outofspace

I'd say UCSD will definitely try harder for you, as Columbia is pretty impersonal. With that said, the Columbia name will, in my opinion, take you further if you're looking to work outside the U.S. after graduating and might be worth the extra $30k because of that. The USCD brand is still not very well known outside the U.S.

Hi mouraq,
After making that post, I ended up being accepted, with a moderate amount of funding, to Georgetown and subsequently attending one of its alumni lunches in the hope that doing so would help me make a more informed decision. I think it did, in that it showed me that I might not be headed in the direction I thought I was by attending a graduate program in IR, at least given my options at that time. I decided to take a chance and turn down all of the offers I received so that I could try out some new things for a year and also have the chance to re-apply and receive more funding. I did not end up re-applying this year, however, and don't (yet?) regret turning down the offers. None of them felt right to me, even though objectively each represented a great opportunity, and that gave me a lot of pause.

Because much of my decision came down to my own expectations and preferences, I'm not sure the above will be very helpful to you. However, I can tell you a bit about my thoughts on the schools (I admit these are just opinions, opinions from my past no less, and should be taken with a huge grain of salt) and their offers before making my decision:
- Georgetown, if an option, is an amazing institution offering amazing opportunities--and it can take you wherever you want to go within the IR world. If I had attended an IR program, I would have gone there (but that's probably just idealism/romanticism on my part).
- UCSD, although not as prestigious, will give you the chance to learn the quantitative and technical skills you need to succeed in a typical IR job. You might have to work a little harder to network from San Diego, though, and even with what seems to be a more close-knit community, you might not be challenged by professors and students like you would at Columbia, due to the latter's more competitive atmosphere.
- Columbia is extremely expensive in comparison to UCSD and doesn't offer the strongest institutional support (I had a lot of trouble getting answers to questions from several different departments there, whereas Georgetown and, to a lesser extent, UCSD were extremely helpful in answering questions). My overall impression was that it was a place where you would be presented with many opportunities--but that you'd probably have to deal with a lot of institutional frustration to take advantage of them. With that said, the faculty there is amazing.
More generally:
- Having the financial freedom to do what you want after graduating is HUGE, especially in the IR world where "entry-level" jobs often do not pay much, or in some cases anything
- Each school has its own focus, and it's a good idea to check out alumni profiles to see if previous graduates have gone in the direction you hope to go
- As coffeeandtravel mentioned, check out the curriculum and course descriptions to see which institution is going to offer you the education you most want
If you have any more questions for me, I'll be more than happy to answer, even though I don't have the inside scoop you were probably looking for. Hope that helps!

You can change your concentration any time and it does not matter what you put on your application. They usually use it just to group you with like minded people during orientation. You can switch and change it yourself, and yes as long as you satisfy the requirements you can do what you want.
also, it doesn't matter what your concentration is because it's not on your degree. It's all about how you market yourself to employers. 
Source: just graduated in May and was a peer advisor my second year. 

If you want, I can send you some syllabuses/syllabi from my classes this spring and last fall, they are all IR related and are courses that are considered foundation knowledge in IR in my opinion. The syllabuses contains readings from books and articles that can either be found on amazon or online. PM me if you want a copy.

I'm 32 and have found my motivation has only increased over time--though the thought of going back to school gets scarier as time passes as well. Even at my age though, I am, like you, contemplating waiting and applying again next year after taking a couple of quant classes, as that was one weak spot in my profile and I think having a good grade in a quant course or two might really improve my chances of getting into a good program with significant funding. It really depends on how the rest of my cycle turns out, of course, but funding is incredibly important in the grand scheme of things and there's just no way I can go $150k or so in debt for an IR degree. In any case, this is all just to say that there's no harm in waiting at the age of 27, especially if you're going to use the extra time wisely and are confident that it will put you in a significantly stronger position next year.

Hi everyone.  Today’s the 11th, and our internal target has been to get decisions (all of them) out tomorrow, the 12th.  We’re aiming for today, though, because we want to get these to everyone as soon as possible.  That’s especially important for  international students, because they have to begin getting the paperwork in order to move here for a year or two.  Please know that staff (and faculty) have been working extra-long hours to get things done right. 
 
Responding to the thread above: as for admission rates, yield rates, and so on, I don’t think anyone from any school is going to give you specific numbers.  And as I said the other day,  speculations about our admission rates are way off.  It’s difficult to get into Harvard, period, but we don’t want some applicants thinking, “Oh, I’ll never have a shot there,” just because their test scores and GPA weren’t stellar.  Especially in the MC/MPA program, we’re looking for someone who has been doing good work – work in the publc interest – and who’ll work to make the world a better place. 
 
You-all should take a look at Matt’s blog at HKS admissions.  We want our process to be transparent so that we get the “right” people applying – and so that folks whom we admit *will* come once we’ve said “yes.”   
 
On admission rates and yields – again without specific numbers – you need to see things from the school’s perspective.  Every school – including HKS – has a budget projection based on enrollment.  Putting our PhD program aside, we have a budgeted number of students in our four programs.  Look here: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/about/history/hks-facts
 
In rough numbers (though not the real, unpublished numbers) the programs are expected to bring to campus this fall, about 210 first year MPP students, about 210 MCMPA students (about 85 of these might be Mason Fellows), about 75 first year MPA students, and about 70 first year MPA/ID students.  The number of applicants to each program differs, and the admissions rates in each category are different.  Is it “harder” to get into one program over another?  No, not from our point of view.  From our perspective, each program is looking for a different kind of student.  Each program has a separate culture, too.
 
Admitted students can petition to defer their acceptance for a year.  As Matt will tell you, deferrals are not guaranteed, and they may not be extended beyond one year.  In considering our yield rates, then, we have to make several calculations.  There’s the yield of admittted students from this year, and there’s a yield rate for the deferrals from last year.  Each program has separate calculations for yield rates in both categories. 
 
Then there’s the “melt” rate.  There will be some students who tell us they’re coming and who send in a deposit, but then don’t come.  There aregood reasons for backing out, including finances, family circumstances, work and visa concerns, etc.  Each program has an estimated melt rate, and each one is different.
 
Take the MCMPA Mason program as an example.  The numbers I’m going to show you are MADE UP (because we don’t release the real numbers), but it’ll give you a sense of things. 
 
Assume that our target number for admissions is 85.  Assume that there were 30 deferrals from last year’s group of admitted students.  Assume that we expect a melt rate equal to 5 admitted students.  How do we get to 85? Figuring in the melt, we’d  aim for 90. If our models suggest a 50% yield on deferrals, then 15 (of the 30) students would come from there.  And if our models suggest a 75% yield on the fresh admits, we need to admit just enough students to get up to the remaining 75 (90-15).  We’d be looking to admit 100 fresh applicants, because 75% of 100 is 75.  And if we happened to have had 400 fresh Mason applications, then we’d be admiting 25%.  Remember, THESE NUMBERS ARE MADE UP, and our admission, yield, and melt percentages vary year by year and program by program.  In this example, though, given a budgeted target of 85 students, we’d expect 15 to come from the 30 deferrals (a yield of 50%), we’d expect 75 to come from fresh applicants (a yield of  75 percent of 100 new admits), and we’d expect a melt of 5.  So, 15+75-5=85.
 
Some of you will find out, presumably today, that you’re on a waitlist.  As with every other school doing admissions right now, a waitlist is an insurance policy against poor “yield” and “melt” estimates.  If Matt’s team has read the tea leaves correctly, we won’t go to the waitlists at all.  Each program, of course, has separate waitlists, and it could be that we end up drawing on one waitlist (MPA/ID, for example) but not another (MCMPA).  As a faculty member, I can appreciate the pressure that Matt’s team is under, because I want his yield and melt projections to be exactly right.  The school doesn’t want to be “under” on students, but faculty absolutely don’t want to admit too many.  All things equal, our faculty would rather have smaller, not larger, classes.  All things equal, we’d rather spend more quality time mentoring fewer students than spreading our time across too many superficial partnerships.  So Matt’s team is caught between the budgeted needs of the school (“Hit your targets, Matt.”) and pressure from faculty like me (“Hey, Matt, get me the very best students, but not too many of them.”)  I’ll admit right now that, as the chair of the MPA and MCMPA admissions committee, I’m sometimes put too much pressure on Matt and his team to get me the very best applicants – but not too many of them.  I suppose Matt has a constituency with you-all, too, the prospective students.  He has to encourage the “right” students to apply while being realistic with everyone else.   It’s a tough job.
 
Which brings us to today.  You’ll get an email.  For the overwhelming majority of applicants, the email will not be good news.  And to you-all, I’m really sorry.  You tried, and we tried, and we took your applications very seriously, and if you’re in one of my programs, please know that you can email me on my harvard account and I’ll walk you though how the committee read your file.  For some of you, you’ll learn today that you’re on a waiting list, and you might be tempted to lobby to get your name “moved up” on the list, but as Matt has explained in the blog, that’s not how things work.   And for some of you, you’ll get great news… and we do hope you’ll come.  Indeed, we’re *expecting* you to come. (Ok, we’re expecting N*YIELD%-MELT to come.)
 
Thank you-all for your patience throughout all this.  HKS gets a tremendous number of applications.  I don’t think any policy school in the world comes close to the volume of applications that we handle.  And unlike most other policy schools, Harvard faculty are exceptionally involved in reading these files, weighing backgrounds, puzzling over letters and essays, and Googling applicants, checking for plaigarism, and so on.  I’ve been on the admissions committee for 20+ years, and I think our facultyserve on the committee because we really love the process.  The volume is overwhelming.  It’s exhausting.  And on days like today… the outcome is also kinda thrilling.
 
Good luck to you-all.

Hi all.  The wait is almost over, and Matt's team over in Admissions has been putting in long hours to get the decisions ready to post.  It's true that we were able to make announcements on March 13 last year, but we didn't like the idea of doing anything so momentous on Friday the 13th *this* year - and our internal target date has been the 12th.  Matt's team is testing out the computer code to generate emails.  We really don't want to have some computer error notify applicants with the "wrong" outcomes.  (There has been a lot of that at other universities lately, so we're making *sure* that our systems are working correctly.)  That said... we are on pace for decisions on the 12th.  And there's a chance (a small one) that we'll get everything ok'ed even before that.
 
A few other comments, responding to the thread.  Yes, admission rates for the MCMPA are higher than for the MPPs, but they're nowhere near what people have speculated.  We don't publicize our admission rates, largely because we don't think they're very meaningful.  For this year's class of Mason Fellows (MCMPAs) for example, we will offer admission to less than a third of the applicants.  We would love to admit a far higher percentage, but we just don't have the capacity, and our applicant pool is so strong.  It takes a tremendous amount of focus and attention for us to read mid-career files, because test scores don't tell us very much about applicants who are in their 30s or above.  And as many of you know, a lot of what we end up doing when folks look at HKS is to *discourage* people from applying if they're not a fit for the school.  I think it's crazy that other schools work to encourage applications from folks who won't get in - just to boost their selectivity ratings.  We're not playing that game, and we'd love to have a higher admission rate from a terrific pool than a lower admission rate from a less terrific pool.  
 
Please also notice, as Matt has discussed so well on the admissions blog, that we have different criteria and expectations for the different programs. Of course, test scores matter for the MPP and MPA/ID programs.  The average test scores for MPA2 applicants are virtually the same as for MPP applicants, but the MPA2 committee is looking for substantially more graduate-level experience that's consistent with our MPP and MPA/ID "core requirements."  That's why we tend to think of the MPP and MPA/ID programs as places to "tool up" for a life in public policy, and we tend to think of the MPA2 program as a place to "integrate across professions."   That said, test scores are *not* the be-all-and-end-all.  We routinely turn down applicants with perfect test scores, and we routinely take applicants with far from perfect test scores.  Not everybody tests well.  We understand that, and we view files more holistically than you may expect.  Letters and essays really *do* matter.
 
As for the MCMPA programs, we just want to see that you have "enough" quant and verbal skills to do well here.  It's entirely possible for someone at the 50th percentile GREQ or GREV to get into the Mid-Career program - because if someone has been out of school for a long time, those standardized tests can mask or hide a lot of wonderful capabilities. That's one reason why we put in a new "quant" question on the application this year, and we'll probably make adjustments going forward, too.  As with the other programs, we in the MCMPA program routinely say "no" to applicants with high test scores if their life stories (or career trajectories) don't fit what we're looking for.  The Mid-Career program is, generally, designed for folks who've been making a difference in the world already, and they need some time here to really work on their leadership and management skills.  Applicants to the Mason Fellows program don't have to take the GREs, and they do just as well as the other Mid-Careers in our classes.  I hope that's a reflection of how much time we spend reviewing each application - looking for passions and competencies. 
 
By the way, it is rare for an Admissions committee to recommend that an applicant switch programs, and we do it only when we think someone really would be a *much* better fit in another program.  If you've been asked to switch, my *guess* is that you wouldn't have made it through in the first committee, and your odds in the second committee are around one in three - or less.  But that's better than zero in three, so say "yes" when Matt asks if you'd like to switch programs.  
 
Finally, a quick word about English... we're really serious about what we say regarding English test scores.  If you're taking the computer-based TOEFL, for example, you will *not* get in if you have a sub-100 TOEFL.  We use a lot of "case teaching" here, so English skills are crucial.  Please, please, please, if you don't have an English score above the minimums that are highlighted on the Admissions site, please don't apply. (We don't need to inflate our selectivity ratings.... and your time will be better spent getting the English skills up to snuff.)
 
Best of luck to everyone.  If you DO get in - know that the competition is CRAZY good, and we're counting on you coming.  And if you don't get in - know that it won't be held against you for a future application.  If you're applying to one of my programs (the MPA2 and the MCMPA), feel free to write me on my Harvard email (I rarely check GradCafe), and I'll be happy to give you some feedback.  Meanwhile.... brace yourselves for a Thursday (the 12th) email.  And the email *might* even come a bit earlier.  

I'm pretty torn myself. However, I personally found this career resource guide EXTREMELY helpful in guiding my thoughts and reasoning for internships/types of jobs I want to pursue/focus my classes on at which ever school I ultimately end up going. HKS's career services put together this list of splendid PDF's detailing what it means to work at places such as Capitol Hill or NGO's and industries like Consulting. It also details WHO comes to career days and how many HKS students they take in each year along with additional resources for further research/prep. Definitely worth a look in my opinion. Not sure why I didn't come across it sooner! It's far from exhaustive, but provides a great overview into fields a majority of people seem to enter post MPP. The link goes to HKS's website where they have the different pdf's listed with a brief description.
 
http://www.hks.harvard.edu/degrees/office-of-career-advancement/alumni/explore-what-s-next-in-your-career/professional-areas-of-interest