Prof. Niels O. Nygaard, director of Chicago Math finance since 1996
Last updated (5/18/10): We received a statement from Dean Robert Fefferman through the university’s spokesman on May 18, 2010 in response to this article. A copy of the statement is appended after the original article.
15 years ago, Niels Nygaard, a professor in the department of mathematics at the University of Chicago, together with many academics at the university and with advice from a diverse collection of Chicago finance professionals, designed the master’s degree program in the mathematics of finance (MSFM). The program was devised over the course of a year and was introduced in the fall of 1996. Playing important parts in the creation of the program were Robert Zimmer and Robert Fefferman. Zimmer, now President of the University, and Fefferman, now Dean of the Physical Sciences Division, successively served as Chairman of the Mathematics Department in the 1990s.
Of the 18 graduates who received degrees in 1997, three went on to PhD programs in finance or economics, and the other 15 are working at international commercial banks, hedge funds, investment banks, and consulting companies.
“We think that the employment picture for the future looks very good,” Nygaard says in March 1998, “and we foresee an increasing demand for people with the kind of strong mathematical background that our program provides.” Approximately 25 students will graduate this year, he says, and the plan is to keep the number of graduates between 25 and 30 in the future.
Over the years, the MSFM program has grown in size and reach. The program now has one remote program oversea in Singapore and another in Stamford, CT. The program enjoys favorable opinion among prospective applicants due to the reputation of the University of Chicago’s Math department. It was ranked among the top 5 program in the 2009 Quant Network Rankings of Financial Engineering/ Mathematical Finance programs.
According to Steve Koppes, a spokesman for University of Chicago, the program currently enrolls 172 students, including 22 students enrolled at the program site in Singapore and another 22 students in Stamford, CT.
Announced only in February 2008, the Singapore program enrolled its first group of students in September of the same year. Local students pay $61,750 SGD (an equivalence of $45,076 USD) for the privilege of learning the same material as their Chicago counterparts. According to its website, the Singapore program, which, established in cooperation with the Economic Development Board of Singapore, is taught through a combination of interactive video conferencing and live on-site lectures by University of Chicago faculty who will periodically travel to Singapore to teach.
In December 2008, the Connecticut Department of Higher Education approved the University of Chicago’s deal with UBS to continue offering a master’s program in financial mathematics at UBS AG’s campus in Stamford. The Stamford program was suggested by a Chicago faculty member who previously worked at UBS. The program enrolls between 25 and 40 UBS employees annually. Three of the 16 instructors in the University of Chicago’s financial mathematics program are current or former UBS employees, including David Lee, chief risk officer at UBS; Paul Staneski and Timothy Weithers, who formerly worked in financial markets education at the Stamford office of UBS.
When Chicago started the MSFM program in 1996, it was among the first programs in the US that produce “quant”, short for “quantitative analyst” – a person who works in finance using numerical or quantitative techniques. While the profession has gained attention in mainstream media due to its perceived role in causing the financial crisis of 2008, the proliferation of specialized quant masters programs started years earlier. Specialty one-year master’s in finance have sprouted up across North America and beyond, giving would-be quants the qualifications they need to enter the trading game. Many entering students possess a PhD in math or physics.
According to Quant Network’s program selector, since 1996, there has been at least 35 new programs established in the US to provide master degrees in Financial Engineering and Mathematical Finance. NYU, Columbia, UC Berkeley, Carnegie Mellon, Princeton all have offered a competing program since then. In 2009 alone, five universities have jumped on the wagon, notable among them MIT Sloan, UCLA Anderson, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
In mid March, words leaked that Chicago University has fired Nygaard, the MSFM program’s founding and only director since its inception. The news only became public on March 25, when Dean Fefferman sent current students of the MSFM program an email (a copy of which was obtained by Quant Network) announcing that Niels Nygaard will be stepping down as Director.
The email caught alumni and students off guard, many of whom were taking C# course with Nygaard at the time. Their reaction ranged from shock, outpouring of support to Nygaard, to relief that change was finally coming. The lack of information further confused the program’s alumni as well as current and prospective students who expressed frustration on various online discussion boards and social networking sites.
Numerous emails by Quant Network to Nygaard, Dean Fefferman, the program’s PR firm, program’s faculty seeking comment have not been returned.
Through a university spokesman, Dr. Peter Constantin – the Mathematics Dept Chair, released a statement to Quant Network that reads “Niels Nygaard has made significant contributions as director of the Master of Science Program in Financial Mathematics since its founding in 1996. Although he is no longer serving as director, he remains a valued and important member of the mathematics faculty.”
Henri Berestycki, a visiting faculty, will be Interim Director while the search for a new Director is ongoing, Chair Constantin announced in an email to the program faculty on April 20.
Interviews with several students and alumni of the program indicated a pattern of growing discontent among students that went unaddressed for years before accumulating in the latest event. A source familiar with the firing told us that in addition to complaints about the program failing to meet students’ career needs, Nygaard’s long running tension with the university administration may have finally pushed the department to make drastic change.
Well-liked by many students, Nygaard is the longest tenured director among mathematical finance programs in the US. In some sense, his dismissal is a concession by University of Chicago to current students who, according to several sources, met privately with Dean Robert Fefferman to voice their frustration. Shortly after this meeting, several changes were made.
It will not be the only high level personnel change this year at the university. University of Chicago’s Booth School of Business is expected to announce a new dean in the coming months, too; its dean, Edward Snyder, is taking a year off before stepping in as dean at Yale. He managed to score the largest gift ever given to a business school— $300 million donation to the University of Chicago in 2008. The Booth business school was named after the donor’s, investment manager David Booth.
While the MBA students at Booth enjoy a dedicated career service afforded by the top ranked business school, many students in the MSFM program express resentment that their department has been slow to meet their career needs.
Despite its rapid growth, the Chicago MSFM is facing stiff competition from departments and business schools across the country whose competing financial engineering, mathematical finance programs aggressively advertise stellar placement numbers as main selling points. Tuition at these programs which traditionally last from one to two years can cost upward to $100K. While only a handful of programs publish detailed placement numbers of their graduates on their website (Chicago MSFM does not), the expectation among prospective students is high. These students normally come from China, India and other Asian countries where MFE education often involves a huge family saving or a loan where only a potential six figures salary job afterward can justify. For many of them, a dedicated placement service with a proven track record is among the most important factors when deciding a program to study.
While only few MFE programs post detailed job placement numbers on their website, the available public numbers keep such degrees in hot demand. Baruch MFE program reports an average base salary of $90,000 (low $75,000 and high $110,000) for its students who graduated in Dec ’09 and May ’10. For its class of 2009 MSCF Full-time graduates, CMU reports an average base salary of $87,397 (low $65,000 and high $120,000).
As the number of schools offering degrees in financial engineering (also known as quantitative finance, mathematical finance, financial mathematics) mushrooms the past decade, it’s increasingly difficult for programs to stand out to attract prospective students and potential employers. Programs hosted in business schools such as Carnegie Mellon’s MSCF (Tepper), UC Berkeley MFE (Haas), and MIT’s Finance (Sloan) have learned to use their business school’s network and career expertise to market themselves as placement-oriented.
Earlier this year, the Master in Finance program at MIT announced that it has received over 900 applications for 60 seat in its only second year. Established in 2009 out of MIT’s Sloan Business School, the $72,000 one-year long program received only 175 applicants and admitted 27 students for its first class ever. Explaining its exponential growth and how it plans to use the resources at Sloan, Julie Strong, admission office of MIT Sloan said in an email to Quant Network that “M.Fin. students benefit from the integrated career planning and recruiting services of both MIT and MIT Sloan’s Career Development offices, including skills assessment, job search, networking, resume building, and interview preparation workshops tailored to M. Fin. students, and individualized career planning advice”.
While the Chicago MSFM program does not implicitly advertise its relationship with the university’s business school, many students interviewed for this article cited the school’s well-known Math Dept and Booth Business School among their main reasons for joining the program. Privately, they had hoped that the career service at the highly ranked Math department would be at least adequate and they would benefit from the business school’s resources. When neither turns out to be true and their complaints yielded little result, some students have come to view themselves as cash cows for the department. The chief complaint among students is that the department has failed over the years to recognize that as a professional program, placement service is of utmost importance and concern to many.
In response, the program has hired Tim Weithers a few years ago as Associate Director to address the problem. Nygaard also hired John Zerolis as an adjunct lecturer in the program and to help with placement. According to several students we talked to, the effect of their hiring on job placement has been minimal.
In January, the university created a new staff position in the Math department reporting to the Dept Chairman and Program Director called “Executive Director” who will guide the strategic direction of the program, assess and develop curriculum, and will participate in admissions and program marketing, student career development, and fundraising. The job ad which was first posted around Jan 15th can be found on various academic jobs boards.
“The burden of running the program has increased over the years as the program has grown. We created this new position in order to provide additional support for the director. The addition of an executive director position is one of several steps the Department of Mathematics has taken recently to support the Financial Mathematics program. The Department is committed to sustained support of the Financial Mathematics program.” – said the statement from Dr. Peter Constantin – the Mathematics Dept Chair.
While the career services is being revamped, the program still faces various complaints from students who have aired their frustrations online as far back as 2005. According to a student review submitted on quantnet.com and discussion on Wilmott forum, the stochastic course and its instructor generate the most remarks. While various instructors have taught the course over the years, Prof. Per Mykland is often mentioned unfavorably in most discussion.
Many graduates of the program we contacted have expressed optimism that the new director will be able to restore trust and bring much needed changes and leadership to the program. “I would like to thank Niels for his many years of service to the program and I’m excited to see what directions a new director will take the program in” – wrote Neal Groothuis, a 2008 graduate of the program.
After 15 years, the Chicago Financial Mathematics program finally realized it needs a new direction as it heads into the new decade. The competition for students and jobs is getting much more competitive. A few universities have already scheduled to offer a competing master degree in financial math in 2011-2012.
APENDIX I: A copy of the statement by Dean Robert Fefferman to Quant Network
When Quant first contacted our office for information, we considered the questions posed and elected to have the chair of our Mathematics Department, Peter Constantin, respond on behalf of the department and the Physical Sciences Division, of which I am dean.
I regret many impressions left by the resulting story, “Windy City of Change.” First, Niels Nygaard steps down from the director position on good terms with me and with the Financial Mathematics program. After 14 years of dedicated service as director of this program, he continues an active role as part of its leadership team and as a valued and highly effective instructor.
The writer failed to include the portion of Peter Constantin’s response that discussed the appointment of Henri Berestycki as interim director. Henri is a widely respected mathematician. He has been a visiting faculty member at the University of Chicago since 2005, and is professor and director of the Centre d’analyse et de mathematique sociales (CAMS) at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS) in Paris. We anticipate that Henri will continue to direct the program for the next two to three years while he remains in the United States.
We also have recognized that in order to be maximally effective, the director needs a stronger support structure. Accordingly, we created the position of executive director and have just appointed Bill DeRonne. Bill will contribute to our program his 30 years of experience as an investment professional and instructor, most recently as president and CEO of FOX River Education Technology LLC, an algorithmic execution broker/dealer.
Henri, together with Niels and Bill, will provide a strong leadership structure for a program that has been growing steadily in size and impact since its founding in 1996. Other steps we have taken to support the Financial Mathematics program include the hiring of both tenured and junior faculty whose academic interests are relevant to the program, an active program of distinguished visiting scholars, and sustained relationships with a set of industry experts. We are proud of our Financial Mathematics program and committed to remain a leader in this field.
Robert Fefferman
Dean, Physical Sciences Division
The University of Chicago
Editor’s note: in response to Dean Fefferman’s note that we failed to include the portion about the appointment of Henri Berestycki as interim director, we went back to check and in fact, we DID mention it. You can find this paragraph about a third way into the article.
Henri Berestycki, a visiting faculty, will be Interim Director while the search for a new Director is ongoing, Chair Constantin announced in an email to the program faculty on April 20.
Furthermore, we received Chair Peter Constantin’s announcement about Berestycki’s appointment of interim director from a student the same day it was emailed. This announcement was appended to Chair Constantin’s statement to Quant Network on 4/26. We contacted Henri Berestycki (to both his chicago.edu and ehess.fr email acount) on 4/22/2010 but received no comment. This is to say we were aware about the interim director appointment and fully indicated that our original article.
APENDIX II: A copy of the email we received that includes the announcement about interim director appointment
You may have already heard this, but we just got an e-mail from the program that Henri Berestycki will serve as Interim Director of the finmath program. I pasted the e-mail we received below.
Best,
********
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:35:12 -0500
From: Bulent Yagcier ****@uchicago.edu
Subject: Interim Director FM
Cc: Peter Constantin <*****@cs.uchicago.edu>
———- Forwarded message ———-
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 12:13:41 -0500 (CDT)
From: Peter Constantin <*****@cs.uchicago.edu>
To: ***@math.uchicago.edu
Subject: Interim Director FM
I am pleased to announce that Henri Berestycki has agreed to serve as Interim Director of the Master of Science Program in Financial Mathematics.
Henri, who has been a regular visiting faculty member here since 2005, is Professor and Director of the Centre d’analyse et de mathematique sociales
(CAMS) at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS) in Paris.
His interests include partial differential equations, variational calculus, mathematical models of the financial markets, mathematical models in biology and ecology, modeling in social sciences. Among his many recognitions, this year he was awarded the French Legion of Honor.
Henri succeeds Professor Niels Nygaard, who has directed the program since its founding in 1996. Niels has been an energetic and devoted founding director and the program has thrived remarkably under his leadership.
Please join me in congratulating Henri on his appointment, and thanking Niels for his many contributions.
****************************************************************************
Peter Constantin
Louis Block Distinguished Service Professor Chair Department of Mathematics The University of Chicago Ry362A
5734 S. University Ave
Chicago, Il 60637
(773) 702-7399
****************************************************************************
Tags: Booth Business School, Chicago MSFM, Henri Berestycki, Niels Nygaard, Robert Fefferman, Robert Zimmer, university of chicago
Related posts:
You might consider hiring a new proofreader/copy editor. You sometimes refer to the program at Chicago as MSMF and others as MSFM. Additionally your verb tenses are off, e.g. “While various instructors teach [sic] the course over the years…”
physecon, 1 year agore: http://www.linkedin.com/newsArticle?viewDiscuss…
News Discussion at Quant Finance group at LinkedIn
Seeking changes, Chicago MSFM fired founding director
From: quantnet.com | May 10, 2010
Niels Nygaard, founding director of Chicago MSFM since 1996, has been replaced as the program tries to respond to students complaints and growing discontent
This article was submitted on May 12, 2010 at 07:12 PM PDT
By Andy Nguyen, Owner, Quant Network LLC
Comment by Alexander Adamchuk, UChicago MSFM'98 alumnus:
“This statement simply is not true.
Most if not all UChicago FinMath students love and admire Professor Niels Nygaard. Ask the alumni of FinMath Program. I'm one of them.
The FinMath program at the University of Chicago is a great success mostly due to extremely hard work and devotion of its 1st Director and The Founder Prof. Niels Nygaard.
Some students (2-5 out of 200) complained about the program that is too short , too intensive and too demanding and about the courses that are too advanced. It is not easy Program.
Everybody is concerned about placement now. Even last year at the difficult job market conditions Niels was able to help many of his students to find a job. Last year almost 100% of all graduating students had the job offers before the graduation date.
The class size is too large now but it is not Prof. Nygaard's fault.
It was a decision of the UChicago administration to admit 50 students more last year due to high demand.
This year there are more than 1000 applications for the Program because of its reputation and a track record of its alumni success.
After all, Niels has agreed to stay with the Program as a Founding Director and to teach his classes and to oversee the development of a Singapore program which he has created a couple years ago.
A new interim director is a long-time friend and colleague of Prof. Niels Nygaard. They are closely collaborating now on the development of the Program. The program is in transition.
A search for newly created position of an executive director is not finished yet.
There are some good candidates.”
By Alexander Adamchuk, UChicago MSFM'98 alumnus:
Thanks for the comment, Alexander
Can you post this comment under the article so our readers can see it.
By Andy Nguyen Owner, Quant Network LLC
Chukchi, 1 year agoAs a current student in the program, I'll offer my insider view: First, Dr. Nygaard is an exceptional instructor, one of the best I have ever had.
Second, as a current student, I know who has been complaining, and why. Some complaints are legitimate, but many students are complaining thought they were going to get an easy 9-month version of an MBA. They were surprised to learn that they had to actually know real math, actually do real math, and actually be good at it. Simply put, many of those complaining are doing so because they cannot cut it in this extremely demanding program. Most of the coursework involves pages and pages of abstract mathematical proofs and derivations, coupled with hundreds of lines of code per week in MATLAB.
The article mentions career placement. I agree this is is one area where the program has been disappointing. However, the financial sector right now is not hiring, so even with a better placement program, it would still be difficult to get a job.
Bottom line: If you want an easy degree as a door to a career change so you can make millions on Wall Street with minimal effort, DO NOT apply to the UChicago MSFM program. Go to a second-tier MFE programs where graduates cannot even explain Black-Scholes and think Girsanov is a Russian comedian. But If you really want to learn the hard and complicated details of financial mathematic from an exceptional faculty with very intellectually challenging coursework, MSFM is top notch.
Brent Skilton, 1 year agoTell me Mr. Skilton and Mr. Alex, which university would fire its founding professor simply because only 2-5 students out of 200 failed to understand Girasnov ? Clearly there is a lot more going on, which you are also aware of. Pages of abstract proofs hundreds of lines of code ha ha ha all the m files are supplied to you and you have to fill in maximum 10 lines of code. My friends in the program are quite demoralized because they are not getting hired because they have not been taught well.
Girasnov Scholes, 1 year agoAs to what happened with Prof. Nygaard, I still don't know and have not received a satisfactory answer from anyone in the program. But the notion that the students only type in a few lines of code can only come from someone who is clearly not familiar with any class taught by Mykland, Paulsen, Hanson or any of the courses in the Finance track. Indeed even in the one class where starter code is given, you have to add a minimum of 10 lines rather than a maximum (actually likely more). What is good teaching is subjective and opinions differ between people. Mr. Skilton and I likely agree, while a number of people don't. Having talked to some of the unhappy students, I second Mr. Skilton's notion that they were almost universally expecting something like business school. They were not interested in a degree that is more like a math grad degree and do not like the teaching methods and expectations of those kinds of programs. The reason that some are not finding jobs is not because they have not been taught well. If that were true placement statistics for Chicago would be bad in both good and bad years. That is simply not the case. The fault, dear Brutus, is not in the stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings.
tchorvat, 1 year agoI think MSFM just needs to focus on Career Placement. I believe rest all is fine. Use the network, alumni, or ABC or XYZ. Just get people placed. I know some really dumb people getting placed from other programs. Ultimately it is all about placement. That's what Harvard, MIT, Princeton or any other damn university boasts off.
Current Student, 1 year agoIf many current students (probably with weak math skills) thought that the U of Chicago MSFM would be like an MBA in 9 months then the U of Chicago must not be doing a good job of explaining their program to potential students ( or miss leading them??) .
So if the U of Chicago is letting in too many unqualified (weak math skill) students that are just set up to get overwhelmed by the math/course work, then who's to blame?
Maybe it's too much about getting tuition $$$ at the U of Chicago.
RICH, 1 year agoIf many current students (probably with weak math skills) thought that the U of Chicago MSFM would be like an MBA in 9 months then the U of Chicago must not be doing a good job of explaining their program to potential students ( or miss leading them??) .
So if the U of Chicago is letting in too many unqualified (weak math skill) students that are just set up to get overwhelmed by the math/course work, then who's to blame?
Maybe it's too much about getting tuition $$$ at the U of Chicago.
RICH, 1 year ago“Pages of abstract proofs hundreds of lines of code ha ha ha all the m files are supplied to you and you have to fill in maximum 10 lines of code. My friends in the program are quite demoralized because they are not getting hired because they have not been taught well.”
Evidently, your friends have not been doing their homework, which would explain why they are having problems. If they had done their work, they would know that the m-files are only provided for you in one class (Roger Lee’s Numerical Methods class), and only for the first few assignments. In all the other classes you have to build your own from scratch.
Second, no one wants career-changers anymore. With the flood of unemployed quants with experience on the street, no one wants people fresh out of a finmath program who have no experience in the industry. This will probably change as the industry recovers, but it is a problem now.
–Brent
BigGamma, 1 year ago“Pages of abstract proofs hundreds of lines of code ha ha ha all the m files are supplied to you and you have to fill in maximum 10 lines of code. My friends in the program are quite demoralized because they are not getting hired because they have not been taught well.”
Evidently, your friends have not been doing their homework, which would explain why they are having problems. If they had done their work, they would know that the m-files are only provided for you in one class (Roger Lee’s Numerical Methods class), and only for the first few assignments. In all the other classes you have to build your own from scratch.
Second, no one wants career-changers anymore. With the flood of unemployed quants with experience on the street, no one wants people fresh out of a finmath program who have no experience in the industry. This will probably change as the industry recovers, but it is a problem now.
–Brent
BigGamma, 1 year ago“So if the U of Chicago is letting in too many unqualified (weak math skill) students that are just set up to get overwhelmed by the math/course work, then who’s to blame?”
The program is marketed as a highly mathematical program. I think a lot of students simply didn’t do the homework. On the website it says that you are recommended to have experience through Calc II and SDEs, statistics, probability/measure theory, and matrix algebra. In addition, there is a 9 month math prep course taught by Dr. Nygaard that one can take before entering the program. A number of students simply did not do their due diligence, and thought this was like a masters in financial analysis or an MFE.
BigGamma, 1 year ago“So if the U of Chicago is letting in too many unqualified (weak math skill) students that are just set up to get overwhelmed by the math/course work, then who’s to blame?”
The program is marketed as a highly mathematical program. I think a lot of students simply didn’t do the homework. On the website it says that you are recommended to have experience through Calc II and SDEs, statistics, probability/measure theory, and matrix algebra. In addition, there is a 9 month math prep course taught by Dr. Nygaard that one can take before entering the program. A number of students simply did not do their due diligence, and thought this was like a masters in financial analysis or an MFE.
BigGamma, 1 year agoI meant experience through Calc III, not Calc II.
BigGamma, 1 year agoI meant experience through Calc III, not Calc II.
BigGamma, 1 year agostudents have not mentioned the travesty that was Advanced options pricing…. The most disorganized course in this program. The professors were more interested in self-glorification than in actual teaching the content.
Career placement is a joke in the dept.
I will say that Niels is a good man/professor. But the course needed change.
Shark, 1 year agostudents have not mentioned the travesty that was Advanced options pricing…. The most disorganized course in this program. The professors were more interested in self-glorification than in actual teaching the content.
Career placement is a joke in the dept.
I will say that Niels is a good man/professor. But the course needed change.
Shark, 1 year agoI am a current UofC MSFM student, and feel infitely more challenged that disappointed. Dr. Nygaard is a superb teacher and mathematician, and the prestige of the program owes much to his stewardship and genuine concern for the MSFM students. His classes are uniformly edifying and rich with resources I can take with me when the classroom instruction is over.
Greg Martin, 1 year agoI am a current UofC MSFM student, and feel infitely more challenged that disappointed. Dr. Nygaard is a superb teacher and mathematician, and the prestige of the program owes much to his stewardship and genuine concern for the MSFM students. His classes are uniformly edifying and rich with resources I can take with me when the classroom instruction is over.
Greg Martin, 1 year ago“The program is marketed as a highly mathematical program. I think a lot of students simply didn’t do the homework. On the website it says that you are recommended to have experience through Calc II and SDEs, statistics, probability/measure theory, and matrix algebra….”
On the addmitions requirements web page
I didn’t see that they suggest that a potential student should know SDE (stochastic Diff Equ.) or measure theory.
(http://finmath.uchicago.edu/new/msfm/prospective/plan_admission.php)
Anyway, the website says “suggested” not “required” math course. Shouldn’t students be required to have the math, before U of Chicago takes their tuition?
Rich, 1 year ago“The program is marketed as a highly mathematical program. I think a lot of students simply didn’t do the homework. On the website it says that you are recommended to have experience through Calc II and SDEs, statistics, probability/measure theory, and matrix algebra….”
On the addmitions requirements web page
I didn’t see that they suggest that a potential student should know SDE (stochastic Diff Equ.) or measure theory.
(http://finmath.uchicago.edu/new/msfm/prospective/plan_admission.php)
Anyway, the website says “suggested” not “required” math course. Shouldn’t students be required to have the math, before U of Chicago takes their tuition?
Rich, 1 year agoInstead of admitting that there is a genuine problem with the MSFM program, and trying to fix that problem, the discussion seems to be about putting Nygaard on a pedestal and glorifying him as a rockstar Professor and the complaining students as idiot underlings who can’t cut the mustard since they don’t know Calc III, Girsanov, SDE etc. This is quite counterproductive, as Nygaard can surely fend for himself while the students are left high and dry with a haphazard curriculum leading to a useless degree and indifferent job prospects. Any degree must be useful to 80% of the students taking it, and you can write off 20% as those who are not motivated, not the other way around.
BS, 1 year agoInstead of admitting that there is a genuine problem with the MSFM program, and trying to fix that problem, the discussion seems to be about putting Nygaard on a pedestal and glorifying him as a rockstar Professor and the complaining students as idiot underlings who can’t cut the mustard since they don’t know Calc III, Girsanov, SDE etc. This is quite counterproductive, as Nygaard can surely fend for himself while the students are left high and dry with a haphazard curriculum leading to a useless degree and indifferent job prospects. Any degree must be useful to 80% of the students taking it, and you can write off 20% as those who are not motivated, not the other way around.
BS, 1 year agoWhen Quant first contacted our office for information, we considered the questions posed and elected to have the chair of our Mathematics Department, Peter Constantin, respond on behalf of the department and the Physical Sciences Division, of which I am dean.
I regret many impressions left by the resulting story, “Windy City of Change.” First, Niels Nygaard steps down from the director position on good terms with me and with the Financial Mathematics program. After 14 years of dedicated service as director of this program, he continues an active role as part of its leadership team and as a valued and highly effective instructor.
The writer failed to include the portion of Peter Constantin’s response that discussed the appointment of Henri Berestycki as interim director. Henri is a widely respected mathematician. He has been a visiting faculty member at the University of Chicago since 2005, and is professor and director of the Centre d’analyse et de mathematique sociales (CAMS) at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS) in Paris. We anticipate that Henri will continue to direct the program for the next two to three years while he remains in the United States.
We also have recognized that in order to be maximally effective, the director needs a stronger support structure. Accordingly, we created the position of executive director and have just appointed Bill DeRonne. Bill will contribute to our program his 30 years of experience as an investment professional and instructor, most recently as president and CEO of FOX River Education Technology LLC, an algorithmic execution broker/dealer.
Henri, together with Niels and Bill, will provide a strong leadership structure for a program that has been growing steadily in size and impact since its founding in 1996. Other steps we have taken to support the Financial Mathematics program include the hiring of both tenured and junior faculty whose academic interests are relevant to the program, an active program of distinguished visiting scholars, and sustained relationships with a set of industry experts. We are proud of our Financial Mathematics program and committed to remain a leader in this field.
Robert Fefferman
Robert Fefferman, 1 year agoDean, Physical Sciences Division
The University of Chicago
When Quant first contacted our office for information, we considered the questions posed and elected to have the chair of our Mathematics Department, Peter Constantin, respond on behalf of the department and the Physical Sciences Division, of which I am dean.
I regret many impressions left by the resulting story, “Windy City of Change.” First, Niels Nygaard steps down from the director position on good terms with me and with the Financial Mathematics program. After 14 years of dedicated service as director of this program, he continues an active role as part of its leadership team and as a valued and highly effective instructor.
The writer failed to include the portion of Peter Constantin’s response that discussed the appointment of Henri Berestycki as interim director. Henri is a widely respected mathematician. He has been a visiting faculty member at the University of Chicago since 2005, and is professor and director of the Centre d’analyse et de mathematique sociales (CAMS) at the Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales (EHESS) in Paris. We anticipate that Henri will continue to direct the program for the next two to three years while he remains in the United States.
We also have recognized that in order to be maximally effective, the director needs a stronger support structure. Accordingly, we created the position of executive director and have just appointed Bill DeRonne. Bill will contribute to our program his 30 years of experience as an investment professional and instructor, most recently as president and CEO of FOX River Education Technology LLC, an algorithmic execution broker/dealer.
Henri, together with Niels and Bill, will provide a strong leadership structure for a program that has been growing steadily in size and impact since its founding in 1996. Other steps we have taken to support the Financial Mathematics program include the hiring of both tenured and junior faculty whose academic interests are relevant to the program, an active program of distinguished visiting scholars, and sustained relationships with a set of industry experts. We are proud of our Financial Mathematics program and committed to remain a leader in this field.
Robert Fefferman
Robert Fefferman, 1 year agoDean, Physical Sciences Division
The University of Chicago
The program has been troubled for years. The first 5 years of the program were excellent — superb, even. The next five saw a decline as the math department saw they had a cash cow they could milk. The last five years have been sad. I would say pathetic, but many of the problems did not merit pathos: they were brought about because people actively chose not to care.
Yes, Hanson, Paulsen, and/or Mykland’s courses are hard; that’s irrelevant to the program director role. Yes, Nygaard is a fine teacher; but, again, that is teaching not running the program. And running the program was not done well: Nygaard warred with people who could have helped and refused to address persistent complaints: rampant cheating, terrible placement, inflexibility of curriculum, nonexistent relationship with the business school, and unresponsiveness to changes in markets. In not addressing these, he diluted the degree’s brand value.
The world has moved on: mainstream finance is now quantitative. That implies a rise in specialization: We now hire people with a masters in operations research, CS, economics, statistics, or finance (with an emphasis on quant courses) — depending on the role. Their positioning as the link between trader and researcher is a role that no longer exists: the researchers are now often the traders; or, the two talk without need for a middleman.
Algo Trader, 1 year agoThe program has been troubled for years. The first 5 years of the program were excellent — superb, even. The next five saw a decline as the math department saw they had a cash cow they could milk. The last five years have been sad. I would say pathetic, but many of the problems did not merit pathos: they were brought about because people actively chose not to care.
Yes, Hanson, Paulsen, and/or Mykland’s courses are hard; that’s irrelevant to the program director role. Yes, Nygaard is a fine teacher; but, again, that is teaching not running the program. And running the program was not done well: Nygaard warred with people who could have helped and refused to address persistent complaints: rampant cheating, terrible placement, inflexibility of curriculum, nonexistent relationship with the business school, and unresponsiveness to changes in markets. In not addressing these, he diluted the degree’s brand value.
The world has moved on: mainstream finance is now quantitative. That implies a rise in specialization: We now hire people with a masters in operations research, CS, economics, statistics, or finance (with an emphasis on quant courses) — depending on the role. Their positioning as the link between trader and researcher is a role that no longer exists: the researchers are now often the traders; or, the two talk without need for a middleman.
Algo Trader, 1 year agoI felt absolutely shocked after reading this article – shocked to find that Chicago has a University much less a financial engineering program! I thought that after Mrs O’Leary’s cow started a fire that burned much of Chicago in 1871 that most Chicago residents returned to farming. I mean where do Obama and us East Coasters get our arugula if not from Chicago? I digress.
Regarding the current Chicago/ Nygaard situation, I think I’ve figured out a way to help. We all know that good trading firms need high powered computers and I would assume the same is true for financial engineering programs. So, I would like to donate my Apple II GS to the financial engineering program at University of Chicago (or is it Chicago State University?). However, I’m not sure if Chicago has internet capability yet so I will be more than willing to print a hard copy of this message and send via snail-mail to dean Fefferman.
east coast quant, 1 year agoI felt absolutely shocked after reading this article – shocked to find that Chicago has a University much less a financial engineering program! I thought that after Mrs O’Leary’s cow started a fire that burned much of Chicago in 1871 that most Chicago residents returned to farming. I mean where do Obama and us East Coasters get our arugula if not from Chicago? I digress.
Regarding the current Chicago/ Nygaard situation, I think I’ve figured out a way to help. We all know that good trading firms need high powered computers and I would assume the same is true for financial engineering programs. So, I would like to donate my Apple II GS to the financial engineering program at University of Chicago (or is it Chicago State University?). However, I’m not sure if Chicago has internet capability yet so I will be more than willing to print a hard copy of this message and send via snail-mail to dean Fefferman.
east coast quant, 1 year agoEast Coast Quant,
It is true that Chicago is largely a farming community…that is why it smells like manure. In fact, I think that Chicago State University even has a Masters in Manure Engineering. I hear it’s just about as difficult to get as the MSFE, and equivally useless. For exammple, you can repackage manure 12 different ways, but at the end of the day, it still smells like manure. Same holds true for financial engineering.
Sincerely,
Bubba
Bubba Quant, 1 year agoEast Coast Quant,
It is true that Chicago is largely a farming community…that is why it smells like manure. In fact, I think that Chicago State University even has a Masters in Manure Engineering. I hear it’s just about as difficult to get as the MSFE, and equivally useless. For exammple, you can repackage manure 12 different ways, but at the end of the day, it still smells like manure. Same holds true for financial engineering.
Sincerely,
Bubba
Bubba Quant, 1 year agoword on eckhart is Roger Lee is leaving also. He was the only full-time faculty in this program.
This program is nothing but a cash-cow for the dept. Thre is is very little for average students. If you are outstnading in Math, it si good. But if you are average, they just want your money. Such a hurried program – everything is in a hurry. They capitalise on the Chicago brand-name.
I wasted 1yr of my life and $50k in this
Shark, 1 year agoword on eckhart is Roger Lee is leaving also. He was the only full-time faculty in this program.
This program is nothing but a cash-cow for the dept. Thre is is very little for average students. If you are outstnading in Math, it si good. But if you are average, they just want your money. Such a hurried program – everything is in a hurry. They capitalise on the Chicago brand-name.
I wasted 1yr of my life and $50k in this
Shark, 1 year agoChicago has a finance math review program and
the course is taught using PDF files on a computer and projector.
The use of the PDF files allows Prof. Nygaard to cover a lot of math quickly enough to lose 80% of the students 80% of the time.
Also, U of Chicago MSFE program seems to think it a good idea to use retired Professors …some professors can teach just fine into their late 70′s but most should stay retired at 67.
Tom C, 1 year agoChicago has a finance math review program and
the course is taught using PDF files on a computer and projector.
The use of the PDF files allows Prof. Nygaard to cover a lot of math quickly enough to lose 80% of the students 80% of the time.
Also, U of Chicago MSFE program seems to think it a good idea to use retired Professors …some professors can teach just fine into their late 70′s but most should stay retired at 67.
Tom C, 1 year agoI am saddened to hear this. I was in the program in it’s early years (1998) and noticed the rampant cheating referred to above. People would collaborate on matlab code and some graduated without ever actually writing their own code. I also have an MBA from Chicago and it’s true, the placement for the MSFE program was nonexistent. When I started the MSFE I was in the last quarter of the MBA, and the two schools would not allow cross registration. The MSFE program HAS to do better for its students. The quality when I was there was very low compared with the MBA program (which was outstanding!)
jvoitle, 1 year agoI am saddened to hear this. I was in the program in it’s early years (1998) and noticed the rampant cheating referred to above. People would collaborate on matlab code and some graduated without ever actually writing their own code. I also have an MBA from Chicago and it’s true, the placement for the MSFE program was nonexistent. When I started the MSFE I was in the last quarter of the MBA, and the two schools would not allow cross registration. The MSFE program HAS to do better for its students. The quality when I was there was very low compared with the MBA program (which was outstanding!)
jvoitle, 1 year agoI had an offer from UChicago and NYU. I chose NYU. While the school itself is good. After talking to current students in Chicago, I can say the placement sucks. They really have no solid relationship with the big banks in NY or London or HK for that matter. Placement is a haphazard process and mostly from local companies. They don’t really court the banks like Berkeley MFE or NYU.
Seems to me that quality of program has gone down as well – with most students from Asian countries who suffer communication problems. I am happy with NYU.
Eric Chow, 1 year agoI had an offer from UChicago and NYU. I chose NYU. While the school itself is good. After talking to current students in Chicago, I can say the placement sucks. They really have no solid relationship with the big banks in NY or London or HK for that matter. Placement is a haphazard process and mostly from local companies. They don’t really court the banks like Berkeley MFE or NYU.
Seems to me that quality of program has gone down as well – with most students from Asian countries who suffer communication problems. I am happy with NYU.
Eric Chow, 1 year agoThe program is top-notch. Actually placement is bad at almost every program though some programs do better than others. Chicago will survive current crises.
The problem is one of competition from the those dastardly devious MBA programs. How do you convince the well-trodden path of banks hiring MBA grads. I have heard horror stories of MBAs being placed into stat-arb or exotic trading roles. While the MBA is good I think MFEs or MSFMs can do alot more in these roles. Really is Wharton MBA even with analytical finance concentration really comparable to an MFE?
Tom, 1 year agoThe program is top-notch. Actually placement is bad at almost every program though some programs do better than others. Chicago will survive current crises.
The problem is one of competition from the those dastardly devious MBA programs. How do you convince the well-trodden path of banks hiring MBA grads. I have heard horror stories of MBAs being placed into stat-arb or exotic trading roles. While the MBA is good I think MFEs or MSFMs can do alot more in these roles. Really is Wharton MBA even with analytical finance concentration really comparable to an MFE?
Tom, 1 year agoOk, my two cents worth on this program.
I am a graduate, and Wall Street Investment Banker… went to an Ivy League School for my MBA… Engineering undergrad etc… MENSA member, GMAT of over 750…
Now, I this program is by far the worst program I ever embarked in !
First, yes, the career placement is horrific. They consider getting three trading companies giving a 30 minute talk in September a good effort. I once got a job advertisement for Dominos Pizza through their infamous career placement ‘specialist.’ This is hard to believe, but VERY true.
Just two blocks away, the top Banks and Wall Street houses come to recruit at the Business School. But, not only do they NOT even drop by to recruit here, but MSFM students ARE BARRED from attending the recruiting events at the B-School.
The placements for this program … IT for a small irrelevant firm. If you hit a homerun, then you get a IT job at a bank (very few cases). GREAT.
It is June, graduation was a few weeks ago, and less than 50% of students are placed; less than 10% are placed in quant jobs. The faculty will cite higher numbers, but sorry – Internships for a 1 year program, or OTP don’t count. Get your heads out of your rear ends.
Second, their curriculum is irrelevant. When you have a hammer, you look for nails to hammer. This program is taught out of the math department (yes, very famous and top 5 in the world). But, they have no business teaching finance – stick to theoretical math, and doing your proofs … People on Wall Street don’t care ! Banks will hire a handful of TOP Ph.D’s to develop models… banks then vet the models, test them etc. for months, then give them to the traders and IT folks to implement. It is a controlled process. A master’s student will NEVER be given a chance to practice what this program focuses on.
Also, on the trading floor, you will NOT go the whiteboard and start deriving models…. not done. You are expected to know the tools, and then to APPLY them as a trader, a quant, a professional. This program stops at the proofs. 90% of the program focuses on proofs. WHO CARES !
The point that was made in an earlier post here is true. The math is hard and you have to be good. Yes, agreed. The point this person neglects to make is that motivated, bright students come to the program to LEARN. You will do well in this master’s program if you ALREADY know the material – so, then what is the point of attending????????????????????????????????? They are inept teachers, then blame the students for being stupid. Well, pass the buck !!!!!!! I went got my engineering degree, not knowing engineering ,but being taught it, and then successfully applying it. Why would I have gone to school if I already knew the material ???????????????????? Answer me that riddle Sherlock !
Third, the professors SUCK ! Yes, Neils Nygaard is a nice guy, and teaches fine. WHO CARES. The hardest course he taught was C sharp. If he is so good, why does he have Myckland teaching Stoch Calc – which was a dismal disaster ! The class had a mid-term average of 25%, and we all ended up getting A’s…. what is this ? Teach the students the material well. If you can’t, get out of the way. We are paying you for your TEACHING ABILITIES in transferring knowledge, NOT your ego nor that of the Math Department. Prof. Hanson – another disaster occurring on a continual basis. Tim Weithers – he is a nice guy in class, but a bitter ass anytime else. WHO CARES. Final Exam worth 100% of the grade, but after class, he nor his TA are anywhere to be found. I emailed him 4 to 7 times two weeks before the final to ask questions, and got NO response. He (and other profs) spend their time in class reading through notes and not teaching, they joke, and emit their arrogance. But, by way of knowledge transfer – very little. Teaching Ability IS NOT a valued ability in this department, and therefore they have no business teaching a professional subject. Paulsen is a NICE GUY. Yes. WHO CARES. He is probably the best professor of the whole lot, too bad he is a visiting prof. A one on one conversation with him yielded much frustration from him – he cited that he is teaching a 1 year course condensed into 2 months. His words, not mine. Well, then focus. This program uses a shotgun approach to teaching, with very little tie back to the topic. They focus on copulas, with NO mention by the prof on how to apply this to the market !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHO CARES.
Professors (yes I am repeating here because it is important) throw up powerpoint slides and READ from the slides. Very little actual teaching happens. Case and point… the fixed income course, stochastic calc, statistics etc… they are clueless instructors.
There is very little access to professors/TAs/help outside the classroom. When class is over, the profs scurry away and hold ONLINE sessions. This is great if you are learning HISTORY. But, sorry, for math, you need a chalkboard and face time… which nicely segways to….
Fourth, they bend to their technology. To be a cash cow (and it is) for the math dept., they offer lectures in Stamford, CT, and Singapore. Well, how they do this is disastrous. In addition to having horrible and clueless lecturers that babble FOR 3 HOUR CLASSES (way too long for math – studies show that after 1.5 hours, students’ brains absorb significantly less), they teach on PowerPoint slides. NO CHALKBOARD or Whiteboard to field students’ questions. If I wanted to go to an online school, I would have taken courses at Phoenix Online University, NOT AT University of Chicago. If you ask a question in class, they try to put math formulas on the powerpoint presentation. THIS IS NOT A GOOD WAY TO LEARN MATH. GET SERIOUS.
The technology freezes, is cumbersome, ineffective.
UChicago, if you want to have a serious program, then have a serious format that caters to learning. Your students are capable and motivated. You demotivate them and waste their money.
Fifth, the curriculum is irrelevant. Classes offered are stapled together with very little tie-in. What is worst, is that courses themselves are stapled together. Topic in Economics… ???????? A complete waste of $5000. They teach the Reimann Integral, but gosh darn it.. ask a student what a yield curve is or a bond and they are clueless.
Sixth, Dr. Fefferman is actually a very talented professor. Well, we got our introduction lectures by him, which was probably the highlight of the program. It was ALL downhill from there.
Ok, now, some of you will attach the messenger… which is me. Fine go ahead. All I have to say is that this is my 2nd Master’s degree, and I was a gifted child. I have studied at some of the top schools in the world, in serious programs (engineering), with the top professors and curriculum. I was also a 3 course instructor at a University, so I have some teaching experience. I have done very well in my career and academic endeavors –thank you very much.
Concerned and Fed Up., 1 year agoI was accepted to several other top programs, but came to UChicago because of their brand/reputation. I have Wall Street experience, a kick-butt resume, and a kick-butt job that I got based on MY background (NOT THIS PROGRAM). I CAN TELL YOU that this department has serious issues with their professors, their curriculum, their technology, their attitude and lack of respect thereof. It is undeserving to be associated with THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, or even with the Online University of Phoenix for that matter.
I am also aware that I am discounting the value of my degree by posting this, but for me the value of my background and previous education more than make up for it. This was a complete was of money, time, resources, breath for me, and MANY MANY others.
Ok, my two cents worth on this program.
I am a graduate, and Wall Street Investment Banker… went to an Ivy League School for my MBA… Engineering undergrad etc… MENSA member, GMAT of over 750…
Now, I this program is by far the worst program I ever embarked in !
First, yes, the career placement is horrific. They consider getting three trading companies giving a 30 minute talk in September a good effort. I once got a job advertisement for Dominos Pizza through their infamous career placement ‘specialist.’ This is hard to believe, but VERY true.
Just two blocks away, the top Banks and Wall Street houses come to recruit at the Business School. But, not only do they NOT even drop by to recruit here, but MSFM students ARE BARRED from attending the recruiting events at the B-School.
The placements for this program … IT for a small irrelevant firm. If you hit a homerun, then you get a IT job at a bank (very few cases). GREAT.
It is June, graduation was a few weeks ago, and less than 50% of students are placed; less than 10% are placed in quant jobs. The faculty will cite higher numbers, but sorry – Internships for a 1 year program, or OTP don’t count. Get your heads out of your rear ends.
Second, their curriculum is irrelevant. When you have a hammer, you look for nails to hammer. This program is taught out of the math department (yes, very famous and top 5 in the world). But, they have no business teaching finance – stick to theoretical math, and doing your proofs … People on Wall Street don’t care ! Banks will hire a handful of TOP Ph.D’s to develop models… banks then vet the models, test them etc. for months, then give them to the traders and IT folks to implement. It is a controlled process. A master’s student will NEVER be given a chance to practice what this program focuses on.
Also, on the trading floor, you will NOT go the whiteboard and start deriving models…. not done. You are expected to know the tools, and then to APPLY them as a trader, a quant, a professional. This program stops at the proofs. 90% of the program focuses on proofs. WHO CARES !
The point that was made in an earlier post here is true. The math is hard and you have to be good. Yes, agreed. The point this person neglects to make is that motivated, bright students come to the program to LEARN. You will do well in this master’s program if you ALREADY know the material – so, then what is the point of attending????????????????????????????????? They are inept teachers, then blame the students for being stupid. Well, pass the buck !!!!!!! I went got my engineering degree, not knowing engineering ,but being taught it, and then successfully applying it. Why would I have gone to school if I already knew the material ???????????????????? Answer me that riddle Sherlock !
Third, the professors SUCK ! Yes, Neils Nygaard is a nice guy, and teaches fine. WHO CARES. The hardest course he taught was C sharp. If he is so good, why does he have Myckland teaching Stoch Calc – which was a dismal disaster ! The class had a mid-term average of 25%, and we all ended up getting A’s…. what is this ? Teach the students the material well. If you can’t, get out of the way. We are paying you for your TEACHING ABILITIES in transferring knowledge, NOT your ego nor that of the Math Department. Prof. Hanson – another disaster occurring on a continual basis. Tim Weithers – he is a nice guy in class, but a bitter ass anytime else. WHO CARES. Final Exam worth 100% of the grade, but after class, he nor his TA are anywhere to be found. I emailed him 4 to 7 times two weeks before the final to ask questions, and got NO response. He (and other profs) spend their time in class reading through notes and not teaching, they joke, and emit their arrogance. But, by way of knowledge transfer – very little. Teaching Ability IS NOT a valued ability in this department, and therefore they have no business teaching a professional subject. Paulsen is a NICE GUY. Yes. WHO CARES. He is probably the best professor of the whole lot, too bad he is a visiting prof. A one on one conversation with him yielded much frustration from him – he cited that he is teaching a 1 year course condensed into 2 months. His words, not mine. Well, then focus. This program uses a shotgun approach to teaching, with very little tie back to the topic. They focus on copulas, with NO mention by the prof on how to apply this to the market !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHO CARES.
Professors (yes I am repeating here because it is important) throw up powerpoint slides and READ from the slides. Very little actual teaching happens. Case and point… the fixed income course, stochastic calc, statistics etc… they are clueless instructors.
There is very little access to professors/TAs/help outside the classroom. When class is over, the profs scurry away and hold ONLINE sessions. This is great if you are learning HISTORY. But, sorry, for math, you need a chalkboard and face time… which nicely segways to….
Fourth, they bend to their technology. To be a cash cow (and it is) for the math dept., they offer lectures in Stamford, CT, and Singapore. Well, how they do this is disastrous. In addition to having horrible and clueless lecturers that babble FOR 3 HOUR CLASSES (way too long for math – studies show that after 1.5 hours, students’ brains absorb significantly less), they teach on PowerPoint slides. NO CHALKBOARD or Whiteboard to field students’ questions. If I wanted to go to an online school, I would have taken courses at Phoenix Online University, NOT AT University of Chicago. If you ask a question in class, they try to put math formulas on the powerpoint presentation. THIS IS NOT A GOOD WAY TO LEARN MATH. GET SERIOUS.
The technology freezes, is cumbersome, ineffective.
UChicago, if you want to have a serious program, then have a serious format that caters to learning. Your students are capable and motivated. You demotivate them and waste their money.
Fifth, the curriculum is irrelevant. Classes offered are stapled together with very little tie-in. What is worst, is that courses themselves are stapled together. Topic in Economics… ???????? A complete waste of $5000. They teach the Reimann Integral, but gosh darn it.. ask a student what a yield curve is or a bond and they are clueless.
Sixth, Dr. Fefferman is actually a very talented professor. Well, we got our introduction lectures by him, which was probably the highlight of the program. It was ALL downhill from there.
Ok, now, some of you will attach the messenger… which is me. Fine go ahead. All I have to say is that this is my 2nd Master’s degree, and I was a gifted child. I have studied at some of the top schools in the world, in serious programs (engineering), with the top professors and curriculum. I was also a 3 course instructor at a University, so I have some teaching experience. I have done very well in my career and academic endeavors –thank you very much.
Concerned and Fed Up., 1 year agoI was accepted to several other top programs, but came to UChicago because of their brand/reputation. I have Wall Street experience, a kick-butt resume, and a kick-butt job that I got based on MY background (NOT THIS PROGRAM). I CAN TELL YOU that this department has serious issues with their professors, their curriculum, their technology, their attitude and lack of respect thereof. It is undeserving to be associated with THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, or even with the Online University of Phoenix for that matter.
I am also aware that I am discounting the value of my degree by posting this, but for me the value of my background and previous education more than make up for it. This was a complete was of money, time, resources, breath for me, and MANY MANY others.
That photo of Neils Nygaard is very very old. If you want to know what he looks like today… Gollum of Lord of the rings…. scary, but the resemblence is sad but striking.
http://www.ratewall.com/cpics/07254e14-0052-4613-9f64-fce864a40c40_lord_of_the_rings_gollum.jpg
Funny, 1 year agoThat photo of Neils Nygaard is very very old. If you want to know what he looks like today… Gollum of Lord of the rings…. scary, but the resemblence is sad but striking.
http://www.ratewall.com/cpics/07254e14-0052-4613-9f64-fce864a40c40_lord_of_the_rings_gollum.jpg
Funny, 1 year agoNeils Nygaard is maybe in his early late fifties/ early sixites and he looks like an average 60 year old. And even if some professor was not that great looking why would anyone make such a comment on Quant website … unless that person was a idiot child …but then anyone with the name “FUNNY” should be assumed to be an imature dumb ass and cann’t be take seriously.
rich, 1 year agoNeils Nygaard is maybe in his early late fifties/ early sixites and he looks like an average 60 year old. And even if some professor was not that great looking why would anyone make such a comment on Quant website … unless that person was a idiot child …but then anyone with the name “FUNNY” should be assumed to be an imature dumb ass and cann’t be take seriously.
rich, 1 year agoMr. Concerned and Fed Up, very interesting post.
rich, 1 year agoSome other posts have recommended Prof Roger Lee.
It would be interesting to hear your opinion on Prof. Lee’s classes?
Mr. Concerned and Fed Up, very interesting post.
rich, 1 year agoSome other posts have recommended Prof Roger Lee.
It would be interesting to hear your opinion on Prof. Lee’s classes?
This is disappointing. As an MFE 2011 aspirant who has taken the Math GRE specifically for UChicago’s requirements, the overwhelming feedback that UChicago’s MSFM is little more than an adhock cash cow capitalizing on the brand name is sad to hear. I hope there are some good measures taken to improve the program, especially better career services.
MFEASPIRANT, 1 year agoThis is disappointing. As an MFE 2011 aspirant who has taken the Math GRE specifically for UChicago’s requirements, the overwhelming feedback that UChicago’s MSFM is little more than an adhock cash cow capitalizing on the brand name is sad to hear. I hope there are some good measures taken to improve the program, especially better career services.
MFEASPIRANT, 1 year agoThe program must make a strong effort to keep the best teacher—i.e. little turnover of the best—or potential students will not be attracted to the program. The names I hear most often compliment are Roger Lee [faculty up for tenure decision] and Yuri Balasanov [industry quant]—I’m sure there are others but these are the ones I hear about. Niels also had very good reviews but it is unclear what his future involvement will be.
JohnF, 1 year agoThe recent stories, this blog, Wilmott and others, accurate or not, have certainly raised questions that the program Board, Math dept. and perhaps university will have to address.
The program must make a strong effort to keep the best teacher—i.e. little turnover of the best—or potential students will not be attracted to the program. The names I hear most often compliment are Roger Lee [faculty up for tenure decision] and Yuri Balasanov [industry quant]—I’m sure there are others but these are the ones I hear about. Niels also had very good reviews but it is unclear what his future involvement will be.
JohnF, 1 year agoThe recent stories, this blog, Wilmott and others, accurate or not, have certainly raised questions that the program Board, Math dept. and perhaps university will have to address.
Rich,
Thanks for the comment… Dr. Lee is probably the most professional and competant lecturers in the program. He has thought about the material, and organizes it logically, intently, and effectively. His teaching is by far the most professional. However, he still has to work with powerpoint overheads to teach math, on-line. His Saturday and Sunday 9AM ONLINE office hours are useless. No out of class accessibility, all communication done by email… I hear he is leaving the program… merely rumor, but it would make sense.
Honestly, when you compare Dr. Lee, he is a the best lecturer in the program, but when you compare him to instructors elsewhere at UChicago, Columbia, Cornell, NYU etc., he is average. It is all relative….
Concerned and Fed Up, 1 year agoRich,
Thanks for the comment… Dr. Lee is probably the most professional and competant lecturers in the program. He has thought about the material, and organizes it logically, intently, and effectively. His teaching is by far the most professional. However, he still has to work with powerpoint overheads to teach math, on-line. His Saturday and Sunday 9AM ONLINE office hours are useless. No out of class accessibility, all communication done by email… I hear he is leaving the program… merely rumor, but it would make sense.
Honestly, when you compare Dr. Lee, he is a the best lecturer in the program, but when you compare him to instructors elsewhere at UChicago, Columbia, Cornell, NYU etc., he is average. It is all relative….
Concerned and Fed Up, 1 year agoGraduated in May ’10 and still unemployed
Roger is OK imo – some students go gaga over him. As baldie (= concerned and fed up) said above, he is the best in the program; but thats not saying much (Yes we all know who you are)
In the land of blind, the one-eyed is king.
Sharkie
sharkboy, 1 year agoGraduated in May ’10 and still unemployed
Roger is OK imo – some students go gaga over him. As baldie (= concerned and fed up) said above, he is the best in the program; but thats not saying much (Yes we all know who you are)
In the land of blind, the one-eyed is king.
Sharkie
sharkboy, 1 year agoOk, so here is what I think.
We all know that the program is broken… for several years. The fact that VERY FEW classes even bother to ask for course feedback at the end of the year speaks volumes. The fact is that management/faculty don't listen to the needs of the students. In the end, you are providing a product, and we students are buying it from you. So, our say should matter. If you don't change a broken product, then you will have reputational risk, product risk… and, sorry, no government will bail you out.
You can only go so long producing a defective product without consumer feedback before someone overtakes you OUT OF Business. BASIC ECONOMICS. Take example from the Business School – how they have innovated and what their reputation is. How do students talk about the professors there vs. here in this program. Case and Point ! The facts are irrefutable, obvious, basic and the TRUTH will come out eventually.
That said, this managment/faculty have been way too defensive in proving, rather INSISTING, nothing is wrong… for too long. Well, now they can't keep their heads in the sand. The secret is out, your reputation has taken a hit, and you can NO LONGER HIDE BEHIND THE BRAND NAME OF THE UNIVERSITY. WE THE STUDENTS/CONSUMERS HAVE SPOKEN. INNOVATE OR CEASE TO EXIST. PROVIDE A PRODUCT WE WANT, OR CEASE TO EXIST/CEASE TO BE RELEVANT (a path you are on presently).
Really, if you call yourself a PROFESSIONAL PROGRAM in FINANCE…. this should be basic. But, evidently, it is not… which speaks volumes.
Please don't get defensive on these remarks. We the students/alum are askig you to LISTEN, UNDERSTAND, COMPREHEND, DIGEST, IMPROVE, RESTART, AND MOVE ON – you ask this of us (although in a broken way).
So, Mr. Alex, and I do know who you are, stop defending a broken system. Be part of the solution or get out of the way. As an intellectual, this should appeal to you.
Hire new instructors/profs – those that make it their business to understand and effectively implement teaching/lecturing and who are subject matter experts. Presently, you have a part time unprofessional faculty… therefore, your program has become as such. The lecturers teach by night, work by day… they ignore students… and for $5000 a course, WE THE STUDENTS ARE PAYING FOR A LOT MORE.
No need to attack me… these words are in all sincerity, concern, and respect for the Dean. Please, please, look hard at yourselves, your product, and how you treat students – especially their hard earned money.
THANKS.
Martingale11, 1 year agoMr. Alex,
Please do not try to be a spokes person for the program. You are neither a student, faculty, lecturer etc. Please let the professionals respond, ie. the Dean. He understands much more, and he has made a decision, along with the University to try to salvage this program, its reputation, and its value. You trying to defend the program, the instructors etc. are going against the Dean's judgement and that of the official governing body that took action based on solid facts, trends over years, and legitimate complaints of students from many many years back.
You have neither the insight nor skill to assess where this program is, should be, nor the needs of the students.
Thanks.
Martingale11, 1 year agoI graduated from the program in 2007.
Niels doesn’t deserve this. And by “this” I mean putting blame entirely on his shoulders. Career placement was always an issue. But, at least when I was there, we often were informed of info sessions from all the major inv banks and many of us attended. It wasn’t handed to us on a silver platter, but the opportunity to meet potential employers was there. Albeit, i never got the sense that inv banks and hedge funds were actively seeking students from MSFM.
The curriculum is spotty. Roger Lee’s courses were great. The guest professors were hit or miss. Per Mykland is a brilliant man, but is not the right guy to be teaching Stochastic Calculus to MSFM students.
Niels had a ton on his plate. He was teaching and trying to run the entire program. They should have hired more industry-linked help as Director-level staff so career placement and teaching staff/cirriculum issues could be resolved from an industry-minded perspective.
I think the MSFM program has to move towards a more applied approach. There was too much concern with posturing the program as more “academic” than the MBA program. They have to learn how to walk the line between mathematical rigor vs practical knowledge transfer. And they have to once and for all create a dedicated career placement division.
Jhinsi274, 1 year agoIt would be very helpful if recent graduates of the program can share with our audience a formal review of Chicago MSFM program via http://www.quantnet.com/submit-review
Andy Nguyen, 1 year agoThat way, prospective students can see various views at one place.
Generally, agree with you Jhinsi274. BUT, what do you mean too much on his plate ???? He is program director, and it is, rather was, his job to construct a program with the right faculty, adequate teaching, good career services, good student feedback… and to listen. He did not… that’s why he is out.
Look, he is a nice person… but so was Mother Theresa… does not mean he nor she was the right person for this job. Hedge funds don’t care if you are a nice person, and students should not care if the director is a nice person. They should care that he is qualified to do the job, is effective in putting together a suitable program, and then adjusts as time goes on. Neils did not do anything.
Hmmmm, with that logic, the Dean has really too much on his plate and therefore the whole department should be failing, or rather the University President should be inundated… you are confused.
IF IT WAS TOO MUCH ON HIS PLATE TO DO HIS JOB, HE SHOULD NOT BE IN THE JOB. Stick to teaching C sharp…
You don’t get it. Supposedly, students from this program are intelligent… but, really ! How can you confuse being a nice guy with not doing your job. Only ONE of these traits matters when I put down $75,000 to do this stupid program.
Rajesh, 1 year agoI just started the MSFM program full-time, in Chicago.
From the things I have been reading these past months, I was expecting to find a rundown program.
I have to say, I’m PLEASANTLY surprised by the quality of this program, and of the students.
While it’s too early to talk about placement yet, I have the feeling strong improvements are being made in the program, with the hiring of an executive director, new UChicago faculty, new career staff. Companies are expected to come on campus all year long, and the criticism from former students seems to have paid off. The teachers we had these past 2 weeks are very competent.
msfm_Student, 1 year ago.
While this may not be the #1 quantitative program in the world, it is DEFINITELY ABOVE the impression left by comments on this website.
Other positive change, they significantly reduced the number of students compared to last year. We are 80 on Chicago campus, and 20 in Singapore.
msfm_Student, 1 year agoHi msfm_Student,
Well, I certainly hope so !!!!!!!!!!!!! Although, I must say that by mid-September this is the way we all felt last year, the year before, the year before that and so on and so on for the past 8 years according to Alumni. It starts great, but then by end Oct/Nov, everyone is depressed.
I sincerely hope that there have been improvements in the program. I think it was a wakeup call for the University on the whole, and for the Dean in particular. Unfortunately, the damage has been done to past students, and recent grads still looking for jobs…
I assume you are infact a student, not faculty/other posting to repair the damage done to the program’s name… If you are a current student, please report back in November/December… I would encourage many students to report back early next year… that will be a better guage as to whether the program has improved. It is still too early to tell..,
An_Alum, 1 year agoI’ll report back later, but I do believe changes are being made. Hope it’s not just an impression.
msfm_student, 1 year agoSo, this is funny… I was speaking to a trading firm in Chicago and guess what… they informed me that they were dissappointed with the quality of the graduates from this program as they had no idea how to do a financial analysis. They only employ a few graduates from this program to code … that’s all they are good for. WOW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Now, this speaks volumes and is inline with all the critisism on this board.
I also spoke to another firm this summer, and guess what, the head trader told me that he never recommends UChicago MSFM students…. why I asked… because they are ill prepared for the job he replied. It seems that faculty has gotten feedback for years from employers… and IGNORED IT.
So, there is merit to what is posted here…
Alum_2006, 1 year ago… when you are a hammer, and all you can do is hammer… you tend to hammer everything in every situation….
This program does proofs very well (albeit, the proofs are now proven to be false and atiquated), and so they stick to this without teaching… they can only reguritate proofs on the pdf powerpoint slides…
FoxyRoxy, 1 year agoTim Weithers needs to leave the program. He is an ineffective recruiter, and a dismal instructor. He babbles for hours in class, jokes, makes it seem easy and fun. His motto is “Foreign exchange is not complicated, just confusing.” His motto should be “FOREIGN EXCHANGE IS NOT COMPLICATED, I JUST MAKE IT CONFUSING.” He makes a relatively easy topic into a mystery… makes students unlearn what they know, and comfuses them.
He nor his TA are anywhere to be found after class for questions… they NEVER RETURN EMAILS… EVEN BEFORE AN EXAM. Simple topics are convoluded, his notes are stupid and can be condensed into a few pages of condensed material. He purposely makes does not teach well, then sets an exam where most do poorly.
He is a bitter ass and needs to go.
If you are going to teach FX, teach how to model FX rates… he focuses on day count conventions…
First go to teaching school, then try to teach… or stick to your day job at the CTC….
WastedOneYear, 1 year agoI would say; they change a bit.
Current Student, 1 year agoHowever, no change on an attitude of the founding director.
Curriculum is the same. No choices, No electives, 1 Booth course is allowed. Heavy Math Proof and Irrelevant.
Professor is the same. In terms of person, teaching styles, homework, quiz and exam.
Let’s see who will teach stochastic calculus in next semester.
and that’s the only one change.
For god sake, I should go to UCLA!!!
“Other positive change, they significantly reduced the number of students compared to last year. We are 80 on Chicago campus, and 20 in Singapore. ”
msfm_Student: Getting fewer students is a POSITIVE???
Do you think that the new Chair said “my objective is to cut enrollement in half…” and the University said great idea … let’ts cut our revenue form $8MM to down to $4MM.
As bad as the school you’re in is, I’m sure that they know that $4MM is less than $8MM…please think a little before you write something.
Not_a_msfn_Student, 1 year agoMy 2 cents:
Many of the negative comments below are unfair to UChicago’s MSFM program.
This program assumes a solid math foundation, in other words, the professors assume you know stochastic calculus at least the first 10 chapters of shreve’s book. That’s why stochastic calculus teaches compound Poisson process and jump process at first class. They put time series analysis and stochastic process in the 7-day review period.
CMU takes 5 courses to cover shreve’s book:Probability, Multi-Period, Stoc Calc-I, Stoc Calc-II, Adv Modelling. And only in Adv Modelling, Kasper starts to talk about chapter 11.
To finish it, if you are ALREADY good at math, go to UChicago, it will be more cost-effective than CMU. But if you are from an Eco background, goto CMU.
Test, 1 year agoIt’s not about “getting fewer students” or less candidates, which is not the case if you read the comment from Alexander Adamchuk above, who I think is involved in the program.
The accusations of admitting too many students in past years to serve as cash cows for the department were probably justified to some extent.
msfm_Student, 1 year agoSo the decision to make changes and reduce the number of admits to prove UChicago is concerned about students, in order to keep a high number of candidates who might not have applied because of the negative reviews online, sounds pretty logical to me.
Maybe you should think more before posting too…
Tim Weithers has resigned!!! No grading of homeworks in Foreign Exchange. Program going straight down the toilet. Or maybe they have figured out they have hit rock bottom, and from here they can only go up.
Sharpie, 1 year agoI agree with Test.
Of the 5 or 6 people I heard whining the most in Eckhart, I noticed they all share a common characteristic:
Not having a hard science background.
If you’re not able to understand Paulsen’s course in statistic, which is of reasonable level, you should question your suitability for quantitative finance rather than the quality of the lecturer.
His lectures and notes are good, and I only had trouble understanding his accent for the first 20 minutes of the first lecture. The homework is pretty useful as well.
The program is certainly not perfect, e.g Al Kanzler’s foreign exchange course is a disaster.
But most of the complaints are clearly made by people not qualified enough mathematically.
Maybe you should consider another field of study…
As for Tim, we don’t have any information on what happened Sharpie…why be so negative?
What we know on the other hand, is that Per Mykland, who was widely criticized, is not teaching stochastic calculus anymore, replaced by a high-ranking faculty member from stats department. But some people seem too concerned about whining to point that out…
msfm_Student, 1 year agoPlease see our other article on this
Andy Nguyen, 1 year agohttp://www.quantnet.com/tim-weithers-resigned-from-chicago-msfm-program/
“This program assumes a solid math foundation, in other words, the professors assume you know stochastic calculus at least the first 10 chapters of shreve’s book. ”
Good America, 1 year agoSo now only the math PhDs are welcomed to apply for this program.
You have got to be kidding me, right?
If anyone knows most of the stochastic calculus stuff himself, why would he apply for your program at all?
You Need to Read This!
http://www.quantnet.com/state-of-financial-engineering/
you seem to miss the points.
By the way, the class size does not reduced and the drop out rate is quite high!
current_student, 1 year agoHere is the enrollment statistics.
http://registrar.uchicago.edu/statistics/
Thanks for the link,
Here are the enrollment numbers for the Chicago MSFM program the past 3 years.
2010 (Source: http://registrar.uchicago.edu/statistics/pos/POS-Aut10.pdf)
Financial Mathematics-Chicago 120
Financial Mathematics-Singapore 31
Financial Mathematics-Stamford 16
2009 (Source: http://registrar.uchicago.edu/statistics/pos/Aut09-POS.pdf)
Financial Mathematics-Chicago 134
Financial Mathematics-Singapore 30
Financial Mathematics-Stamford 22
2008 (Source: http://registrar.uchicago.edu/statistics/pos/Aut08-POS.pdf)
Andy Nguyen, 1 year agoFinancial Mathematics-Chicago 110
Financial Mathematics-Singapore 29
Financial Mathematics-Stamford 29
current_student,
In fact, if you check the matriculated students in the Autumn 2010 quarter versus Autumn 2009 quarter it shows a drop of about 20 in the number of students (you need to look in the quarterly census reports). The latest report in the end-of-quarter reports is from the 09-10 academic year and can’t show you anything about the current academic year. This comports with my observations of the number of students in class, so I suspect this is correct.
part_time student, 1 year agoThe prerequisites are clearly stated on this page :
http://finmath.uchicago.edu/new/msfm/prospective/plan_admission.php
“A solid background in Mathematics comparable to a bachelor of science degree in mathematics or another field of physical sciences is essential.”
If people don’t know how to read, they shouldn’t be applying to college at all.
msfm_student, 1 year agoI’m in the course, and despite what some people say, it is not required to have graduate knowledge in math.