Some thoughts on EC Specializations

So all this talk about specializations has been going on for quite some time. I guess it's something people would want to know if there are many others in the same batch doing so. And this is especially so for my batch as it's our last year and we have probably already cleared most of the modules and will thus be forced by circumstances either to specialize or not to specialize. I have my own thoughts on this as well so I decided to pen them down. The disclaimer is that this is in no way representative of the "right" thing to do and you should take it with just a pinch of salt.

I am actually on the road to declaring two specializations, that is Quantitative Econs and Monetary & Financial Econs. It just so happens the modules I took fulfill the requirements of these two specializations. In fact, I am just missing one module to be able to complete a specialization in Monetary & Financial Econs and this module can be either EC4333 Financial Economics or EC4334 Financial Market Microstructure. As for the Quantitative Econs specialization, I am missing EC4301 Microeconomic Analysis III, EC4303 Econometrics III and EC4304 Economic and Financial Forecasting. Out of these three modules, I had already intended to take two so I might as well just take the remaining EC4301 to fulfill the specialization. And I should also say that I am taking two more level 4000s than what's the common practice of 40 MCs. So that also means two less level 3000s. Nonetheless, I had already intended to do so from the start of Year 3. The more important reason for why I decided on EC4301 is also because I have this one extra EC module that I still haven't decided on for the next AY. And even though it can be either EC4333 or EC4334, I am not intending to declare a specialization in Monetary & Financial Econs as much as I could have taken one of them in place of EC4341 International Economics II this semester. Truth to be told, I was deciding so hard between EC4341 and EC4334 before I finally chose to stick with EC4341 one day ago. 

Now it seems kinda stupid for me to not declare a specialization in Monetary & Financial Econs. I have a few reasons for doing so. 

First, I am not the least interested in EC4334 much less EC4333. I know what the content for EC4334 is going to cover: the models, the kinda foundational knowledge you need (yes, it's EC3304 for anyone who intends to take) etc. And more importantly, I realized it's not a useful module. I would like to go into more technical fields like policy planning or research kinda line of work or at the very least making use of some level of Econs knowledge I had learnt. However, the models in EC4334 are strangely not mentioned in any research or at least if there is, I'm having a hard time finding it. Moreover, I feel that models in there are a bit too simple and arbitrary like what I had mentioned in my previous post. So it's neither useful nor interesting which means it satisfies none of the two criteria I am looking for in any module. Actually, EC4341 isn't very useful as well from what I see in existing literature. But the intuition from it is useful cos the same idea is applied in a lot of research. 

Second, what do you hope to show your employer with a specialization in Monetary & Financial Econs? I for one don't think it's worth shouting about cos I feel that with this specialization, it won't get you further into the banking industry or anything like that. No matter how specialized you may be in Financial Econs, it can't measure up to those that Financial Maths majors are doing. I guess one perk is that it can show the banking industry employers how keen you are on finance-related stuff. But on a more practical level, taking EC4333 (much less EC4334) won't really give you an edge over others in terms of the knowledge you're learning. This brings me to my next point of why I wanna declare a specialization in Quantitative Econs. Personally, Quantitative Econs is a field more unique to Econs itself. If you look at the modules covered, it's mostly gearing students up on Econs models as well as Econometrics. And like I said, I only have one more module remaining that I haven't chosen so yeah, it can be either EC4333 or EC4301 but I chose EC4301 despite how much I am against microeconomics. My mindset is since I've all along been doing the more theoretical side of Econs and very little of the applied side, I should just do it all the way. Anyway, the content for EC4301 is actually not so bad, kinda interesting in some sense. I hope it'll be better under Saturo in Sem 2. 

But all in all, and this might seem quite ironic, I don't think specializations add any value for EC if you're not intending to go into technical fields which is what I gather from most EC majors. There's also the problem of deciding between CAP and specialization as I believe for every specialization, there is this killer module that majority of students tend to avoid in order not to screw up their CAP. Then again, if your class of honours is already stable, go ahead by all means. I think for the next few batches, you'll probably have to declare a specialization seeing how it would possibly become a norm. Actually, I think even for my cohort, many people are attempting to declare specializations as it was a very unpleasant surprise that I didn't get allocated the most unexpected module, EC4303 and my friend didn't get allocated EC4333. 

In conclusion, there're a lot of pros and cons that come with doing specializations. I also took a lot of time to sit down and think bout it which made me flipped flopped back and forth between EC4341 and EC4334 before I finally decide that EC4341 is both more interesting and more useful. I guess everyone has their own reasons for doing what they do. Probably the most important thing to keep in mind is not to do a specialization just for the sake of doing so.