Stephen33

As the poster above suggested, this is a personal decision for which there is no one "right" answer. Personally, I would not pay too much for perceived reputation, because I think its practical value tends to be greatly overstated. As I've said before on this board, my experience has been that a great name may help you get an interview (particularly if you have no or little experience), but once you have worked for a while, others will focus entirely on your demonstrated abilities & accomplishments, rather than where you went to school. Truthfully, in the working world, very few people care where you went to school. A great "brand name" degree is a legitimate source of personal pride and satisfaction, but I would caution against choosing a school based upon an expectation that it will confer significant professional advantages- particularly when your alternatives are other well-respected schools. Just my $0.02. Good luck to all with your decisions.

This sounds very risky to me; I would recommend you tell them - very politely, but firmly- that you need to know about the funding situation by a certain date, no later than April 15. Once the April 15 date has passed, you will have lost any leverage you might have. The school's vagueness is not a good sign, imo. If you choose this school without a guarantee of funding, you should be fully prepared to receive nothing, because that is a very real possibility.

George Washington has no prestige advantage over Minnesota. HHH is a respected program, and the University of Minnesota is a better institution overall than GW. If I were in your shoes, I would be headed to Minneapolis, no question. Students from all sorts of good schools - including Minnesota - get jobs in Washington all the time. They sometimes have to work a little harder at it, but an absence of significant debt gives you the time and flexibility to do so. Few things are more constraining of choice than a hefty debt repayment schedule. Just my $0.02. Good luck with your decision.

dngo, I would approach this cautiously, at least at the beginning. You might wish to simply ask if Penn has a policy regarding matching/adjusting awards based on other offers, without referring to your specific situation. They will know what you are getting at, and if they are receptive to the idea they will ask you what your Heinz award is.

Just one postscript to my previous comment. One area where I think Ford has the upper hand over Duke is the breadth and quality of course offerings outside the policy school proper. This is not to denigrate Duke in any way, but the graduate offerings at MIchigan are incredibly extensive and of uniformly high quality. Michigan may not be the "absolute best" in that many fields, but it never less than very, very good, and you can find almost any course that suits your fancy at UM. This is a real strength that is worth considering, imo.

For whatever it is worth, when I was deciding last year I ran into several students who were deciding between Duke and Michigan. After visiting both schools, the prevailing view seemed to be "too close to call." The two schools seem to have quite similar strengths, and neither have any glaring weaknesses - with the possible exception of location. After the decisions had been made, the students I talked with tended to cite "intangibles" in explaining their choices. I doubt any of you would regret choosing either school, irrespective of your area of focus. Of the two, I visited only Michigan, and I was very impressed (I ended up going elsewhere, but not due to any shortcoming of Ford or Michigan).

This is in response to the questions in the last two posts: regarding quantitative content, I can't speak to SIPA, but here is what I wrote in an earlier post about Harris:

Thanks, dngo. You are in a better position to evaluate the intrinsic merits of the programs, since I have personally visited neither. I was speaking only of the respective reputations, and their impact on your employment prospects. I am a first year student in another program (Chicago/Harris) but I did seriously consider Heinz last year. Somewhat ironically, my decision not to attend Heinz was based partly on financial considerations.

I question your assumption about "brand recognition". Carnegie Mellon is a highly respected school among employers, and Heinz would generally be considered a much stronger policy program than UPenn/Fels. You mentioned location as a factor- but in all other respects, Carnegie Mellon/Heinz is a clear-cut first choice, in my opinion. If you are considering a career in public service, I do not think the UPenn name will get you anywhere that the CMU name will not; indeed, I might argue that the reverse is true. Just my $0.02

Shani I did not receive your PM; in response to your question, I would say that the international reputations of Chicago/Harris and Columbia/SIPA are pretty similar overall. I too am an international student, and personally consider it a "wash". SIPA has been around longer (the Harris School is only 20 years old) and that might confer some advantage, but on the other hand I would say that the University of Chicago name carries at least as much weight as Columbia - perhaps more. It would depend in part on where you are from, but Chicago is a pretty famous brand in most parts of the world (some would say a bit "infamous" too, due to Friedman et al., but that is another story). For what it is worth, I looked at SIPA last year, and ended up not even applying. My policy interests tend to domestic policy, and here I think Chicago has the upper hand; for international policy, I'm not sure what the situation is.

I agree with younglions. Carnegie Mellon is top-notch- very seriously underrated, imo. Only one caveat: if you are looking to avoid a quantitative emphasis, Carnegie Mellon is probably not the place to do it.

Even if the financial terms were equal, I would choose WWS. It yields nothing to HKS in terms of either inherent quality or reputation, and it provides a more intimate learning environment. The only reason I would even consider HKS in your situation is if I were pursuing a dual degree in business or law. btw, congratulations on the very impressive admits.

App4MPP Thanks for your comments. In response to your question, I do not consider the quantitative requirements here excessive by any means. I think they are appropriate, in that they ensure that graduates have a sufficient degree of technical expertise to "ask the right questions" about any given piece of policy research. In addition, there are two separate statistics sequences here: one more theoretical and mathematical (appropriate for those who may be considering a PhD) and a second, more practical, stream for the rest of us who do not aspire to be academicians or researchers. The latter stream is not overly technical or mathematically demanding. Probably the toughest core courses for most students - assuming that you are not taking the advanced stats sequence - are the 2 courses in the core economics sequence. Even there, the technical requirements do not extend beyond basic calculus (for which you are taught all you need in math camp). There are plenty of more advanced economics/econometrics courses if you like that sort of thing, but none are required. In short, I think the balance here is fine.

Yes, you may enroll in 4 classes per quarter, but I would consider the matter carefully before doing so. Most students are busy enough with the standard load of 3.

Current Harris student here. I faced the same choice last year, so I will enumerate what I see as the main differences between the two programs. I am reasonably familiar with Ford since I gave it a close look before choosing Harris, but inquiries regarding Ford are best directed toward current Ford students. That said, here are my basic impressions: 1. I think the emphasis on economics (and, more generally, "rational choice" models within the broader political economy sphere) is stronger at Harris. This comes, perhaps (but not necessarily), at the expense of other characteristics. Ford struck me as a school that tries to balance economic/quantitative training with a more traditional "public administration/management" curriculum. You can obtain some of the latter at Harris through course offerings in other departments (Business school and perhaps Social Service Administration), but you can also avoid it if you prefer. What you cannot avoid, however, are healthy doses of economics and statistics (2 quarters' worth apiece) and political economy (a 3-quarter sequence), all required. 2. The political economy sequence at Chicago is distinctive (I did not see a counterpart at any of the policy programs I looked at), and I think is a major strength of the program at Harris. If any students are interested in the particulars of this sequence, feel free to PM me. This sequence, in conjunction with the economic theory requirements, lays a strong conceptual foundation for the policy field courses. 3. The quarter system at Chicago versus the semester system at Michigan. The quarter system means that you take 18 courses over 2 years, instead of 12. Once the core requirements are met (7 courses worth), this gives an enormous amount of latitude to take other courses of interest throughout the university. Apart from the 7 core courses, you take a minimum of 5 courses at the Harris School and up to 6 courses in other departments (most frequently in the Law School, Business School, and economics and political science departments). To cite one example, several of my classmates are taking Gary Becker's course on Human Capital in the upcoming term (I am thinking about it). I hope this is helpful. As noted above, please feel free to PM me if you have any questions.

MPPP, I just sent you a PM reply.

I believe (hope) that I have sent messages to everyone who requested them. If any of you have not received a reply, please let me know.

MPPP, younglions, nyr: Did any of you receive my PMs? They are not showing up in my "sent messages" box, so I am wondering if there is a technical glitch. Thx.

Certainly. I'll PM you shortly.

MPPP: I will send you a PM shortly.

Another current Harris student here. I found these boards very useful last year when I was making my decision, and would be happy to answer questions from prospective students (we are between quarters right now, so I have the time).

Linden As someone who has spent a good deal of time in the workforce (and has been on the employer's side of the hiring decision numerous times), I think it is important not to over-estimate the impact of a degree from a "name" institution. Other factors being equal,the "name" may give you something of an edge in obtaining an interview, but that is about it. A degree from a good university, coupled with an excellent cover letter and a strong interview will overcome any reputational gap quite quickly in most instances, I can assure you. If finances are close between two schools, reputation might be a legitimate deciding factor, but otherwise, I am doubtful. I went through this process last year (I am in the first year of an MPP program), so I can empathize. Good luck with your decision.

I have narrowed my choices to Chicago and Michigan (MPP programs). Any relevant information or advice to help me with my decision would be greatly appreciated. Funding is reasonably close (Chicago is $8,000 per year better). I plan to visit both schools within the next 10 days, but would also like to gather as much infomation as I possibly can beforehand. I am not overly concerned with post-degree employment issues, because I expect to return to my current job when I complete the MPP. My main concerns are 1) overall quality of program; 2)the general atmosphere and working enviroment for students (i.e. collaborative vs. cuttthroat) and 3) nature of the core curriculum (e.g. is it extremely "math heavy", or reasonably well balanced bewteen quantitative and qualitiative analysis?). My research interests lie primarily in domestic policy, but without a particular area of focus. Basically, I am looking for a well-rounded education in policy analysis. Thanks in advance, and good luck to all with your respective decisions.

Pls. check your messages.

Done; I've replied.