cmnt29

I'm not sure if the return on investment for an IR degree would be worth it. If you want to work a the world bank, i'd suggest getting some finance experience at another bank for a few years and then applying there, -or- trying to get a job as a contractor there. I believe, someone correct me, but it is tough to get a position there, but it is easier to get a contract one through an outside company. In any case, I don't think education is where you should put your effort, put your focus into a job search strategy. good luck

I think the MBA is DESIGNED to help you do stuff like what you want. What do you see as the benefit of going to SAIS? Georgetown's business school has a very international curriculum, maybe you should look at that too. And you could always go Maryland/Smith and take a few extra classes in politics or public affairs.

to anyone interested, i went there (MIA) and can answer questions. (I'll try to be nonbiased but obviously I have one). Also, i took a quick glance at the tuition stuff, it looks like it is 3Kmore/year than Fletcher or SAIS and a few K less than HKS based on tuition, and then each location has their own cost of living. NY is expensive there is no denying that, but looking closely at the numbers SAIS seems to only budget 3K/year in personal expenses while HKS and sipa budget around 6K. However I just glanced at it, so i'd look into the details of tuition not just the bottom line. i believe gazelle's claim about the large waitlist is true. and le_neocon's idea that students are open to the private sector is also true. a large section of the class focuses on econ/finance and goes into banking/finance/federal reserve/risk services and/or consulting. they have a less dc focused crowd than Georgetown, GWU or SAIS, which is partly because of their location and partly because the school is 50% international, whereas the others are less (I think). As to someones previous mention of the Japanese diplomatic respect for the school, its likely true because the Japanese government sponsors a large number of students there every year so there a large number of alumni in Japan

From the Sipa admissions blog (hopefully helps you breath easier) http://rtl.lamp.columbia.edu/sites/sipa/tag/gre/ The Matrix Friday, November 20th, 2009 I am hesitant sometimes to use personal experience/opinions when blogging about admissions issues, but every once in a while I will toss in a cultural reference that I understand maybe not everyone will understand. We have applicants from over 100 countries each year and I understand that not everyone may understand the context, but I try to add enough detail to make the point understood. One of my favorite movies is The Matrix. I remember pondering the plot for days after I first saw it. A good movie for me is one that makes me think for a while after seeing it. I was not huge fan of the second and third installments, I think they should have left it at one movie, but such is the Hollywood model of producing sequels when a first installment of a film is a hit. Anyway, for those who have not seen the movie the plot is based upon machines that set up a virtual reality called the Matrix. Computer programs are written to provide humans with a world that they believe is real, but is not. Humans are connected to the Matrix and do not physically live in the world, rather they live life as if a character in a computer program. Why? Well the machines wanted to tame humans and use them as energy sources after the war between machines and man cut off sunlight to the earth of course! If you have not seen the movie, no, sleep deprivation from my travel schedule has not caused me to go off the deep end, it really is the plot =) What does this have to do with admissions? Well I think that sometimes we buy into a sort of Matrix regarding goals we wish to accomplish in life. In some cases our society convinces us that there is a formula associated with the goals people have or achievements we seek to accomplish. Admission to graduate school is a goal many have and society has led many to believe that admission to a graduate program is a Matrix. Why do I believe this? Primarily because two of the most common questions I have been asked as I have been traveling this fall are: * What is the average GPA required for someone to gain admission? * What are the average GRE scores of an incoming student? These are two questions that I dodge like an adept politician (or should I say like Neo dodging bullets?). Why? Well two primary reasons are the diversity of age in our applicant pool along with the fact that we receive applications from over 100 countries each year. Last year we received transcripts from close to 900 different universities and the youngest enrolled student this year is 21 and the oldest is 51. With so many countries, universities, teaching styles, and grading systems you might think that it would not be fair to establish a singular standard for all applicants. I agree – no single standard should be used to judge all applicants to SIPA. We evaluate each applicant as an individual and the process is very holistic. There is no Matrix. Each person has a different story, background, education, experience, and goals. Yes, we do look at GPA and test scores, but we put them in context and scores and grades are relative to the experience of an applicant. Another example I could use to state why average GPA is not important is strength of schedule. One applicant may have a “soft” academic record in terms of courses chosen while another applicant chose very challenging courses and achieved a lower GPA than an applicant who chose an easier pathway. Should we punish the applicant that chose the more challenging path? The Admissions Committee does not believe so. How about the GRE? Would it be fair to expect that an applicant that speaks English as a third language should score as well on the verbal portion of the GRE as someone who speaks English as a native language? Again I believe the answer is “no.” I do understand the desire of applicants to have information regarding GPA and GRE. It is valid to seek an answer to the question, “How can I tell where I stand in terms of previous successful applicants to your program?” I will offer up a few comments, none of which ever puts anyone totally at ease, but bear with me. First, the younger someone is the more attention we pay to grades and test scores. Why? Well younger people have less work experience. The older someone is, the more we might give them a “break” in terms of grades and test scores. I would not expect that a 51 year old applicant would do as well on the GRE as someone that is 21 and just graduating. However the 51 year old has decades of experience that the 21 year old does not. Second, overall GPA is not as important as grades in particular courses. Let’s say that an applicant majored in Economics and had a GPA of 3.1. Perhaps this applicant went “off the board” and took some challenging classes that were unrelated to their major. Maybe he or she got a “C” in a Sociology of Religion class. Intellectual curiosity is admirable and average grades in a few classes may not be looked upon as a negative, but rather as a positive for wanting to expand one’s intellectual development. I hope you understand where I am going with all of this – there is no formula we use to admit a student. I know this still will not put you totally at ease so I will offer one final comment on test scores. On the GRE we look more at percentiles than we do number scores. Let’s say you scored a 680 on the quantitative portion of the GRE. This may have put you in the 71st percentile meaning that 29% of those that took the exam scored better than you, and 69% scored lower than you. As a general guideline I can say the following regarding percentiles as viewed by the Admissions Committee at SIPA: * The low 80s to the high 90s could be considered superior * The low 70s to the low 80s could be considered excellent * The low 60s to the low 70s could be considered good * Scores in the 50s could be considered fair However, again realize that this scale is relative and we have no cutoffs. An applicant may speak English as a third language and thus might have scored below the 50th percentile on the verbal portion of the GRE. At the same time, this applicant could have scored very well on the TOEFL exam and the Committee will take this into account. One of the most common questions we receive centers around the question of what could be called “eligibility” for our program. I completely understand where applicants are coming from regarding such questions, but I do want to emphasize that the Admissions Committee at SIPA does not use any sort of formula to admit students. The process of evaluating applicants for admission is very holistic and we look at each part of the application. Besides possessing a college degree, there are no specific criteria for admission. There are surely things applicants can do to strengthen their candidacy for our program but we do not require a specific GPA, certain test scores, a particular major, or a certain number of years of work experience. We get questions such as the following all of the time: # I studied a major unrelated to what I wish to study at SIPA. Does this disqualify me from admission? # I have not taken an economics class, does this mean I have no chance of being admitted? # I have only worked for one year, does this mean I will not be admitted? # I did not score well on the GRE/GMAT – does this jeopardize my candidacy? # The work experience of high does not really relate to my proposed field of study, is this a problem? # Is it worth my time to apply based on my background? There certainly are generalizations that can be made about the majority of those who are admitted to SIPA. The average age of an admitted SIPA applicant is approximately 27. However we have had students as young as 21 join us. The majority of applicants that apply to SIPA have completed a microeconomics and macroeconomics class. Is it a requirement that all applicants have completed such a sequence prior to being admitted? No. I do not want to sound like a politician who is dancing around the question and I understand the desire applicants have for “concrete” answers, but admission decisions really come down to an applicant’s story – a story the encompasses each and every part of the application. In the past I worked for a school with a strong focus on arts, entertainment, music, and media. One faculty member left an impression upon me because he constantly stated something along the lines of the following: “The success of a movie has everything to do with the story. You can have the best actors, the best special effects, the best soundtrack . . . but without a good story such resources just go to waste.” Something similar can be said about applicants. Some applicants possess very relevant experience but are unable to bring everything together in their application. This may result in a scattered application with no real discernible theme or story. On the other hand, there may be an applicant with seemingly unrelated experience and a major that was far afield from what they wish to study at SIPA, however s/he does a superb job of making sense of all of the parts by weaving all of the parts of their application together into a compelling story. This might be accomplished thr0ugh the choice of recommendation writers, compelling volunteer work, and a focused personal statement. The personal statement really is the “glue” that holds the entire application together. We would love to interview each candidate for admission but are unable to do so. Thus your personal statement is where we get to know you. It is divided into three questions and in question #1 you really should focus on your passion, future goals, what you hope to gain from SIPA, and what you will contribute to SIPA. Questions 2 and 3 are wide open, but you should write wisely and try to include information that contributes to the story you are trying to convey in your application. In sum, there are general characteristics that we look for in an applicant, but in the end a compelling story, mixed with evidence of academic and professional competence that will allow one to handle our curriculum, is really what helps an applicant to stand out. One final note, some applicants have questions concerning our desire to see evidence of success with quantitative methods/economics at the undergraduate level. Why is this important? Well all SIPA students, regardless of degree or major, are required to take a full year of economics, a quantitative analysis class, and a financial management class. As you might imagine, those with little to no previous experience in these areas would likely struggle greatly with our curriculum. Also, second year fellowship consideration is tied to academic performance in the first year of study and a certain way to disqualify oneself from fellowship consideration is to do poorly in these classes, which are all first year requirements. Thus, we do like to see evidence in an application of success in classes that relate to quantitative methods.

Well, I don't think the acceptance rate tells the whole story. My guess from linkedin and reading bios and reading their website (The requirements say you have to have substantial grad school coursework) is that is basically the program you go to if you want to check the HKS block because you are a HBS/HLS/Med school student. So that knocks out most everyone and those others schools obviously do some serious vetting. I was surprised to see the high acceptance rate for mpp and the low % of international students. Either way, the reality is that much of the admission discrimination in all policy schools takes place in the form of who can/is willing to pay for a degree with the ROI of a policy school. E.g. 120K of debt for undefined financial and career benefits. (I did it for less money and thought it was a good investment) Obviously the dean understands that and is trying to get some more money. If they had the war chest that WWS does, then...that'd be amazing.

Wasn't the 246 for the actual enrolled class? Can't remember. If so, then assume a good 66% yield and 246/.66=372/1344=28%

When I went to school, not at Korbel, students often also had administrative positions within the research centers/career services etc. I'm not sure if it was a work-study, imagine it was. They may have these for you. An admin job within a relevent research center actually seems like a good deal, you get to do your HW while sitting there, and you get to know the faculty. the RA positions were probably 75% phd students Also, maybe I missed this but 20K is about as good as you can do for these schools. Most everyone else takes out the loans for the balance, which is your decision, and considerably harder even to get loans for int'l students, i'm told. Depending on which school you go to, many have endowed scholarships for students from that country. And many countries sponsor a few students I think.

Hmm, interesting. Building on what others have mentioned, I'd start with a cost-benefit analysis: Is the 4-7 years in the school likely to lead you to a better financial position than a two year program with loans from another school Is there an alumni network? (Which, is obviously smaller, but one of the main benefits of plunking down money for these schools) Also, this is the tougher job to quantify, find out if phd's are preferred in your intended job area. It seems sometimes that phd's have a better ability to rise to the top of their institutions, but no always, and it depends on many factors. Also, on the downside of phd's is that employers sometimes do not want to hire them because they believe that this person so loves issues x, that they don't want to hire them for issue a, believing that they'll leave at the first sign of being able to find position covering issue x, somewhere else. however, i don't think this necessarily applies to your situation. More like if you got a phd in chemistry and wanted to work at the world bank...and even then they might like that. Last, what's the completion rate of the program. Many students seems to leave after 5 years with nothing to show for it, which stinks. Either way, it seems you are off to a good start.

2010app, you're ok in my book. Honesty > praise that we all expect in gen y

The question here is more than a matter of if you can get in (which I'd put at an 75% probability of getting into one of those), it is a matter of if should you attend. Knowing a language as an American is a bonus when applying to schools, even if you aren't native, especially if you want to work for the three letter agencies, which do not hire foreigners. It is also good for U.S. firms if it is coupled with a core business competency. That said, since you are still in college, even if you get in, should you attend? As some others have mentioned, a few years in the workforce would give you -direction towards a career, and you may not give a rats a$$ about east asian politics in two years. you have been in academia for your entire life. Scoping out the real world may change your perspective on things. -idea of what skills it takes to make it in your desired career -maturity --during graduate school it gives you the ability to better learn and contribute --you'll get along with others better bc you'll be the same age (if you are 22 and they are 27, its tougher to relate) --and after school you are much more employable if you already have work experience, thus leading to hire starting salary to pay off the crushing amount of debt that you are then wondering why you took on. And last, like they said elsewhere, your academic record is strong enough that if you wait 3 years, you'll be able to choose from among these schools and maybe squeeze some money out of them.

Ashley, Great academic stats, and I'm sure you are anxious and excited about grad school and becoming a DOS employee. You are correct that age will work against you. And, I would consider these factors -the average incoming age of a FSO is about 32 I think. I'm not sure what it is for the civil service, but the Main State positions are very competitive. Ask around the office. What are the chances you will not be hired immediately after grad school because of lack of experience? If this is a possibility, might it not be better to wait about 3 few years and then: -you'll likely get into the school of your choice AND receive some scholarship money AND be competitive for a civil service posting. Also, if you consider the foreign service, they have a program, and the name escapes me, where they pay for your grad degree.

You scrubbed the actual post well enough that it doesn't reveal any info about you, just wanted to bring that to light. That said, it seems like a good start. on the school specific one I would expand on: -info about why that school (just like you would do in a cover page when applying for a job) beyond the coursework. Why is the curriculum, location, alumni network, internship opportunities, etc., so great about school X or Y that you are willing to spend $120K and two years there. which leads into.... -as i think you started to write, but may have edited out, a specific reference to where you want to work afterwards and what you want to do there. I have no real insight here, but think that much of the reason they admit someone is their focus to find that job in the short two-year timeline. So what types of jobs will you be looking for, and how will the school enable you to become more qualified for those jobs. - And maybe a bit on why you will be a great and UNIQUE addition to that will CONTRIBUTE to the classroom discussion and DIVERSITY. Good luck.

Criticism? I'm going to write this nicer than i did before: I do not recommend posting this stuff on an open forum to be ripped off, read, and traced back to you by the adcom. My 2 cents

Ok full disclosure I went to SIPA Academic vs policy=Cornell07 laid out, but i would argue that SIPA is not that policy oriented. most of the security and regional courses fall within the poli sci dept and are therefore academic classes. policy ones are to be had if you want to, but you shape your course of study. I think I wrote one, count it one, memo at SIPA. the rest was academic stuff. economics=SAIS requires you to concentrate in it, at least for the MA. SIPA makes you take a year of econ, and has another "skills" course or two of budgeting/finance and management. Yale, i dunno. academics= the sais curriculum is strategic studies, and therefore more defense focused, whereas the other two schools are security studies and not totally focused on defense issues. Consider asking yourself about these differences Class size Yale=23, SAIS=250, SIPA=350. SIPA is also the most international with a full 50% of the classes coming from abroad, where SAIS is around 40%, Yale i dunno Location: New Haven, NYC, DC. You choose. NYC is definitely a diverse and eye opening experience What will you do after you leave your current job? I'd choose the program that best prepares you for that and, IMO, is the result of a large alumni network, practical skills coures that go beyond security issues in east asia. Curriculum=as aforementioned, compare what you'll have to take at each school