- UID
- 571752
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2010-10-7
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
http://www.quantnet.com/forum/threads/some-truth-about-the-columbia-msor.1358/page-3#post-15956上面的，08年，很长，有很多讨论，最重要的一个帖子粘贴如下：
So midterms are over and people are beginning to worry about finishing up term projects and final exams here in sunny Morningside Heights. It's weird to think that I'm almost half-way done with a master's degree in operations research considering I still don't know all that much about this boringly-named subject. I think that's a good segue into what I wanted to say this afternoon on this thread. I hadn't posted anything in a while since there weren't many other helpful facts I could dig up to provide about the programs here at Columbia that everyone seems to be so concerned about: the MSOR, MSFE, and MAFN. But this has changed now that I have been here for three months. Here is what I have learned since being here to help all those applying for next year:
1) All three programs are the same. Read that again. All three programs are the same. Now I know you're going to quote coursework on me, but I'm just telling you like it is. Considering the state of the economy (which I'll talk about in a minute), I was thinking of doing the MAFN program next year to complement my skill-set learned in the MSOR. After all, mathematical finance is totally different from operations research, they're even in different departments at Columbia. Right? *Buzzer sounds* Wrong. I emailed with the director of the MAFN, Mikhail Smirnov of the math department, to find out about the admissions process to the program because I figured I could get away with having the IEOR (industrial engineering and operations research) department just forward the math department my application materials and have an easy worry-free acceptance. The response I got was as follows: we do not accept Columbia master's students because there is too much overlap in the coursework. "[Y]ou already have [a] quantitative masters from Columbia for your resume". I was pretty surprised at the time, but didn't mind all that much because the truth is I probably wouldn't learn all that much from the MAFN after having taken the MSOR. The absolute truth of the matter is that the programs are so similar and are only interpreted as different because of the names. I suppose the MAFN has more statistics, but come on people. Some examples are: Stochastic Processes (math) = Stochastic Models (IEOR), Intro to Mathematical Finance (math) = Intro to Financial Engineering (IEOR). Oh, there's Numerical Methods in Finance and Stochastic Methods in finance offered for the MAFN, but you can just take them for your MSOR if you want. It's the same. I'm taking a MAFN class right now called Quantitative Methods in Investment Management. It's a good time: my group members are one MSOR, one MAFN, and one M.S. in Electrical Engineering. You come to Columbia for a "quantitative masters" and you are essentially given free reign to do whatever you want, essentially making all three programs the same. (You can even take courses in international relations if it suits your fancy, but that you'd probably have to explain to anyone who looks at your transcript.) I know I didn't talk about how MSOR and MSFE are the same, and the reason for that is because once you study here in the IEOR department for any reasonable amount of time, it is just so overwhelmingly apparent that it feels almost silly to write about. The IEOR department tries to make it look like MSFE students are given preference over and more respect than MSOR students, and as a lowly MSOR student (which is ludicrous already as a lot of us here simply liked the MSOR program better and decided to apply for this one over the MSFE), you actually believe it for about a month or so. But it's simply not true. At the end of the day, you get to take all the same classes (I don't care what the website says, this is the real deal), you get all the same interviews (yes, we do, I'm living proof), and you are treated the same by professors. The only people who seem to enjoy providing you with an inferiority complex are the IEOR administration and admissions people. I have to believe that this is just how they are promoting the programs in order to make it seem like the MSFE is made up of only demigod students and to become more well known as a leader in the field. I suppose it's a way to differentiate. But it's just not how it really is. We are looked at the same by professors and recruiters alike. It's just an excuse for Columbia to admit more students who all want to study the same stuff. If you only have one degree program, you can only admit so many people before it looks weird. But if you have three, then you get three times the tuition. Don't argue with that logic; I'm in a quantitative master's degree program at Columbia.
2) I figured I should give an update about what the job market looks like for everyone. It's bad. It's really, really, really bad. If you're looking for a job right now you know what I mean. If you're not in the job market and you're trying to imagine what's going on with on-campus recruitment right now, it is absolute lunacy. It is madness. There are firms with hiring freezes that show up to interview students just because they want to make it look like they are healthy on all fronts, and then of course don't hire ANY. I want to emphasize one thing though. It is horrific for EVERYONE. It is bad for the undergrads, the MSOR, MSFE, MAFN, and the MBAs alike. You get to chat with people close to you in line to interview, and they come from all three programs. There doesn't seem to be any discernible pattern in who gets more interviews. I don't think I've heard of even one person in any program landing a full-time offer. I mean, there probably are a few, but clearly not many. That said, I have final rounds coming up with a truly top notch investment firm (can't name because that might ruin my whole anonymous thing, but just trust me), and if I get it I will do cartwheels down 120th street in front of the Mudd building and then sing praises to the demigod FE students. More applicable to this discussion, though, I have never had an interviewer ask me why OR and not FE. All that matters to them is the coursework, which you can make the same (or splash in some "mathematical finance" or some finance from the business school to look extra suave), that you list on your resume. And your grades of course matter, but the beauty of the MSOR is that you don't have any grades yet while you're applying for jobs, assuming you're completing it in two semesters. Then again, maybe you want your grades up because the grade inflation here is truly remarkable. Especially the business school, they distribute A+s (yes, you can have a 4.3 here) in a manner that I believe was inspired by how crack was handed out in nearby Harlem in the late 1980s.
So, in conclusion, it really doesn't matter which program you do. Just get here any way you can, because it's a much better place to be than in a job right now, and don't be disheartened if you're "only" accepted into the MSOR program. Take the courses that are relevant to what you want to do and then go after it and everyone appreciates you for it.
Good luck to everyone out there, lord knows we all need it.
归纳一下，主要就是说MSFE，MSOR和MAFN的主要差别就是在admission，也就是咱们现在处在的这个环节上，进去之后要找工作主要还是靠自己努力，拿的interview都是差不多的，课程结构也差不多。
转帖而已，不是自己的意见，不过我倒是十分相信事在人为这句话。个人目前也在纠结Columbia的MAFN，Oxford的MFE和LSE的Msc F。十分能接受回国工作，所以比较看得开吧。很喜欢牛津的校园。 |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-4-2 13:15:37
收藏
收藏
楼主
