greendiplomat

That's what these forums are here for, right? I just noticed your signature / admissions results, btw. Congrats! Do you know what you want to get into academicall/professionally?

OK, that I'll agree with. Talk on!

This page gives a good overview of what one can expect. I understand that this is their attempt to make financial aid available to the deserving students based on their performance in their first year, but I think it's a poor admissions strategy in that admits don't like the uncertainty of not knowing how much in fellowship aid they can expect in their second year and often end up going to other schools for that reason.

Agreed that this thread is getting out of hand; I've sent you a PM. In short, I don't think I've ever objected to quantity of posts, and I'm curious to see what made you think so. Rather, I'm objecting to his posts where he tells people not to apply to school X because they're not worthy, instead of giving constructive criticism on how they can improve their candidacy. That, in combination with his (deleted) posts from this thread is what moved me to take action to prevent these forums from becoming a hostile environment. Give previous years' notifications and this year's earlier deadline, I think your friend could be on to something, down the grape vine or not.

P.S. I'm noticing that he's since deleted a good number of his posts. Go figure.

While I do think that some people are over-reacting, Kaka's posts aren't just about confidence (also look at his posts on some of the other threads). He methodically feels the need to drag people through the mud in order to assert his "confidence", and I definitely do think that such behavior is inappropriate.

We all definitely agree / are aware that admissions committees judge an applicant's merits holistically, rather than based on a numbers-based rubric. I do think, though that you're being a bit contradictory in trying to make your point: "Anybody who thinks "the numbers" can get you into (or eliminate you from) a program is flat out WRONG. My numbers:" "My GPA is the min GPA to even be considered to most programs" The whole point I think you're trying to make is that there is no cutoff GPA, that is, that there is no "min GPA to be considered to most programs" in the first place, and I think your track record is telling of that. Congrats on your admissions, and I hope there's more to come!

Firstly, I'd just like to point out that I wrote this post over a year ago; whatever the case, there was no disrespect meant, if I came across that way. I definitely agree with you that, as true when choosing to apply to any degree program, everyone needs to make their decision based on what makes the most sense to them, curricularly and otherwise. In that sense, I think the distinguishing characteristic of the 1-year MPA-ESP is its cohort model. Academically, this means that most of your classes will be required classes with an elective or two every semester, making this program produce more generalists in environmental policy than specialists in specific sub-fields of environmental policy. Also in terms of professional networks, the small class size means that you'll get to know your peers pretty quickly, but you have less time and opportunity to make connections with the rest of the SIPA crowd. Based on the above, I think the program is wonderful for people who have a good degree of work experience, and who are going to SIPA to add an environmental and/or policy component to their expertise in a short amount of time. I personally decided against this program because my interests were such that I wanted the ability to take coursework in IR theory, climate policy, and advance microeconomics; I wasn't specifically interested in most of the science classes that you're required to take in your first semester as an MPA-ESP student. Again, that was a personal decision, and I don't discourage people from deciding that the MPA-ESP is the best choice for them. That being said, there's no denying that the MPA-ESP program, while a great program, doesn't have the cachet or the massive alumni network that come with the decades of history that the two-year programs have. At the end of the day, though, degrees are like investments---the more they increase in desirability in the future, the more value possessing them has; I'm sure the MPA-ESP program will only grow in prestige and alumni network moving forward.

I went there for undergrad, and with my former department (econ) housed in the International Affairs Building (IAB) and having taken a few SIPA classes my senior year, I'm very familiar with SIPA both in terms of curriculum and general vibe (though I'm not pretending to be the most knowledgeable person on gradcafe; I think there's a current MDP student that lurks these forums as well and I'm sure there are more). Either way, let me know if any of you have questions, and I'd be glad to answer. ETA: In response to your question, SubjectNotebook, as you can tell by some of the posts in the admissions blog that cplanicka posted, they take a few weeks to print/process/distribute the applications every year, so it has absolutely no effect. For instance, I got the application in SECONDS before the deadline (I think the time-stamp read that I got it in 8 seconds before the deadline) and got in, if that makes you comfortable.

While I don't have a problem with the thread itself, I will agree with blingem in that bumping this thread makes the issue of dress codes seem like a bigger deal than it is. The conclusion that we came to (and the reason why the thread died in the first place) is that it's not something that anyone should be losing sleep over, and I think bumping it reinforces the notion that people that haven't been to grad school in the US like CC139 should be worrying about what to wear.

Also, question about the fellowship applications. Did people generally re-use the materials that they submitted in their original applications? In particular, I just noticed that they ask for a resume (as opposed to a CV as they do in the admissions application). Did people reuse the same CV that they submitted, or do people think that they make the resume/CV distinction on purpose so that we submit more condensed ones for the fellowships? Also, along similar lines, I used a relatively narrative style (at least in the beginning and end) in my statement in my admissions application, but did people retain the same general structures in their statements or did people write the shorter 1-page essays more in the style of a to-the-point no-frills cover letter?

You obviously have a good grasp of the pros (great school and program) and cons (the consequences of the program being non-traditional and relatively new, if I remember correctly). Judging from the MIB class of 2010 employment data from the Fletcher website, it does look, though, that students seem to be successful in finding jobs in both private sector work as well as the type of public sector work in which you express interest in the long-term. I'd say that, given the above, Fletcher would be a great fit for you. (As with any program, though, you always need to be skeptical of whether those students got those private-sector jobs due to what the program offered, or the private sector experience that the students already had.) In addition to Fletcher's MIB program, out of the list of schools that you've applied to, I'd say that the program that jumps out at me as making sense given your career goals is SIPA's International Finance and Economic Policy concentration (though that might be an effect of knowing more about SIPA as a Columbia alum / SIPA admit... I'd be curious to hear what other people think about the other programs that braindead lists). Though it's not a concentration that I've researched in depth, I recall reading that the finance coursework that the International Finance track offers exceeds the depth that a general MBA would offer, with the added benefits of being able to take one Columbia Business School class a semester (pending prereqs) and being able to work/network with prospective employers in the city. Given how informed you seem to be, I'm sure you've already done this, but in addition to the finance/B-school coursework that the various programs allow you to take, I'd say take a look at the various schools' employment data (% graduates going into private sector jobs, in addition to past employers), and then wait around for admissions/funding decisions and make your decision accordingly.

Oh I thought you meant you were waiting to hear back from Vogue Magazine because the thread title made it SO unclear.

I guess it's the lack of explicit question that put him/her off, but I do agree that there's a huge number of harsh responses as of late. I think it's just that time of year (i.e. when admissions results are coming up, making people antsy). In response to the original post, I think that you're definitely a strong candidate, though how strong depends on things that you didn't post. What's your quantitative background like (i.e. What did you study as an undergrad, and if not econ-related, what math/stats/econ classes did you take and how did you do in them)? If you're unfamiliar with public policy programs, how did you communicate in your personal statement that you're a good fit for HKS and vice versa?

Wow, why so bitter? I never said that he's a shoo-in because of his GRE scores (I think it goes without saying that GRE scores alone will get him in, without having to speak to the ad comm); all I said is that he has "a chance" (i.e. that it's worth trying), which is why I went the constructive route of asking him what econ/quant classes he has and telling him that the most important thing for someone coming directly out of undergrad is for them to show direction/initiative. On that note, though, this coming from someone that applied directly out of undergrad and ended up deferring for a year primarily for personal reasons, even if you're as decided on your academic/professional path as I was coming out of undergrad, taking even just a year off does to work full-time with a relevant organization makes a world of difference both in terms of what you'll learn and what professional connections you'll make (e.g. I've learned more about domestic climate policy than I would have in a semester-long class at SIPA, and I already have an implicit job offer for after I graduate). I just noticed that you indicate that you're applying to JD, MPP, and MBA programs on your info, so, given that information, regardless of whether you'll get into these programs or not, I think it would be best to take some time to find out what it is that you really want. Even if you do get in to the most selective program, whatever prestige that these programs will afford you is definitely not worth the debt that you're getting yourself into if it's not going to get you where you want. To answer your question, adollarninetynine, the quant classes that HKS's MPP program "prefers" are "some college-level economics, statistics, and mathematics", and, while it will help prove your ability, none of the programs at HKS (not even MPA-ID) actually require you to have taken econometrics, contrary to what kaka says. Since the econ requirements at MPP programs are roughly equivalent to the intermediate level classes that you'll take as an undergrad in economics major, the classes that'll make you a solid candidate would be Intro Micro & Macro (if not Intermediate), Intro Statistics w/ Calc, and Calculus III, though obviously the more the better (though until a certain point... if you have a grad degree's worth of econ by the time you enter, you'll need to prove that why actually need the MPP). Though the HKS page that I linked doesn't make the above classes a firm requirement, I'd say you'd have to prove your quantitative ability otherwise if you don't have them (if not take them somewhere after you get your bachelor's).

To play devil's advocate here, I think that Princeton's reputation is slightly inflated in admissions boards like these, due to its "desirability" to applicants as THE school to get into (mighty low admit rate and abundance of funding, both arguably due to small class size), and, as such, I don't think placing Princeton at #4 isn't that questionable. Given the above, I think the question should be why schools like Syracuse and Indiana-Bloomington place above/among the likes of HKS and WWS (N.B.: Not arguing that these are bad programs; just not as highly regarded from within the public policy space). The answer there would be super arbitrary methodology and lack of input from established professionals and academics in the public policy space.

Right; I agree. You have the numbers to stand a chance (though, from the limited information that you've given, I can't guarantee that you've shown your econ/quant prowess), but the reason why they want work experience is to demonstrate that you have direction. If you've demonstrated exceptional interest (as well as leadership) in public service through academics, extracurriculars, and internships, I think you have a chance.

I'm sure you'll be just fine. The MPA/ID program class seems to comprise of a good number of students from developing countries that intend to do work to help their home countries, whether directly via their respective governments of via international organizations, and you also seem to have the necessary quantitative experience. The only concern I would have is whether you demonstrated to the admissions committee that you even need the degree, given that you already have a master's degree in economics. You can never guarantee these things, but I'm sure you stand a good chance.

Shit, son. In all seriousness, though, I wonder whether the shift to more MPAs is part of a larger strategic vision, and, if so, what the rationale behind it is. Personally, I think SIPA would benefit from maintaining its "brand" as a leading IR school, though I guess the application numbers might be suggesting otherwise (not to mention that the space between public policy programs and IR programs is one that's yet to be fully occupied).

You're correct in noticing that there's barely a difference between the two, as indicated by the table at the bottom of this page. As you'll notice, the only difference is that MIAs take Conceptual Foundations of International Affairs + a course that fulfills the Interstate Relations requirement, as opposed to Politics of Policymaking I + II that MPAs take. Additionally, MIAs have a foreign language requirement (which is only required for the Economic and Political Development concentration for MPAs), and the dual degree options are slightly different if you're interested in those. As far as general "vibe" goes, having taken a few SIPA classes as an undergrad, I know that SIPA students are also aware that their programs are pretty much the same, and, given that they take all of their classes together (again, apart from Conceptual Foundations / Politics of Policymaking), there's no observable "segregation" between the two programs. The MIA program is older and bigger (350/year as opposed to 110 for the MPA program), so the MIA program *might* have a larger network, but, again, same school and virtually the same program (and people tend to know that the MPA at SIPA is very international-oriented). In sum, it just boils down to which out CF / PoP you see yourself taking.

What, in general, is the standard policy with regards to (re)application limits at policy schools? I ask because I've completed a round of applications, decided to defer, and was made a job offer during my year off that's hard to refuse. For instance, I remember hearing 3 for HKS once, but I don't seem to be able to find the link supporting this. If this is the case, would this limit apply to applications to the entire university (including undergrad), or just the school in question? What about PhD programs (i.e. many applications for doctoral programs at policy schools are handled by the graduate school of arts & sciences at their respective universities; if I attend an MPP/MIA program the second time I apply to schools and later decide to get a PhD, would I only be allowed to apply once?)? Does withdrawing an application before the results are announced make that time not count, or is an application counted the moment it's submitted? I realize that I've asked a ton of questions, for thanks for sticking with me.

Whoa there, glad I came across this thread and intervened before someone convinced you to put down money to fulfill prereqs that you've probably already fulfilled. The prereqs, including "three semesters of calculus", are written assuming the American model, under which you either take three semesters of calculus, either directly as an undergraduate, or by placing out of the first 2 semesters through AP Calculus in high school (even when you take the latter route and only take Calculus III as an undergrad, which many competitive applicants do, you're aware that you're placing out of 2 semesters). Given that in the British system, you're expected to have A-level Mathematics when applying for a bachelor's in econ, this would be the equivalent of the latter route, which, in combination with your math/stats for econ, should more than suffice. In short, just make sure you know how to do partial derivatives, and you'll be fine.

Having gone to Columbia for undergrad (and taken a few SIPA classes while there), I'm going to make a *slight* modification to the above. I agree that public policy / IR schools have no dress code (tacit or otherwise) and dress is generally more casual than B-schools. That being said, I think that their students are slightly less casually dressed than students at your average college, something that I think can be explained by 2 factors: (1) at the end of the day, these are professional schools and the perception of peers as future colleagues is more pronounced than during undergrad; and (2) because most students don't live on campus, students can't show up in the straight-out-of-bed PJ-bottoms-and-hoodie look. The last class that I took there, for example, had a handful of students that came directly from work and were thus definitely business casual, with the rest of the class ranging from jeans/hoodie casual to preppy. I wouldn't worry too much of it, but my strategy when in doubt (and probably what I'll do the first day of SIPA) is to dress preppy so that you won't stick out in either environment (casual or business casual) and to adjust accordingly as the year goes on.

I know this might be a no-brainer, but have you tried calling the office? You obviously don't want to miss the application deadline, and if it's a glitch in their system, you have the right to call.

If you already have relevant/related work experience in an international NGO and are just looking to get a Masters to make you eligible for jobs at, say, the UN, I think you're thinking along the right track in that you should do whatever would cost you the least. Coming directly out of undergrad and looking to develop expertise in my area (climate economics/policy) however, Wagner made no sense for me, so I'd say avoid Wagner if developing proficiency in new areas relevant to a job at the UN. And to defend SIPA (since I feel like this opinion is under-represented on these forums ), the size of the incoming class is very big, so, yes, statistically, it makes sense that a larger number of students have trouble finding jobs than at a smaller school like, say, WWS. That said, the benefits of a larger class are that you have a much larger alumni network to benefit from once you graduate, and you have a much more varied course selection than you would at a smaller school. In the end, I think that SIPA is what you make of it, and, if you set yourself up correctly, it can be an amazing launching-pad for careers in international affairs, especially in the UN system (which makes sense, given its location in NYC). In the end, I think it's worth considering how much you'll be in debt and job security upon graduation (and if you're already a well into your career, this would be the deciding factor), but if the graduate program in question won't take you down the career that you're looking to pursue, it's not worth your time and money.