正式打算转商学院的PhD了

darcie

太搞笑了，不要总是这个大牛那个小牛，有点自己的独立观点好不好，比如he zhiguo, 确实是个star, 但他的两篇RFS文章基本是模仿，这两年合作不少发表不多，当然比咱们混饭吃的是好多了，尽管前途不确定。

还是回到lz的问题 ，搞搞本校的推荐信，wustl很不错了。  见过那边理科transfer成功的，转到金融也只是长征第一步，也许到头来只是回到零点也不是没可能，反正后面出路还是看个人努力。

liupingno0

Dybvig很强 DD bank run model啊，经典。lz加油！ 争取做neng wang no. 2哈哈

dandanapple

大家讨论了八页，都纠结在lz“应不应该转”，以及成为star的potential上。

所以lz放心好了，我也觉得你转系没什么问题，只在于学校好坏。

要不发信联系一下和你背景类似的中国faculty，问问他们意见？

howareyou123

其实我认为多数情况下人们没有必要转专业，行行出状元。
我自己就应该去搞物理研究，不知道怎么跑来申请商学院了，完全是阴差阳错。。。

bernanke

The fact that the earth rotates around sun is a conjecture in the first place. The data is there. Just look at the accounting and finance Chinese faculties in the top 20 programs who got their job after 2005 and see their background. I listed some examples above.
Also if you ask econ faculties whether being a job market star is more likely to become a leading scholar in the field and see what they says.

说了半天全市你自己conjecture，那就请不要上来就用statistics。

-- by 会员 xiaopanghu (2010/3/18 14:12:29)

bernanke

Papers may not be close to truth, but the truth is that Chinese faculties in top 20 accounting and finance programs are almost exclusively from econ, accounting and finance background. It's fairly straightforward and not difficult to check.

bernanke, if you have any serious research experience, you will understand that papers are not even close to the truth, rather, they just provide the authors' perspectives.

-- by 会员 desert2009 (2010/3/18 14:16:52)

bernanke

Not a big deal? I happen to know lots of people in top econ PhD programs and Chinese students rarely excel in those courses. In most top programs A is reserved for only a tiny portion of the students taking the course and I rarely see a lot Chinese getting As, regardless of their background. I am the exception, though.

you got be kidding us. 1st year macro and micro courses are not a big deal for people with scientific background, provided they are good at what they are doing. They can easily make up the economic background via personal reading. You will find that out If you have taken any serious econ courses.

-- by 会员 desert2009 (2010/3/18 14:12:32)

neo1001

人家问的是转商学院的问题, 跟这些star的出身有什么关系? 要是每个人都是star的话, 那就没有star了
我也不赞成纯粹跟风地去转学科, 读PhD毕竟不是一两年的事, 兴趣也很重要. 但是人毕竟是人, 现实的问题必须考虑. 况且, 谁说人一定要第一次就把方向找准了? 一来不是所有人都那么幸运, 二来世界总在变, 我们自己也在变, 对于将来, who knows? 当然有人会认同这种转方向的做法, 有人不会认同, but so what? 你不可能让所有人认同你, 让他们说去好了.
另外, 关于statistics, 现在的finance prof或job market star多数是有传统的background, 从这个你能推断什么? nothing. 套用我一个prof经常说的一句话 "I would be surprised if this is not the case." 数理化教育的主要目的本来就不是去提供人才给商学院. finance的prof本来就应该是大多都来自econ和finance. 要硬说数理化的转金融不成功, 再怎么也得有个benchmark来比较吧?

bernanke

Seriously speaking, most research are imitation. You can say Krugman imitates Dixit's research, but that imitation got the Nobel Prize.

太搞笑了，不要总是这个大牛那个小牛，有点自己的独立观点好不好，比如he zhiguo, 确实是个star, 但他的两篇RFS文章基本是模仿，这两年合作不少发表不多，当然比咱们混饭吃的是好多了，尽管前途不确定。

还是回到lz的问题 ，搞搞本校的推荐信，wustl很不错了。  见过那边理科transfer成功的，转到金融也只是长征第一步，也许到头来只是回到零点也不是没可能，反正后面出路还是看个人努力。

-- by 会员 darcie (2010/3/18 14:42:41)

bernanke

Here is a benchmark. one of Zhiguo He's colleagues from Northwestern who had a physics background cannot land a job in the U.S. and went back to PKU.

人家问的是转商学院的问题, 跟这些star的出身有什么关系? 要是每个人都是star的话, 那就没有star了
我也不赞成纯粹跟风地去转学科, 读PhD毕竟不是一两年的事, 兴趣也很重要. 但是人毕竟是人, 现实的问题必须考虑. 况且, 谁说人一定要第一次就把方向找准了? 一来不是所有人都那么幸运, 二来世界总在变, 我们自己也在变, 对于将来, who knows? 当然有人会认同这种转方向的做法, 有人不会认同, but so what? 你不可能让所有人认同你, 让他们说去好了.
另外, 关于statistics, 现在的finance prof或job market star多数是有传统的background, 从这个你能推断什么? nothing. 套用我一个prof经常说的一句话 "I would be surprised if this is not the case." 数理化教育的主要目的本来就不是去提供人才给商学院. finance的prof本来就应该是大多都来自econ和finance. 要硬说数理化的转金融不成功, 再怎么也得有个benchmark来比较吧?

-- by 会员 neo1001 (2010/3/18 23:24:53)