GRADUATE STUDENT HANDBOOKDEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICSJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

Academic Year 2023-2024(Updated August 2023)

Department of Economics Johns Hopkins University Graduate Student Handbook

Contents
O. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Faculty
B. Faculty Administrative Assignments
C. Important Dates

I. PROGRAM OVERVIEW
A. Overall Requirements
B. Course Requirements
C. Credit Hours and Summer Registration
D. Development Plans and Review Process
E. Student Performance

II. PROGRESSION THROUGH THE PROGRAM
A. The Program’s First Year
B. Comprehensive Examinations
C. The Program’s Second Year
1. Coursework
2. Mentored Research
3. The Second-Year Paper
4. Evaluation of Students Who Fail the Comprehensive Exams
5. Evaluation of Students Who Pass the Comprehensive Exams
D. Years Three and Beyond
1. Courses
2. Research Workshops and Student Presentations
3. Training for Teaching Positions (Teaching Assistant Positions)4. The Dissertation Pre-Proposal and Proposal
5. The Dissertation Process
6. The Mentoring Relationship
7. The GBO

III. GRADING OF COURSES AND THE COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION
A. Course Grading
B. Grading of Comprehensive Examinations

2

IV. FINANCIAL SUPPORT
A. The First Through the Fifth Years
B. Sixth Year Students
C. Other Fellowships and Aid
D. Outside Jobs

V. OTHER MATTERS
A. Information Technology
B. Getting a Job
C. Residence and Term Leave
D. Awards and Internal Fellowships
E. Other Student Financial Support
F. Graduate Advisory Council
G. Student Wellness
H. General Student Support
VI.

APPENDIX

Annual Review/Individual Development Plan Worksheets
JHU Mentorship Commitments of Faculty Advisors and PhD Students

3

FACULTY
PROFESSORS
Laurence Ball: Macroeconomics
Francesco Bianchi (Louis J. Maccini Professor): Macroeconomics, Finance
Christopher Carroll: Macroeconomics, Public Finance
Gregory Duffee (Carl Christ Professor): FinanceMark Gersovitz (Professor Emeritus): Economic Development, Public Finance
Bruce Hamilton (Professor Emeritus): Urban Economics, Public Finance, Labor Economics
Yingyao Hu (Chair): Econometrics, Empirical Industrial Organization, Labor Economics
Olivier Jeanne: International Macroeconomics, Monetary Policy
Edi Karni (Scott and Barbara Black Professor): Economics of Uncertainty and Information,
Decision Theory, Microeconomic Theory
M. Ali Khan (Abram Hutzler Professor): Mathematical Economics, Trade, Development
Robert Moffitt (Krieger-Eisenhower Professor): Labor Economics, Public Economics,
Econometrics, Population Economics
Jonathan Wright: Time Series Econometrics, Empirical Macroeconomics, Finance

ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS
Ying Chen: Game Theory, Information Economics, Political Economy
Brendan Daley (Ralph S. O'Connor Associate Professor): Theory of Financial Markets
Adam Isen: Applied Microeconomics
Elena Krasnokutskaya: Industrial Organization, Applied Microeconomics, Applied Econometrics
Nicholas Papageorge (Broadus Mitchell Associate Professor): Health Economics, Labor
Economics, Economics of Innovation
4

Seth Richards-Shubik, beginning January 2024: Health Economics, Applied Econometrics

ASSISTANT PROFESSORS
Jonathan Elliot: Industrial Organization, Environmental Economics
Marcelo Fernandez: Microeconomic Theory, Market and Mechanism Design, Political Economy
Stelios Fourakis: Macroeconomics, International Economics
Yujung Hwang: Labor Economics, Political Economy, Development Economics, Urban Economics
Lixiong Li: Econometrics, Applied Industrial Organization

FELLOWS
Barclay Knapp: Managerial Economics & Business Strategy

RESEARCH PROFESSORS
Richard Spady (Professor): Econometrics, Industrial Organization
Matthew Wiswall (Professor): Applied Microeconomics, Applied Econometrics

ASSOCIATE TEACHING PROFESSORS
Muhammad Husain: Labor Economics, Urban Economics, Applied Microeconomics
Somasree Dasgupta: International Trade, Economic Growth, Macroeconomics

LECTURERS
Robert J. Barbera: Macroeconomics, Energy
Giovanna Maria Dora Dore (Senior Lecturer): International Development, Comparative Politics
5Sohani Fatehin (Senior Lecturer): Applied Microeconomics, Health Economics, Development
Economics, Public Economics
Joshua Feinman (Adjunct Lecturer): Macroeconomics, Financial Markets
Kevin Heerdt (Adjunct Lecturer): Derivatives, Corporate Governance, Alternative Investments
Barbara Morgan (Senior Lecturer): Labor Economics, Public Policy
Floyd Norris (Adjunct Lecturer): Financial Markets
Ludmila Poliakova: Macroeconomics, Development Economics
Hellen Seshie-Nasser: Development Economics, Gender Economics, International Economics,
Environmental Economics

JOINT APPOINTMENTS (Principal appointment is with another school or division)
Andrew Ching (Professor, Carey Business School): Industrial Organization, Applied Econometrics
Michael Darden (Associate Professor, Carey Business School): Health Economics, Information
Economics
Itay Fainmesser (Associate Professor, Carey Business School): Business Economics
Michael Keane (Wm. Polk Carey Distinguished Professor, Carey Business School): Labor
Economics, Econometrics
Pravin Krishna (Professor, SAIS): International Trade, Political Economy
Jian Ni (Associate Professor, Carey Business School): Industrial Organization
Alessandro Rebucci (Associate Professor, Carey Business School): International Finance andMacroeconomics
Shubhranshu Singh (Associate Professor, Carey Business School): Marketing
Carlos Vegh (Professor, SAIS): International Macroeconomics

6

FACULTY ADMINISTRATIVE ASSIGNMENTS
Department Chair: Y. Hu
Placement Officer: C. Carroll, R. Moffitt
Director, Center for Financial Economics: R. Barbera
Director, Advanced Academic Program: L. Ball
Graduate Admissions Committee: J. Wright (Chair), Y. Chen, A. Isen, O. Jeanne, E. Karni, A.
Khan, E. Krasnokutskaya, N. Papageorge
Computing Coordinator: R. Moffitt
Assistant Computing Coordinators: Y. Hwang, L. Li
Department Web Page: B. Daley
Happy Hour Coordinator: Economics Graduate Organization (EGO)
Department Coordinator: R. Moffitt
Budget Coordinator: R. Moffitt
Course Scheduling: O. Jeanne
Diversity & Inclusion Committee: L. Ball, Y. Chen (chair), S. Dasgupta, M. Husain

Advising
Undergraduate
Director of Undergraduate Studies: S. Dasgupta
Co-Director of Undergraduate Studies: M. Husain
Advisors: B. Hamilton, B. Morgan, R. Barbera, M. Husain, S. Dasgupta, S. Fatehin, L. Poliakova,
H. Seshie-Nasser, and all T/TT faculty

Graduate
Director of Graduate Studies: G. Duffee

Research Seminars
Macro
TheoryApplied Micro
Second-Year Research Seminar

Fall
C. Carroll
M. Fernandez
E. KrasnokutskayaE. Karni
7

SpringJ. Wright
E. Karni
N. Papageorge
E. Karni

IMPORTANT DATESDissertation Pre-Proposal Due Date: December 1, 2023
American Economic Association Annual Meeting/North American Winter Meeting of the
Econometric Society (San Antonio): January 5-7, 2024
Dissertation Proposal Due Date: May 1, 2024
Second–Year Research Paper Due Date: June 1, 2024
First Year Student Comprehensive Exams:
Macro: July 1, 2024; Econometrics: July 5, 2024; Micro: July 9, 2024
First Year Comprehensive Exam Makeup:
Macro: August 15, 2024; Econometrics: August 19, 2024; Micro: August 23, 2024

8

I. PROGRAM OVERVIEW
Our department is by far the smallest of the leading graduate departments of economics in the
country. To have a first-rate graduate program, we restrict the range of fields that we cover. We
have strong core groups in economic theory, applied microeconomics, macroeconomics,
econometrics, and finance.
At the graduate level we offer only a PhD program, not a terminal Master’s program. Students
admitted to the PhD program can receive an MA degree by fulfilling part of the requirements of
the PhD program.
This handbook is concerned only with the PhD program. The word “student” refers always to a
graduate student in the PhD program. In the interest of brevity, but not prejudice, the words “he”
and “his” should always be taken to refer generically to students. Other common abbreviationsin this document are DGS, denoting the department’s Director of Graduate Studies, and Chair,denoting the department’s Chair.

A. Overall Requirements
Graduate education requirements are set primarily at the department level rather than the school(Krieger School of Arts and Sciences) or university level. In the economics department,
successful completion of the PhD program requires:
1. Satisfying course requirements.
2. Passing a comprehensive examination of performance or otherwise demonstrating
substantial research potential in the first two years of the program.
3. Demonstrating teaching ability by successfully acting as a Teaching Assistant.
4. Completing a dissertation that the faculty determines is acceptable.

B. Departmental Course Requirements
Students must pass 15 one-semester courses for the PhD degree, where “pass” is defined as a
grade of at least a B-. Students also take Research Seminar courses (180.697) in the fall andspring of the second year. No pass/fail courses, including 180.697, count towards the 15-course
requirement.
Courses eligible for the 15-course requirement include all 600-level courses offered in thedepartment for a letter grade. Courses offered pass/fail include seminar workshops and a few
courses generically described as “reading courses.” As of this writing, our reading courses are
180.690, Advanced Econometrics, and 180.673, Advanced Labor Economics. These can bevaluable courses for students who have already completed their 15-course requirement.
With approval from the DGS, courses offered by other departments can be eligible for the 15course requirement. No more than two courses outside the department count towards the 159

course requirement. The course content should be equivalent to a 600-level department course.
With the permission of the DGS and the willingness of the course instructor, the instructor may
augment the course with additional content in order to meet this standard. Our department is ona semester system, but not all courses offered at the university are semester-length courses.
With the permission of the DGS, two or three quarter-length courses in other departments
qualify as one or two semester-length economics courses, respectively.
In general, a student cannot take a course twice for credit—for example, a student cannot
receive two course credits for passing 180.605, Advanced Macro, in two different years. With
the permission of the DGS, this restriction can be relaxed if the course content differs
substantially in the two different years. This typically occurs only when different instructors
teach the course.
Students qualify for an MA degree upon passing 14 (not 15) of these courses and after
demonstrating teaching ability through successful performance as a Teaching Assistant for one
semester.

C. University Course Requirements and Summer Registration
All courses, including the department’s seminar series, are assigned a credit-hour equivalent.
The university requires that students maintain full-time status, defined as at least nine credit
hours per semester. In particular, international students must meet this requirement to satisfy
the requirements of their visa. Students are not allowed to exceed 20 credit hours per semester.
The department’s course requirements discussed in I.B. are not tied to credit hours.
First-year and second-year students, who take full course loads, routinely satisfy credit hourrequirements during their fall and spring semesters. Students in the dissertation stage of the
program must register in fall and spring semesters for a placeholder course, 180.891,“Dissertation Research.” This is a pass/fail course that simply indicates the student is engaged
in research. The DGS is the instructor.
When registering for 180.891 in SIS, students choose the number of credit hours associatedwith the course. The university prefers that students in their dissertation stage register for 20
credit hours each semester. To avoid a problem with the 20-hour maximum, students should
first register for seminars and any other courses they plan to take. Students then register for180.891, choosing the number of credit hours to reach a total of 20 hours.
The university highly recommends that all PhD students, including rising second-year students,
register for nine credit hours in the summer. This is a purely administrative action because thedepartment does not offer summer courses. Students should register for 180.891. The
department recommends choosing 15 credit hours for the summer version of 180.891. There isno summer tuition fee for this course.

10

D. Development Plans and Reviews
Each student needs to be on a path towards a professional career in economics. To help keep
students on such paths, the Department conducts year-end reviews for all students who willcontinue in the program in the next academic year. These reviews also involve producing
individualized development plans (IDPs) for students.
Annual reviews/IDPs take place in the second half of May/early part of June. Students first fillout a “Annual Academic Progress and Professional Development Plan” worksheet. Department
administrators send these forms to students at the appropriate time. The forms are also in the
Appendix to this handbook. Filled-in worksheets are returned to the administrators, who thensend the forms to the students’ advisors. The DGS serves as advisor for all first-year andsecond-year students. Dissertation advisors receive the forms for all third-year and higher
students.
Advisors then schedule meetings with their advisees. Year-end meetings with third-year
students include both the advisor and a second reader of the dissertation proposal. Year-end
meetings with fourth-year and fifth-year students include the advisor and two other members of
the student’s dissertation committee. The faculty and students discuss the student’s progress inthe previous year and work out a plan for the next year. Faculty write up notes on the meetingfor inclusion in the Review/IDP worksheet. The completed worksheet is sent to all participants
and stored in the department.
Fourth-year and higher students have another review at the end of the fall semester. The meeting
evaluates the progress made towards meeting the student’s main research goals that were
included in the previous year-end review, and outlines a research plan for the spring semester.
This meeting takes place with the student’s main dissertation advisor. The procedure for thesefall semester reviews matches that for the annual reviews. Department administrators send
worksheets to students at the appropriate time, students fill them out and return them, then theadministrators send the forms to main advisors. Main advisors schedule meetings and write up
the discussion in the worksheets. They then return the worksheets to department administrators,
who provide copies to the students. The worksheet template is in this handbook’s Appendix.

E. Student Performance
Section II of this handbook describes a student’s normal progression through the program.
Occasionally a student does not meet the benchmarks of this normal progression. Section II also
describes consequences of failing to meet these benchmarks, which include probation anddismissal from the program. Probation and dismissal are formal university actions, governed by
the processes described in Graduate Student Probation, Funding Withdrawal and Dismissal
Policy. Any department probation or dismissal action is taken in accordance with theseprocesses.
Original research is at the core of a student’s progression towards a PhD. Thus, plagiarism is avery serious offense. Plagiarism is copying of another person’s work (ideas, writings, etc.),
11

published or unpublished, without proper citation. We will severely punish plagiarism inresearch papers, up to dismissal from the program. The Krieger School’s formal policy foraddressing plagiarism and other forms of cheating is described by its Graduate Academic
Misconduct Policy. A former student with a PhD may have the degree revoked if plagiarism issubsequently discovered in a dissertation. We advise students to familiarize themselves withproper procedures for citation in accordance with standards in scholarly journals and American
higher education.
Should any student believe that another student has in some way plagiarized a research paper ordissertation work, the appropriate action to take is to report the alleged facts immediately to the
Chair. No other way of dealing with suspected cheating is permissible.

II. PROGRESSION THROUGH THE PROGRAM
A. The Program’s First Year
Students focus on course work during the first year. The first-year classes develop general
methodologies in microeconomics, macroeconomics, statistics, and econometrics. In the fallsemester of their first year, students normally take Microeconomic Theory I (course number
180.601), Macroeconomic Theory I (180.603), Core Mathematics for Economics (180.609),
and Statistical Inference (180.636). In the spring semester of their first year, students normallytake Microeconomic Theory II (180.602), Macroeconomic Theory II (180.604), andEconometrics (180.633).
A student must receive a passing grade (B- or better) in at least six of their seven letter-grade
courses to continue in the program beyond their first year. Students who pass five or fewer
letter-grade courses are dismissed after their first year without a Master’s degree. Such a
student can appeal to the DGS if the student thinks there are extenuating circumstances. The
DGS, in consultation with course instructors and the Chair, will rule on the appeal.

B. Comprehensive Examinations
In the summer after the first year, students take separate comprehensive examinations on
microeconomics, macroeconomics, and statistics/econometrics. Each is a three-hour exam.
Students studying for the comprehensive exams can meet with the instructors of their first-year
courses to go over material in preparation for the exam. Various prior comprehensive exams
are also available for students to study.
Section III.B. of this handbook describes criteria for passing the comprehensive exams. Briefly,
there are minimum acceptable scores for each exam, and a minimum acceptable mean scoreacross the three exams. Students have two opportunities to pass the comprehensive
examinations: in early July after the end of the first year and in late August before the beginningof the program’s second year. The specific dates vary from year to year. The Calendar ofImportant Dates at the beginning of this handbook contains the upcoming dates.
12

Students who do not pass the comprehensive exams as of the beginning of their second year in
the program are placed on academic probation for the fall semester of their second year. Section
II.C.4 of this handbook discusses consequences of this probation.
C. The Program’s Second Year
Students in their second year take field courses, work on mentored research, and write a secondyear paper. This second-year program helps develop student’s research skills so they are in aposition to transition to their own dissertation research.
C.1. Coursework
Second-year coursework focuses on fields within economics, such as macroeconomics,
microeconomic theory, econometrics, finance, and applied microeconomics. Students areencouraged to take five or six field courses during their second year. In addition, students are
required to take the pass/fail course 180.697 “Research Seminar” in both semesters. The fallResearch Seminar consists of different professors discussing how to identify promising research
topics. During the spring course, students present their own research from their second-year
paper.
C.2. Mentored Research
In approximately mid-May of their first year, the DGS provides students with a list of professors
who are available to act as research mentors during the next academic year. Students examine
the web pages of the professors to determine which professors might be good matches as
mentors. Students then contact professors to discuss the possibility of a research mentorship.
By mid-June, students report to the DGS their preferences for research mentors. The DGS thenmatches students with research mentors in both semesters of the second year. The mentor istypically the same across the two semesters, but need not be. Students are also assigned
corresponding sections of 180.896, “Research Practicum,” in the fall and spring, for which theyregister in SIS.
The nature of the mentored research is jointly chosen by the professor and the student. This
choice is based on the professor’s research, the student’s interests and the student’s priorresearch experience. The professor may propose one or two specific research projects for the
student to pursue, either in conjunction with the professor (“joint research”), or without(“directed research”). In addition, the student may assist the professor’s own research (“RA”
work) if the professor thinks that this will help the student. Mentorships in economic theory
typically are programs in which the mentor helps the student learn how to read papers. An
important component of the mentoring relationship is frequent meetings between the student andthe professor.
Once the student is paired with a mentor and the nature of the research is determined, the student
prepares a written plan for the semester. The plan includes an outline of the work to be produced
13

by the student. The mentor edits the description as necessary. The written plans are provided by
the student to the DGS before the beginning of the semester.
The above description should make clear that mentorships are not a vehicle for informal chats
about second-year paper topics. They are instead classes for which students are evaluated. The
class will involve at least as much work as a typical second-year class. Mentors are responsible
for assigning work and evaluating work. Research Practicum is a pass/fail course. Mentors basethe grade on the student’s participation in the mentorship and the quality of their work.
The professor who mentors the student in the fall semester will likely, but not necessarily,
mentor the student in the spring semester. A student may want to explore research in two
different fields prior to choosing their specific field of study; faculty might be on leave for asemester or otherwise occupied. A student might decide during the fall that research in adifferent field or with a different professor suits the student better. Alternatively, the professor
might conclude the student should work with someone else. Requests for changes go through the
DGS.
C.3. The Second-Year Paper
Each student must write a solo-authored research paper during the second year. The paper will
have a main supervisor and a second reader. The idea for the second-year paper can come fromthe student, a research mentor or other professor.
The second-year paper is distinct from, but likely related to, the research mentorship. The
student can choose a topic suitable for supervision by the student’s research mentor. If thestudent chooses a topic outside of the mentor’s expertise, the mentor will assist the student in
identifying a suitable supervisor. In turn, the supervisor will assist the student in identifying asuitable second reader. Although the supervisor provides primary guidance, the student andsecond reader should meet at least monthly during the spring semester.
The deadline for identifying a general topic and a supervisor (via email to the DGS) is January
15. The deadline for reporting the identity of the second reader (via email to the DGS) is
February 28/29. The papers must be completed and submitted to the DGS, the supervisor, andthe second reader by June 1. Students will present work from their papers in the spring Research
Seminar. The paper is graded either pass or revise/resubmit. The readers determine thedeadline by which the revision must be resubmitted.
C.4. Evaluation of Students Who Fail the Comprehensive Exams
As Section II.B. of this handbook notes, students who do not pass the comprehensive exams asof the beginning of their second year in the program are placed on academic probation for thefall semester. During the fall these students follow the same curriculum as students who passed
the comps: second-year courses and a research mentorship.
After the completion of the fall semester, the faculty votes whether to retain or dismiss each
student who failed the comps. They are guided by information from second-year instructors and14research mentors. The majority of those voting must agree to allow the student to remain in the
program.
The department’s guiding principle is that faculty judgment of a student’s research potential can,in rare cases, outweigh poor performance on the comprehensive exams. The expectedconsequence of failing the comprehensive exams is dismissal from the program. A minimum
requirement for remaining in the program is that the student’s research potential exceeds thepotential of the median student (across many years) who passes the comprehensive exams. In
addition, a member of the faculty must agree to serve as the student’s dissertation advisor of lastresort. This tenure/tenure-track member of the faculty will serve as the advisor in the event thatno other faculty member is willing to advise the student during the dissertation stage of the
program.
Students are notified of the outcome of the meeting as soon as possible. Any student thatreceives a majority vote to remain in the program is removed from probation, and participates
fully in the usual Spring semester activities for second-year students.
Students that do not receive a majority vote to remain in the program are dismissed effective theend of the spring semester. These students will not participate in a research mentorship in thespring, nor will they write a second-year paper. Their focus will be on course work and teaching,since students who pass 14 courses and demonstrate teaching ability will qualify for a Master’s
degree. The teaching requirement is satisfied by performing successfully as a Teaching Assistantduring the spring semester.
C.5. Evaluation of Students Who Pass the Comprehensive Exams
Students who pass the comprehensive exams are evaluated at the end of their fall and springsemesters. The only formal evaluation at the end of the fall is based on the Research Practicum
grade. A student who receives a failing grade in the fall semester 180.896 course is placed on
immediate academic probation. If the student also fails the spring semester 180.896 course, thestudent is dismissed from the program at the end of their second year. Failing both fall andspring courses indicates that the student is not capable of producing original research at the level
required for the program.
The DGS conducts year-end evaluations for all students who pass the comprehensive exams, aswell as those who fail the exams yet are successfully removed from probation after the fallsemester. This evaluation relies primarily on performance in research mentorships and secondyear classes. The evaluation takes place in May, prior to the submission of the second-year
paper. The student’s research mentor(s) prepares a report. The DGS also gathers informationfrom second-year instructors. The DGS places on probation those students for whom thedepartment has considerable uncertainty about their ability to write a dissertation.
This probationary period continues through the fall semester of the third year. At that time, ifneither the student’s second-year paper nor their pre-proposal submission (described in Section
II.D.4. of this handbook) display evidence of the ability to write a dissertation, the student isdismissed from the program. Otherwise the probation ends.
15

D. Years Three and Beyond
Students spend these years engaged in research. Each semester students register for a researchworkshop and for the dissertation research course. Students learn how to teach economics byacting as Teaching Assistants. Most importantly, students work on their dissertation.
D.1. Courses
In their third year, students take any necessary letter-grade courses to reach the 15-course
requirement.
D.2. Research Workshops and Student Presentations
The Department offers workshops in Applied Microeconomics (180.694), Microeconomic
Theory (180.695), and Macroeconomics/Finance (180.696). Faculty from outside theuniversity, JHU faculty, and advanced graduate students present their original research at theseworkshops.
Students in their third and later years are required to enroll in one of the Research Workshops.
Consistent failure to attend may jeopardize a student’s funding. Students may choose to also
attend presentations at other workshops. The extent to which a student participates in the
Research Workshops forms part of the basis on which faculty members evaluate their work at
all stages of the student’s career, including job placement.
Every graduate student in year three and higher must make a presentation of their work at least
once in the academic year. These presentations are relatively informal for third-year students
and are progressively more formal for higher-year students. Regardless of subject area, students
who are on the job market must make a formal, 1 ½ hour seminar presentation of their job market
paper in the fall. These presentations are made at the relevant Research Workshop.
The structure of presentations for students not on the job market depends on the research area.
Applied Microeconomics has a one-hour brownbag workshop at which third-year and fourthyear students make presentations. Fifth-year students make 1 ½ hour presentations at the endof the spring semester at a one- or two-day session. Macroeconomics/Finance uses their
Research Workshop for all required student presentations. Third-year (fourth-year) students
make a 45-minute presentation in the spring (fall) semester. Fifth-year students make a full 1½ hour presentation in the spring semester. Macro-finance students organize an informal
brownbag seminar, but these presentations are not a part of the required student presentations.
Microeconomic Theory students give 30-minute or 45-minute presentations, usually in the
Research Workshop. Ad hoc presentations are scheduled when necessary.

16

D.3. Training for Teaching Positions (Teaching Assistant Positions)
The DGS assigns students to TA positions based on pedagogical concerns, student interest, andinstructor preferences. Students act as TAs each semester beginning with the fall of their thirdyear. In one semester of their third year, each student will be a TA for either Elements ofMacroeconomics or Elements of Microeconomics, based on the student’s research interests.
Typically, students are TAs for courses related to their field of study. The maximum annual
workload for a teaching assistant is 16 hours per week for 30 weeks. Actual workloads may beless in some courses.
Teaching is an important responsibility and must be taken seriously. Teaching assistants are
required to take direction from course instructors and respond promptly to communications from
instructors and department administrators. They are also required to treat students in theircourses with professionalism and respect. A student who repeatedly fails to meet theserequirements will be put on probation. Failure to meet these requirements while on probation
will result in dismissal from the program.
The university has substantial resources available to help TAs learn how to be effective
instructors, including courses that help improve communication skills of students for whom
English is not their primary language. See homewoodgrad.jhu.edu/professionaldevelopment/teaching-assistant-resources/ and krieger.jhu.edu/cle/language-programs/esl/
D.4.The Dissertation Pre-Proposal and Proposal
In the fall of their third year, students work with faculty to define, in broad terms, a dissertation
topic. The choice of topic cannot be disentangled from the choice of dissertation advisor.
Students do not write dissertations on their own and simply submit them to the department uponcompletion. Instead, students work closely with an advisor throughout the process.
The department urges students to begin serious work on the dissertation as soon as possible.
Students should talk to multiple professors during the process of developing a dissertation topic.
As the topic narrows, students should seek out at an early stage one or two members of thefaculty who are prepared to supervise the dissertation to its completion.
By December 1 of the third year in the program, students submit to the DGS a dissertation preproposal describing the work they are doing, specifying a professor with whom the student isworking, and the progress the student has made. The pre-proposal ensures that students areengaging with faculty to flesh out a dissertation topic. Students will receive comments on the
pre-proposal from the specified professor.
As discussed in Section II.C.5 of this handbook, the pre-proposal is part of the information usedby the DGS to evaluate students who were placed on probation at the end of their second year.
For all other students the pre-proposal is not formally evaluated.
By May 1 of the third year in the program, each student must have a main advisor drawn fromthe pool of tenure-track and tenured professors in the department. The student must explicitly
ask a professor to serve in this role. If the professor accepts, the student informs the DGS of17main advisor’s identity.
Also by May 1, each student submits a dissertation proposal simultaneously to the DGS and thestudent’s main advisor. This proposal gives the department a basis for evaluating thefeasibility, progress and promise of a dissertation plan. The department recognizes thatsometimes plans are modified in the course of the research. The proposal should include(i) The name(s) of at least one additional professor (i.e., other than the main advisor)
with whom the student has discussed the dissertation proposal at length.
(ii) An abstract of the proposed research.
(iii) A detailed statement of the work already done and to be done, describing its
objectives, its relation to the present state of knowledge in the field and to similar workin progress elsewhere (if any), the techniques to be used, the data to be used (if any),
and the significance of the expected results.
The department imposes no specific rule concerning the length of the proposal. Normally, a
proposal is unlikely sufficiently detailed unless it contains at least twenty double-spaced pages.
The main advisor and a second reader evaluate the proposal. The DGS chooses the second
reader from among the faculty that have worked with the student on the development of the
topic. The readers determine if the proposal is acceptable. If the proposal is not accepted, thereaders describe in writing in what ways the proposal requires revision. The readers and DGS
determine a date by which the revised proposal is due. This process continues until the
proposal is acceptable.
The dissertation proposal is an important step in a student’s progression towards a PhD, andthere are substantial consequences for failing to meet this timeline.
(i) A student who fails to submit by May 1 a proposal, or submits one that is seriously
deficient, is placed on academic probation (or probation continues). This applies only toa student who fails to submit any proposal, or who submits one that is very seriously
deficient. It does not apply to a proposal that is on a reasonable track but needs morework to be acceptable. A student who has not submitted any proposal, or whose
submitted proposal is very seriously deficient, is dismissed from the program by
December 1 of their fourth year.
(ii) A student who has submitted a proposal that is not very seriously deficient, yet does
not have an accepted dissertation proposal by December 1 of their fourth year, is placedon academic probation. Such a student will remain on probation until the student either
completes an acceptable proposal, or is dismissed from the program. The probation
period cannot extend beyond the end of their fourth year.
(iii) A student who does not have an accepted dissertation proposal by the end of theirfourth year in the program is dismissed from the program as of the end of the fourth18year.

D.5. The Dissertation Process
In the department’s experience, frequent contact between student and advisor is critical to thecreation of a strong dissertation. After the dissertation proposal is accepted, students andadvisors must meet at least monthly (in-person or virtually) to go over the student’s progressand discuss next steps.
Both advisors and students are responsible to maintain this contact. Students who routinely do
not respond in a timely fashion to correspondence from faculty (or administrators) may be put
on probation. If communication does not improve the student will be dismissed from theprogram. Naturally, a student might be out of email contact for a week or two owing to asummer vacation or another reason. Since the PhD program is a 12-month/year commitment,
students are expected to inform their advisors in advance of any periods when the student will
be out of contact.
Students benefit from a variety of faculty perspectives on their research. The department
formalizes this through a dissertation committee. During a student’s fourth year the student, with
the input of the main advisor, puts together a three-person committee. The committee chair isthe student’s main advisor. The existence of a committee does not mean the student is allowed
to talk with only three professors; more input is better than less. A student’s committee need notconsist entirely of tenure/tenure-track faculty in the department. If a professor outside of thisgroup can be a member of the committee if the professor is able to provide valuable input and iswilling to participate. The student must report to the DGS the members of their committee by
May of their fourth year.
The selection of advisors, including a main advisor, need not be permanent. If a student's
interests change, the student may identify a new main advisor. As with the initial selection, thestudent must explicitly ask a tenured/tenure-track professor to take over the role of main
advisor, and the professor must accept. The change should then be reported to the DGS. In
exceedingly rare circumstances, a student may be unable to identify a new main advisor. For
example, if the student’s main advisor departs JHU and no one else in the department has
similar research interests, there may be no tenure/tenure-track professor who readily accepts therole of main advisor. If so, the student should enlist the assistance of the DGS to identify a new
main advisor.
Students should aim to identify their dissertation topic and write their dissertations within three years.
Along with the first two years of coursework and mentored research, this implies a period of five
years in the PhD program. It is true that most economics PhD students at Hopkins and elsewhere
take six years to complete the PhD program. The job market in economics is competitive, andthe best employers expect dissertations to be very polished. Students who seek the bestplacements often benefit from taking a sixth year to improve the dissertation. In addition,
setbacks in dissertation research can sometimes make it difficult to complete the program in five
years. In either of these cases, a student may remain for a sixth year.
19Nonetheless, it is unwise to aim for six years, since setbacks are common in research. Students
should aim to be finished in five years. If all goes very well, then they can complete in five years,
but an extra year is available if that would turn out to be helpful.
Six years is the absolute time limit for resident status in the program. Students who are notfinished by the end of the sixth year must withdraw from the program or apply for non-resident
status. It is possible, however, for exceptions to be made in truly unusual circumstances. A student
wishing to remain for a seventh year must apply to the DGS. While exceptions are possible, we
anticipate that almost all requests for a seventh year will be rejected.
The department is committed to ensuring that students stay on course to complete the Ph.D.
program within six years. The department will place a student who is substantially behind schedule onacademic probation. The department will provide the student a set of benchmarks to meet in order toreturn to schedule. The probation period will last at least six months. At the end of the probation
period the student is either taken off probation, probation is renewed, or the student is dismissed fromthe program. During this dissertation period, decisions on probation and termination of students
will be made by the DGS in consultation with advisors.
The schedule that determines whether a student is put on academic probation is(i) During the student’s fifth year, the student must be on track to have a reasonably
polished version of one chapter of the dissertation completed by the end of the summer
following their fifth year in the program. This chapter is typically described as thestudent’s “job market paper.”(ii) The student must have completed a reasonably polished version of the job market
paper by the end of the summer following the student’s fifth year.
(iii) The student must go on the job market, as described in Section V.B. of thishandbook, in the late fall of the student’s sixth year.
(iv) During the student’s sixth year, the student must be on track to defend thedissertation at a GBO (discussed in Section II.D.7 of this handbook) by the end of thesummer following the student’s sixth year.
(v) The student’s GBO must take place by the end of the summer following the student’s
sixth year.
Students who have not defended their dissertation by the end of the summer following their sixthyear are dismissed from the program. Exceptions granted to this normal progression are unusual,and are made by the DGS. In those cases, students are typically required to apply for non-resident
status. Non-resident students pay ten percent of the resident student tuition and pay separately
for medical insurance. Non-resident status is often allowed when a student has gone through thejob market, taken a job, and has subsequently encountered an obstacle in completing thedissertation and/or scheduling the GBO. The university has a small grace period during which
20

students can finish their dissertation at the beginning of the fall semester without paying tuition.
In rare circumstances the Chair, in consultation with the DGS, may relax any of these progress
benchmarks. The only time this has occurred is during the coronavirus pandemic.
D.6. The Mentoring Relationship
Advisors train students and prepare them for their professional career. This mentoring
relationship is an important part of graduate education. Following the university’s policy on
mentoring commitments, the DGS will be the department’s point person to whom students cango if they have questions or concerns related to their own PhD advisor. In particular, if a student
thinks that one of their mentors in the department is not providing the necessary mentorship, thestudent can appeal to the DGS.
The DGS will work with the student to determine what aspects of the mentoring relation need
improvement. The DGS will make any necessary recommendations to the Chair, who is
responsible for implementation. For example, the Chair may meet with the mentor to describe
how the mentoring process should be modified, and require more monitoring of the mentoring
relationship by the DGS. If necessary, the Chair may require another professor to replace theoriginal mentor.
If the DGS is the mentor about whom the student is complaining, the DGS role is replaced by thechair of the admissions committee. If the department chair is the mentor, the DGS and the chairof the admissions committee are jointly responsible for implementing any necessary
recommendations.
The Dean’s office is available to help mediate mentoring disagreements. The formal universitywide web page is here. The Appendix to this handbook includes the university’s policy on
mentorship commitments—in other words, what the university expects of both students andfaculty.
D.7. The GBO
The university requires an oral examination, called a Graduate Board Oral Exam (GBO), of all PhD
candidates. In our department, this exam occurs after the dissertation is completed. The university
has detailed rules concerning this examination and the submission of the dissertation. A
committee of three faculty from the department and two JHU faculty outside of the department
evaluate the student’s command of economics and the quality of the dissertation.

21

III. GRADING OF COURSES AND THE COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATIONS
A. Course Grading
The grading of each course is entirely the responsibility of the instructor, and is based onwhatever criteria the instructor considers appropriate, such as performance on a written or oral
examination, a term paper, or a research project. If the student believes that a given course
grade is unjust, the student should feel free to raise the question with the instructor, but the
instructor’s decision is final.
Courses are normally graded on the scale of C-, C, C+, B-, B, B+, A-, A, A+, with B- or above
constituting a pass, all other grades a failure. In some courses the instructor chooses to grade
pass/fail, such as in a reading course. The Research Workshops are graded pass/fail.
A failing grade in a course, other than a first-year course, may be remedied by retaking thecourse and passing it. Subject to instructor approval, a failing grade may also be remedied byfurther examination, either written or oral, or any other method specified by the instructor. In
case a student fails a course, and then passes it by any means other than retaking the course, the
new grade must be a B-; the Department's records will show that the grade was originally afailure.
Cheating on course examinations is a very serious offense. Cheating may consist of two or more
students collaborating to answer questions on an examination, or by one student copying theanswers of another student when the latter student is unaware of the action, or by a student
improperly using notes, readings or other materials on an examination. The department punishes
cheating severely. Punishment can include expulsion from the program. The Krieger School’s
policy towards cheating is described in its Graduate Academic Misconduct Policy.
Should any student believe that another student has in some way cheated on an examination, thestudent should report the alleged facts immediately to the Department Chair, or to the instructor of
the course. No other way of dealing with suspected cheating is permissible.
B. Grading of Comprehensive Examinations
Students need not bring an examination booklet or any other paper to a comprehensive exam. A
lined writing pad will be provided to each student just before the examination is administered.
All backpacks must be left in the departmental office during the exam. Students are allowed
pens, pencils, beverages, and snacks but calculators are allowed only at the discretion of thefaculty monitor. All other items kept in a student’s possession are subject to inspection. Eachstudent's paper will be identified only by a number. The number will be stamped on each page ofthe student's writing pad. Students will be asked to write on one side of a page only, and to use adark pencil or ink.
For the comprehensive examinations, a numerical scoring system is employed. As a guide, thefollowing table of equivalencies with letter grades is given 2.0=C, 2.3=C+, 2.7=B-, 3.0=B,
3.3=B+, 3.7=A-, 4.0=A. The comprehensive examinations are passed if
22

(a) each of the three examinations receives a score of 2.7 or more;and(b) the average score over the three examinations combined is 2.85 or more; otherwise theexaminations are failed.
Students who take the exams in July have the option to retake any or all of the three exams in
August. For any subject exam that the student takes in both July and August, the department
uses the higher of the two scores in calculating the student’s performance on the subject exam.
The Chair may modify any of these requirements in extraordinarily exceptional circumstances.

IV. FINANCIAL SUPPORT
A. The First Through the Fifth YearsStudents receive financial aid packages of a full tuition waiver (including health insurance fee)plus a stipend, as described in the university’s offer of admission to the program. The
department guarantees the tuition waiver and the stipend through the fifth year of study, provided
that the student is making satisfactory progress at each stage.
B. Sixth Year Students
No funding is guaranteed in the sixth year. The department’s policy for students entering in Fall
2022 or later is that the department will endeavor to pay tuition and medical insurance for sixthyear students, along with a stipend. Year-six stipends will not exceed 60% of the stipend that is
guaranteed to them at admission. For example, at the stipend level for 2023-2024 of $34,500,
this is $20,700. No funding is guaranteed; the only guarantee is a cap on a stipend. The
department hopes to provide support at this level but cannot control all aspects of the budget.
The department also reserves the right to not fund students whose performance in the program
does not warrant funding.
The department allows exceptions to the 60% stipend cap for students who receive external
fellowships that reduce the department’s stipend expenses. “External” means the funding does
not come from funds under the control of the university. For example, a student awarded a fullstipend NBER external fellowship in any of years one through five will receive in year six the
KSAS-level stipend from the department. Internally-funded fellowships are listed in Section
V.D of this handbook.
The department’s policy for students who entered prior to Fall 2022 has been detailed in a
separate communication to these students.

23

Students will be notified in the spring semester of their fifth year what type of support the
department will provide for the sixth year.
C. Other Fellowship and Aid
Several institutions and foundations besides the University provide graduate fellowships ofvarious kinds. One such source is the National Science Foundation. We encourage students toapply for outside support, and the student should feel free to ask the faculty to assist them withthe application. The award of outside support not only allows the Department to fund more
students with the budget we have, it can mean additional money for the student as discussed in
Section IV.B of this handbook. Such an award is a useful signal to prospective employers andshould go on a student’s curriculum vitae when going on the job market.
Each student who receives an award of outside support should notify the Department
immediately. This will help the Department to distribute its funds more effectively.
D. Extra Jobs
A graduate student has three primary duties: First, the student should work diligently on theircourses or their dissertation, depending on their year of study. Second, the student should
develop teaching and research competency by fulfilling the duties of any teaching assistantship or
research assistantship. Third, the student is required to attend at least one Research Workshop in
third or later years of study. These tasks together are a full-time job. In recent years, however, thefaculty has observed that some graduate students have taken jobs outside the department, such as
Teaching Assistantships in other schools within the university.
Our experience has shown that this is not wise. In the case of international students on an F-1
visa, it may jeopardize the visa. While a graduate student may increase their income by taking a
job outside the department, it has the by-product of substantially impeding progress on thedissertation. This is not an intelligent long-run strategy. The best strategy both psychologicallyand financially is: Complete your PhD as soon as possible.
Graduate students are welcome to take summer jobs between the Spring and Fall semesters,either as a research assistant in the department working with a faculty member, as a teacher inthe summer program of the university, or as a research assistant at one of the institutions—public
or private--in the Washington area. Such jobs are helpful in supplementing income fromfellowships and are often a good learning experience. However, it is important that a student
make progress on their dissertation as well in the summer. Hence, it is advisable for a student totake a summer job that permits him to work on their dissertation. Students should know thatmany outside jobs require the student to be a U.S. citizen or permanent resident, and to be
proficient in English.
Experience reveals that the channels of communication by which knowledge of summer jobs isspread around are too diverse and ad hoc to make it feasible to coordinate the process throughthe Department in any systematic way. Nevertheless, it is useful to maintain an informal networkof information, and so anyone who has knowledge of such jobs being available should inform the24

DGS. Similarly, anyone who is qualified and has need for a job should inform the DGS so thatjobs and applicants can be matched as far as possible. Interested students should check thenotices on the Departmental bulletin board. Job openings for summer positions are posted there.
To receive Curricular Practical Training when working outside the university in a teaching or
research assistant job, international students must register for the course (360.851) “Arts andSciences Research Practicum” and fill out the appropriate forms from the international office.
The course is offered every semester and in the summer.

V. OTHER MATTERS
A. Information Technology
Humphrey Muturi (hmuturi@jhu.edu) is in charge of the department’s IT systems. He is the firstpoint of contact for “how-to” questions concerning computer accounts, local and remote accessto the department’s network, and specialized computer resources.
The department also has faculty who serve as computing coordinators. Computer coordinators
are available to answer broad questions about computing in the department, or specificcomputing questions that require an economics background. Current coordinators are listed
under “Faculty Administrative Assignments” at the beginning of this handbook.
B. Getting a Job
The Department recognizes a responsibility in helping each student to obtain a first job, whether
in academic or other walks of life. To this end, each year the department designates a Placement
Director from among the faculty. It is the duty of the Placement Director to coordinate theefforts of faculty and students alike in obtaining the best possible results on the job market.
Students who do not have a complete, presentable job market paper as of the date on the timetableprovided by the Placement Director will not receive support from the department’s formal job
placement process. A student’s main advisor and the Placement Director determine whether the
student satisfies this requirement.
Each Placement Director chooses their own way of organization, but the process necessarily
involves some important common factors. Normally, early in the year when a student enters thejob market, the student’s curriculum vitae (including a thesis summary) is collected by thePlacement Director, and these documents are assembled and sent around to a large number of
economics department and other research-oriented agencies in this country and Canada (othereconomics departments do this too). Prospective employers use such documents, and responses
to public advertisements and/or direct approaches to faculty members at Hopkins, to arrange
preliminary interviews during December. Interviews are typically online. The purpose of theseinterviews is normally for employers to arrive at a short list of candidates for further, lengthierinterviews, to be conducted at the employer's home institution.

25

Job market candidates are required to complete several forms for the Job Market, such as a
curriculum vitae, thesis abstract, and other notes and materials. These will be described in detailby the Placement Director to all students who are on the market. The Placement Director will
instruct the students to have their thesis advisor look over the abstract and curriculum vitae
before submitting it.
C. Residence and Term Leave
Neither the University nor the Department has (or would enforce) rules about how close to
Hopkins students should live. However, to be a full-time student means being on the campus
most of the week, and it is hard to do this if one lives at a considerable distance from the University.
Past experience has shown that living more than thirty miles away tends to have a markedly
adverse effect on performance. Hence students are urged in the strongest terms to live near enoughto Hopkins to make possible genuinely full-time activity here.
At any time during the PhD program, a student may apply for a leave of absence of a semester ormore. During a leave of absence, a student is not expected to make progress toward the degree.
A leave of one semester (or more generally, an odd number of semesters) complicates a student’s
progress because the formal job market process for new PhD economists happens once a year, inlate fall and winter. The department requires that students go on the job market no later thantheir eleventh active semester in the program. This corresponds to the fall of the sixth year for
students who do not take any leave. Thus a student who takes a one-semester leave in any ofyears one through five must go on the market in their tenth semester. Students who take a onesemester leave during the fall of their sixth year will not be able to make use of the department’s
formal job placement support. The Chair may modify any of these restrictions in extraordinarily
exceptional circumstances.
D. Awards and Internal Fellowships
Faculty vote on the following awards in May.
Eugenio and Patricia Castillo Award. The Department makes an annual award to the student
who, in the Department's judgment, has displayed the best performance in their first two years in
the graduate program. The recipient receives a small cash award. An alumnus of the Department,
Eugenio Castillo, and his wife, Patricia, very generously fund this award.
Bruce Hamilton Research Seminar Award. The Department makes an annual award to theadvanced graduate student (3rd year & up) who has demonstrated the best performance in one ofthe department’s research workshops—not as a presenter, but as a participant. The recipient
receives a small cash award, which is also generously funded by Eugenio and Patricia Castillo.
Professor Joel Dean Undergraduate Teaching Award. The Department makes two or three
annual awards to students who have shown excellence as a teaching assistant or instructor.
Recipients receive cash awards. This award is very generously funded by Joel and Monica Dean.

26

Clarence M. Guggenheimer Award. The Department makes a small cash award to a student for
general outstanding performance in their work towards a PhD. This award is funded by thedepartment.

Internal fellowships are funded by donors to the university. The faculty choose recipients in
May (or, in one case, in December). The fellowships are then used to partially fund the student’s
tuition and stipend during the following year. These internal fellowships do not provide any
additional funds to students.
Carl Christ Fellowship. This fellowship honors a distinguished former faculty member and isawarded to an outstanding graduate student entering their fifth or sixth years. Part of thestudent’s stipend is funded by this fellowship.
Castillo Fellowship. This fellowship is awarded to a top student entering year four.
Helen Farr Fellowship. This fellowship is awarded to a top student entering year three.
Prewo Fellowship. This fellowship is awarded to a top student entering year two.
T. Rowe Price Fellowship. This fellowship is awarded to the first-year student with the best fallsemester performance, based on grades and instructor comments. This fellowship continues
through the student’s second year.

E. Other Student Financial Support
The Department provides limited financial support for purchases of Stata software, conference
registration fees, and travel expenses for paper presentations.
Stata
With one exception, the Department does not reimburse students for software purchases. The
exception is for Stata. Any student in years three through six can receive a one-time
reimbursement for a personal Stata/SE perpetual license (student pricing). Here, “one-time”
means the student is reimbursed only once. For example, the student cannot ask forreimbursement in year three, then buy an updated version in year six and ask for an additional
reimbursement.
Conference Registration Fees and Travel for Paper Presentations
The Department has limited funds for conference support. The lifetime limit per student is$1,500. The Department will reimburse, up to $200/conference, conference registration fees atconferences where the student is not presenting a paper. No other expenses associated withthese conferences are reimbursed. The Department will reimburse conference registration and27

travel expenses for students whose research has been accepted for presentation at a conference.
The Department does not pay fees for submitting papers to conferences or journals.
Financial support is provided only for “serious” economic conferences. This term is difficult to
explicitly define but your advisor knows what it means. Prior to spending any money, thestudent must receive two approvals. First, the main advisor must agree that the conference isimportant for the student’s professional development. Second, the DGS must approve the fundexpenditure. The student should therefore ask their main advisor to email the DGS, confirming
the importance of the conference. The DGS will then inform the student and the advisor whether
expenditures will be reimbursed.
Reimbursements are handled by the Administrative Coordinator. The process is unfortunately
complicated. Students must set up a Concur account, which is the University’s
reimbursement/payment system. This is a one-time process. Students then submit receipts to the
Administrative Coordinator. Directions for setting up a Concur account, as well as
reimbursement forms, are available from administrative staff.

F. Graduate Advisory Council
The department has a three-member Graduate Advisory Council. The representatives, chosen by
the graduate students, meet regularly with the Chair, DGS, and Admissions Committee chair todiscuss issues of importance to graduate students. Representatives are chosen in summer andserve for the next academic year. One representative is chosen from the rising second-year
cohort, one from the rising third-year and fourth-year cohorts, and one from the rising fourthyear and fifth-year cohorts.

G. Student Wellness
Graduate School can often be a time of stress as students manage not only their school work, butalso work, relationships and other responsibilities. It is very common for students in such a
position to experience periods of feeling down, overwhelmed, anxious or depressed. As withany illness, taking care of yourself and getting treatment is important. The JHU student wellness
web site ishttps://wellness.jhu.edu/about-health-and-wellness/
This site is a central location to explore the variety of health and wellness resources available tostudents.
Professionals in the Student Health and Wellness Center or Counseling Center are here toaddress your needs and provide both care and resources. If you are concerned about a friend orclassmate, you can also contact those resources for a consultation. Please find their contact
information below:

28

Counseling Center-https://studentaffairs.jhu.edu/counselingcenter/
3003 N Charles St
Homewood Apartments
Suite S-200
Baltimore, MD 21218
Tel: 410-516-8278
Student Health & Wellness Center- https://studentaffairs.jhu.edu/student-health/1 E 31st St
Homewood Apartments
Suite N200
Baltimore, MD 21218
Tel: 410-516-8270
Students may also contact Renee Eastwood, Director for Graduate Academic Affairs, in our
Dean’s office. Her email is rseitz5@jhu.edu. Renee is Krieger’s point person for helping
graduate students. She can answer any questions that you might have and can help you navigate
the various resources and options that are available to you.
H. General Student Support
The following offices are available to Homewood graduate students seeking assistance withacademic and non-academic concerns.
Renee Eastwood
Director for Graduate Academic Affairs, Krieger School of Arts & Sciences
Wyman Park Building, Room 614 rseitz5@jhu.edu
Krieger School of Arts & Sciences Dean’s Office - http://krieger.jhu.edu/about/contact/
Graduate Representatives Organization - http://studentaffairs.jhu.edu/gro/
JHU Counseling Center - http://studentaffairs.jhu.edu/counselingcenter/
Office of the Dean of Student Life - http://studentaffairs.jhu.edu/student-life/
Homewood Graduate Affairs - http://homewoodgrad.jhu.edu/
Homewood Admissions Office - https://www.jhu.edu/admissions/graduate-admissions/
Office of Student Disability Services - http://web.jhu.edu/disabilities
Office of Institutional Equity - http://web.jhu.edu/administration/jhuoie/contact.html

VI. APPENDIXThis appendix contains worksheets for reviews. It also contains a university document, “JHU
Mentorship Commitments of Faculty Advisors and PhD students.”

29

Department of Economics
Krieger School of Arts and Sciences
Johns Hopkins University
Annual Academic Progress and Professional Development Plan
Review for First-year Students
This Annual Academic Progress and Professional Development Plan document is meant to help you, anEconomics PhD student, reflect on and discuss with your advisor both (a) your academic and research
progress and annual goals and (b) your professional goals, including your strengths, areas to explore, areas
to improve, values, and plans. This form will be completed annually throughout your doctoral studies anddiscussed during an annual meeting with your advisor. This form is intended to be a springboard forconversation between you and your academic advisor. After the conversation has occurred, the student
and advisor should sign this form, and each should then receive an electronic copy.

************************************************************************************
Name:
Date:
Advisor:*************************************************************************************

1

Academic Goals and Objectives
1. What areas of economics are you most interested in? Has your course work during the past year
altered your ranking of the most interesting areas?
Click here to enter text.

2. How well do you think you’ve mastered the material presented in your classes? Are there any
courses that were particularly difficult for you?
Click here to enter text.

3. Which courses do you plan to take next year?
Click here to enter text.

Career and Professional Goals
1. What are your long-term professional goals? In particular, do you know whether you would preferan academic, policy/government, or a private sector position after receiving your PhD? Whichcareer options, tracks, or sectors do you want to learn more about?
Click here to enter text.
2. What shorter-term objectives may help you achieve those goals? E.g., are there specific skills you
would like to acquire or improve? Are there courses, workshops, experiences, internships, etc. thatmight be helpful in getting additional exposure, furthering, or better articulating, these professional
goals?
Click here to enter text.

3. What specific steps will you take to further these professional development goals?
Click here to enter text.

2

4. Do you anticipate any challenges in meeting these professional development goals? Are there
factors that could negatively affect your ability to pursue your short or long term professional
goals? What help can your advisor or other faculty/staff provide?
Click here to enter text.

Additional Comments
Student: please provide any additional comments you would like to share regarding your academic
progress, professional goals, career plans, special concerns, or goals for the coming year.
Click here to enter text.

3

Advisor Section

First-year courses and grades
Click here to enter text.

Comments about student progress, special concerns, goals, or other thoughts
Click here to enter text.

Date of meeting where conversation occurred about above:_________________________________
Student signature_________________________________
Faculty advisor signature___________
Date___________
Date

4

Department of Economics
Krieger School of Arts and Sciences
Johns Hopkins University
Annual Academic Progress and Professional Development Plan
Review for Second-year Students
This Annual Academic Progress and Professional Development Plan document is meant to help you, anEconomics PhD student, reflect on and discuss with your advisor both (a) your academic and research
progress and annual goals and (b) your professional goals, including your strengths, areas to explore, areas
to improve, values, and plans. This form will be completed annually throughout your doctoral studies anddiscussed during an annual meeting with your advisor. This form is intended to be a springboard forconversation between you and your academic advisor. After the conversation has occurred, the student
and advisor should sign this form, and each should then receive an electronic copy.

************************************************************************************
Name:
Date:
Advisor:*************************************************************************************

1

Academic Goals and Objectives
1. In what area of economics do you plan to write your dissertation? Be as specific as you can. The
department recognizes that specifics are in short supply for many students at the end of theirsecond year.
Click here to enter text.

2. Describe briefly your second-year paper. Discuss any challenges you faced in writing the paper
Click here to enter text.

3. Are there any courses you have not yet taken that are important for your dissertation research?
Click here to enter text.

Career and Professional Goals
1. What are your long-term professional goals? In particular, do you know whether you would preferan academic, policy/government, or a private sector position after receiving your PhD? Whichcareer options, tracks, or sectors do you want to learn more about?
Click here to enter text.
2. What shorter-term objectives may help you achieve those goals? E.g., are there specific skills you
would like to acquire or improve? Are there courses, workshops, experiences, internships, etc. thatmight be helpful in getting additional exposure, furthering, or better articulating, these professional
goals?
Click here to enter text.

3. What specific steps will you take to further these professional development goals?
Click here to enter text.

2

4. Do you anticipate any challenges in meeting these professional development goals? Are there
factors that could negatively affect your ability to pursue your short or long term professional
goals? What help can your advisor or other faculty/staff provide?
Click here to enter text.

Additional Comments
Student: please provide any additional comments you would like to share regarding your academic
progress, professional goals, career plans, special concerns, or goals for the coming year.
Click here to enter text.

3

Advisor Section

Second-year courses and grades
Click here to enter text.

Comments about student progress, special concerns, goals, or other thoughts
Click here to enter text.

Date of meeting where conversation occurred about above:_________________________________
Student signature_________________________________
Faculty advisor signature___________
Date___________
Date

4

Department of Economics
Krieger School of Arts and Sciences
Johns Hopkins University
Annual Academic Progress and Professional Development Plan
Review for Third-year Students
This Annual Academic Progress and Professional Development Plan document is meant to help you, anEconomics PhD student, reflect on and discuss with your advisor both (a) your academic and research
progress and annual goals and (b) your professional goals, including your strengths, areas to explore, areas
to improve, values, and plans. This form will be completed annually throughout your doctoral studies anddiscussed during an annual meeting with your advisor. This form is intended to be a springboard forconversation between you and your academic advisor. After the conversation has occurred, the student
and advisor should sign this form, and each should then receive an electronic copy.

************************************************************************************
Name:
Date:
Advisor:*************************************************************************************

1

Academic Goals and Objectives
1. Describe your research progress during the past year. Third-year students should describe theprogress made in producing a dissertation proposal, as well as any additional research. Fourth-year
and higher students should discuss key milestones and accomplishments in their research during
the past year.
Click here to enter text.

2. What were any academic challenges you faced in the past year?
Click here to enter text.

3. What are the main research goals you would like to accomplish in the upcoming year? Please be
specific – for example, completing empirical analysis underlying the first chapter of yourdissertation, constructing a formal model to support the intuition you’ve developed on your second
chapter, and deriving testable hypotheses for the third chapter of your dissertation.
Click here to enter text.

4. Do you anticipate any challenges in the next year in meeting your goals described in Question 3
above? What can be done to help reduce barriers in the coming year?
Click here to enter text.

5. When do you expect to go on the job market?
Click here to enter text.

2

Career and Professional Goals
1. What are your long-term professional goals? In particular, do you know whether you would preferan academic, policy/government, or a private sector position after receiving your PhD? Whichcareer options, tracks, or sectors do you want to learn more about?
Click here to enter text.
2. What shorter-term objectives may help you achieve those goals? E.g., are there specific skills you
would like to acquire or improve? Are there courses, workshops, experiences, internships, etc. thatmight be helpful in getting additional exposure, furthering, or better articulating, these professional
goals?
Click here to enter text.

3. What specific steps will you take to further these professional development goals?
Click here to enter text.

4. Do you anticipate any challenges in meeting these professional development goals? Are there
factors that could negatively affect your ability to pursue your short or long term professional
goals? What help can your advisor or other faculty/staff provide?
Click here to enter text.

Additional Comments
Student: please provide any additional comments you would like to share regarding your academic
progress, professional goals, career plans, special concerns, or goals for the coming year.
Click here to enter text.

3

Advisor Section

Your assessment of the dissertation proposal
Click here to enter text.

Comments about student progress, special concerns, goals, or other thoughts
Click here to enter text.

Date of meeting where conversation occurred about above:_________________________________
Student signature_________________________________
Faculty advisor signature___________
Date___________
Date

4

Department of Economics
Krieger School of Arts and Sciences
Johns Hopkins University
Annual Academic Progress and Professional Development Plan
Review for Fourth-year and Higher Students
This Annual Academic Progress and Professional Development Plan document is meant to help you, anEconomics PhD student, reflect on and discuss with your advisor both (a) your academic and research
progress and annual goals and (b) your professional goals, including your strengths, areas to explore, areas
to improve, values, and plans. This form will be completed annually throughout your doctoral studies anddiscussed during an annual meeting with your advisor and a secondary advisor. This form is intended to
be a springboard for conversation between you and your advisors. After the conversation has occurred,
the student and advisors should sign this form, and each should then receive an electronic copy.

************************************************************************************
Name:
Date:
Year in the program (e.g., 4th if you are finishing your fourth year):
Main Advisor:
Secondary Advisors:*************************************************************************************

1

Academic Goals and Objectives
1. Describe your research progress during the past year. Third-year students should describe theprogress made in producing a dissertation proposal, as well as any additional research. Fourth-year
and higher students should discuss key milestones and accomplishments in their research during
the past year.
Click here to enter text.

2. What were any academic challenges you faced in the past year?
Click here to enter text.

3. What are the main research goals you would like to accomplish in the upcoming year? Please be
specific – for example, completing empirical analysis underlying the first chapter of yourdissertation, constructing a formal model to support the intuition you’ve developed on your second
chapter, and deriving testable hypotheses for the third chapter of your dissertation.
Click here to enter text.

4. Do you anticipate any challenges in the next year in meeting your goals described in Question 3
above? What can be done to help reduce barriers in the coming year?
Click here to enter text.

5. When do you expect to go on the job market?
Click here to enter text.

2

Career and Professional Goals
1. What are your long-term professional goals? In particular, do you know whether you would preferan academic, policy/government, or a private sector position after receiving your PhD? Whichcareer options, tracks, or sectors do you want to learn more about?
Click here to enter text.
2. What shorter-term objectives may help you achieve those goals? E.g., are there specific skills you
would like to acquire or improve? Are there courses, workshops, experiences, internships, etc. thatmight be helpful in getting additional exposure, furthering, or better articulating, these professional
goals?
Click here to enter text.

3. What specific steps will you take to further these professional development goals?
Click here to enter text.

4. Do you anticipate any challenges in meeting these professional development goals? Are there
factors that could negatively affect your ability to pursue your short or long term professional
goals? What help can your advisor or other faculty/staff provide?
Click here to enter text.

Additional Comments
Student: please provide any additional comments you would like to share regarding your academic
progress, professional goals, career plans, special concerns, or goals for the coming year.
Click here to enter text.

3

Advisors’ Section

Main and secondary advisors’ comments about student progress, special concerns, goals, or otherthoughts
Click here to enter text.

Date of meeting where conversation occurred about above:_________________________________
Student signature_________________________________
Main advisor signature_________________________________
Secondary advisor signature_________________________________
Secondary advisor signature___________
Date___________
Date___________
Date___________
Date

4

Department of Economics
Krieger School of Arts and Sciences
Johns Hopkins University
Progress Report, End of Fall Semester, for Fourth-year and Higher Students
This Annual Academic Progress and Professional Development Plan document is meant to help you, anEconomics PhD student, reflect on and discuss with your advisor both (a) your academic and research
progress and annual goals and (b) your professional goals, including your strengths, areas to explore, areas
to improve, values, and plans. This form will be completed annually throughout your doctoral studies anddiscussed during an annual meeting with your advisor and a secondary advisor. This form is intended to
be a springboard for conversation between you and your advisors. After the conversation has occurred,
the student and advisors should sign this form, and each should then receive an electronic copy.

************************************************************************************
Name:
Date:
Year in the program (e.g., 4th if you are finishing your fourth year):
Main Advisor:*************************************************************************************

1

STUDENT SECTION
1. Describe the nature of your fall semester meetings with your main advisor – their frequency,
whether they are in-person or virtual, and whether they are one-on-one or other faculty/students
are present.
Click here to enter text.

2. Describe the nature of your fall semester meetings with other faculty/and or advisors; same
information as in (1).
Click here to enter text.

3.

As of the date of your last annual review, what were your main research goals to accomplish foryour job market paper in the fall semester? Please be specific – for example, what empirical work
did you want to complete, what model extensions did you want to produce.
Click here to enter text.

4. What progress did you make towards these job market paper goals? What problems have come upthat you’ve solved, and what problems (if any) have slowed your progress?
Click here to enter text.

5. What papers (if any) are you working on other than your job market paper? With whom are you
working on these papers? What progress have you made on these papers in the fall semester?
Click here to enter text.

6. Outline your research plan for the spring semester for the job market paper and any other papers
you are working on.

Click here to enter text.

2

ADVISOR SECTION
The advisor’s comments about student progress, special concerns, goals, or other thoughts
Click here to enter text.

Date of meeting where conversation occurred about above:_________________________________
Student signature_________________________________
Main advisor signature___________
Date___________Date

3

JHU Mentorship Commitments of Faculty Advisors and PhD Students
This document outlines mentoring expectations of faculty advisors and of PhD students at
Johns Hopkins University. These expectations should be discussed together.

Faculty advisors should commit to the following responsibilities:
Training:
•

•

•

•
•

•

The PhD advisor has the responsibility to mentor the PhD student. This
responsibility includes committing to the training of their PhD student, building on
the PhD student’s individual professional background and in support of theirindividual professional aspirations.
The PhD advisor has the responsibility to participate in ongoing and regularmeetings with their advisees to discuss academic and research progress. The
advisor and student should agree on expected frequency of and preparation for
meetings and use meetings to brainstorm ideas, troubleshoot challenges, andoutline next steps. The advisor should identify a co-advisor/mentor should theprimary advisor be unavailable for an extended period (sabbatical, leave, etc.).
The PhD advisor has the responsibility to participate in a formal annual
meeting with the student to discuss academic progress and next steps in theacademic program. This responsibility includes helping to ensure that the
document summarizing this annual discussion is completed and submitted inaccordance with program requirements.
The PhD advisor has the responsibility to encourage their advisees to reachout, as relevant, to additional co-advisors or informal mentors.
The PhD advisor has the responsibility clarify the student’s funding package
and to clarify any work and/or teaching expectations associate with the
package.
The PhD advisor has the responsibility to contribute to a training
environment that fosters independent, scholarly research, and professional
growth.

Research• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to provide guidance in scholarly
research. This responsibility includes helping to identify a workable research
project and helping to set reasonable goals and timelines for research completion.
The advisor should encourage the student to expand their skill sets and share ideas
with others at Johns Hopkins and externally.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to monitor research progress. The
advisor should encourage effective use of time. The advisor should meet regularly
with the PhD student to hear updates on progress, results, and challenges in
activities and research.

1|PageProfessional development:• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to discuss career development with
the PhD student, including in any number of sectors of interest to the student.
PhD advisors should assist in identifying resources to further the student’s
professional goals.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to participate in a formal annual
meeting with the PhD student to discuss professional development goals. The
advisor should help to ensure that the document summarizing this discussion iscompleted and submitted in accordance with program requirements.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to nominate the student for relevant
professional opportunities and try to connect their advisees to relevant
professional contacts and networks.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to allow time outside of research forstudent engagement in professional development activities including, forexample, skill building workshops, professional conferences, additional researchcollaborations, or other informational sessions.
Respectful engagement and well-being:• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to treat their advisees, other students,
and colleagues with respect at all times.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to commit to being available to meetwith the PhD student. The advisor and the student should agree on expected
frequency of and preparation for meetings, and expected timeframe for responding
to emails and for providing feedback on work products. The PhD advisor should
give their full attention during meetings and should reach out to PhD students who
are not making contact.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to be supportive during both
successful and discouraging periods of training.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to communicate in a respectful andconstructive manner, including if the advisor has concerns that the PhD
student is not meeting the expectations outlined in this document. This
responsibility includes using concrete and specific language when providing
suggestions or critiquing work.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to take an interest in the student’s
well-being, to listen to any concerns, and to connect the student, as
appropriate, with additional resources.

2|PagePolicies:• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to become familiar with and respect
University, school, and program policies for PhD students. The advisor will
acknowledge all PhD student benefits and entitlements, including, as relevant, paid
and unpaid leave.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to discuss with the student relevant
policies, commitments, and expectations related to funding, work, research
assistantships, teaching assistantships, sick leave, or vacation.
Responsible conduct:• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to become familiar with university
and professional codes of responsible conduct for PhD students. This
responsibility includes reporting any possible violations as required to relevant
parties, including to the relevant Dean’s office and to the Office of Institutional
Equity.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to discuss and help clarify authorshipor intellectual property issues and appropriately recognize the student’s
contributions to any collaborative work.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to model professional behavior inboth interpersonal interactions and in scholarly integrity.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to complete Title IX Training
regarding sexual misconduct and sexual harassment as required by the
University.
http://oie.jhu.edu/training/
Continuous quality improvement as an advisor:• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to participate in mentor training andbest practices discussions. This responsibility includes striving to be a better
mentor and to learn tips and practices that improve their work and skills as anadvisor.
• The PhD advisor has the responsibility to ask advisees for constructive
feedback on mentoring. This responsibility includes doing their best to respondprofessionally to these suggestions and consider whether or how best toincorporate them into their mentoring interactions.

3|PagePhD students should commit to the following responsibilities:
Training:• The PhD student has the primary responsibility for the successful completionof their degree.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to familiarize themselves withacademic milestones and to strive to meet all milestones within the expected
timeframe.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to meet regularly with the PhD
advisor. This responsibility includes providing the advisor with updates on the
progress, outcomes, and challenges in coursework, research, and academic or
professional activities. The advisor and the student should agree on expected
frequency of and preparation for meetings, and will use meetings to brainstorm
ideas, troubleshoot challenges, and outline expectations for work and timelines.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to participate in a formal annual
meeting with the advisor to discuss academic progress and next steps in theacademic program. The student should ensure that the document summarizing
this discussion is completed and submitted in accordance with program
requirements.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to seek additional mentors to expand
their training experience, as appropriate.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to understand their funding package
and to clarify any work and/or teaching expectations in line with thisfunding.
Research:• The PhD student has the responsibility to work with the advisor to develop athesis/dissertation project. This responsibility includes establishing a timeline
for each phase of work and striving to meet established deadlines.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to seek guidance from their advisor,
while also aspiring increasingly for independence.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to engage in activities beyond theirprimary research responsibilities. The student should attend and participate inany research-related meetings and seminars relevant to their training area.

4|PageProfessional development:• The PhD student has the primary responsibility to identify their professional
goals and to develop their career plan following completion of the PhD
degree. This responsibility includes familiarizing themselves with professional
development opportunities within Johns Hopkins and externally. Students should
identify specific activities to pursue that will advance their professional
development and networking.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to prepare a Professional
Development Plan annually that outlines their research and career
objectives. This responsibility includes discussing this plan annually with theadvisor. The student should ensure that the document summarizing this discussion
is completed and submitted in accordance with program requirements.
Respectful engagement and well-being:• The PhD student has the responsibility to treat the advisor, other mentors,
and colleagues with respect at all times.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to make themselves available, withinreason, to meet with the advisor upon request.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to communicate in a respectful andconstructive manner if they have concerns that the advisor is not meeting the
expectations outlined in this document.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to be open to constructive criticism by
the advisor, other mentors, and colleagues.
• The PhD student has the responsibility, as possible, for their well-being,
should consider discussing any concerns with the advisor or other mentor(s),and should connect with available resources when needed.
Policies:• The PhD student has the responsibility to familiarize themselves and comply
with University, school, and program-specific policies and requirements for
PhD students.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to discuss with the advisor relevant
policies, commitments, and expectations related to funding, work, research
assistantships, teaching assistantships, sick leave, or vacation. As needed, thestudent will provide any documentation relevant to stated policies on leave andother requirements to the student’s program, school, or the University.

5|PageResponsible conduct:• The PhD student has the responsibility to conduct themselves in a
responsible and ethical manner at all times.
• The PhD student has the responsibility to familiarize themselves with
University codes of responsible conduct for PhD students.
••

The PhD student has the responsibility to engage in responsible research
conduct. This responsibility includes completing the responsible conduct of
research training requirements of their specific school and program, and any
specific discipline training requirements (e.g., animal and human subject work).
The student will maintain accurate and contemporaneous records of research
activities in accordance with the norms of best practices in their own discipline.
The student should discuss authorship and intellectual property issues with theadvisor.
The PhD student has the responsibility to complete Title IX Training
regarding sexual misconduct and sexual harassment as required by the
University.
http://oie.jhu.edu/training/

6|Page