NPRjunkie

Have you checked their website? Google is often a good resource.

NYU/Wagner accepts everyone and their cat at a premium exceeding the school's value to your resume. If you're using the USNews rankings, throw them out the window. NYU is the top ranked most expensive school in the country and one of the least generous in terms of financial aid. No offense. But my god, save yourself the time and money. Look at SAIS or GWU for better programs at lower cost with more financial aid or Columbia if you want to be in NYC.

Princeton, Columbia, and Yale are definitely a stretch (Princeton being the biggest stretch by far--your chances are virtually zero there). You'll be fine for NYU/SPCS (is this the school under which they house "global studies"?). They'll even open the door for you and will be happy to take all your money. So would Seton Hall. If you think an internship at a "prestigious government agency" gives you a competitive edge, think again. As I've said many times before, everyone and the mother has internships. I had 3 internships at 3 prestigious government agencies and on Capitol Hill. Get real experience, otherwise I'd recommend applying to SAIS, GWU, American. Those schools will be full of kids who all think they have prestigious government internships.

I know, sorry. I was really directing my comment toward the schools, not you. They say CV because CVs are longer which allows applicants to include extraneous details about the meaningless/fluffed up endeavors of their undergrad. careers. But I digress... Good luck! 2 years should put you in the average range for schools like SAIS.

Two years makes you hardly out of diapers. Put your education on top. You're applying to a graduate program, therefore your undergrad. education and performance are especially important to them anyway. You should not even be calling it your 'CV' if we're being anal, here. Your education takes less precedence once you've had many years experience in one field and consistently in one job. "Any experience above zero" does not count as that. I'd say five years minimum, but unless you've reached a point where you're a hot commodity based on your experience, don't put your education anywhere but the top. It's most definitely what is expected and you'd look like a weirdo if you're in your 20s (with 2 whole years experience) and you didn't.

The U.S. Foreign Service, yes.

The FS won't care where you got your degree from or what it's in. A policy degree, however, will be more versatile in other areas of government and outside it.

*ladder

By all means apply if you want to, but I'd suggest the caliber of student there doesn't exactly live up to the hype. Your undergrad is a top global university and you have work experience already; you are competitive for jobs already that a SAIS grad. would be applying to upon graduation depending on the type of development work you want to end up doing. I think all those options (multilateral/govt/think tank) should sound uninteresting to you. On the research end of things, your options for think tanks are entry-level positions (for which, as a Stanford grad. with work experience, you're already qualified). There is no room for advancement on the research end between a research assistant and a fellow; you'd have to go to the programming side of things if you want to climb the think tank latter, which doesn't seem up your alley. For multilateral, I'd just point out the obvious: bureaucratic nightmare, thankless work, the potential that your 200-page report will never be read by anyone ever, etc. This might be less the case for the banks, but it's generally the case for IGOs engaged in development. For gov't work in general, you may not even need a master's degree. But for the jobs you do, it doesn't matter where you go to school. I don't really have any suggestions; I'm just providing disillusionment you should factor into your decision making. You might consider the more entrepreneurial end of things in terms of agricultural development (i.e. start-ups conceiving new solutions to old problems). Development as it exists today is such an old beast that needs to be shot and no one wants to pull the trigger. I'd say HKS and WWS (or even Columbia for that matter) would provide more in the way of innovative and entrepreneurial career trajectories, but SAIS will suit your needs just fine if that's what you want. I don't think it'll really add or negate anything you have already acquired in terms of education/work experience.

I think you're fine for all the top programs, including WWS. Why even bother applying to SAIS? You'll be a fish out of water there, I promise you. LSE really has a reputation it doesn't deserve and I've heard that from people who've gone there. Oxford would be awesome but its academics are parochial by American standards. I think you're competitive for the MPA-ID at HKS but, despite your credentials, you might get no money. HKS has the largest endowment ten times over but it's by far the stingiest with money; even Columbia is more generous as a percentage of its endowment. Consider WWS more seriously. You're already qualified to work at a think tank in DC (although why would you want to?), and multilateral banks won't really care where you got your master's. It's not fancy work and it's also a multilateral conditional lending institution which won't give you much cache after this whole global "rebalance" stuff boils over. I'm half-kidding but you don't need a degree from HKS or WWS to work at the World Bank. You might as well go to GWU. Your GRE won't sink you.

Yeah I know there are a good chunk of people straight from undergrad, fewer of whom will be at Fletcher and GTown than at GWU, American, and so on. You have 7 months of unrelated work experience, a low quant score, and haven't completed econ yet. Internships will not put you at the top of the pile; everyone and their mother has internships. Both schools are a stretch, in my opinion, but Fletcher is the more likely of the two. Maybe you're fine for Fletcher, actually. It's not all that competitive. My opinion is none of these programs are worth going to without work experience, and the top programs have a higher threshold for work experience anyway. Even while I was at SAIS, where there was a good chunk of people straight from undergrad., I (and others) marveled at how many were naive/unfocused how they were devaluing our degrees/experience. I'm not doubting the ability of people to succeed from lower tiered schools; I'm doubting the value added to an already thin resume by a public policy degree (lower tiered or not). My advice is to get work experience, even if you get into Fletcher or GTown.

Fletcher and definitely GTown are a stretch. You should get more work experience. If you go to one of those programs with your current profile, it won't really enhance your resume to go to one of the lower tiered schools. These programs are really intended to augment work experience, not substitute it.

SAIS just has the reputation of being strict on econ when in reality it's not really that competitive a program overall compared to other top IR schools, especially compared to GTown which is much smaller. You certainly have enough work experience for SAIS. Chances of admission to GTown, Yale, and Columbia will be lower due to either smaller program sizes or larger pool of applicants no matter what the quality of each program is. Yale, for example, is more competitive and an excellent academic/theory focused program but arguably won't provide as well-rounded an education as SAIS for a career in international relations. Nevertheless, it'll be harder to get into due to the smaller cohort. GTown for similar reasons. It depends on the narrative you construct. I knew kids as interns who were fresh out of undergrad doing an MSFS as well. One sold boats for a living prior to GTown. You never know, but having had access to admissions numbers to these schools, SAIS is your best bet and I think you have a solid chance at the others. I was just saying GTown was your greatest stretch, but by no means unattainable.

I knew plenty of people at SAIS who hadn't done micro and macro prior to enrolling but the vast majority had it on their belt already (although equally as many struggled with econ while at SAIS because their intro. econ classes were just "principles of micro/macro" with no real math/calc). It's a strong recommendation and something they seriously consider, but not a deal killer if you balance it out with something else (esp. given your quant score on the GRE). I think Columbia has a similar, strong recommendation re: econ (I believe they require a separate quantitative resume, even). I think you'd be fine for SAIS at the very least. Georgetown might be a stretch on the other end.

Yeah, possibly. Sorry, for some reason I mixed up that post with the one by devly.

I'll be blunt: your stats are pretty bad for a PhD program in the States. Consider the MPA first if you really want a public policy PhD and get a stellar GPA.

A PhD is not doable in three years, not even outside the U.S. (typically). The average length of a PhD in poli/sci is 6-7 years. The only exceptions are programs that are dual-degree that reduce the PhD length to a minimum of 4 years. and (obviously abroad) PhDs or DPhils may involve 3 taught/research years and 1 year for dissertation.

Reconnect with your professors and get their recs. With the possible exception of WWS, you're competitive for all the top programs so long as your GRE is in the "above average" range. You'd fit into their smaller percentage of applicants with little work experience, but among those in that category, I'm sure you'd be near the top of the pile. Just depends how many people straight out of undergrad they want to take in a particular year. The more prestigious your undergrad institution (which yours is), the more likely you'll be considered.

Just the application fee. I don't think (in principle) you'd be looked at positively or negatively for reapplying, but a year of "consulting" (a category that can really be applied broadly to a lot of things) probably isn't strong enough to construct a narrative compelling enough for the HKS admissions committee. I had a friend waitlisted at HKS one year, he reapplied, and was rejected the following year. If anything, it might hurt you if the narrative you construct in your application this year is completely different from the one you might construct 1 to 2 years down the line. And now that the economy is recovering, these schools (particularly Ivy ones) are getting more competitive again since they traditionally get more applicants. I speak from experience since (ironically) I now work at an Ivy school I turned down years back, but I don't want to get too specific. But without saying too much, I think it is worth waiting, getting more experience, and trying to get into a public policy school with the best overall university brand. This is not because other schools can't do what you want them to, especially with respect to government service; it's because preferences and career trajectories can change radically in the few years you accrue experience and in the two years you are in these programs, and you want a resume that will be versatile enough to do what you want it to do. Unless you're approaching your 30s, for god's sake wait, get experience, and apply down the line. Maybe you'll even want an MBA or JD instead, or no degree at all. I was waitlisted at HKS with a couple years experience on my belt, a near perfect GPA, and a better quant score. And that was several years ago. I was naive in my decision making process as a kid (practically) and feel like I lack a versatile enough degree. Maybe had I waited another year I could have changed my trajectory radically. You never know.

Your GPA is low and your quant way too low and you have only a year of volunteer work experience somehow mixed with consulting work (if I understood you correctly). HKS is a *huge* stretch, in my opinion. Raise the quant score and get a couple more years work experience.

Most definitely. Those scores (and GPA) would make you competitive for any top public policy program, and it seems you have a decent work history. An MDiv from Yale would also make you look interesting. Cornell would probably just have to open the door for you, along with SAIS, GWU, American, etc. Princeton, Harvard, and Georgetown would probably still be tough (in that order) but you'd have a shot. HKS has a human rights concentration you should look into.

Nothing you said is remotely at odds with what I said. I said no one will care about a theory vs. professional degree in the FS (true); I said no one will care if you went to an APSIA school (true); I said for the FS it doesn't matter where you got your degree (true); I said a professional degree is more versatile than a theory-based degree if you don't choose the FS (true); I said the best possible brand name you can get in terms of schools can only serve you better (true); I said no one will care what you studied 5 years down the line (true); I said, at most, they will care if you went to the same university they did without any reference to Ivy League schools (true and absolutely the exact same thing you said). Did you really just make me repeat my entire post? I didn't go to an Ivy school and I (quite obviously) include my own school in the top branded ones that I mentioned. But, having turned down an Ivy school for SAIS and now 5+ years down the line and wanting another career change, I most certainly would prefer an Ivy branded degree especially compared to my friends who chose a different program. It's my particular problem (not with the school), but I never indicated any of that in my post above so I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. I think a lot of people like to pretend these are objective rankings when it completely depends on your own trajectory, and that can change dramatically in and shortly after grad. school. It always seemed half my classmates were greenhorns fresh from undergrad so I'm not sure what all the fuss is about with my program, but whatever. I'm sure each school has its strengths and flaws.

Could be wrong but I think Columbia has the biggest human rights program (university wide) and it has a co-curricular program deeply tied to the UN. Might be IGO biased, but I went to one of their events and saw Jean-Marie Guéhenno (former head of UN peacekeeping--i.e. second most powerful guy at the UN at one point and SIPA faculty) just casually interacting with students and eating a cookie. Nothing to bat an eye at. Things like that sometimes make me wish I went to another program. ...

This may factor into need-based financial aid, like work-study appointments.

Do not use a letter from your senator. No one will care and they'll know it's just a form letter. If you have to even use an internship as one of your letters, use your supervisor.