<p>I wrote a thread a few weeks ago comparing Michigan and LSE for a grad degree in International Relations. Since then I have had the chance to e-mail students currently in the master's IR program at LSE and I have been getting some surprising (or disturbing to me) results. It seems like a good number of the American students there don't believe the program is worth the money and feel like they aren't learning anything. Here is what one student had to say-</p>
<p>"My advice as a fellow American is to attend school in the States. LSE is a world renowned institution that will look fantastic on a resume, there's no doubt about that. But, I honestly feel like I haven't learned anything that will be of use in a career focusing on IR."</p>
<p>Is this true? Is LSE really not as great as it sounds? I am beginning to hear this more and more and am wondering if it's true. Please post with comments and questions.</p>
<p>I really like it. I don't do IR but I heard good things about it from my friends. Also heard really good things about History of IR. My friends in IR are American and Canadian.</p>
<p>I'm doing the MSc history of IR next year; all the alumni I managed to get a hold of (through unofficial channels of course) have nothing but positive things to say about it. I'm really looking forward to it next year.</p>
<p>In my experience at the LSE (in the economics department) you only get out of it what you put into to it - if you hope to be spoon fed it'll be a disaster. If you put yourself about it can be extraordinary - I was happy to get a $100 parking fine simply to continue a great discussion I was having with a professor.</p>
<p>I also found the same thing. There are those who really get involved and then there are those who just come in to the few hours a week of classes.</p>
<p>You had to oay a 100 fine plus the congestion charge!! That sucks.</p>
<p>That is a very good point about getting out what you put into it. I feel that this is the case with most things, but especially grad school at LSE. </p>
<p>The only other sort of negative thing I have heard about the school is that it is too "theory heavy." This may be fine for people looking to go into academia, but for those of us looking to find work after, I don't know exactly how beneficial it would be. </p>
<p>Also, I don't know if any of you are familiar with the grad program, but all it takes is 3 classes total and writing a thesis to graduate. I just hope this enough to really learn some things about IR. Although, I could always just attend some of the other classes LSE offers for free to enrolled students. Still working on that final decision...</p>
<p>Icblatnik- we were just talking about this issue today in class, albeit in more general terms. Your question is a nice real world example of the contrast between human capital theory and the screening hypothesis.</p>
<p>Human capital theory: Education adds to the human capital of the individual, making him or her more productive in his or her future work. The resulting higher productivity allows the worker to command a higher wage.</p>
<p>The screening hypothesis: Education does not make the individual significantly more productive, but rather acts as a signal to employers that the person is smart enough to learn and be good at the assigned job. The academic qualification thus acts as a certification of ability to learn, allowing the worker to command a higher wage.</p>
<p>If you believe in human capital theory, you should go to Michigan because you will learn more, thus adding more to your human capital, which will make you more productive in your future work and allow you to command a higher wage. </p>
<p>If you believe in the screening hypothesis, you should go to LSE because the perceived selectivity of the school sends a more powerful signal than does Michigan. The LSE certification of ability to learn will allow you to command a higher wage even though you will be no more productive as a result of having attended.</p>
<p>Which one is right? It isn't clear. My take is that in certain fields, such as engineering, education does lead to higher productivity. In other fields such as finance, it doesn't; education is used as signal more than anything else, which would explain why firms are willing to entrust millions of dollars in assets to Harvard graduates, even if that person's degree was in a totally unrelated subject that requires a completely different skill set.</p>
What you've pointed out here is a fundamental difference between PhD programs in the US and the UK. The large course requirement for PhD programs in the US is due to the fact that most students join the program straight out of undergrad, whereas in the UK it is not the norm to join PhD programs out of undergrad, but rather after a Master's Degree.</p>
<p>Yes, I was speaking to a master's program...not a Phd. </p>
<p>Nauru, as far as human capital theory and the screening hypothesis. I believe that they are probably both important on some level. I am not really sure which I favor overall. I guess learning more is always good...but one could make the argument that one would get a better "cultural" education at LSE, that one would not get at Michigan. So that is another factor to add to the equation.</p>
<p>I just found out my housing situation at LSE today and I was offered a place in Northumberland House. I'm pretty excited about this. Any one have any idea if it's any good? It's was opened in 2006 so I'm assuming the facilities are still pretty new and clean.</p>
<p>Never actualy been inside Nortumberland but it is supposed to be very nice and a fun dorm. It's also really close to the LSE (about 10 min walking) and just around the corner from Trafalgar Square.</p>
<p>lol st andrews you mean... (is there a university called st thomas?)</p>
<p>Still deciding. LSE is now harassing me via email trying to make me hurry up. Warwick and Edinburgh are also on the table. I'm going to visit LSE and Warwick next week so we'll see what happens.</p>
<p>Everybody is telling me I should go to LSE even if would be for an MSc in Basket Weaving. That includes people with experience in the industry in which I want to work, and current profs. I'll admit it's having a strong effect.</p>