To the Admissions Committee: I taught the applicant Econometrics and supervised their thesis. I recommend them for your MS in Economics & Public Policy.
Their thesis on a state welfare scheme's impact resisted the advocacy conclusion everyone expected, honestly reporting that the identification strategy couldn't support a clean causal claim — and proposing what data would. A student who says 'the evidence doesn't let me conclude that yet,' about a result they'd have liked to find, has the integrity policy economics desperately needs.
They handle data carefully and reason causally with discipline. I recommend them strongly.
To the Admissions Committee: I supervised the applicant at an economic-research organization for two years. I support their MS in Economics & Public Policy application.
The applicant cleaned and analyzed household-survey data that others had used carelessly, and found that a widely-cited internal statistic had been computed on an inconsistent sample — a correction that changed one of our policy briefs. They care more about the number being right than about it being convenient, which in applied policy work is invaluable.
I recommend them with conviction.
To the Admissions Committee: I supervised the applicant's research on labor-market outcomes. I recommend them for your MS in Economics & Public Policy.
The applicant investigated a wage-gap result and, rather than report the raw correlation, worked through the selection issues that could produce it spuriously — concluding honestly that part of the effect survived rigorous treatment and part didn't. That willingness to shrink their own headline finding to what the data supports is the mark of a real economist.
I endorse them highly.
To the Admissions Committee: I coordinate a policy-advocacy group where the applicant volunteered for over a year. I recommend them for your MS in Economics & Public Policy.
The applicant translated dense economic research into briefs that legislators' staff could actually use — and, importantly, refused to let us overstate a finding for rhetorical effect, insisting our advocacy stay honest to the evidence. Someone who protects the integrity of the evidence even under advocacy pressure is exactly who policy work needs.
I recommend them warmly.