<p>I am currently a university student who found himself in a similar position this year. I wanted an opportunity to do advanced macroeconomic theory, dynare, etc... so I asked my professor. He recommended the ABCs of RBCs and I found myself in a similar position. While I do not know your experience with macroeconomics, I found that the best place to start was to self-study your local university intermediate macroeconomic theory textbook for undergrad, as well as learn math rather intensely. Once I did that, going back to ABCs of RBCs was way easier.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-04-19T16:47:08.750Z
2024-04-19T16:47:08.750Z
David deVyver
<p>As I had hoped to learn enough macroeconomic theory to get some research ideas, my goal at the beginning of this summer was to read through and complete the problems in an introductory advanced macroeconomics text (my first-year PhD macro courses left me more stunned than enlightened). I started with The McCandless's ABCs of RBCs, and quickly found that it was above my ability level when I reached problems I didn't even know how to set up, so now I'm trying Romer's Advanced Macroeconomics. I've gotta say that after having to consult the solutions manual several times through Chapter 2 out of 12, I'm feeling rather discouraged as the solutions involve methods that are not intuitive to me and not discussed in the text.</p>

<p>Is there even any point in someone with my skill level tackling such a task? I can't really see myself being a macroeconomic theorist after this, and it seems that the vast majority of empirical macroeconomic studies use reduced-form linear models backed by hand-waving arguments based on principles or intermediate theory, so I'm starting to doubt the utility of studying advanced theory at all.</p>

<p>I understand this may be an an "illegal" question here on Stack Exchange, so I won't protest if it's closed. But if not, does anyone have any tips for how to proceed?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-18T03:38:20.423Z
I just took a course in Macroeconomics (Not at the Phd level) and the professor teaching the course gave us assignments analyzing real world data which helped reinforce the concept that these are not simply hand-waving arguments but can be usable in a practical sense. Based on what you are saying it seems that maybe you should make sure you have a strong grasp on the intermediate/undergraduate theory taught so that you can proceed to study the more advanced material without being "stunned".
Bensstats
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-18T13:45:47.673Z
Surprising to hear that I may not be all that good at intermediate theory -- I was far and away the top student in that course! But perhaps we didn't have enough empirical connections for anything to really stick.
economicist
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-04-19T18:13:58.643Z
I can also recommend the book: Macroeconomics: Imperfections, Institutions and Policies by Wendy Carlin and David Soskice. I think its a good upper undergraduate macro book that also gets into some of the graduate macro stuff. That being said, you should consider searching online for some lecture notes. Macro is a huge discipline and it may be worth finding the notes that focus on the areas that you are most interested in.
Econometric Novice
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-05-14T05:51:44.310Z
@economicist: It's not easy because I've had to fight through the literature ( without any economics background ) and try to understand it for a project I've been working on. But, as Econometric Novice said in the last sentence, it's too overwhelming to try to learn "macro-economics" on your own. Figure out exactly what you like and are interested in and then focus on that. If it's math that's the problem then battle through courses in math. If you like it and find it interesting, you can do it but focusing on something is key.
mark leeds
<macroeconomics><reference-request><self-study><theory>
How to self-study graduate level macroeconomics? Is there even a point?
economicist
# How to self-study graduate level macroeconomics? Is there even a point?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-06-18)

As I had hoped to learn enough macroeconomic theory to get some research ideas, my goal at the beginning of this summer was to read through and complete the problems in an introductory advanced macroeconomics text (my first-year PhD macro courses left me more stunned than enlightened). I started with The McCandless's ABCs of RBCs, and quickly found that it was above my ability level when I reached problems I didn't even know how to set up, so now I'm trying Romer's Advanced Macroeconomics. I've gotta say that after having to consult the solutions manual several times through Chapter 2 out of 12, I'm feeling rather discouraged as the solutions involve methods that are not intuitive to me and not discussed in the text.

Is there even any point in someone with my skill level tackling such a task? I can't really see myself being a macroeconomic theorist after this, and it seems that the vast majority of empirical macroeconomic studies use reduced-form linear models backed by hand-waving arguments based on principles or intermediate theory, so I'm starting to doubt the utility of studying advanced theory at all.

I understand this may be an an "illegal" question here on Stack Exchange, so I won't protest if it's closed. But if not, does anyone have any tips for how to proceed?

**Tags:** macroeconomics, reference-request, self-study, theory

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I just took a course in Macroeconomics (Not at the Phd level) and the professor teaching the course gave us assignments analyzing real world data which helped reinforce the concept that these are not simply hand-waving arguments but can be usable in a practical sense. Based on what you are saying it seems that maybe you should make sure you have a strong grasp on the intermediate/undergraduate theory taught so that you can proceed to study the more advanced material without being "stunned".  
> **username_0**: Surprising to hear that I may not be all that good at intermediate theory -- I was far and away the top student in that course! But perhaps we didn't have enough empirical connections for anything to really stick.  
> **username_2**: I can also recommend the book: Macroeconomics: Imperfections, Institutions and Policies by Wendy Carlin and David Soskice. I think its a good upper undergraduate macro book that also gets into some of the graduate macro stuff. That being said, you should consider searching online for some lecture notes. Macro is a huge discipline and it may be worth finding the notes that focus on the areas that you are most interested in.  
> **username_3**: @username_0: It's not easy because I've had to fight through the literature ( without any economics background ) and try to understand it for a project I've been working on. But, as username_2 said in the last sentence, it's too overwhelming to try to learn "macro-economics" on your own. Figure out exactly what you like and are interested in and then focus on that. If it's math that's the problem then battle through courses in math. If you like it and find it interesting, you can do it but focusing on something is key.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_4 on 2024-04-19. Score: 2

I am currently a university student who found himself in a similar position this year. I wanted an opportunity to do advanced macroeconomic theory, dynare, etc... so I asked my professor. He recommended the ABCs of RBCs and I found myself in a similar position. While I do not know your experience with macroeconomics, I found that the best place to start was to self-study your local university intermediate macroeconomic theory textbook for undergrad, as well as learn math rather intensely. Once I did that, going back to ABCs of RBCs was way easier.


---

