console

Two words: Tim Geithner.

Wow, you've posted some infantile nonsense before, but this one takes the cake. You're officially annoying. Sorry for ruffling feathers, but I just can't stand idly by and read your condescending remarks anymore. It's nice to get into a great program--however that's judged--but quit bragging about it, will you?

Wow, this thread's been pretty active. Sorry I've been gone for a while there. Mountains of readings... 1) Yes, I'm a current SAIS student. 2) On the weakness of Korea, Canadian, Japan studies, maybe it's not fair to say that those programs are weak. But I do think they are weaker than some of the others at SAIS, which may not be a bad thing. I'm thinking mainly of the ability of the director, funding, courses, opportunities across a broad range (kinda vague?). For example, the China program offers 8 classes this semester, compared to 3 by Korea studies (one of which is a NE Asia class with a Korea component). The same is true for Canada and Japan in the paucity of course offerings. While it's possible that those few classes are amazing, finding classes that fit your interests might be an issue. I've also been told that the SAIS Korea program is security focused, which makes sense, but it can be a bit limiting. In terms of directors, China's Lampton is well respected, loved by students and very active, compared to Korea's Suh, who I haven't heard the most flattering things about. But funding's a different story. Korea and Japan (not sure about Canada) have lots of money so that's a plus--lots of program/class trips to the countries. I do think that the US-Korea Institute is a great resource, though I really don't know about the research opportunities. Another thought is to consider which professors you'd like to work with at the various IR schools--Victor Cha at Georgetown for Korea maybe. On a side note, SE Asia does have a lot of money it seems. It gives grants for language study in SE Asia for winter break. Ridiculously cool. My thoughts are based on talking with students in the programs, as I'm not in any of the ones mentioned, so maybe I'm not the best source. And if SAIS offers the best Korea or Canada program, I'm totally with you. I'm just trying to offer some details that I didn't have last year. 3) Jobs in specific sectors/orgs. This is a great question, one that SAIS students frequently talk/worry about. It's generally true that folks getting jobs in any field, had some experience before SAIS. Grads who get finance jobs were i-bankers before coming here, etc. I don't think there are any game-changing IR degrees out there. The MPA/ID at HKS might be the closest thing for dev finance, but that thing's not a free pass either. Work experience certainly is the most important component of your resume, and some people argue that working for two years (if you don't have a lot of experience) might serve you better in the long-run than getting an MA in IR. I think (hope?) if you take full advantage of the econ courses at SAIS, network heavily, do relevant and substantive internships, WB, OPIC and other intl' finance positions are attainable. If you don't have the relevant background, you're just gonna have to work a little harder. Lastly, folks from dev countries seem to face less competition, but plenty of American students get into the multilaterals as well. I don't have any specifics though. 4) Fin aid for second years. I'm actually still waiting to find out myself. The consensus is that more second years get money, but it's kind of an awkward subject to broach. I can't imagine that SAIS will give significant money, but apparently a lot of second years get something. 5) Comparisons between SAIS and MSFS. You're probably bored with the usual comparisons: private sector v. govt, area studies, who throws the better parties. I might be able to give you a better response if you provide some more details about your interests/preferences or specific questions. Here's a quick anecdote though: I went on an "ocean safari" off the coast of Africa, and out of the six people sleeping on this totally deserted island, one was a recent MSFS grad. He absolutely loved his time there, referring to it as a "two-year vacation," and got a great job at Treasury. That's totally useless info, but I thought it was kinda funny. Hope that helps.

For those of you considering SAIS, I'd like to add a few points to the discussion. 1. SAIS area studies is only strong in *certain* regions. China, Latin America, SE Asia and the Middle East are particularly well developed, while Korea, Japan and Canada seem to be a bit weak. Africa's at a crossroads--great director, small program, limited funding, but growing. Not sure about the other regions, but I think the particulars of SAIS's area studies should be considered, rather than the whole. 2. While you can still take classes offered by other concentrations, you're at a significant disadvantage in certain cases. SAIS goes by a bidding system for oversubscribed classes. You start with 1,000 points and earn 100 each semester. The popular/small classes could be out of your reach if you need to bid significant points more than once. It's rare that you'll need to bid a minimum of 1,000 points to get into a class, but it actually has happened. Blows my mind. Even for the required econ classes you might have to bid 50-100 points to take it with the "good" and/or easy professor. To be fair, most of the classes aren't subject to bidding, but it's something to consider when you're about to commit to a school for two years and possibly a chunk of money. I had no idea about it until orientation. This issue might speak to the person trying to decide between SIPA development v. SAIS not. Since Intl' Policy is out too, SIPA might make more sense unless you're into other concentrations, which doesn't seem to be the case. In my view SIPA and SAIS are peer schools, and in your case SIPA might provide advantages in terms of interests and access to classes. Plus I wouldn't discount the access to the other unbelievable departments/school at Columbia. The B-school, law school, ed school, poli sci, history. Shit, now I'm starting to think I should've went there. Seriously though, SAIS just doesn't have these opportunities, at least not at the same caliber and feasibility. Joint degrees are a whole different animal. But I understand there are other variables in your decision equation. Damn, I'm becoming one of those quant nerds (as opposed to a nerd in general). 3. Is the concentration that important? I've heard mixed opinions on this. Some say employers are gonna look at the degree more than anything else. Others have cited things like the IP concentration being instrumental in working at the Dept of Energy. I'm not sure myself, but it seems that what the SAIS degree adds most is the intl' econ component. It's true that some students just want to get the requirements out of the way, but I'd say more students either value it from day one or see the importance and go beyond the required 6 courses, as evidenced by the good amount of people doing an econ specialization. The SAIS-World Bank connection is well advertised, but outside of that, being quanty is already and increasingly crucial for IR and especially development. That's my sense anyway. I hope this helps someone somewhere. And I really hope this helps dispel the notion that rankings make a program. Also, generalizations about the entirety of a program, including mine, should be considered with a healthy dose of caution. I'd be happy to answer any other question you have about SAIS. Good luck with your decision and enjoy what you've got going on before grad school starts!

Yes, he absolutely does. The member of congress/senator he works for is a long-time member of an IR committee. So it worked out for him in the end, but he seemed to have struggled out of the gates. I got the sense that he was a bit disappointed with the alumni network, but a variety of factors could've contributed to his troubles. Also, things might be quite different today. He must've been at Yale at least 10 years ago. It looks like they're getting serious about policy. Again, I think the program can be a great fit, unlike say a Stanford, which adds very little value. And if Yale's giving you money, that's just another huge plus. In addition, you'll be in an incredibly intellectually challenging place in all sorts of angles. Lots of upside.

Hi Sroek and Others, First of all, congratulations on your acceptances. It's no easy feat, particularly in this admissions cycle. I honestly think the Chicago MA in IR adds very little value. I guess if you want a theory-based academically-oriented program you could make a case for it, but it seems a bit like a degree unsure of its purpose. One argument is that it's a good primer for a PhD, but the program touts students' ability to take courses at Harris, the law school and other departments. The other argument, though not stated as forcefully, is that the degree will help you get a job in IR policy or the private sector. I hardly think a one-year academic degree helps achieve this goal. Never mind the lack of networking and the inability to develop a concentration within IR, I just don't think you can take enough classes in a year to do some real policy analysis in addition to the theory/history based courses. Lastly, the Chicago brand is pretty impressive, but people working in IR know the solid MA programs and won't be impressed just because you have Chicago CIR on your resume. I guess if you're planning on working outside of IR, Chicago prestige might come into play. In the end, the program seems only good for IR PhD aspirants who don't yet have a package that will get them into an actual PhD program. Prestige is an issue every admissions cycle, and it was a factor for me too, but after having been in grad school for a year, I've realized people take it a bit too far, to the point of creating these mythical programs. When you look at the IR rankings, applicants aren't the only one falling for this apparently. UCSD, Syracuse and Denver should be ranked higher in my view, while Chicago, Stanford, MIT and Yale to a degree should be lower. But with all the emphasis on going to a "top" school, what I hear most from career services at my school and from alumni is the importance of networking. I know this isn't news, but contacts in and out of your school network is absolutely the most important thing, unless you're getting into something quite technical. And yeah going to a "top" school does give you access to some impressive people, but there are plenty of folks working in IR at high-level positions who didn't go to those schools. In my view, while the prestige factor can be justifiably be part of the calculus, the fit is so much more important; that is, the character of the school (if I can call it that: community feel v. all business), the strength and courses offered in your area of interest, flexibility and so on. So if I had to choose between Chicago and Denver as someone looking for a professional IR degree (and that's what APSIA's all about right? Not theory study), I'd take Denver without hesitation. I don't know either program personally so who am I to say, but I do know someone from CIR who got little from it in terms of professional development and I've heard from lots of people that Denver's got a great program and it's on the rise. I would try not to give in to the prestige-whoring that's rampant not only in the IR field, but in our society generally. Don't get me wrong, since we live in this world, going to a "top" school makes your life easier and there is some merit to why these programs are sought after, but other schools equip you with skills and opportunities to do amazing things with your life. The important thing is commitment to your field and making good decisions (finding mentors, picking classes, etc.) during grad school. I hope this wasn't too preachy, but for me it was hard to get a sense of the balance between going to the best school I got into and going to the right school for me. My decision came down to choosing a school that was strong programmatically in areas that I was weaker in and seemed important for future professional development. I know this is a tough decision, but I would just urge you to continue to seek out opinions from lots of people and try not to listen to anybody too much. Is that bad advice? I don't know, I don't REALLY know what I'm talking about. Good luck to you all of you!

Actually, that should give you hope more than anything else. It just goes to show you that adcoms are looking for more than near-perfect stats. Plus we don't know what kind of experience this person has or what the sop is like. Take comfort in knowing that the process is holistic. You'll find that most students that fill classrooms at even the top schools aren't people with ridiculous scores and gpas. Meanwhile, the poster will probably get a nice fellowship from another school.

One alum's perspective: A legislative director in Congress told me he regretted going there because 1) the program is more academic than policy oriented and 2) Yale gives its undergrads more love than its grad students. But this is just one person's view. The degree seems to carry considerable cache, and the program could be a great fit, particularly for someone who wants an academic approach and the ability to craft a concentration. I would also keep in mind that since the program's small, there's a limited alumni network. Could be good or bad.

If you're sure you want to get into development finance--and it sounds like you are--SIPA hands sdown. No question about it in terms of strength of program. Money is another issue though.

I think there's some truth to everything that's been posted. I would add the following: 1. An LSE degree isn't as recognized in the US compared to degrees from American IR schools. Conversely, the LSE degree is very well respected in the UK and perhaps other European countries. 2. For the average Msc from LSE, you will probably take three courses the entire time and write a thesis. 3. More academic than US programs. I'm not too sure about the joint and special programs like the global comm with USC and the Science Po joint, but they seem more practical than the others. In the end, if you have all the info and the program's a good fit, don't let anybody tell you otherwise. Good luck!

Admissions to definately a game so you'll be able to do something with what you've got so far. That said, the rest of your app better be amazing if you want a real shot at the top schools. We're talking 1400+ GREs with high quant, insiring SOP, and the standard glowing recs. Do that and you'll be golden. I find that you don't have a whole lot of experience. Internships, especially overseas, are great, but everybody knows congressional internships are mostly BS. Most IR applicants have at least two years working overseas, even if it's Peace Corps. I advise most people to work for a few years before applying to IR master's programs because it'll really make your education enriching, for other students as well. But I'd ask you what exactly do you want to do after the degree? I'm assuming IR-related jobs, but choosing an MA program has a lot to do with exactly what within that field. If you don't know, go get a job for a few years. I'm not too sure about your list of schools. The top programs are (in no particular order) SAIS, SIPA, MSFS, Fletcher, Woodrow Wilson and HKS. Based on reputation, if you have a degree from any of those schools, you should be in a good position. There are other good programs, but these are generally recognized throughout the policy community. I don't know why you'd consider USC, UT and NYU. Don't know much about overseas programs, but King's College is really a strategic studies course. Are you interested in that field? Generally, the US programs offer a nice balance between theory and applicable skills. What you have in your profile so far won't disqualify you from any schools right off the bat, but if you want to be competitive add more to your case.

What? You didn't hear that SAIS had a 100% acceptance/wait list rate this year? Pretty amazing. It's nice to commiserate like this. I'll try to follow what you did initially and move on. But I had a moment of epiphany yesterday as I was walking home. Yeah I want to go to a great program and get the preparation I'll need for my career, but it's not like which school you attend is going to make or break you. I just got so caught up in this applying to grad school mess, but in the end how I spend the next two years of my life is much much more important than where I spend it. So I'm gonna stop stressing about all this so much, release the palpable tension in my body and stop being such a turd to be around. We'll see how that goes. Thanks for the heads up on the housing situation in DC. I feel a lot better about the possibility of moving there relatively late in the game, and I think it'll help that I lived in the city before. Bajillion's a really big number. Hope everything works out. Took me a while to figure out SO though (silly optometrist?). Good luck to all of you.

Thanks for the tips Gopher. I just got back from Peace Corps in December, so I really don't own anything that isn't foldable or made out of straw. My lease is up in June so no problems there either. The biggest thing is the prospect of at 3 more months of uncertainty. At this point, I almost feel like I need to move on with my life, emotionally more than anything. And I don't even wanna think about finding an apt during the busiest time of the year, competing with all the students enrolling in the fall. Anyway, I guess I'm just venting really. SAIS would be a great opportunity.

Dude, if you still haven't heard, I don't think it's necessarily bad. SIPA's been sending out mad late acceptances too. Has anybody out there gotten in off the SAIS wait list (Not this year of course)? Can you really plan for grad school if you find out at the end of June earliest? Wondering if this is feasible.

Got a letter via snail mail. It was the nicest one I've gotten from grad schools, as far as wait list letters go.