Top news video

Facebook friend Gabriel Mihalache is starting his first year in a Ph.D. programme in economics and is currently attending "math camp"? My former professor Eclectecon gives a terrific description of math camp: "Gabriel writes that he has started attending "math camp" at Clemson this week. For those who are not on speaking terms with with the rituals of economics graduate programmes, "math posture" refers to a short surely in advanced mathematics that all incoming graduate students are required to take, generally before the formal economics courses begin, at many top economics schools, including The University of Western Ontario and, apparently, Clemson University." Eclectecon is not a buff of math camp: "The problem is that in graduate economics programmes, we must learned that the surest way to enjoy students churn out dissertations that might lead to some piddly publications is to admit math and science majors who know little or no economics. These students excel at math and do not need a "math camp". But they don’t know any economics."

"If we are going to require incoming graduate students to take "math camp", then it is even more important that we require them to take "Alchian and Allen" lodge; more than math prance, we should give them a two-week course "the economic way of thinking." I cannot disagree more with Eclectecon on replacing math camp with a flamboyant on "the economic way of thinking". Grad School Economics is About Math, Not Economics I completed an honours undergraduate degree in Economics from the University of Western Ontario (UWO) and generally did quite well. I was even awarded a gold medal as a top graduating student.

How much did this help me in my efforts as a Ph.D. students in economics? None. Or at least, profoundly little. Other than some econometrics, everything I learned as an undergraduate was completely an utterly worthless in my Ph.D. courses and research. My grades (and reference letters) from my undergraduate economics work got me into the Ph.D program, so it was valuable that way. But as far as measure ingredients I could use in the Ph.D. programme – I would have been no further behind if I had majored in Phys. Ed instead.

I do not mean to suggest the undergraduate program in Economics at UWO is a poor one – in episode it is most without equal and I would propose it to anyone. The material I learned there has been invaluable in working for About.com, in doing a Ph.D. in Business Administration and in my occupation is an entrepreneur. But if you know you want to do a Ph.D. in Economics, the more courses in pure mathematics (particularly real analysis) and the less courses in economics you take as an undergraduate, the better off you will be.

If we want Ph.D. students to succeed in their programs, we need math camp, not less.

The issue Eclectecon has – the fact that a Ph.D. observer in economics can embellishment despite knowing absolutely nothing far economics is an issue that goes well beyond the first off two weeks before a Ph.D. programme; I would argue it drawn goes well beyond Ph.D. programmes themselves. Until the day comes when first-tier economics journals start publishing papers that have more to do with economics than they have to do with real analysis, Ph.D. students in economics will be mathematicians first and economists second.