How to maximize my chances of getting admission to a particular graduate program despite a low GPA?

October 27, 2007 5:19 PM

I am applying to the London School of Economics (Econ-Msc:2 years) program this year. Unfortunately, I only have a 3.2/4 GPA. Hence, I was hoping if I could receive suggestions as to how I can maximize my chances of getting into the program ...

My current goal in life is to become an Economics professor at a prestigious graduate school whilst doing research in Development Economics. From what I know so far, it is impossible to do so until and unless you get a Ph.D. in Economics from an equally prestigious graduate program (Top 15). Gaining admittance into a Top 15 program for me, at the moment, is out of question due to my low GPA (3.2/4) and math deficiency (I just meet the min. requirements).

For someone like me, it appears that the only way of gaining admission at a Top 15 Econ Phd program is by attending and excelling at the Msc Econ program at the London School of Economics. Hence, I am really determined in doing so. Unfortunately, however, I fear that my low GPA (3.2/4) would get me rejected at the London School of Economics.

I truly believe that, if provided the opportunity, I can excel at the Msc program. Apart from the GPA, my application will be strong in other aspects: GRE - 770/540/5, great letters of recommendation from Professors with whom I have done independent research (one of them is extremely well published), junior/senior year GPA of 3.5/4, and a lot of meaningful independent research experience pertaining to Development Economics.

Hence, I was hoping to receive suggestions as to how I can gain admission to the program despite my low GPA ... I am willing to go to any lengths to attend this program ... even take out loans for it ....

Any comments and suggestions would be forever appreciated.

p.s. My undergraduate institution has a huge grade deflation and the average GPA is around 2.8. This partly explains the reason behind my low GPA.

posted by Batman2743 to education (16 comments total)

The application page for your course says that a first-class honours degree is the minimum entry requirement. In the American grading system, I imagine this corresponds to 3.5+. As a guide, approximately the top 20% of students in the UK get a first. Were you in the top 20% at your college?

Bearing in mind that LSE admits 145 people from 1,115 applicants for this course alone, I'd suggest you ring up the LSE admissions office and ask how many students they've admitted in previous years with <3.5 GPAs. I don't want to be negative, but if they say they haven't admitted any, I'd suggest cutting your losses and going with your Plan B. If they say you still have a realistic chance, great! Either way, best of luck to you.
posted by Aloysius Bear at 5:37 PM on October 27, 2007 [1 favorite has favorites]

Are you an American? My girlfriend is getting her BSc in economics from Warwick and has the same plan on pursuing a PhD. Her advisors say she has good chances to get into an MSc program at Oxbridge or LSE, but that it'd be a better idea to go for an MSc program in Canada if she wants to eventually do a PhD in the US. They said US admissions committees would generally be more familiar with Canadian schools, that the profs would have better knowledge of each other - and that it'd be a lot cheaper to boot! Maybe you should keep our friendly northern neighbors in mind when applying for master's programs, eh?
posted by pravit at 5:59 PM on October 27, 2007

US admissions committees would generally be more familiar with Canadian schools

More familiar than LSE? Not likely.
More familiar than Warwick? Yes. Oxford, Cambridge, LSE have cachet in US academics; other British schools are much more chancy.
posted by LobsterMitten at 6:14 PM on October 27, 2007

As to the actual question:
Do your professors have any advice for you about how to get into LSE, or about what your fallback plan should be if you can't get in?

Maybe you could do an extra year of undergraduate math, to burnish your profile, and apply again? I would think a competitive economics program would be pretty rough going if you are not comfortable with the math.

Something else to think about: again and again you mention the importance of prestige in your goals. Now is the time to start thinking about what you really need to do the work you want to do. That is, try to reduce the importance of one-size-fits-all prestige in your mind. Many bright and ambitious students focus too exclusively on rankings and so on, but once you're actually in a position to enter academia, what will matter is how well prepared you are to do very high quality research, and getting a position that will allow you to do the work you want (and live in a place you like etc). Thinking that you will only be happy if you can get a job at a top-tier research university is a recipe for complete misery and a nervous breakdown at 30. You can work your way up from a second-tier grad school if your research is good enough, and even doing research at a second or third tier school might be a great outcome for you if it allows you to do the projects you want to do.

As you think about this, be sure that the baseline of your thinking is flexibility: I'd like to get into LSE, but many different outcomes this year will still enable me to pursue the things that really matter to me.
posted by LobsterMitten at 6:25 PM on October 27, 2007 [3 favorites has favorites]

I have a British MA and am now getting an American PhD (and I'm an American citizen). It was fast, which was good, but it was expensive. Looking back on it, I sorta wished I hadn't shelled out the cash to live in London for a year to get that MA. Although I LOVED London, that was $40k or so in debt that I could have saved by going to a funded MA/PhD combo program. I saved a year of my life, sure, but if you have a good GPA in your econ course and since you have a fine GRE score, why not apply to funded American Econ MA programs (and there are some) and then go to a funded PhD? Or better yet, why not apply to a join program?
posted by k8t at 6:39 PM on October 27, 2007

Monica Lewinsky just graduated from LSE. Is that relevant to your situation? Maybe. I don't konw what her grades were like, but she didn't have a stellar reputation to get her in there. She either had really outstanding grades or they were impressed by her entrepreneurial initiative.

You really should beef up your resume with some work experience, writing, etc. If you're willing to do anything to get into the program, taking out loans is the least of your problems. Most student--at least in the U.S.--take out loans. You have to make yourself more attractive to the admissions person/committee/department.
posted by HotPatatta at 6:39 PM on October 27, 2007

I have to comment on the Canadian suggestion. Canadian baccalaureate programs are not equivalent to US baccalaureate programs. I don't know if that holds true for graduate programs. Non-US transcripts must be professionally evaluated and that can cost around $250-$300. If the OP decides on an out of country degree program, please factor in the cost of translating transcripts as well as the unpleasant reality that the degree may not be recognized for full value at the next school. A student I am familiar with has a biology BS degree from Canada that was only found to be equivalent to 2.5 years of a US BS program when professionally evaluated.
posted by 45moore45 at 6:58 PM on October 27, 2007

LSE's econ program is tough to get in to, but some of their other Taught MAs aren't so tough.

My UK transcript has a second page that explains the grading system.
posted by k8t at 8:34 PM on October 27, 2007

The GRE scores are fine but your GPA shows a lack of discipline and/or attention to your studies. That's how admissions staff at any school will see it. Beefing up your resume with solid work experience and perhaps some published research will help, but top programs like LSE, Harvard, MIT, McGill, etc. are concerned with scholarship and little else.

Perhaps you should set your sights a little lower. To achieve what you have outlined would be very difficult if you have not spent a lifetime preparing. And even if you could get in to the LSE, which you almost assuredly cannot, a phd from an Ivy league college will not get you close to a tenured position at a prestigious university. A lifetime of scholarship, research, and and contribution to your field will be the only thing that qualifies you for a post such as the one you describe and even then it will take a lifetime of politicking to gain tenure in even a third rate economics program.

I hate to be such a downer, but you need to hear this. You should apply to the best programs you think you can get in to. But be realistic. If you excel, even in a not-so "prestigious" program, make the right connections, and have an opportunity to contribute to meaningful published work in your field then you can get in any program in the country.

Good luck in the dismal science. Oh, also I'm not sure what you mean by a "math deficiency" but if you're struggling with the mathematics yet excelling with economic theory, might I suggest political economy? Less mathematically rigorous and right up your ally if you have taken a liking to development issues.
posted by willie11 at 9:19 PM on October 27, 2007

BTW, since you're interested in Development Economics, may I recommend the MA in Development at SOAS? The Econ was SERIOUS there! It may not lead to a career in academia, but you'll be able to get into with your GPA for sure.
posted by k8t at 10:05 PM on October 27, 2007

Canadian baccalaureate programs are not equivalent to US baccalaureate programs.

This may be true in one particular case. (Bible college? Diploma mill? Community college? Non-science stream within BS?) However, it is not typically true. Students in my graduating class had no problem gaining admission to Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, etc.
posted by acoutu at 10:17 PM on October 27, 2007

You may be too worried about your GPA. Mine was worse than yours, by a lot, and I had no problem getting into top graduate programs. If your college has big grade deflation policies, they should have a standard letter that you can include with your applications explaining why your GPA is lower than the kids coming out of Yale. If there is no standard letter available, you need to write one and include it with your applications. Don't be whiny and apologetic -- you are explaining why you are a good applicant, not why they should take pity on you.

The math deficiency may be a big deal, though -- all the econ people I know are super fluent in mathematics. A year studying high-level math may be of more use to you than an expensive stay at LSE -- you should talk to some people at the kind of grad programs you hope to attend to see what the real story is.

Also, in a lot of fields (but econ may be different), if you are interested in international development you really need a couple of years out there actually doing development work to be considered to have much credibility. If you are a US citizen, the Peace Corps is a good option; don't be shy about using family or other connections, too, to set something up. Again, you need to go and talk directly with some people who are doing what you want to be doing to see what your best options might be.
posted by Forktine at 2:07 AM on October 28, 2007

I think you may be being overly worrying about the need to be in a top 15 institution from the start. It's quite possible to get into a pretty good institution for your MSc/MA, perform well and parlay that up to access to a program at a better institution for PhD entry, then to access somewhere else for your postdoc. You enhance your chances by working hard, producing the goods research wise and getting to know the right people. Have a good MSc dissertation to show round to potential PhD supervisors, go to conferences and try to meet potential supervisors - to talk about their work, (ask intelligent questions, relate it to what you want to do, etc).
Competition for PhD slots can be open (if a prof has some research funding to spend) OR you can approach them and ask will they support your bid to a particular funding body. Most academics would be glad to hear from a good student (if they can demonstrate they are good) who wants to apply for a PhD.

Good work and winning funding through your career really can allow you to make jumps up the university quality ladder. I got my MSc from a pretty crap uni, used it to get me into a decently rated uni for my PhD, then got my first postdoc job at a top 3 UK business school. I'm now at a top 20 UK uni because I wanted a particular position but a friend of mine here is just finishing her PhD and has been offered a 5 year postdoc at Harvard.

Don't get hung up on having to be at a top place to secure your long term dream, find the best place you can and prove you're good.

I third the SOAS recommendation.
posted by biffa at 2:33 AM on October 29, 2007

Competition for PhD slots can be open (if a prof has some research funding to spend) OR you can approach them and ask will they support your bid to a particular funding body. Most academics would be glad to hear from a good student (if they can demonstrate they are good) who wants to apply for a PhD.

The admissions and funding situation is not necessarily this way everywhere. Systems differ between the US and the UK for example. It is more common in the US for grad students to be fully funded by their university, whereas that's not true in the UK. (You will just want to look into the details of whatever system you're applying into)
posted by LobsterMitten at 6:59 AM on October 29, 2007

Also, and take this with the huge caveat that I am not a economist, in most fields you do not need a phd from a top-15 school in order to teach at a top-15 school. Few fields are that incestuous, thankfully. You do need a phd from a reputable and strong department, of which there are a lot more than 15 (probably well over 100, counting all the good international universities), but much more important is that your own work must be at the level of the departments to which you aspire to join. And the reputation of your adviser is really key -- if you go to a great department, but work with the person who is seen as being a real dud, your job search may not go very well.
posted by Forktine at 7:18 AM on October 29, 2007

Hi everyone ... thank you so much for putting in the time to share your thoughts on the matter. I appreciate all of your comments and be rest assured I have seriously considered the different options presented here and found many of them to be very helpful.

Over the week, an interesting development has ocurred. I confirmed with the registrar's office that our average GPA is a 2.9 as opposed to the average GPA of undergrad institutions of 3.4 in the U.S.. This is huge as it suggests that if I had gone to the 'average' american undergrad institution, I would have come out with a 3.7 GPA as opposed to a 3.2.

I am meeting my adviser tomorrow to discuss this matter. I am hoping that my undergrad institution will include a letter regarding the 'uninflated GPA' at my institution with the transcripts. My hope is that this process will help level the playing fields (for me) during the application process and give me a stronger chance of admission.

p.s.: I am applying to safeties as well.
posted by Batman2743 at 9:45 PM on October 30, 2007