[yonanz]

Good day forummers

I know this topic has been done to death. However, I really need some good, solid advice. and all the information and advice pertaining to this topic are scattered all over, so I would like everything to be consolidated in this thread.

I'm having a huge, head-splitting dilemma between NUS econ and SMU econs. This is a life changing decision and being a meticulous person that I am, I want to make a very informed and calculated decision.

I shall list out some of the pros and cons that I have gathered, Nevermind if they are accurate or not, if they are not, please state your opinion in an amiable manner.

NUS PROS

Long history and established.
Many distinguised alumnis
More variety in modules. More econs modules and also chance to expose to modules of other majors
More exchange opportunities
Better chances for postgraduate since NUS brand name is internationally recognised
Not so much project-oriented and more theory based. Exams and test take up a significant portion of final results and I like it this way.
I prefer the campus and I like the diverse options of CCA available

Cons
Poor teacher-student ratio. I have heard of it countless times. Lecture halls are squeezed pack and tutorials are really the place where one actually learns up close. However, tutorials are mainly administered by grad students and its also only 2 hour every fortnight. Correct me if I'm wrong. Some people told me that it's extremely difficult to interact with professors given the poor faculty-student ratio, and also, many teachers in NUS cannot teach well.

Very diffficult to attain good honours, typically reserved only for the top 10% of the cohort.

Heard bad things about NUS envrionment, including result system isnt transparent, the curriculum is dry and average, and professors don't give a damn about the students. It seems to me that many nus graduates have very poor impressions of their former school, even citing poor student welfare and representation.

SMU

Pros

Close interaction between profs and students. I like this one alot because I value close up learning and I know one can benefit from this much more than lectures. Good teacher-student ratio means more attention, more personal help and professors get to know their students personally, meaning easily obtained and more individual-tailored recommendations for postgrad studies.

Ability to do a double major. I find this a plus because I realise econs as a degree alone is not very useful. I want to do a 2nd major in finance so I am able to widen my job scope. Although I dont really like projects, I feel that I might not like it because I havent tried it. I do however think that smu practical oriented training gives an edge with respect to job prospects because projects and presentations in the real world is freaking important. I also know of a first class nus econs grad getting cheesy offers like operations, stat board and competition commission, while a smu magna econs grad got into front office. I just think SMU gives its grad a job-seeking advantage, with their job placements, career office and internships schemes.

Faculty credentials. I have glanced through smu faculty list and these people are really a bunch of powerful academics. Some people have also told me that some of the best NUS academics have defected, and that the current NUS faculty is < SMU faculty. I would like to know more about this because I want high quality professors to teach me, and I need high quality professors for their graduate recommendations.

Cons

Not much choices in modules.

Got alot of non econs related modules that are compulsory, like government and ethics.

Like what i have said, too much weightage given to non academic things like presentations.

SMU econs seems to have a smaller class size and on the average, greater student quality. The competition is definitely stiffer.

SMU isnt so internationally recognised unlike NUS.



Im really torn between both schools. It seems to me that nus might be able to provide better brand name, and better social life. SMU gives me the impression of a pressure cooker environment and the lack of a social and extra curricular life outside of academia.

My most important aim, however, is to do well and aim for a good decent graduate school. I believe in this aspect, SMU seems to serve my goals better because of its better teacher-student ratio, close interactions, seemingly better faculty and better teaching. and close teacher-student interaction and low ratio means that I can better obtain personalised recommendations from them. I dont want to be a cog in the wheel, I want to be someone who can get the best of learning experience.

PLEASE HELP GUYS! Especially welcome advice from SMU and NUS econs grads, and SMU AND NUS econs students. I know these topic has somewhat become banal but I need a final review before deciding and all of your advice means ALOT ALOT to me. Thank you guys. I really appreciate it.

[mybiscuits]

tell us why do u wanna study econs first.

[K|muRa^84]

SMU. It brings out the tiger in you. Lol.

But seriously, look through Petrelli's posts. He graduated from SMU with a double degree in econs and biz.

I'm from NUS and I agree with almost everything you've listed.

[crappyboy1]

don't think you need any advice.

I just want to point out the following:-

SMU is a direct honors course. (you don't have the option to grad in shorter time with a pass degree if the results are not so good) It is as difficult (if not more difficult) to get good honours (summa/magna) as compared to NUS. Some employers will even ask: "what is cum laude? third class honors?"

This means everyone is highly motivated to outdo and outlast. Think of it as survival game in real life version. prof recommendation won't mean a thing if your grades on average sucks.

i.e. its a tradeoff. you can't enjoy best of both worlds without having to work hard at it/bear more risk.
SMU is like an IR casino where stakes are high. NUS is like the usual toto/4d. hope this helps. (want to point out the scary things smu students worry about most of the time in this reply instead)

[patryn33]

if SMU model after Wharton a basic 4yr program isn't direct honors.
getting a latin honors isn't the same as graduating with honors.
grad with honors require U to do honors credits, while keeping your GPA above 3.5 generally (must be cum laude).

[crappyboy1]

yes. a 4yr basic is not "honors program" like you said.

SMU in general do not have "honor programs" except for economics school. (and it is reflected in your transcript on top of the usual latin honors granted to record honors credit attempted.) Have to source your own professor to do this "honor program"/capstone thingy. Very troublesome for unmotivated stinkaporean students like me.

what employer usually look at is your cum laudes, magna cum laudes and summa cum laudes.

patryn33 wrote:

if SMU model after Wharton a basic 4yr program isn't direct honors.
getting a latin honors isn't the same as graduating with honors.
grad with honors require U to do honors credits, while keeping your GPA above 3.5 generally (must be cum laude).

[yonanz]

mybiscuits wrote:

tell us why do u wanna study econs first.

Hi mybiscuits, thanks for your reply.

Erm to put it simply, I want to do econs because it's something i like [and excelled in] since jc and i know im reasonably decent in mathematics as well. So it's sort of a natural choice for me.

In fact, I am holding on to a law offer but I will be rejecting it next cycle and applying to smu/nus econs next year.

[yonanz]

crappyboy1 wrote:

don't think you need any advice.

I just want to point out the following:-

SMU is a direct honors course. (you don't have the option to grad in shorter time with a pass degree if the results are not so good) It is as difficult (if not more difficult) to get good honours (summa/magna) as compared to NUS. Some employers will even ask: "what is cum laude? third class honors?"

This means everyone is highly motivated to outdo and outlast. Think of it as survival game in real life version. prof recommendation won't mean a thing if your grades on average sucks.

i.e. its a tradeoff. you can't enjoy best of both worlds without having to work hard at it/bear more risk.
SMU is like an IR casino where stakes are high. NUS is like the usual toto/4d. hope this helps. (want to point out the scary things smu students worry about most of the time in this reply instead)

hi crappyboy, thanks for your reply, appreciate it.

that's some things i have thought about. that's why I mentioned that smu student quality is generally higher and the competition stricter. That's why Im damn scared. Were you once a student of SMU? Can you share with me the general standard of econs students and the modules on offer?

My aim is to go into good grad school. I cant say where, nor can I see myself specialising in any particular field, since it's too early to tell. But i know pretty clear by now that I want to do my masters in a good overseas uni. That's my general plan, and I'm willing to work hard for it.

Which uni do you think can serve me better? Do you have any friends doing postgraduate in good unis overseas?

[yonanz]

K|muRa^84 wrote:

SMU. It brings out the tiger in you. Lol.

But seriously, look through Petrelli's posts. He graduated from SMU with a double degree in econs and biz.

I'm from NUS and I agree with almost everything you've listed.

hi kimura

thanks for your reply. grateful for it.

i'm hoping petrelli will weight in on this, but he's not online so far so shall wait for him

can u tell me the pros about studying at NUS? are my points all there is to it?

[yonanz]

patryn33 wrote:

if SMU model after Wharton a basic 4yr program isn't direct honors.
getting a latin honors isn't the same as graduating with honors.
grad with honors require U to do honors credits, while keeping your GPA above 3.5 generally (must be cum laude).

hi patryn33, thnx for reply, appreciate it.

i dont understand. How is latin honours not the same as graduating with honours? Pls elaborate can? thnx.

[0385985]

TS, competiton in SMU is quite mad....so if u wan go there.Be prepared.And presentation u believe it or nt is a part and parcel of working life nxt time...if u hate presentation, u shuld not come SMU.


Got alot of non econs related modules that are compulsory, like government and ethics.-----> i believe other school also have such similar mods..but all these mods are quite useful, really get u thinking what you should do when u graduate.

[yonanz]

0385985 wrote:

TS, competiton in SMU is quite mad....so if u wan go there.Be prepared.And presentation u believe it or nt is a part and parcel of working life nxt time...if u hate presentation, u shuld not come SMU.


Got alot of non econs related modules that are compulsory, like government and ethics.-----> i believe other school also have such similar mods..but all these mods are quite useful, really get u thinking what you should do when u graduate.

hi there, thanks for your reply.

haha thanks for telling me that. i guess the fierce competition in SMU is something we all know. and i do acknowledge the fact that presetnation and projects are part and parcel of the working world and SMU training is very good careerwise.

Yet my general plan is to go to a good grad school. Even though non econs modules are helpful to develop a person's attitude and general knowledge, it is not helpful in terms of graduate studies. Cuz in econs, one needs to stomach as many maths modues as possible. Im afriad if I go smu, the modules are not enough for me to qualify for top graduate schools.

[crappyboy1]

Yes. was smu student 2 years ago. Graduated decently with Bsc (Econs) and BAcc. Still a (part time)student (but now at NUS econs- exams coming and it sucks!).

Wanted to point out the competition because i remember certain job/post grad oppotunities are often exclusively made available to high GPA students (eg. career seminars with top foreign banks, top grad schools).

Its always about 100 or so invited during my time. (out of a total population of 2000 for 3rd and 4th year students). Implies that only about slightly more than 5% university wide will expect to graduate with magna / summa cum laude. Thats really less than the other 2 local unis. ------------> You have just doubled your risk of not getting "good honours"

On masters, i personally feel its easier to get a grad place with smu undergrad education if you have decent grades. profs (associate or full prof) there are generally more "famous/powerful" and happy to help with recommendations. smu econs in my time really give undergrads the attention given to grad students at NUS (maybe because back then smu econs don't have grad students).

I personally know enough smu students doing graduate business courses in top us universities. Fewer examples for grad econs because the size of econs batch was too small and many econs students want to study mba after IB stint ------------> grad econs usually at oxford/cambridge, not in states.

Most smu students just want to work (career talks and interview preparations in smu too effective?!). I'm personally quite thankful i did not do graduate studies overseas. (if not have to face the lousy job market).

hope that helps.

yonanz wrote:

hi crappyboy, thanks for your reply, appreciate it.

that's some things i have thought about. that's why I mentioned that smu student quality is generally higher and the competition stricter. That's why Im damn scared. Were you once a student of SMU? Can you share with me the general standard of econs students and the modules on offer?

My aim is to go into good grad school. I cant say where, nor can I see myself specialising in any particular field, since it's too early to tell. But i know pretty clear by now that I want to do my masters in a good overseas uni. That's my general plan, and I'm willing to work hard for it.

Which uni do you think can serve me better? Do you have any friends doing postgraduate in good unis overseas?

[Petrelli_83]

My personal views on SMU versus NUS Econs.

I feel economics is a general subject and most people who pursue it at the undergrad level unlikely will see it through to a PhD. Economics is truly appreciated at the PhD level, IMO, not for the fact that it is mathamatically rigorous at the highest level, but because economics is really a social science that requires a certain level of maturity, social experience, and working experience to appreciate the theories without being overly obsessed with the math that is in place merely to support a particular hypothesis, rather than form the basis of the theory itself. I'm not trying to play all wise and knowledgeable, but as a person who has gone through a four year economic course, i never truly understood the theories in macroeconomics untill the financial crisis struck, and i personally witnessed how money is being circulated in the global economy, after working in a bank. Having said a load of irrelevant nonsense, i hope to bring across the point that one need not be concerned about the depth, the rigor, or the quality of the professors etc between the 2 schools for the fact that whatever you're going to learn in both schools at the undergrad level does not matter very much if your ultimate aim is grad school economics. So if your ultimate aim is grad school econs, you should, as people in teh forums have pointed out, simply choose whichever school has the most disintguished professors who can write you a recommendation letter, because that, to my knowledge of grad schools in economics, is probably the most important factor after the demonstration of your mathamatical capability.

But for the majority of us (i would think so), who don't intend to go to all the way, and u have to choose between the 2 econ programs, It would perhaps, as many in the forums have pointed out, be more important to assess the non-academic aspects of the 2 different universities. Many factors such as the degree's recognition, it's associated job prospects etc. can be safely held constant. Local degrees are usually on an equal standing, and employers usually don't care if you're from SMU/NTU/NUS as llong as ur a local grad, unless he or she has a personal bias towards any particular university.

Having said that, SMU and NUS are both pressure-cookers, and i feel the most important factor to consider should be your style of learning, and your pace of absorption. It is difficult to make friends in NUS FASS, and if you're going into the econs course alone, you're at a severe disadvantage compared to students who got in as a group, and are able to do their tutorials together, share tips etc. NUS is known for being remarkably stingy in 1st class honours, and getting one in FASS would be a significant achievement. Assume you're someone who's mathamatically strong and don't need friends, next is to assess your pace of learning. NUS is generally less focused on project work (changing as we speak), and offers you more time to revise and absorb the theories. I noe everything is relative, and competition doesn't get any easier because everyone has more time to study, the competition will end up stiffer, but if you're someone who's of average intelligence, and learns via understanding rather than memorising, but once understood, you can perform on par or even better than the rote-learners, then NUS would give you that extra bit of breathing space to digest the theories, understand the theory behind the math etc. though not much more.

On the other hand, SMU is very project intensive, but that doesn't mean the students cover less theory. The amount of theory they cover is still extensive and on par with NUS. Difference is that you are often given so many projects to ccomplete for your non-econ modules, you are rarely given any breathing space to digest your theories properly. Believe it or not, Acc students can progress into the 3rd year not knowing their double entry, and finance majors forgetting how to calculate present value etc. If you're someone who has good concentration, and able to "turn on" and study anytime, anywhere, in pockets of 1-2 hours here and there, good organization skills, and good memory, you'll probably do quite well in SMU. If you're the kind who takes it slow and cannot memorise without fully understanding the theories (like me), e.g. you HAVE to know why PV formula is 1/(1+r), or you absorb slowly, you'll find yhourself consistently short on time. I've seen a lot of dean-listers who rote-memorise their way to an A+, or have a strong math background to help them grasp the theories easily. I've seen Acc students who don't understand the essence of consolidation accounting, but scored an A+ in Advanced Financial Accounting. If you are the kind who can play your way through your JC years, and later on, spend 2 months sitting down for intensive study, and still get 4 As, then SMU is really the placce for you. If you're the kind who can't take intensive study, and has to spread out your studying evenly, and thrives when you have a more regular study pattern, then SMU might not be the place for you.

Next, the environment.

SMU's students are generally more proactive and more aggressive in securing internships, gathering knowledge about the industry etc., owing to the culture laid down by seniors, and originates from the ridiculous amount of indoctrination from the career centre that investment banking is the only good job around. Having attended several internship preparatory talks, i have lost count of the number of times Ruth (director of OCS) mentions Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch. I have never heard her mention working for any other company other than a bank. The preferential treatment of students with high GPAs or are in double degree programs, (sometimes requested by the employers themeselves), serves to strengthen and perpetuate the belief that your GPA defines your worth as a student, and incidentally, the amount of respect among your peers. Beause the student population is so small, everyone knows each other, news of X or Y getting into certain ivnestment banks and drawing $x amt of salary can quickly spread around, and adds pressure even to the slackest student. NUS on the other hand, has a much more robust student population, and for the fact that people usually don't know each other, you don't hear too much word of mouth of who and who got into which investment bank, and that helps to take away some of your stress, but also makes you a less informed person. (of course, this fact is fast changing with all the rage on invetsment banking.)

If i have to choose again, i'll choose NUS econs anyday. Because i want to enjoy a real university life, not start work prematurely.




Above are just my personal opinions, and from my experience studying in SMU/NTU, and friends in NUS.


But again, i'll like to stress that these are my personal opinions.

[Wzierbovsky]

I don't know enough of either program in NUS and SMU to add to this thread, but this remark you've made below is a very astute one.

Petrelli_83 wrote:

Because i want to enjoy a real university life, not start work prematurely.