- Joined
- 5/2/06
- Messages
- 12,164
- Points
- 273
Columbia MAFN Columbia MAFN decisions...
- Thread starter LarryFields
- Start date
@ Andy, Yes, I meant Prof Jan. He is now at Frankfurt school since 2010.
Only the Director is there-Prof. Mikhail Smirnov (Mathematics)
These have left-
1. Prof. Ioannis Karatzas (Mathematics)
Eugene Higgins Professor of Applied Probability; Ph.D., Columbia University, 1980
Probability and Random Processes, Stochastic Analysis, Optimization, Mathematical Economics and Finance.
2. Prof. Julien Dubedat (Mathematics)
Assistant Professor, Ph.D., Universite Paris-Sud, 2004
Probability Theory.
3.Prof. Jan Vecer (Statistics)
Associate Professor, Ph.D., Carnegie Mellon University, 2000
Mathematical Finance.
Only the Director is there-Prof. Mikhail Smirnov (Mathematics)
These have left-
1. Prof. Ioannis Karatzas (Mathematics)
Eugene Higgins Professor of Applied Probability; Ph.D., Columbia University, 1980
Probability and Random Processes, Stochastic Analysis, Optimization, Mathematical Economics and Finance.
2. Prof. Julien Dubedat (Mathematics)
Assistant Professor, Ph.D., Universite Paris-Sud, 2004
Probability Theory.
3.Prof. Jan Vecer (Statistics)
Associate Professor, Ph.D., Carnegie Mellon University, 2000
Mathematical Finance.
I noticed a weird thing: there are only 14 admissions reported here and 10 more reported in other forums. but there are also more than 10 watilisted. normally when a school has sent out most admissions, it starts waitlisting people. so how do you guys think?
menovive
Columbia MAFN
- Joined
- 4/6/11
- Messages
- 69
- Points
- 18
A Humble Request
I do accept that those left were "Star" Faculties. But Please don't under estimate someone unless you have been taught by him/her. Prof Ghosh has done some amazing work in Prob and Stat. Infact I am looking forward to learn from him.
- Joined
- 5/2/06
- Messages
- 12,164
- Points
- 273
- Joined
- 2/10/11
- Messages
- 19
- Points
- 13
The IEOR's website also lists them.
http://www.ieor.columbia.edu/directory/faculty.html
http://www.ieor.columbia.edu/directory/faculty.html
- Joined
- 5/2/06
- Messages
- 12,164
- Points
- 273
It's under affiliated faculty which has nothing to do with their employment with the MAFN program.
A Humble Request
@menonive
You bolster my point. Has done amazing work in prob and statistics but not in finance. If I wanted to learn prob and statistics, I would have gone for applied mathematics. Prof. Jan has specific publications in applications of models to risk and investment.
http://stat.columbia.edu/~vecer/index.html.
What do you think is the reason that after ONE YEAR, Prof Jan's name shines in faculty but not Prof. Ghosh's name. He left at the end of spring 2010. Don't try to take me wrong. But I refuse to believe that an Ivy League School can be this careless for one year. How can I not be suspicious, when Columbia itself is giving attention to someone else.
Good point @Tigga. The fact that they haven't explained it and are ignoring the fact, is pretty suspicious. No one at admissions want to gives any comment. They just say check the website and they are only responsible for application process. Their career services is already trashed all over net. They are just misleading students.
From my perspective, take it with a grain of salt:
- Poor career service
- Teaching quality is shoddy at best and highly variable (especially Professor Smirnov's introduction to mathematical finance class - don't even bother going to lecture as he won't actually teach anything. Far better off studying on your own).
- IMO it's more important to have good TEACHERS than "star" professors. We are talking about a one year Masters program, not a phd, and it's better to get an education.
- Lack of quant-level programming makes it hard for you to be hired even as a developer (you can finish the program with just a cursory knowledge of VBA. MATLAB can work) - lack of flexibilility on the professor's part in accepting of other more industry-level programming languages.
I've seen very few people get decent 'quant' related positions from this program - most end up in MO/BO-roles.
Luckily I am a part-time student so I don't (yet) have to worry about finding a job, but I feel sorry for many in the program (especially from China/India) who are blowing 30~40K for the Columbia name.
This isn't consulting/investment-banking where brand often matters more than substance. You need to know and learn the material inside out, both from a theory and an applied perspective, to even have a shot at being a quant. I'm not sure if this program provides that... Obviously I can't say anything about other programs but from hearsay it seems like Baruch is an excellent combination of both.
- Poor career service
- Teaching quality is shoddy at best and highly variable (especially Professor Smirnov's introduction to mathematical finance class - don't even bother going to lecture as he won't actually teach anything. Far better off studying on your own).
- IMO it's more important to have good TEACHERS than "star" professors. We are talking about a one year Masters program, not a phd, and it's better to get an education.
- Lack of quant-level programming makes it hard for you to be hired even as a developer (you can finish the program with just a cursory knowledge of VBA. MATLAB can work) - lack of flexibilility on the professor's part in accepting of other more industry-level programming languages.
I've seen very few people get decent 'quant' related positions from this program - most end up in MO/BO-roles.
Luckily I am a part-time student so I don't (yet) have to worry about finding a job, but I feel sorry for many in the program (especially from China/India) who are blowing 30~40K for the Columbia name.
This isn't consulting/investment-banking where brand often matters more than substance. You need to know and learn the material inside out, both from a theory and an applied perspective, to even have a shot at being a quant. I'm not sure if this program provides that... Obviously I can't say anything about other programs but from hearsay it seems like Baruch is an excellent combination of both.
- Joined
- 2/10/11
- Messages
- 19
- Points
- 13
Hi all. I have been admitted to both MSOR (was redirected from MFE) and MAFN and have only 3 days to respond to the MSOR offer. Although MAFN was one of my favorite programs, but after reading these posts about it I am not sure which program is better. After all, don't you think that MAFN is still better than MSOR?
- Joined
- 12/29/06
- Messages
- 146
- Points
- 28
What do you mean better?
MSOR and MAFN are designed differently by two completely independent departments. Just because the same original pool of applicants (quant-wannabe) ends up in these programs for one reason or another, it does not mean it's the right program for them.
The MAFN program is a cash cow, design to maximize numbers of students while giving minimal career support. Remember, it's the Math dept after all with limited revenue-generating sources. All the money goes to support PhD students.
Like most hopeful applicants, the school is banking on the name and that the students would be just happy to be at Columbia. In most cases, it seems to work since you don't hear much complaining from the India/Chinese students.
If you are a white guy and/or have connection/good with building up network, then you have better chance of landing some kind of finance job. If you are like the hundred of other Asian students it admits, you will not like it at all.
Last and most importantly, do not go to any program that does not publish its placement/admission stats or give you the answer when you ask. It's the #1 sign the program is not worth your money.
MSOR and MAFN are designed differently by two completely independent departments. Just because the same original pool of applicants (quant-wannabe) ends up in these programs for one reason or another, it does not mean it's the right program for them.
The MAFN program is a cash cow, design to maximize numbers of students while giving minimal career support. Remember, it's the Math dept after all with limited revenue-generating sources. All the money goes to support PhD students.
Like most hopeful applicants, the school is banking on the name and that the students would be just happy to be at Columbia. In most cases, it seems to work since you don't hear much complaining from the India/Chinese students.
If you are a white guy and/or have connection/good with building up network, then you have better chance of landing some kind of finance job. If you are like the hundred of other Asian students it admits, you will not like it at all.
Last and most importantly, do not go to any program that does not publish its placement/admission stats or give you the answer when you ask. It's the #1 sign the program is not worth your money.
The idea that if a program does not disclose their employment stats then it is not worth your money is too extreme for me. I can understand it being an issue if we were applying for mba and the salary $ is one of the standard criteria rankings use, but this is just a ms. Look at other ms, how many programs do you see give detail stats? Frankly, Columbia does not need to disclose or keep track of the stats because students are going to apply and attend anyway, there is no need for the marketing.
If you are choosing a school based on how well the school can do the work of finding a job for you, then maybe you should join one of those things where you pay to do internships. I'm not saying we shouldn't expect decent career service, but it almost seems like some people expect too much free lunch.
If you are choosing a school based on how well the school can do the work of finding a job for you, then maybe you should join one of those things where you pay to do internships. I'm not saying we shouldn't expect decent career service, but it almost seems like some people expect too much free lunch.
- Joined
- 12/29/06
- Messages
- 146
- Points
- 28
@onthesc
We diverge very quickly here. You are talking about "but this is just a ms" like "Master in Computer Science/Math/History/Art". If that you mean, then I agree nobody is expecting the program to provide anything.
But we are talking about "Master in Financial Engineering/Math Finance" which is career-target/terminal professional degree. And this is even narrower career path than MBA graduates.
Why do you think MIT MFin/Princeton MFin disclose their stats and Columbia does not. The reason that "Columbia does not need to disclose or keep track of the stats because students are going to apply and attend anyway, there is no need for the marketing" does not really hold here.
Do you know how much MIT/UCB spends on marketing? Why do they even need marketing with your logic if students are lining up to apply?
I never said people should choose the program based on "how well the school can do the work of finding a job for you". I said the students should expect some level of basic information to decide. Placement/internship data is basic information, not privileged info that only current students can know.
If you are a business and you basically telling your potential clients to pay up, join our program and they can learn about the data, it sucks big time. It either tells me I'm not 100% comfortable with that idea.
I'm sure there are always suckers who will pay up upfront and come on Quantnet to ask things like "I have been admitted to XYZ, can you tell me the placement, how good that program is?"
That is a sucker who didn't bother to do his HW. And many programs are loaded with these suckers. If you are not savvy enough to go find the critical data for yourself, you aren't savvy enough when it comes to finding a job on Wall Street.
Lastly, do we agree on the point that applicants should be given as much information on the programs they plan to apply to? The lack of basic information is something needs to be changed quickly. This is 2011, the age of information.
We diverge very quickly here. You are talking about "but this is just a ms" like "Master in Computer Science/Math/History/Art". If that you mean, then I agree nobody is expecting the program to provide anything.
But we are talking about "Master in Financial Engineering/Math Finance" which is career-target/terminal professional degree. And this is even narrower career path than MBA graduates.
Why do you think MIT MFin/Princeton MFin disclose their stats and Columbia does not. The reason that "Columbia does not need to disclose or keep track of the stats because students are going to apply and attend anyway, there is no need for the marketing" does not really hold here.
Do you know how much MIT/UCB spends on marketing? Why do they even need marketing with your logic if students are lining up to apply?
I never said people should choose the program based on "how well the school can do the work of finding a job for you". I said the students should expect some level of basic information to decide. Placement/internship data is basic information, not privileged info that only current students can know.
If you are a business and you basically telling your potential clients to pay up, join our program and they can learn about the data, it sucks big time. It either tells me I'm not 100% comfortable with that idea.
I'm sure there are always suckers who will pay up upfront and come on Quantnet to ask things like "I have been admitted to XYZ, can you tell me the placement, how good that program is?"
That is a sucker who didn't bother to do his HW. And many programs are loaded with these suckers. If you are not savvy enough to go find the critical data for yourself, you aren't savvy enough when it comes to finding a job on Wall Street.
Lastly, do we agree on the point that applicants should be given as much information on the programs they plan to apply to? The lack of basic information is something needs to be changed quickly. This is 2011, the age of information.
- Joined
- 2/10/11
- Messages
- 19
- Points
- 13
@Tigga
I agree with you that it is very important to have as much information about programs as possible when deciding to apply and later choose the final destination. I admit that MAFN fails to provide that essential information and eventually loses some of its strong applicants. Although I've heard great reviews about MAFN from its alumni, after @IMPACT's alert now I am seeking for current students' reviews. As regards MSOR, most of posters claim that these programs are similar and their opinions are based on their personal experience. So I posted my message in this thread in order to get more info about these programs from more experienced members ( I regard you as one of them). The reason that I've gotten into this situation is that I hadn't an opportunity to apply to all the best programs ( I had narrowed set of universities for applying because of the conditions set by financial supporter). In my opinion, MAFN is well regarded on Wall Street, has less class size than MSOR, and is more quant oriented. But hasn't good Careers Service, courses are offered in the evenings. MSOR has flexibility, better Careers Service. However, I think that it will be more difficult to secure a job after graduation from MSOR rather than from MAFN. I will appreciate any advice and hope will make the right choice.
I agree with you that it is very important to have as much information about programs as possible when deciding to apply and later choose the final destination. I admit that MAFN fails to provide that essential information and eventually loses some of its strong applicants. Although I've heard great reviews about MAFN from its alumni, after @IMPACT's alert now I am seeking for current students' reviews. As regards MSOR, most of posters claim that these programs are similar and their opinions are based on their personal experience. So I posted my message in this thread in order to get more info about these programs from more experienced members ( I regard you as one of them). The reason that I've gotten into this situation is that I hadn't an opportunity to apply to all the best programs ( I had narrowed set of universities for applying because of the conditions set by financial supporter). In my opinion, MAFN is well regarded on Wall Street, has less class size than MSOR, and is more quant oriented. But hasn't good Careers Service, courses are offered in the evenings. MSOR has flexibility, better Careers Service. However, I think that it will be more difficult to secure a job after graduation from MSOR rather than from MAFN. I will appreciate any advice and hope will make the right choice.
@Tigga,
I agree that more stats is better. But to say that if a program does not disclose their stats, they aren't worth jack is too much. Do realize that most of these programs are fairly new, and I would imagine when they were founded, a lot were just like any other Master of Science programs. Also, I think a MS is by nature either a stepping-stone to PhD or a career-oriented degree. So how come we do not expect them to post their stats on how many goes into PhD and how many gets a job? But we expect that from a MFE program? I would only have that expectation if that is the industry norm. In my opinion, it is not the norm yet. So when stats disclosure isn't an expected information, I would not be quick to dismiss a program based on the stats omission alone.
@albertino,
If you are 100% sure you want to go into a quant-oriented route, I suppose the MAFN is the one to take. It will give you a rigorous set of courses to take that should prepare you well for interviews. Also the name of the major is more "quant finance".
Choose MSOR if you think you might need more time to think about career paths. If you are a citizen, you can even delay your graduation time while you work at internships and take courses to find what interests you. At the end of the day, you are getting a Columbia name from both programs, and you could technically receive very similar education from both as well.
I agree that more stats is better. But to say that if a program does not disclose their stats, they aren't worth jack is too much. Do realize that most of these programs are fairly new, and I would imagine when they were founded, a lot were just like any other Master of Science programs. Also, I think a MS is by nature either a stepping-stone to PhD or a career-oriented degree. So how come we do not expect them to post their stats on how many goes into PhD and how many gets a job? But we expect that from a MFE program? I would only have that expectation if that is the industry norm. In my opinion, it is not the norm yet. So when stats disclosure isn't an expected information, I would not be quick to dismiss a program based on the stats omission alone.
@albertino,
If you are 100% sure you want to go into a quant-oriented route, I suppose the MAFN is the one to take. It will give you a rigorous set of courses to take that should prepare you well for interviews. Also the name of the major is more "quant finance".
Choose MSOR if you think you might need more time to think about career paths. If you are a citizen, you can even delay your graduation time while you work at internships and take courses to find what interests you. At the end of the day, you are getting a Columbia name from both programs, and you could technically receive very similar education from both as well.
- Joined
- 2/10/11
- Messages
- 19
- Points
- 13
@onethesc, thanks for your advice and offer.
I am an international student. Although I haven't any Finance background, I think my Math knowledge is quite good (Applied Math major with 4.o/4.0 GPA). It is my believe that with my Math skills and MAFN curriculum I will be more competitive when applying for a job after graduation. As of Operations Research, I have only passed a standard course on Deterministic Models which indeed was interesting but didn't require deep Math. Thus, I think that quant-oriented career path will be both beneficial and interesting choice for me.
I am an international student. Although I haven't any Finance background, I think my Math knowledge is quite good (Applied Math major with 4.o/4.0 GPA). It is my believe that with my Math skills and MAFN curriculum I will be more competitive when applying for a job after graduation. As of Operations Research, I have only passed a standard course on Deterministic Models which indeed was interesting but didn't require deep Math. Thus, I think that quant-oriented career path will be both beneficial and interesting choice for me.
- Joined
- 2/10/11
- Messages
- 19
- Points
- 13
Could you type it till tomorrow?
