Prospective student contributor program

Good work gets better when someone else can challenge it.

AEA Fellows is the framework for eventually opening this site to other students—to build models, investigate companies, cover market news, write newsletters, publish opinions, and explain finance without hiding behind finance vocabulary.

The honest status: this is the program design, not a claim that a cohort already exists. I have not selected fellows or opened applications yet. I am publishing the standards first so the opportunity has a real shape before it has a roster.

Why build this

From one student’s journal to a student research table.

AEA started as a way for me to make my own decisions visible. The next version should add something I cannot create alone: disagreement before publication, specialties beyond my own, and work useful to readers who do not arrive speaking markets.

The goal is not to imitate a bank or pretend students are already professionals. It is to practice professional habits early—clear questions, defensible sources, honest uncertainty, respectful debate, and revisions that remain on the record.

Seven publishing desks

Different work. One visible standard.

A fellow would choose a lane, own a specific deliverable, and work with an editor or peer challenger before it reaches the site.

The publication route

Six gates between an idea and a byline.

  1. 01Pitch

    State the question, why it matters, and what evidence could change the answer.

  2. 02Source

    Build from filings, data, direct documents, and clearly labeled secondary reporting.

  3. 03Build

    Draft the article or model with assumptions and missing information visible.

  4. 04Challenge

    Give a peer the job of finding the weak link, not just fixing commas.

  5. 05Publish

    Add a byline, date, sources, disclosures, and the limits of the conclusion.

  6. 06Revise

    Update the record when facts change. The original reasoning does not disappear.

Editorial standard

What earns the AEA byline.

A polished conclusion is not enough. The work has to show how it got there and where it could be wrong.

Read the full Research Standards →
  • 01

    Source before story. Link the evidence and distinguish reported fact from interpretation.

  • 02

    Countercase before confidence. Address the strongest serious objection.

  • 03

    Assumptions in daylight. Models show inputs, scenarios, and what drives the result.

  • 04

    Disclose tools and interests. Holdings, conflicts, data limits, and meaningful AI assistance belong beside the work.

  • 05

    Revision without erasure. Corrections are dated and the reason for the change stays visible.

  • 06

    No stock-pick theater. AEA Fellows would publish educational research, never solicit clients, capital, or trades.

Credit & ownership

Your work should still look like yours.

Each contributor would receive a named byline and retain credit for the thinking, writing, and model they produced. Editing should sharpen an author’s voice, not sand it into AEA house language. I would remain responsible for the site’s publishing standard and final editorial decisions.

Current statusBuilding the table before filling the seats.

Applications are not open yet. The next step is to test the workflow, prepare contributor templates, and decide how the first students can be supported well enough to make the experience worth joining.

See the kind of work Fellows would build on →