Stephen33

I vote for the Princeton Review's "Cracking the GRE". I had only 5 days to prepare, and found it a very efficient study aid, particularly for the Q section.

Current Chicago (MPP) student here. In answer to your question, I would say that Chicago definitely has a more domestic focus than, say, schools like Columbia or Johns Hopkins. There is certainly opportunity to take several IR courses (primarily through the Political Science Department), but for development I don't think the offerings are very extensive. As for "soft courses", you can avoid them pretty much entirely if you wish. Several of the more "quant-focused" students take the advanced stats sequence, and report it to be very challenging. Also, you can test out of the standard economic theory sequence and move on to advanced courses, both within the policy school and in the Economics Department proper. Some of the MPP students are taking the PhD economics price theory course (which I believe Gary Becker still teaches) this fall. I think pretty much everyone finds that sufficiently "challenging". Other than stats and econ, the only other substantial requirements are the political economy sequence, which I found very interesting (and by no means "lightweight" or "soft").

Johns Hopkins does have an MPP program, but it is not at SAIS. Their MPP is offered by the Institute for Policy Studies, which I believe is located in Baltimore. The MPP program is small, but I've read some positive things about it. It might be worth a look.

Steiner-5 I don't know much about either Columbia-SIPA or NYU, but you might consider adding Chicago, Michigan, Duke and Carnegie-Mellon to your list of 'possibles'. From everything I have seen and heard, these programs are strong and well-respected; also, I believe they all have a substantial econ/quant emphasis (Chicago certainly does). This would seem to play to your strengths/interests.

Unless the program requests a writing sample, I would not include one (they are generally overwhelmed with paper, and may not welcome more). On the other hand, you could certainly mention your policy analysis class in your statement, and discuss how the class clarified/reinforced your interest in a policy-oriented career. Given your strong GRE scores, I think your main challenge is to make a convincing case that you are committed to a "career shift". In my own program (Chicago-Harris), I know at least a few people who came from the private sector. Write a good statement, and I'm quite confident that you will be fine.

I think you should be a competitive candidate for most of the programs mentioned. Your GRE scores are certainly better than "decent" - they are excellent. If you provide a compelling statement of purpose, I suspect that you will receive serious consideration almost everywhere. Your GPA might disqualify you at KSG, but I doubt that it would do so at any other of the schools listed. As for academic references, they are not always expected for candidates who have been out of school for an extended period. I was admitted - with substantial funding - to a number of good MPP programs last year, with no academic references. I had been out of school for over a decade. Good luck.

I think you should be competitive. A 600 verbal should still be 80th percentile or better, and your 770 Q is excellent for any policy-oriented masters program. On balance, I suspect your GRE scores should help, rather than hurt, your chances.

biohazard99, welcome to Harris. Feel free to PM me if you have any questions.

Baltar: Your current thought process appears sound to me. Washington and Minnesota are good programs within very good universities. Given this, I think there have to be very compelling reasons to assume substantial debt in another program. Based on what you have written about yourself and your objectives, I do not think the "case for debt" is at all compelling. I think a number of people on this board are treating their choice as a very expensive lottery ticket - as in, if I attend super-prestigious school X over good school Y, there is a slightly higher chance that I might obtain my dream job. Perhaps so, but the difference in odds is likely quite small. If you go to any large government department or agency, you will find numerous graduates of both types of schools. Once your career is underway (in the public sector, at any rate), your superiors will judge you - and your career opportunities will be determined - almost exclusively on the basis of what you do, rather than where you went to school. School prestige is certainly a nice bonus, but for those determined on public service career, it won't likely do much for you financially. If you think you may end up in the private sector, the calculus may be different, but in this case an MBA and/or Law degree would generally make more financial sense than an MPP.

Sorry, but I think this is pure wishful thinking. Competitive programs do not need to offer funding to wait-listed students, because there will always be "takers" without funding. The programs make their waiting lists long enough so that they never have to "bid" for students. I'm not trying to burst anyone's balloon, just trying to encourage a sense of realism so that everyone can proceed with their decisions on an objective basis.

I think the only way this would happen is if ALL students in a program receive funding. Think about it: if you were a student admitted in the initial round without funding and accepted the slot, would you not have serious cause for complaint if a wait-listed student were subsequently admitted WITH funding? Programs will not do this to first-round admits, because it is so obviously unfair.

The Ford building is very nice (he writes somewhat wistfully). The Harris building is functional, not unlike a lot of government offices. It is not new; I'd guess that it has been around about 30 years. A new building has been approved, but it won't come in time to benefit this year's entering class. On the other hand, the University of Chicago campus overall is very beautiful, and it is small enough that it a few minutes' walk will take you to numerous study/relaxation spots that are as nice as can be. So: Building: Advantage Ford Campus: Advantage Harris City: You decide .

Pearl, I do not know enough about Georgetown to offer an informed comparison. I do recall, however, that another current Harris student who frequently posts on this board ("xxnormajeanxx") took a close look at Georgetown last year. You may wish to check her previous posts.

Pearl, two comments: I think you are over-stating the "quant" emphasis. Harris provides a very solid foundation in quantitative methods, but I have not found it excessively quantitative by any means. There are plenty of high-level quantitative courses offered at Harris, but most are electives, not requirements. You are correct about the pervasiveness of economics here, but I consider that a major plus. As a long-time policy professional, I can assure you that an ability to apply economic reasoning is a huge asset throughout the policy world, including in many areas where you may not presently consider it relevant. In this area, I doubt you will find better training ground than Harris.

for your sake, I hope the Fels financial aid people aren't reading this board.

dngo, if you don't mind my asking, are you still leaning in the direction of Penn/Fels? CMU was one of the schools I considered seriously last year, so I'm always curious as to people's impressions and decisions wrt Heinz.

I think people are entitled to their own impressions, which is why I limited my previous responses to points of fact. That said, I would not disagree with the substance of normajean's comments about Harris. As those who have read her other posts can attest, she is candid, and by no means a "homer" (some of you may recall that she recommended SIPA over Harris to a prospective student whose interests lie in IR). If anyone has further questions about Harris, feel free to ask via post or PM.

Just one quick follow-up to Magician'sAlliance's post: he mentioned a second-hand account of a student who supposedly failed the calculus placement test twice. This is most certainly an outlier. About two-thirds of my cohort passed the placement test on the first try, and I believe the vast majority of the remainder passed it the second time around. The calculus requirement here is not onerous by any means, but you have to put in the work. I had been out of school for over a decade prior to entering the program, and passed the placement test without any difficulty on the first try. But I studied diligently during math camp. Also, I'm not sure how a faculty advisor can help one study for math test. Like I said before, you have to put in the work. Not every student does.

MagiciansAlliance, thanks. I had no problems with your comments, which seemed an entirely honest reflection of your observations and impressions. Further, you went out of your way to concede any potential bias on your part. You were very fair. It is rather funny, but I saw some of the same things at Harris last year as a prospective student, and reached a different conclusion. At Harris, I asked for - and received- what I considered a balanced view of the school's pluses and minuses. People here tend to be very honest - sometimes to their own and their school's detriment - and "boosterism" is practically non-existent. I liked the feeling that I had an objective basis for an informed assessment. This is not to take away anything from other schools, but I refuse to believe that "everything is great" at other schools. The problem is, you tend to find out about these things later on, rather than when such information can be most useful. I am thinking in particular, though not exclusively, of factors such as placement. The key piece I of advice I would offer prospective students considering any given school is to ask hard questions, and if you don't get what seem to be satisfactory answers from administration/students/alumni, then ask persons who are not affiliated with any of the schools you are actively considering. In fact, I would do the latter anyway, just to be certain. Good luck to all with your decisions.

Current Harris student here. One point of clarification: most of the MPP students I know do not commute, but live near the university here in Hyde Park. I think between a quarter and a third of Harris students live elsewhere in Chicago. Hyde Park is small and relatively sedate (certainly less vibrant than downtown or some of the North Side neighborhoods) but I have found it pleasant enough. Before coming here I was concerned about the rather tough surrounding neighborhoods, but they are not really relevant to the day-to-day life of a student. I don't think it is appreciably different here than any other urban campus in America. btw, I share the previous poster's liking of Ann Arbor; I too found it great college town, but decided to come to Chicago anyway. Either choice is a good one.

The difference has to be a lot greater than $130k "over the course of one's career" to make it financially worthwhile, due to the time value of money.

In most cases, the original e-mail notifying your of your acceptance (assuming that you were notified by e-mail) should provide directions - and usually a link - to an electronic accept/decline form.

May I suggest that you initiate a follow-up correspondence with the professor at school A? It is entirely possible that he was having a bad or unusually busy weekend, and/or perhaps he simply assumed that you will be attending school A. A respectful e-mail inquiry regarding your proposed research might generate a further conversation that could either allay or confirm your concerns. In short, I think what you need is more information, and I think the best way to obtain it is to deal with the professor directly.

Thanks, Linden. Good luck with your decision. Try to remember that these are all good choices. I have little doubt that, whatever you decide, you will end up with a very successful career.

Deechi, your impressions/experiences match my own. I have been on the other side of the table in hiring decisions for several years (not in D.C., but with in a fairly large government internationally) and, once a certain standard of educational quality is met, the actual school attended is irrelevant in almost all cases; for a candidate with a few years of experience, I'd say it is completely irrelevant. I know this is hard for some to believe, but it is true, at least in the world of government. I would urge prospective students to take with a large grain of salt the various claims of admissions offices/alumni with regard to the purported "unique" virtues of their respective schools. You are on the receiving end of marketing campaigns, and the claims should be judged accordingly. It is far better to listen to the views of knowledgeable individuals (Deechi, you strike me as one such) who have no stake in your decisions - including no personal connections to the schools under consideration.