Twitter | Search | |
Μatthew Alampay Davis
Much of first-year macro could be moved to a second-year optional field course instead. I'm all for economists having a shared language established in first year, but seems implausible that the optimal core comes out to a perfectly even split between macro, micro, and metrics.
Reply Retweet Like More
Μatthew Alampay Davis Nov 30
Replying to @wmdecon
I posted this at 2am thinking the macro people would be asleep. Please call off your hit men.
Reply Retweet Like
Μatthew Alampay Davis Nov 30
Replying to @wmdecon
As a peace offering, I am willing to also lop off auction theory from micro.
Reply Retweet Like
Rui Mascarenhas Nov 30
Replying to @wmdecon
I’m obv biased but I think general equilibrium is an important part of that shared language. Agree with reformulating curriculum; disagree with some economists not being exposed to some macro tools
Reply Retweet Like
Rui Mascarenhas Nov 30
Replying to @wmdecon
I would keep the core micro and stats/metrics and add the following course Fall: dynamic programming + general eq. theory Spring: EITHER Macro I (w/ focus on history of ec thought) OR empirical methods + best practices for data science
Reply Retweet Like
Michael McMahon Nov 30
Replying to @wmdecon
Optimal for whom? For those that want to study GE and macro policy, you may want to delay some parts of metrics or micro. Given most don’t know precisely what they will want to study, probably optimal to expose to all and let them make (reversible) choices in year 2.
Reply Retweet Like
Μatthew Alampay Davis Nov 30
Replying to @mcmahonecon
To me, first-year is a normative judgment about what tools all econs should have regardless of field of study. I think a reduction in macro by a quarter or so would still be enough to cover GE and a reduced policy treatment that cuts off inessentials (e.g. ZLB+macrofinance, imo).
Reply Retweet Like
Marie Mora Nov 30
Replying to @wmdecon
I think the same thing about mathematical models in the Econ core, w/often more focus on math than Econ. Would be great to keep math Econ as a field but not have it detract from Econ, which can cause students to leave bc they’re not studying what excited them to pursue Econ PhD.
Reply Retweet Like
Μatthew Alampay Davis Nov 30
Replying to @Marietmora
I might have a hard time agreeing depending on what you mean.
Reply Retweet Like
Robert Tetlow Nov 30
Replying to @wmdecon
That's what public policy programs are for. Most of those are econ PhDs without the macro, with a sprinkle of political science added in. As best I can tell.
Reply Retweet Like
Matt Holt Nov 30
Replying to @BobTetlow @wmdecon
Finance PH.D.s too.
Reply Retweet Like