chocolatecheesecake

One way you may be able to find more "second-rung" schools is to take a look at what's below the top rankings on US World and News. Another could be to talk to professors at one of those schools, and ask them about comparable programs at other institutions, which they'll have heard a little about too since that's their competition.

@wolfie53, I hope both prospects are in the area that you're interested in working on. If not, choose the one that's more related to why you're interested in public policy and graduate school. Personally, if all other things were equal, I'd jump at the chance to work in actual policy on the state level. You'll never learn more than when you're actually doing the work, and it'll be great for future work prospects, whether or not you have a degree. Just think about it -- as a boss, would you rather hire someone who's actually spent two years doing the work? Or do you want to hire someone who's spent two years researching it? Both will give you a lot of insight, but I'd go for the actual experience.

I'm sure what Bunsen Honeydew is pointing out ever so bluntly is just your lack of professional work experience so far. I second WinterSolstice in saying that work experience is super helpful not just for applying to school but for helping you figure out what you want to do. You only mentioned very briefly your future career aspirations -- I would suggest figuring out what areas you want to focus in would definitely help you, especially when it comes to looking at programs. As for the programs, spend some time on their websites and read about their focuses and faculty. First-hand research is sometimes best. Enjoy!

Yes, I'm rather happy to report. I got into two of the four schools I applied to and was offered a great amount of aid. I think that my work experience was definitely instrumental in that. Here's my post in the if you'd like to take a look, and I think all the posts there are of great use. You can see how in many cases, work experience directly leads into the decision to get an MPP and also shapes your career goals. Enjoy!

Congrats on the job offers! What would help is if you went into more detail about the area that you will be working in, and really see whether that is aligned with why you want to go to public policy school and what jobs you hope to get after you're done with policy school. Number 2 strikes me as being most directly relevant to the work you would do at school, but the most important factor is really why you want to come to grad school -- which one of these jobs helps you tell the story of why you want to go to grad school? There's a lot of jobs out there that can be helpful for an MPP, but they are different for each person because you need to articulate your own story and how these job experiences helped direct you to an MPP in your SOP and materials.

Agreed. I asked an old professor of mine whom I haven't seen in four years, but he was my BA advisor and also wrote a letter of recommendation for me for an earlier fellowship/ job a few years ago, so I felt more comfortable asking him for this since I'd done it before and he had something else to go on other than just his memories of me.

Since nobody has brought it up, I thought I'd mention MIT's M.S. in Technology and Science Policy. I had a friend who recently did this degree, and it sounds like it's done her a lot of good. I think it is more scientific, though, hence the MS instead of MPP. More info: http://tppserver.mit.edu/53/tpp54.htm

I want to reflect what Gov2School has noted here, because it's pretty important. The remedy to your low undergrad GPA is not really more years of work experience, though that can only help; it is to take graduate classes in public policy, statistics, microeconomics and/or calculus and get As in them, whether you end up with a certificate or not. I think it will also be important to them why your undergrad GPA ended up so poorly and what classes your worst grades were in. For example, if you did a biology undergrad, and got some Ds and Fs in organic chemistry or neuroscience, that's not exactly exciting, but you know, they won't necessarily take that as a sign you can't do econ analysis. If they were in math and econ courses, then there's no way you'll get into school unless you show you can do those classes again and much more excellently. It helps if you have a reasonable explanation for your poor academic record at that time -- family or illness, and I think they are open to that sort of thing, but only if you're over that hump now. It will also help to have a good and recent academic reference (maybe from taking those grad classes!) as yet another data point to testify to how good you are at doing the work now. As a side note, you may consider asking the staff, as someone else mentioned, and they can tell you how they weigh the GPA in their applications or what may alleviate a bad GPA for a certain candidate. Otherwise, your professional work sounds like a great beginning, and I think if you can take at least 3 classes in the areas I mentioned and receive As, you will have a chance at getting into some schools, though maybe not with funding. And good luck!

Very, very excited about making this post! Previous Schools (Name, type, or tier): University of Chicago Previous Degrees and GPAs: B.A. in Sociology, 3.63 overall GPA GRE Scores (Verbal/Quantitative/Analytical Writing): V 168, Q 156, W: 4.5 Previous Work Experience (Years, Type): 1 and 1/2 years at a social service agency for immigrants, doing fundraising and external relations; 2 years for a high school enrichment program based at a university, doing career and college counseling. Math/Econ Background: Statistics for social sciences in college, which I got a B on, but nothing other than that. Moral of the story: take calculus when you're in undergrad no matter what you're doing! I really regretted that. Foreign Language Background (if applicable to your program): native speaker of Mandarin Chinese, bits and pieces of French and Latin otherwise. Intended Field of Study in Grad School: Public policy, specifically domestic social policy, in education and labor. Long Term Professional Goals: Non-profit or government, in advocacy preferably, working in cross-sector initiatives that integrate education and employment, like vocational education, education for prison populations, transition from school to work, etc. Possibly working as a policy advisor in state or local government. Schools Applied to & Results: I applied to four schools for the Masters in Public Policy program: Berkeley GSPP (rejected), Michigan Ford (waitlisted), USC Price (accepted with full-tuition merit scholarship), Duke Sanford (accepted with ultimately $26k in fellowship funding, $4k in an assistantship). Ultimate Decision & Why: I sent off my acceptance to Duke this morning, which made me intensely happy. Overall, this whole process felt more intense but wholesome. It forced me to think hard about what was right for me according to what I really wanted to do afterwards, and as I went through the process, I felt more focused and purposeful instead of feeling adrift and hopeless, like the last time I was applying to places. (You know, those fond days of being a high school senior and hoping that schools will validate all your efforts from the last four years by accepting you into their bosom.) To tell the truth, I was confused by Berkeley (which was my top choice)and Michigan's responses, because I felt like I was a great fit for their focus in education and labor. I haven't gotten confirmation back from either school on this, but now I'm pretty sure it was my lack of econ/math experience and my less-than-stellar quant score on the GRE. I chose Duke for a lot of reasons. Duke has a much better emphasis on groupwork and intensive research -- they have a spring consulting project for first-years and a master's project for second-years, whereas USC only does the spring practicum (a group work exercise) for their capstone. I also looked closely at all the professors at both schools: Duke has a great contingent of education and labor focused faculty who are also majority women, which is amazing. I sensed far more of a private sector bent in the faculty at USC who specialize in transportation, health care, real estate, etc. This forum provided me with good info about people's experiences at USC, but ultimately, I believe it is not the most solid base for someone interested in social justice-related causes. Finally, Duke has a much smaller cohort (50-60), and I've gotten to know so many with related education interest from our admitted students Facebook group and the numerous live chats with Duke's student ambassadors. USC has done a poor job of contacting me, and I've only heard back from one of the professors I emailed, and no current students. Also, cost of living is much better in Durham. I have some savings, so overall, I'll take out $20K or so in loans, which is almost nothing to sacrifice to have a program and experience I believe will better position me for the right job afterwards. Advice for Future Applicants: The most important question to answer before you apply is: what will it help you to do? Having as clear an idea as possible of what you want to do when you're done with that grad degree is the best preparation for it. The second most important question to answer is: have you had any full-time job experience? My aims for grad school changed drastically between my last year of college and last fall when I began applying, and full-time work was the most important factor in helping me figure out what I want to do in the future, which goes back to the first question. It doesn't matter what exactly your degree was or in what sector you've been working in (public or private or international), but before you apply, make sure that you have a clear vision of where you want to be in the future and how this degree can help you get there, and can articulate how your experience to date has brought you to understanding the above. (Also conveniently exactly what you have to write in your SOP!) Also, know your strengths and weaknesses. I took two graduate classes in an MPA program to make sure that I wanted to do public policy, and it helped me gain a recent academic reference that I sorely needed. I probably should've taken an econ course as well just to get it on my transcript, because I knew quant was my weak spot. I almost screwed up because one of my recommenders (well meaning but flaky) did NOT come through, and I had to get a last minute substitution, so know your recommenders well and choose them wisely! Finally, ask for more money if you have a decent competing offer. I think USC was not the best fit for me, but the full-tuition scholarship they offered enabled me to get $5K more from Duke per year. Overall, this has been a great experience even if I didn't get into my top school. I feel pretty confident I'm choosing a program that financially has worked out but more importantly is a great fit for me and what I want to do in the world.

A few questions -- have you graduated yet? And of course, put more work into improving your quant score before you take the actual exam, but I don't know how well the mock exam actually approximates the situation. Your credentials look fine in general, and I think you would have no problem explaining in a subsection of your application (rather than the SOP proper) about your switching undergraduate universities. Plus, you've kept your grades up in all of the, so I think it's hardly going to be an issue for graduate schools. What I'm really concerned about is a definition of direction. You're going to get the most bang out of your buck not to mention your time investment if you know what you want to do after your degree. Take some time and work experience to figure out what you really want to do AND if you need a degree to do it. Three years of work experience for me were extremely illuminating and directed me onto a different path. This is also true for countless other people you'll encounter on the forum, so it's not that you can't go into grad school right now if you're just graduating, but that work experience can only help you in your situation. You're contemplating several different paths right now: the MPP is very different from Security Studies at Georgetown or even the IR degree, and then the LSAT is worlds away too. It's great to have an articulated range of interests, and you should find a relevant full-time job that explores one of these areas. Maybe the congressional office would be of help in connecting you to that. Again, your credentials are great and will probably get into some schools, but they may not offer much funding, and more important, it may not be the right thing for you to. Graduate school can be a springboard and launch you to where you want to go, but you need to know the direction or you won't be able to get the job you want afterwards or make the most out of the experience.

Agreed about the LORs needing an academic one. It is really very important for schools to see that you have done both parts well. I would suggest taking some classes between now and the winter to boost yourself in maybe statistics, which fills in your transcript nicely, and forging some good ties with the professor. I took two classes as a non-degree student the year before I applied, and the professor ended up being one of my three references, which worked out really well. Also, if you can write a bang-up SOP, then I'd say the Verbal GRE is not as important. Good luck!

More feedback from anyone who attended Open House, please! My mind's almost made up, but there's no harm in getting extra information. We're all making expensive and difficult decisions here, so more data points are better. @ZacharyObama, I gave your post a lot of thought after reading it. I think you make some very good and valid points; USC is simply strong in some areas and not in others which are more of a priority for me. For me, that cohort experience and having other people who are vocal and passionate about the same thing is extremely important. I will likely not be choosing USC this fall. What I will say is that your differentiation of the MPP and MPA and what they prepare you for are largely adequate, and I am in pursuit of both sort of skill sets. I think that a detailed understanding of the mechanics of a policy and how they are constructed is integral to being a good policy administrator and manager in the future. The reason that I'm doing the MPP instead, though, is because I think classes do a better job of teaching you how to do robust policy analysis, and work experience is, in my experience, the better way of understanding how to manage, budget, and strategize. I suspect I'll end up taking a few classes on that too, but there's less of an option to do rigorous policy analysis as an MPA.

My two cents about the waitlist, having worked in admissions at an educational program: a waitlist pool can help the admissions team craft their ideal class to be diverse and robust. They can use the waitlist to fill the areas in which they would like more representation, be it men, women, a certain age group, work experience, background, etc. I would venture a guess that it largely depends on who doesn't end up accepting their offers. That said, it does not hurt to keep in touch and show how good of a fit you are!

I'm glad you had a good impression of USC on visit day! Still weighing my own options, but I feel it's unlikely I'll be in LA at this point. =( About your career objectives, I'm honestly not familiar with your field of work, but I think you should try drawing some direct lines between what the MPP and MIB separately offer and what you want to do in two years, when you're done with the degree (those new advancement opportunities you're talking about?). A lot of different fields can offer you international travel at this point. From what I've heard from a previous alum who graduated a few years ago, USC is much stronger in the domestic field than in international development (though they have faculty who do that too), so if you're looking for something that will garner you international contacts or a network for that sort of thing, it could be difficult. I also think you should not rule out re-assessing your situation and coming up with a more defined vision of where you want to be in a few years, because those two degrees you are contemplating will launch you on very different paths. If you're still wavering between which is best, I think it could mean you should reconsider and maybe apply in a future year, if you feel you absolutely need it. I've been looking at jobs the last two years that I've been interested in in advocacy and non-profits, and many of them say a Masters in Public Policy. That's part of the impetus that's been pushing me toward it, so I'd advise looking at those job postings or looking at staff biographies on websites of organizations you're interested in to see their trajectories and paths. A new grad degree, no matter what it is, will certainly open up new paths, but I think they will be different ones. In order to make sure you don't waste money (or time, which is just as precious), I would reassess to make sure you really want a graduate degree right now, and if so, which one.

I'd like to echo everyone on money, but IMHO, NYU has the edge over Chicago on international development. Chicago is starting to make a bit of a name for itself in terms of engaging in overseas development, but if you want your pick of NGOs, non-profits, think tanks, consultancies, and other organizations who work with the international audience, you should be in New York. I also do not discount the importance of being surrounded by people who are all working in the same sector and having that community or environment. Chicago is a regional and nationally oriented city, not quite international yet.

Rishi, I definitely urge you to look more at the faculty and identify specific people you are interested in working with, given your interest in social policy. My impression is that you will find a lot of people. I wanted to focus on the same area at Berkeley, and had good conversations with Jesse Rothstein (rothstein@berkeley.edu) who is very useful and helpful to talk to. I think suggestions from people will only take you so far now. With only two choices, I'd say you should put in the time to closely examine every aspect, email professors you want to talk to, and ask them about your potential path or opportunities in the area of your interest should you attend. Close-detailed comparisons of the two programs, faculty, and what you want out of the degree is the best way to help you figure out the best fit for you at this point. Also, in terms of the international brand value, I think UChicago probably fits slightly above Berkeley, but that's just in terms of how well people know it as an undergraduate school. I think Berkeley has the slightly more prestigious MPP program. IMHO, brand names don't confer any additional advantages when you are looking at two schools that are both really up there, so you can only look at what is right for you. Good luck!

@Lazuliii, I just wrote someone else a detailed post on the topic of reimbursements and TAships. Tl;dr is that graduate assistantships are out there for whoever makes an effort to get them by emailing professors/keeping an ear out, and they offer up to 50% reimbursement depending on the hours that you work. Good luck!

You should definitely contact Price and talk to them about this. The deadline for scholarship consideration was December 15, so that's two months afterwards for you. I would try Sarah Esquivel, who has been behind most of the communications (sesquive@price.usc.edu). Good luck.

Good suggestion from SyracuseStudent. There's also a lot of jobs in the non-profit sector that are very entry-level and will give you a good idea if that's the kind of work you want to do. City and urban planning often have to work with environmental concerns a lot. I know it seems pretty clear what you may be doing, but if there's still doubt in your mind about the MS versus the MPP, it may be a good idea to go head to work for some savings, some clarity, and time. I piled up four years of work and a few graduate classes while I was working in order to make sure I was ready and knew what I wanted to do, so some time is not a bad idea.

Great point. I think that's what I was trying to say when I was concerned about lacking that critical mass of peers who were passionate about the same thing -- I think we'll still be able to find a space for that and do what we like to do, but I really want to learn something from others who have been doing the same thing for longer or in different places around the world and be challenged to take what I've done to a higher level. I already visited last fall and am currently overseas, so I won't be able to attend the admit day. Ana and dazed, please both have lots of conversations with current students and professors and let me know how it goes! Who did they assign to you guys as your advisor? I got Raphael Bostic who sounds like he could definitely be great. However, he and many other faculty at USC seem to have their bonafides with the current administration and federal level stuff or large corporations and committees. I'd also like to think I can learn a lot from someone more local who have been practitioners slogging out their non-glorious work, if that makes any sense, about the actual implementation and development of local and regional policy.

This is a great question for GSPP staff at Berkeley, because you've been admitted and they can now give you personalized attention. Go hunt them down and make them work for you! Same when it comes to your questions for Chicago. When I visited last spring and talked to Berkeley, both staff and current students told me that those positions are not rare, but you do need to actively seek out the ones you're interested in and pitch yourself to the professors. I was told in particular about a very popular undergrad class taught by a sociology professor called Wealth and Poverty which has *twenty* sections of undergraduates, all needing their own assistants! More people have teaching positions than research positions, but it sounded like anyone who really wanted one got it. They weren't all reserved for students in their second semester or second year of the MPP either; several people I spoke to said they started in their first semester at Goldman. Just looking online, here's what I've found in terms of fee remissions and things like that: Great overview of how those positions work: http://gspp.berkeley.edu/admissions/tuition-and-financial-aid/gspp-ase-employment Detailed guide about working as a Graduate Student Instructor/ Researcher (GSI/GSR are their terms for TA/RA): http://grad.berkeley.edu/policies/guides/category/appointments-guide/what-you-need-to-know-appts/ Fee remission bulletin in all its glorious detail (what you have to do to get it and keep it): http://grad.berkeley.edu/policies/guides/fee-remission-bulletin/ Registrar's updated fees/tuition figures: http://registrar.berkeley.edu/feesched.html There is nothing that says international students can't qualify for fee remissions. In fact, the second link I provided specifically details the English language requirements for students who did not attend undergraduate institutions in the States to become a GSI/GSR. Tuition remission here is not tied to in-state or out-of-state or even federal citizenship -- it is a perk privy to employees of the university who are also attending school there. Since you become an employee and a part of Berkeley's graduate student employee union, you are entitled to remissions. These links describe in great detail what kinds of fees or tuition are remitted after how many hours of work or what percentage FT (full time) you are, and don't forget to check the registrar's for updated figures on exactly how much money that means you get back. (Also, if you think this is generous, I've heard even better things about the deal that Michigan's graduate student union received... it's something close to 100%!) To better differentiate the two schools, I think you should look more closely at each school's faculty and research areas to figure out who does the kind of work you want to get experience in and ideally pursue after graduation. I recently did the same thing myself by going through each faculty's profile meticulously. (Now I know everyone's names!) Since you only have two schools to decide between, this will not take insanely long. I think UChicago may have an edge in helping you find a job in India after graduation -- I know they just opened their Center in Delhi -- and I don't think Goldman's international focus is as strong in terms of their career services. Nonetheless, that's more a question for GSPP Career Services themselves. What I do think is that Goldman does have a smaller cohort than Chicago, so that may be helpful too. Finally, Chicago is going to give you some cold, cold winters. Okay, approximately just two. =) Cost of living is going to be quite cheap for a large US city. Expect to pay between $700-900 a month for a studio or one-bedroom in Chicago. That cost will probably double when you go to Berkeley and rent an apartment in Berkeley or Oakland, but you'll have much more mild weather to deal with. I wish I was in your situation since Berkeley was my top choice and I did a lot of research into the school, but ultimately, they will both be great experiences for you. Best of luck!

A few weeks after looking at my acceptances (USC and Duke) and comparing money (full ride at USC, about half at Duke), I'm circling back to USC and becoming very torn between USC and Duke. The thing is, I'm really concerned about the fit of my interests and what the school is strong in. I spent a few hours going over faculty profiles and looking at practicums from the past year or two, and I'm finding very little that has to do with education, employment, social policy, and poverty or welfare related initiatives. The same goes for the professors -- USC seems to be very strong in real estate, transportation, housing, planning, health policy, and a bunch of other fields that I can't help but classify as the fields of public policy where there's a lot of money in play. There are some professors in the social work school and the education school that I may end up working with if the pickings among Price professors is as slim as I think it is. I would like to hear more from current students and admitted students. My biggest fear is that I'm going to lose out on something if there's not a critical mass of my cohort who are interested or passionate about the same subjects, or have a social justice bent to their future careers. It'd be cool to learn about housing and health and other equity-related issues, but it's not what I want to do after I graduate. What are other people who are thinking about USC looking to work in? Do you guys have the same concerns? In comparison, I've been able to talk on Facebook and meet other students who are thinking about Duke, and many of them are education-policy minded, which at least makes me feel that I will have supportive people who are like-minded. I've also identified and emailed several faculty I know I would like to work with there. Maybe a bit of debt ($20-30K) is worth getting the right experience out of the MPP?

I think you missed something in comparing price tags. Goldman costs $12K a semester, not per year. That means it's $24K a year for in-state residents and $36K for out-of-state, depending on which you are. The actual financial cost for both could be about equal, however, if you take into consideration that Berkeley's tuition remission can be generous if you work 10-20 hours a week as a teaching assistant or research assistant. Similarly, UChicago I've seen be very generous with the amount of fellowships they award -- as a private school, they have a deeper pot of money than public schools such as Berkeley. The more important issue at hand is however what your choices are right now. Which schools have you been accepted to and how much have they awarded you? It doesn't quite make sense to choose between Berkeley and UChicago since you would still need to reapply. You mentioned USC Price, so I'm guessing that's an option. I think its focus is definitely quantitative enough, just going by their curriculum. There is much more variation between the programs at USC, UChicago, and Berkeley in terms of their different focuses and strengths, so it really depends on your preference and interest. Try to look at just the schools you've been accepted to. If you still believe that none of them are a satisfying enough choice, in terms of money or in terms of what you want out of the program, then you can decide to refuse all offers and hunker down to reapply for next year.

I visited USC last fall and have also been accepted with a great funding package. I also have many similar interests as yours (primarily urban policy, economic development, education, etc.) My primary impression, which I would be glad to get other peoples' perspectives on, is that USC has quite a heavy private sector focus when it comes to public policy. There is a strong business presence in the Price School and its emphasis on the Schwarzenegger Center. I got a lot of emails lauding the public-private partnerships, and the school of education at USC is also prominent in backing charters and such. A lot of faculty also seem to have their hands in international development, business, real estate, etc. etc. according to their bios. All this is definitely interesting, but it's decidedly a different focus from the centers on poverty and social work and economic development that Michigan has. Obviously, I'm biased because I'm more interested in one than the other, but it did not seem like the focus was on government and non-profit at USC. I was waitlisted at Michigan so I probably won't end up there, but my impression really pushes me to attend Duke instead, which I also received some funding at. Finally, about the community there -- I sat in on a class, which was a positive experience, but the population of MPPs seem very overshadowed by the other students doing real estate development, public planning, etc. who were right next door. One MPL student gave me a tour, as well as a bad vibe. The campus and the undergrads are straight out of The O.C. I come from a very nerdy school, and USC kind of seemed far from that. It was okay, but a real culture shock.

Go to Berkeley. I visited both schools, and if you have the chance, you should definitely do so too. Harvard's faculty while renowned are far too busy giving talks and traveling the globe to give you personal attention. Berkeley's faculty is good at what they do and they're actually going to be there. The cohort size (huge at Harvard, smaller at Berkeley) was also a huge factor. I didn't even end up applying to Harvard because I was turned off by the way that the guide discussed his experience as a first-year student, which seemed very impersonal and not at all close-knit.