EC4401 Honours Thesis

Till today, this remains as the module which I'm most disappointed with the grade I got. Maybe I shall start from the very beginning when I was still contemplating on the topic for my thesis. It first started off as a very difficult decision as to when I should do my thesis. I had to choose between Semester 1 and Semester 2. Most people would do their thesis in Semester 2 and I do understand from my friends who took their thesis in Semester 2 that the graders decided to be very generous and would give out at least an A- to everyone who's doing thesis, much to my disappointment though. Anyway, I decided to do my thesis in Semester 1 after very much contemplation, mainly because I wanted to do a full-time internship in Semester 2 so I really needed to overload heavily in Semester 1. That's how my 30MCs came about. Next to decide on was the topic. All along, I had wanted to do a thesis on international trade preferably with Davin Chor. But because of my impromptu decision, I did not manage to take EC4341 International Trade II (that's how it was named back then) in Semester 2 of my third year. In fact, the only EC module I was taking in that semester was EC4332 Money and Banking II. During the start of the semester, I still wasn't enticed into switching my topic. I didn't really like EC4332 in the beginning cos it was too theoretical and I couldn't see the application of it. But gradually, as we moved into Week 7 or so, the material Martin Bodenstein was teaching became very interesting. It was starting to get very policy-related. Then I decided, he's the one who's gonna be my thesis supervisor. I think it really makes things easier when your supervisor knows you personally beforehand. Also, his style and way of thinking is really something I admire. Eventually, this all seem to fall rightly into place as I was told that I was the highest scorer for the finals. The A+ also came to me as a sort of reaffirmation of my decision. At that point in time, I wasn't thinking about doing an empirical thesis at all perhaps because I've gotten enough exposure from Dr Song while I was working as an RA for him and I really wanted to try something different. That's why I decided to do a theoretical thesis with Martin Bodenstein, analyzing the effectiveness of monetary policy using a New Keynesian Model. I must say that the process was painful, very painful in fact. Nonetheless, being able to survive through this arduous process is still something I derive great satisfaction from. I really underestimated the difficulty of coding up a model that runs through 72 equations. Making sure everything equilibrates wasn't an easy feat. Prof. Bodenstein had warned me how difficult this process would be. To think I even wanted to come up with such a model on my own. I am really thankful for all his patience and guidance while I was trying to get past obstacles after obstacles. Even he and the assessors themselves acknowledged that such a thesis could only be done at graduate level. However, it remains that I didn't manage to impress one of the assessors enough (as much as I don't wish to reveal too much details of this). Indeed, as I was told later on after I got my grade, it just takes one assessor's grading to be off the mark and there goes the A. Yeap, so I ended up with an A-. I was truly disappointed with it. I really enjoyed every bit of my thesis but the final grade failed me. As much as I don't regret doing a model that is difficult to get it up and running in the first place, I wished I had more time to work on my thesis. I could have done a much more robust analysis if I was given more time. Back then, I really pondered hard over whether it was a rash decision to have cleared 30MCs. Really, it was gonna be fine if there wasn't the irritating EC4103. But I guess the old saying that every cloud has a silver lining is true. Had I not overloaded in Semester 1, I couldn't have been able to do a full-time internship in Semester 2 and secured a job so easily. Yet at that point in time, I was really planning on doing a Master's or PhD especially after Prof. Bodenstein had strongly recommended me to do so. Apparently, he was very impressed with me and was thus quite taken aback as well that I didn't get an A but he emphasized that what's important about thesis is what I learnt from it not so much of the result itself. Indeed, I can't deny that I gained a hell lot of knowledge and skills through working with him over the three or four months. His advice has really opened me up to a whole lot of new perspectives. Then again, now that I think back, I also blame it on my writing skills. It really matters as to how the entire thesis is presented. I think I could have done a lot better in that aspect and until now, I'm still trying to improve on this weakness of mine. All I can say is for those who are looking to score an A or above, you don't have to be adventurous and do something that is very challenging like what I did. Rather, a simple technique is enough to get you to an A. I think this is the misconception that many have; that we all must apply those very difficult stuff in order to get the A. But this is really not the case. I know of people who did very simple econometrics techniques and still got away with an A or even A+. If you really wanna work on difficult stuff, it's your choice to boost your knowledge even further and it remains that there are still people who manage to get the best of both worlds: do something challenging and still score well. Personally, as much as I'm truly disappointed by the result, I still never regretted working on the topic that I did. It was really an eye-opener and I got exposed to something very different from the usual things I had been learning. I've become so interested in monetary policy ever since then, so much so that I'm beginning to question myself right now whether there's a chance I'll go back to do what I love most.

AY2015-2016 Semester 1 Module Review

I am very grateful that I got over 30 MCs with results that isn't too far from my expectations. Actually, 30 MCs wasn't as bad as I thought especially after I submitted my thesis. Since I only have 15 MCs to do a review for, I shall try to be even more detailed this time round.

EC4103 Singapore Economy: Practice and Policy

I have much grievances over this module. It is nothing but a burden. Ask me to name anything I learnt from it and I won't even be able to think of a single thing. Probably how to follow instructions and carry out the commands in Stata? Right, so this module was introduced this semester as many employers have given feedback that NUS EC graduates can only regurgitate theory but aren't so well-versed when it comes to knowledge of the Singapore economy. Although this may be true to a certain extent, this module is definitely not gonna help much in that aspect. I honestly think the way the module is taught needs to undergo some serious revisions.

How does this module work? There are 5 lecturers and each of them assesses 20% of the course. Depending on the lecturer, there could be 2 or 3 reports to hand up over that 2 or 3 weeks. If not, presentations had to be made. Occasionally, presentation slides had to be submitted as well. This cycle continued and I think there were about 8 written assignments in total over the entire semester. Every assignment had to be presented and so on top of the additional presentations, there were a total of about 10 presentations. Initially, the module started out slow and steady with the report having a page limit of two sides. Then it became worse with each lecturer, with the last lecturer allowing a page limit of 5 to 7 pages. There were 5 themes in total. Aamir Hashmi took the first one and it was, in summary, on the macroeconomics of Singapore i.e. the characteristics of its economy etc. Danny Quah was next and took the part on growth if I didn't remember wrongly. Then came Ivan Png who taught Singapore productivity. Up next was Jessica Pan who taught income inequality. Last was Chia Ngee Choon who took the aspect of Singapore budget policies. Or was it taxation? I can't really remember but it was something along those lines. 

The bottomline is this: lectures are pretty much useless if you're talking about scoring for this module. Actually, even for the purposes of learning, the lectures still remain useless. The thing is the assignments had absolutely nothing to do with what was taught in lectures. The only thing that you need to know is how to surf the net and look for relevant information. So it wasn't surprising that the turnout for the lectures was just getting more and more pathetic by the week. I did not attend lectures at all but still managed to get away with a decent grade. The assignments by the first two lecturers started off as generic essay-based questions so you could say that it's pretty much a test of general knowledge. Then they became Stata-based with the next two lecturers. And the last lecturer's was simply basic calculations using Excel. Needless to say, the assignments of these three lecturers required students to obtain the correct results as well as to analyze the results. For Ivan Png's, all we had to do was simply to follow the step-by-step instructions in the assignment using Stata and then analyze the regression results. Jessica Pan's part was a lot harder in comparison as hers was not so straightforward so a lot of people had difficulties. But the tutor (Kelvin Seah) was always ready to help and you can actually check with him if the graphs and results you got were correct. And this was important as correctness is a major determinant of your score for Jessica Pan's segment as is the case for Ivan Png's as well as Chia Ngee Choon's parts though the other two lecturers weren't so flexible with the validation of answers.

This module consumed a lot of my time every week but really, I got nothing out of it. It came to a point that the workload was so heavy that I found the completion of assignments and preparation for presentations becoming increasingly burdensome. Among all the 5 themes, I picked up pretty much zero stuff. Before I took this module, I know so much about Singapore. After completing this module, I still know as much about Singapore. That's how helpful the module had been. By the way, this module is fully groupwork. After being assigned a tutorial group, you will be assigned to your groups. You don't get to choose your group members. So if you and your friends are in the same tutorial group but do not have different starting letters for your names, then you don't have to think of being in the same project group. Cos how they assigned the groups was a no-brainer. They simply went by alphabetical order and grouped say, ABCD together in one group, EFCG in another and so on. Anyway, this is pretty crucial. Your grade is highly determined by peer review as much as I thought it didn't play a big role. After submission of each report, your group members are supposed to rate you and not to worry, it's confidential. I gave high ratings for my group members but it ended up that two (out of three) of them got a grade lower than me.

Result: A-

I was surprised by this grade as it exceeded my prediction of a B+ or worse. I am really thankful to my group members for giving me good reviews (as they said). Of course, that comes with a price as I was doing a lot of the work. Then again, I thought we allocated the work quite well as everyone was doing what they're good at. This is not to say that I think A- was deserving of the work we had put in. Seriously, considering how much effort this module requires, I think I should have gotten an A in return. But this module is the sort that you put in 10 times more effort than what you get in return. Hopefully there will be some changes to this module for the next batch as I don't think the majority would like to experience what the Year 4s had just gone through.

EC4301 Microeconomic Analysis III

This is supposed to be a level 4000 module. It is also supposed to be a core module initially. Something wrong must have happened midway which caused it to become so unworthy of a level 4000 module in terms of both workload and content. Anyone who has gone through both EC4101 and EC4102 will definitely tell you that EC4101 is nothing compared to EC4102. And true enough, EC4301 is pretty much peanuts compared to EC4302. This module was taken by Chen Yi Chun this semester. And it's not that he can't teach difficult stuff but that he wants to tone down the difficulty due to past bad experiences. He's a pretty good lecturer and I think his lessons are surprisingly not mundane even though the content may be. The module started off hard as we were taught all the abstract stuff in consumer theory. Actually, abstract may be too strong a word for some. It won't actually be if you have been exposed to MA modules. Then when everyone thought they were done for for this module, the lecturer's announcement that midterms and finals weren't gonna test all these proofs came as a huge relief.

Topics
1.   Preference and Utility
2.   Utility-Maximizing Problem and Its Solution
3.   Utility-Maximizing Problem and Expenditure-Minimizing Problem
4.   Law of Demand, Exchange Economies, Pareto Efficiency
5.   Core and Competitive Equilibrium
6.   Welfare Theorems and Existence of Competitive Equilibrium
7.   Choice under Risk
8.   Externality
9.   Asymmetric Information
10. Modelling Strategic Behaviours I
11. Modelling Strategic Behaviours II
12. Incomplete Information and Efficient Mechanism

Weightage

Homework: 20%

Midterms: 30%

Finals: 50%

The homework was given out on a weekly basis and they were to be completed in groups of four or maximum, five. It wasn't graded based on correctness but rather, completeness. So I should expect that no one lost any marks from this component. There was also only one tutorial presentation per group. So the workload for this module was real light.

Midterms was tested up to Topic 5. Topic 6 was covered but not tested and its lecture was conducted during the recess week. Although this topic wasn't compulsory, it turned out to be useful for midterms. If you had attended the lecture or studied the notes on your own, it would help in scoring for your midterms. So take it with a pinch of salt when the lecturer says it's not tested. I disliked the topics after midterms especially Topics 8 and 9. They were way too simplistic for a level 4000 module and it wasn't value-adding in any way especially Asymmetric Information. Up till now, I still haven't been exposed to proper modelling of asymmetric information. All I understand are the implications of asymmetric information. Topics 10 and 11 are on game theory. Topic 12 was centered around mechanism design but its basis came from game theory. Mechanism design was a real interesting topic but too bad, it had to be so brief in this module. I scored 95 for my midterms. Average was 85? I can't recall exactly. The highest was 98 out of 100. I scored 95 probably cos I was pretty good at the first half of this module. Edgeworth Box was covered for Topics 4 and 5 but of course it wasn't as lame as what was taught in EC3101. Then again, I attribute the 95 I got mainly to the lecturer. I actually made many mistakes but he was amazingly lenient with his marking. As long as you showed some understanding of the concepts, he will give you credit. So keep this in mind if you're taking the module under Chen Yi Chun: do not leave anything blank. Actually, midterms was rather insignificant as it was upon 100 and when you convert the marks to 30%, it becomes negligible. The lecturer said it himself that people who scored well for midterms usually didn't score well eventually whereas those who didn't score well for midterms are the ones who fared well eventually. As much as there may be some truth to that statement, I personally think that midterms are such that you should get at least slightly above average if you are looking to get an A- or above. Nonetheless, I don't dispute the fact that finals is the determining factor and my grade is an affirmation of that as well. By the way, both midterms and finals were open-book though it wouldn't have helped much.

It was claimed that finals is cumulative but trust him not. On the whole, finals was easy. I got screwed up thanks to the steep bell curve and mistakes I shouldn't have made at all. As the second part had three chapters on game theory, it was no surprise that there was one entire question dedicated to game theory in the finals. Even though having taken EC3312 may be a plus, it wasn't as much help as I thought. Basically, game theory in this module was a lot more simplistic than in EC3312. Anyway, as with EC2101 and EC3101, the questions in the finals are such that it carries an overly high weightage. For instance, I could be given 10 marks for just a three-liner solution so it was pretty hard to gauge what was required of me especially when certain questions were quite open-ended.

Result: A-

I don't know what to make of this grade. After midterms, I was aiming for an A. After finals, I was realistically expecting a B+. I guess knowing your concepts well is the key to scoring for this module.

EC4303 Econometrics III

First and foremost, this module isn't as difficult as most may imagine it to be. There was more breadth than depth. Honestly, I question the use of econometrics exams at times. Here's the thing. You don't actually have to know how to prove theorems. All you need to understand are the concepts and properties of the theorems as well as how to go about applying them. But unfortunately, and I don't blame the lecturer for this, econometrics exams usually involve quite senseless questions. Anyway, this module was taken by Tatsushi Oka and he takes the definition of politeness to the next level. The topics covered for this module were quite impromptu in the sense that the later topics were chosen only because some of us were doing on these topics for our term paper.

Topics
1.   Ordinary Least Squares Estimation
2.   Linear Probability Model / Maximum Likelihood Estimation
3.   Nonparametric Regression
4.   Quantile Regression
5.   ARMA model
6.   GARCH model
7.   LASSO
8.   Panel Data Models
9.   Program Evaluation I: DID Estimation
10. Program Evaluation II: IV Regression
11. Program Evaluation III: Regression Discontinuity
12. Classification and Regression Tree

Weightage

Problem Sets: 20%
Term Paper and Presentation: 20%
Book Presentation: 10%
Participation: 10%
Finals: 40%

There were 3 problem sets and all of them were easy. They were graded based on effort and correctness. Most people scored 100 or at worst, 99 so this component wasn't gonna make any distinction among the students.

The term paper was to be done in groups of 3. You get to choose your groups. Basically, you had to find an existing paper, replicate the results and extend the paper. There were 2 presentations for this component. The first one was a 5-minutes presentation and it only involved presenting about the existing paper as in the type of dataset etc., the results your group had replicated and lastly, an outline of the extensions. The second one was a 10-minutes presentation and you had to present on the extensions your group had come up with. The report was only limited to 3 pages excluding appendices and all so it was pretty slack. The draft was due sometime during the middle of the semester whereas the final one including probably the last one and a quarter page on extensions was due sometime in Week 12 or 13.

Book presentation. This is probably the one and only useless component of this module. First, we were assigned a textbook, Statistical Learning from a Regression Perspective by Richard Berk and this textbook is considered pretty advanced for undergraduates. All the equations inside weren't what you normally see in an econometrics textbook. Second, this textbook was taught with students making presentations in their groups so every week, there would be one presentation until all 8 presentations were done. The chapter that you present on was decided by drawing lots. So some got the earlier chapters which were easier while those who got the later ones might need to spend a bit of time understanding the earlier ones before they could do their presentation slides. The presentation was up to 25 minutes and all 3 group members would present a section. I think during this weekly presentation, everyone was just shutting off their ears and that included me. The thing is some presentations were so poor that you could tell they didn't really understand the content themselves which I perfectly understand why. I really question the use of this component as the presentations not only consumed time but also, the book chosen is a bit too advanced for self-studying as its content is very different from what you usually see in econometrics.

Don't worry about the component on participation. You can get it just by attending all the lessons.

I actually only realized finals is 40% as I typed the weightage. But finals is the determining factor to your grade for this module. Oka was very generous with the 60% CA component as he said that everyone would probably get full credit for it. Finals was open book and there were some questions that we could directly refer to assignment solutions or lecture notes to get the marks. Then again, I thought the differentiating factor came in in the last 2 questions which added up to a total of 16 marks. I probably screwed up more than half of that 16 marks but judging from my grade, I believe most people did as well.

Result: A
This grade came as a big surprise as I was expecting at most an A-. Even though this module was more of breadth and it was a lot less rigorous than I thought, I think it's pretty much a must-take if you're looking to go into specialized economics jobs. Anyway, knowing more econometrics models is always a good thing for someone studying economics. This is not to say that you should take it if you're afraid of screwing up your CAP. I think I just managed to scrape through an A as it was really competitive with the cohort size of 20.

AY2015-2016 Semester 2 Modules

It's finally gonna be my last semester! Can't believe 7 semesters have gone in a flash. Anyway, MPE's coming up so it's time I decide on my modules. I won't be in school for most of this semester so I have to choose my modules appropriately to minimize my workload. By the way, I think I forgot to update my modules earlier but it was a last minute decision that I decided to take EC4301 Microeconomic Analysis III in place of EC4341 International Economics II. One reason was that I was afraid that in Semester 2, EC4301 will clash with EC4304 Economic and Financial Forecasting, another module to clear my specialization in Quantitative Economics. But a more important reason was that I decided EC4301 is much lighter than EC4341 which was just what I needed in such a hectic semester. I was glad I took EC4301 instead because EC4103 was unexpectedly a lot heavier than I imagined it to be. Right, so here are my modules for this semester. Oh and cos I overloaded last semester, this semester's really light but I deliberately planned it this way.

EC4304 Economic and Financial Forecasting

I am actually kinda looking forward to this module as much as I am reaching my threshold of dealing with Econometrics or Statistics for that matter. This module is based on time series forecasting, an area that I think will be very useful if one wishes to go into economics research-based sectors. You'll see an element of time series almost everywhere so it really helps to have a good understanding of it. Nonetheless, the focus of this module is on forecasting. But it is definitely interesting. Anyway, even though most of us have already gotten exposed to some sort of time series in EC3304, there was very little emphasis on how we can apply time series models in reality. And I think the application really comes in in the form of forecasting. In other words, this module is both interesting and useful. With my two criteria met on top of this being the remaining module to complete my specialization, this module is definitely a must-take.

EC4880 Topics in Macroeconomics

Two semesters ago, I wanted to take this module and decided to drop the idea. Now, two semesters later, I decided to take it again and this time for real. The reason why I chose this module is 99% because it is a night class which means I'll be able to make it to school in time for the lessons plus this module is pretty light. But the 1% remaining comes from the fact that I actually have quite a bit of interest in growth theories and this module seems like the best choice if I wanna learn more about that. Only thing that's holding me back is that it's an essay-based module and it's very qualitative. Then again, seeing that it's my last semester, I think it's fine. Hopefully this module is still fruitful to some extent.

GEH1019 Food and Health

Firstly, I am not too sure why the module code is changed. I think it has something to do with freshmen requirements. Secondly, this module is real light; just two projects and one finals. Thirdly, I actually just need one damn module to clear my Science GEM requirements. Lastly, it fits my timetable. Apart from these, there is no other reason for why I chose this module. Maybe I'll pick up something about diet nutrition?

End of hellish semester

And so I ended my second and last paper yesterday. Goodness, juggling thesis with three more modules on top of RA work has been quite a challenge though I must say it has been a really fulfilling one. I think the bulk of the work from the three modules came from EC4103. But I shall leave that discussion to my module review. Actually, life has been good past the thesis submission deadline. Cos I was suddenly left with just 10 MCs (EC4103 was over by Wk 13) which well, made me slack from Week 13 onwards all the way to exam week. I guess many Year 4s are quite unfazed by their results at this point in time cos' their CAP is somewhat fixed already.

Anyway on a lighter note, I see that there're still a lot of readers despite having taken a hiatus from blogging for 4 months. I'll reply to those who have commented asap. But I am resuming my RA work again so no promises! By the way, it seems interesting why so many people are asking for EC4332 notes. I'm no longer gonna make available my notes though as I don't think lecturers would like to have their materials circulated around. So people who are really interested should approach the lecturer for the notes. It will work as I have friends who do that.

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.

AY2015-2016 Semester 1 Modules

Now that MPE is coming up, many people should have finalized their choice of modules. I have as well and this semester will be without doubt the most gruelling one of all. 

1. EC4103 Singapore Economy: Practice and Policy

This is a compulsory module so there's nothing much to comment on it. Now that I think, as much as I don't like microeconomics, I think that EC4301 will be more interesting than EC4103. So I don't know if I actually welcome the change that no longer requires me to take EC4301. 

2. EC4303 Econometrics III

There's a new module this semester, EC4305 Applied Econometrics. I believe the department set EC4305 such that it'll avoid overlap with EC4303. So if you look at the content covered for EC4305, you might think "Hey, that's really kinda applied and that means it's gonna be useful." But you're not gonna see EC4305 in the list of my modules below. The reason being I am not into empirical research or anything along that line. If you're doing theoretical research,  EC4303 will definitely be more useful. But if you're looking to learn more, meaning breadth instead of depth, without any particular specialization in mind like whether you wanna go into the empirical or theoretical line, then I do think EC4305 is better cos EC4303 will mostly just be building onto the same topics that were covered in EC3303 and EC3304.

3. EC4341 International Economics II

I have mixed feelings towards this module before I decided on it. The part causing a lot of difficulties when I took EC3341 was HO-theory. So it made me concluded: ok, I am bad at anything to do with micro. And if you look at the syllabus for EC4341, it's just mostly micro stuff; not even anything on exchange rates. I think anyone who took EC3341 or even EC4341 knows what I mean. As much as International Econs sounds like a huge macro field, the concepts covered are actually pretty micro in nature. When I took EC3341 under Dr. Lu Yi, he made the same comment as well. In fact, and I forgot to mention this in my module review for that semester, I had to read this book that was recommended to me by Dr. Lu, Advanced International Trade: Theory and Evidence by Feenstra before I could fully understand theorems like the Stolper-Samuelson theorem before leading up to HO-theory. So why did I choose this module in the end? I think this field is a hot topic no matter where you go. That just means that it's good to know bout International Econs even if you're not specializing on it cos chances are you'll have to deal with it in one way or another at some point in time. And I mentioned before that if I were to take EC4341, I would take it under Davin Chor and not Gentile. Just compare their syllabus and you'll see what I mean. But anyway, Gentile's no longer taking EC4341, at least not for this AY.

4. EC4401 Honours Thesis

It seems a little weird that I'm taking HT despite having only a 2nd Upper. Why go through all that trouble since I'm not even anywhere near 1st Class? The usual practice is that those people with a CAP of 4.0 to 4.49 will simply take some more modules to clear their Honours requirements. Well, I have a few reasons for it. 

First, I wanna experience how doing research is like and there's no other avenue better than HT to get that experience. Second, there seems to be no end in reading up and knowing more. There's so much knowledge out there that you can learn and it's not possible to know every single thing. But there is one skill that is important and that is, applying what you've learnt and HT allows me to do that. There's one more little reason and it could be more of being practical. Although it seems like the Econs department has really expanded the list of level-4000 electives, many of them still don't appeal to my interests. So HT is a good choice if I wanna clear my requirements yet have nothing else to take. Then again, the very big drawback of HT is that it's all or nothing simply because of the amount of MCs attached to it (though I strongly believe it is over-weighted). 

Then why not take it in Semester 2? I would have loved to. Simply put, circumstances didn't permit me to. When I approached my supervisor, he told me he'll be available for the whole of this coming AY. But he told me at the end of last semester that he'll be away for the most part of Semester 2 of AY15/16. So that just means I have to do it in Semester 1. I actually think that taking HT in the last semester has its perks because you get the chance to broaden your knowledge base even more and also, for those who still haven't got an idea of what to do for your HT, Semester 1 of your fourth year is a very good buffer period to begin exploring your options cos it is highly likely that you'll be taking the most number of level-4000 modules in this semester as compared to the two semesters of your third year.

Modules that I had considered

1. EC4307 Issues in Macroeconomics

Can't deny that I wanted to take this module mainly because it was Aamir teaching it. I had such a good impression of him after 4102. But after looking at the syllabus covered, I decided against it. In fact, it was a big NO. Not only is it not interesting for me at all, it's a very content-based module without much quantitative stuff. I mean, my goodness, he's using the 3102 textbook; IS-LM when you're in Year 4?!

2. EC4334 Financial Market Microstructure

This is actually quite a good module. It's literally about the workings of the financial market, like what happens after bidding, valuation etc. It's quite interesting. You don't really need EC3333 to do this module. In fact, EC4334 is more of EC3304 from what I see. But the problem is that the models seem very out of nowhere and I don't like it when models are like that cos they usually seem very arbitrary. So I decided no, this module isn't suitable for me.

So yup, 3 level-4000s and HT, that's 30MCs for me. I've already sent in an appeal to overload and it has been approved. All I gotta do is to send in another email after CORS ends. I hope there won't be any hiccups during that period. I sent in an email so early cos I was actually in a situation when I appealed during CORS and my appeal wasn't processed even until the time when I had to do the bidding.

So now you can see why it's gonna be my most gruelling sem. And coupled with work as an RA, this sem will inevitably be very tiring. Uh well, I've got my reason for doing so once again and unless my plans are confirmed, I'll not talk about it as of now.