MA Economics that is not maths heavy

Diamondsandrose

I'm currently pursuing an undergraduate degree that is 1/3 economics and am interested in pursuing a masters but maths is not my strong point and I worry I would be unable for it at a level 9. Would courses like the MA in business economics in UCC be better? http://www.ucc.ie/en/ckl06/

Iwasfrozen

I don't mean to put you off but I think you'll struggle in any Economics MA if you're not good at maths.

andrew

Diamondsandrose wrote: »

I'm currently pursuing an undergraduate degree that is 1/3 economics and am interested in pursuing a masters but maths is not my strong point and I worry I would be unable for it at a level 9. Would courses like the MA in business economics in UCC be better? http://www.ucc.ie/en/ckl06/

I'm in a similar position, though in the sense that while my degree had plenty of Economics, I probably didn't do enough mathematics. For the sake of enabling you to make a comparison: I've taken 1st and 2nd year maths & stats courses, a 3rd year Econometrics course, and a 4th year Course in Game Theory. This is in addition to other generally maths-y courses, which were mathematical but where the emphasis isn't on the maths per se. I'm also planning on doing an Msc. soon, and know many people who have done an Msc.

So, my 2c, is that if your course is only 1/3 Economics, you very likely haven't done enough Maths for an Economics masters (or at least, not an Economics masters). The way I see it, you have a few options:

1. Do an Economics masters anyway - assuming you get accepted into one. Masters courses often feature intensive maths courses in advance of the course proper, which provide an opportunity to catch up. However, you'd need to be realistic about your ability to absorb a lot of new maths, and your willingness to put in a lot of time doing maths. It'd be really difficult, and you'd want to have a decent level of mathematical ability. You say you don't, so you'd probably want to avoid this option.

2. Take a year out, and spend some time getting your maths up to scratch in advance of the masters. This is what I've done, because I know the courses I've mentioned above aren't nearly enough in order to prepare for a masters. Between free online videos such as Khan academy, downloadable books, various diplomas etc, you could easily get your maths up to scratch if you like, at low or 0 cost. You could also work while doing this; perhaps you could find an employer who'd pay for a masters.

3. Do a different masters (which you've mentioned.) There are also masters' in Economic policy which you might consider. Be aware though, that employers may not consider such a masters as a substitute for an Economics masters. If you just want a masters for the sake of having one and don't plan on doing economic research, this is fine. But if you want to be an Economist, then you'll need a masters in Economics.

An important caveat here is that Economics masters' vary in their mathematical content. For example, I know that the Trinity masters is quite maths-y. A good thing to do would be to attend the office hours of the people teaching on the masters course. They'd be able to tell you exactly the level of maths required.

Diamondsandrose

andrew wrote: »

I'm in a similar position, though in the sense that while my degree had plenty of Economics, I probably didn't do enough mathematics. For the sake of enabling you to make a comparison: I've taken 1st and 2nd year maths & stats courses, a 3rd year Econometrics course, and a 4th year Course in Game Theory. This is in addition to other generally maths-y courses, which were mathematical but where the emphasis isn't on the maths per se. I'm also planning on doing an Msc. soon, and know many people who have done an Msc.

So, my 2c, is that if your course is only 1/3 Economics, you very likely haven't done enough Maths for an Economics masters (or at least, not an Economics masters). The way I see it, you have a few options:

1. Do an Economics masters anyway - assuming you get accepted into one. Masters courses often feature intensive maths courses in advance of the course proper, which provide an opportunity to catch up. However, you'd need to be realistic about your ability to absorb a lot of new maths, and your willingness to put in a lot of time doing maths. It'd be really difficult, and you'd want to have a decent level of mathematical ability. You say you don't, so you'd probably want to avoid this option.

2. Take a year out, and spend some time getting your maths up to scratch in advance of the masters. This is what I've done, because I know the courses I've mentioned above aren't nearly enough in order to prepare for a masters. Between free online videos such as Khan academy, downloadable books, various diplomas etc, you could easily get your maths up to scratch if you like, at low or 0 cost. You could also work while doing this; perhaps you could find an employer who'd pay for a masters.

3. Do a different masters (which you've mentioned.) There are also masters' in Economic policy which you might consider. Be aware though, that employers may not consider such a masters as a substitute for an Economics masters. If you just want a masters for the sake of having one and don't plan on doing economic research, this is fine. But if you want to be an Economist, then you'll need a masters in Economics.

An important caveat here is that Economics masters' vary in their mathematical content. For example, I know that the Trinity masters is quite maths-y. A good thing to do would be to attend the office hours of the people teaching on the masters course. They'd be able to tell you exactly the level of maths required.

Thanks for the reply, I think a masters in public/economic policy would suit me, tbh I am more interested in the macro side. Also you are right, a bit of direct research really is required on finding out the mathematical content. The problem is I find myself quite average at maths i.e. I am doing well with the maths side at undergraduate level just not sure how hard it could get in a masters (didn't do honors for the leaving).

andrew

Diamondsandrose wrote: »

i.e. I am doing well with the maths side at undergraduate level just not sure how hard it could get in a masters (didn't do honors for the leaving).

I also didn't do honours for the leaving either - dropped down to pass at the end of 5th year. Did you find ordinary level difficult at all? Did you do ordinary level due to a tactical decision, or a bad teacher, or because you have always done ordinary level? It might be that you're actually not as bad as maths as you think (having done fine with the maths side of things so far), and could get up to scratch with a bit of self directed study.

Hillmanhunter1

I don't think you'll find an MA in Economics that isn't Maths-heavy, and if you want to be taken seriously as an economist you need an MA in Economics. If however you want to operate in the area of public administration and/or public policy (including economic policy) you don't really need an MA in Economics. For example, this is a part-time course that many senior public servants take:
https://www.tcd.ie/Economics/postgraduate/msc-economic-policy-studies/

Hasschu

What you will run up against is what is known in academia as a weeder course. For the last fifty years or so Economics has donned the coat of respectability provided by the aura of "hard science" meaning Math and Physics. The weeder in economics would usually be Math, in Medicine and Nutrition it is usually organic chemistry or organic biology, in engineering it is usually Physics. Economic modelling tools are built by Physicists and Mathematicians.

A good understanding of economics can be had by studying Politics, Commerce and History. Add an ability to use the tools which are available in banking, gov't and academia and you would be miles ahead of what today are referred to as the idiot savants. Sad but true.