rigorous Math courses in college. Hence, an Economics degree itself, can only help for industry related aspirations.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Please. I never said pursuing graduate study. I know full well that students seeking graduate study should be taking real analysis, theoretical probability, and the like. But we have never been talking about graduate study.</p>
<p>Again, my example was public finance and public economics. If a student is interested in exploring government finance and how government programs work and their implications, with a possible interest of pursuing a career in government, would they be better off at a school like Dartmouth -- which only offers one course in public economics -- or a school with much more breadth like a Chicago or Berkeley or Cornell? </p>
<p>
[quote]
But then again, Economics at the UG level is all so trivial anyways that any differences in the quality of the material between different departments are virtually minute (unless you're like...at Caltech or something). Here, the brand name of the school matters (if you're looking at selling out).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Agreed that quality differences are minute. But breadth is not.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Cayugared2005. A top 20 econ department is still very good considering there are many hundreds of econ departments throughout the country.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>True, but in graduate student circles it seems like there is a dramatic drop in placement outside the top ten. So it might not matter for undergrad, but it does matter for grad. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Cayuga, quality, not quantity.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I've worked in an office with Dartmouth, Cornell, Columbia, Harvard, Yale, Middlebury, NYU, UCSD, Northwestern, Colby, Williams, Wellesley, and Bard economics alums.</p>
<p>There is no difference in the quality of the undergraduate education at these schools, and others.</p>
<p>The classes that you take definitely matter for econ grad school. They even ask you what books you used. Being able to take a first-year graduate course while an undergrad gives you a tremendous leg up in the applications process for Econ PhD programs.</p>
<p>Well, Dartmouth has a pretty good Public Policy minor and a Rockefeller program that hands out D.C. internships like candy - so it's entirely unclear to me whether or not one would be better off at Cornell, etc. I've always felt that the types of classes that one takes doesn't really help a lot towards pursuing a career in government. After all, take a look at George Bush. I think the emphasis for government related economics is on connections, or college brand name.</p>
<p>
[quote]
they don't matter for grad school??
I'm pretty sure that econ grad schools look at the classes you take and the grades you get in them... am i missing something?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well...not exactly.</p>
<p>Take Ben Golub here on CC. He took maybe...1 Intermediate Micro class (and 2 other Econ classes in smaller Econ subfields) as an undergraduate, but he's now pursuing a PhD in Econ @ Stanford.</p>
<p>If you're looking into grad school for Econ, you should almost exclusively, be a Math major. Not having that 3rd Industrial Organization class will not hurt nearly as much as not having that class in Real or Functional Analysis.</p>
<p>If the best measure of a good program as how it plays to the crooks and charlatans on Wall Street, we are in a sad state of affairs.</p>
<p>The Rockefeller program at Dartmouth is excellent, as is Dartmouth's reputation in government circles... although the jury is still out on Paulson. </p>
<p>Again, I'm just speaking to the breadth of educational offerings and suggesting that at smaller schools with less comprehensive faculty students may find their options for further study limited by the time they reach their senior year.</p>
<p>Investment bankers at work--scroll down panels.</p>
<p>The</a> credit crisis explained in black and white - Telegraph</p>
<p>
[quote]
Uh no...that hardly matters if you're looking at industry. Even if you're looking at grad school, having advanced Econ classes doesn't really matter all that much either (see above).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>How about taking advanced classes for learning sake and intellectual pursuit? I'd hope some of us don't choose classes solely based on whether they matter in grad school admission or industry. Dartmouth is awesome but it's not for everybody and it's a fact that it's lacking in some area (whatever that is and every school is in the same situation) and that's okay. Nobody is perfect.</p>
<p>i agree with you, but if you want to get into a good grad school, you can't take classes blindly</p>
<p>the best institutions for economics are:</p>
<p>Harvard
LSE
UChicago
Yale
MIT</p>
<p>Harvard, LSE, and Yale are leading in all publishing rankings</p>