bsack

solid, i already have a foreign affairs subscription, but i'll definitely check that out. appreciate it

do you think it would be feasible to be competitive in PRA with just an MPhil if i take some quant courses at summer school? or would i definitely need to scoop up an MBA or econ masters somewhere down the line?

oh totally agree 100%, michigan is a very good school. i'd put it a solid 5th for state schools after cal berkley, ucla, virginia, and ut austin. i was just saying that if you preclude the relatively obscure ivies (namely dartmouth and brown), 80-90% of the time the ivies are going to come out slightly ahead in terms of networking opportunities, alumni connections, career services, global name recognition, reputation and rankings among academics and employers internationally and domestically, and other tangible career benefits like that. but i really do mean slightly, they got themselves a top 15 business school over there at michigan, a quality law school, and one of the better poli sci phd's.

this is all a useless digression, and i'd really prefer to delete it once it's read. and i'd much rather get back to the topic posed in the first post. i didn't even bring up the ford school in the first place. and, if you read again, you will see that solio and i were discussing the econ masters at umichigan, not the ford school: also...i googled ford's website, and this is what their admissions FAQ says: Do you need math, statistics, and economics classes in order to qualify for admission? While you do not need these classes to qualify for admission, it would be helpful to you and to our Admissions Committee to have some idea of your skills in these areas. We recommend that you take an introductory Calculus, Statistics, and Micro Economics course. Exposure to these subjects will ease your transition to the Ford School's quantitative curriculum. Is there a minimum GPA? The median GPA for last year's incoming class was a 3.4. frankly, i don't understand why you would go out of your way to say: "Michigan is not an appropriate safety school for someone with your profile." the only reason i can think of would be to denigrate, and frankly i think that's in a little bad taste. as clearly indicated by ford's own website, i am no less competitive than any other person in my age cohort (i.e. people coming fresh out of undergrad that might consider applying to ford a few years down the line after some work experience), because literally nothing i have said on this thread thus far would indicate that i am not more than up to snuff with ford's requirements/class profile, quantitative or otherwise. i don't know if you're a ford alumni and i've offended you, in which case i apologize and i didn't mean to offend you, but i was just giving my honest opinion. if it means anything to you, i do like the wolverines, my boy tom brady played there. and one of my favorite professors at elliott is a umich guy, david shambaugh, so no hard feelings

frankly, all of this would be news to me and i think to most educated people. a quick google search indicates that michigan's MPP only costs $21,000 for out of state which is literally half what other top ranked IR and policy programs cost for everybody (out-of-state or otherwise). now, if ivy-level prestige is "only for undergrad" and michigan and columbia/harvard/georgetown/yale/hopkins masters are all basically the same thing, why aren't people (1) lining up to apply mich and (2) why are so many more people (including other people on this very thread, let alone the entire government affairs section of gradcafe) applying to the latter schools? they could be getting the same education for 50% off! either these people are totally irrational and don't know what they're doing, or they're making a strategic decision based on their personal career interests and there is something fundamentally flawed with your claims. now, i dont know if your claims were limited to IR graduate programs or professional graduate programs at these schools in general, but, and im not trying to be rude, i think the kids sitting at harvard law, stanford business, or some of the "lesser" ivies like wharton, columbia, or--maybe yale with it's ultra-competitive global affairs program, would get a pretty good laugh out of this. now, i'm in no way, shape, or form saying that michigan is bad. ford is good at what it does, they got a very good b-school in ross, a good law program. but dont give some b******* that it's basically the same thing as places like columbia, harvard, stanford, upenn, or "maybe tied with yale," that's bad advice to be giving to me and other kids on the site trying to get information. (and i don't know why you mentioned princeton as being better than michigan. princeton has few, if any, professional grad programs beyond WWS to compare against with michigan.) such claims aren't grounded in the real world in terms of placements, salaries, etc. but i guess i might as well throw at a dartboard to decide which graduate schools to apply to. as for using acceptance rates to assess programs, if you re-read what i wrote, you'll notice that we are both arguing the same exact thing: that acceptance rate doesn't indicate the quality of the program itself. there's no point of contention there, we're already in agreement and i dont know why you brought it up. i don't know if you misread or misinterpreted, but do have a look at my post above again. lastly, on prestige, i never said a word about prestige. in fact, if you do command+F search of this thread, the only users to use the word "prestige" on this thread are ben414 and monocle, i personally never brought it up. what i did say was i would consider a good network and connections to work off of (plus a recognizable name that employers might like) to be things that could be beneficial. call me crazy, but i don't think it's totally absurd to say sipa and sais and other big time established schools in washington, new york, etc might have a better network and connections than a program run out of ann arbor, just my opinion. plus, there are plenty of non-ivy programs that offer similarly good networks and known programs, like georgetown in dc and tufts university in boston/medford. again, michigan is a perfectly good, well-known school, but it just doesn't have the same level of other benefits that the big boys in IR have. ceteris paribus, that's how you differentiate between your various choices. and if i'm gonna drop some real dough, i'd like to get my money's worth with my ROI. so it's got nothing to do with prestige for its own sake; it's about objective differences in terms of tangible, material benefits from the program (networking, career services, innocuous useless things like that). based on your post on the thread about multilaterals, i think we're in agreement on this point: "So you think an alumni network that is 10-20 times as large in the multilateral org sector is an insignificant factor?...Alumni network matters a lot, and yours will be at a severe disadvantage for multilateral orgs if you go an aforementioned program....HKS [ivy league] and WWS [ivy league] seem to place well everywhere." not that im applying to multilaterals, but same general principle applies

i would certainly not be opposed to taking linear algebra or something over the summer, seems sensible and it would probably make me more competitive. i'm not really looking at HKS ID tho, given it's development emphasis and somewhat older average age.

solio was referring to michigan's applied economics terminal masters, not their MPP. frankly, i didnt know they had a MPP, and i do fulfill the requirements for their econ masters. this is the degree i was referring to in my post. and, as a separate aside, even if their MPP did have a lower acceptance rate, i imagine their applicants would have weaker stats than applicants to sais, sipa, georgetown, kennedy, and the other top programs, which tend to be pretty self selective in the first place. frankly, it would not make sense to me that top applicants would compete for a seat in ann arbor, when they would be better off at established programs at ivy or ivy-caliber schools in new york, dc, etc (unless their tuition is really cheap like princeton or something) i fulfill all of the IPS requirements, as per their website: "The IPS program requires the completion of five prerequisite courses prior to matriculation: Microeconomics Macroeconomics Statistics International finance* International trade* *International trade and international finance are often covered in a single international economics course. " Source: https://ips.stanford.edu/academics/ma-degree-program many students actually complete their requirements after matriculation, so i think i've actually come out ahead

microeconomics (A, highest grade in class), macroeconomics (A, highest grade in class), international economics (a combination of international trade and finance, A highest grade in class), single-variable calculus (-A), statistics in the social sciences (-A). i have yet to take an econometrics course or a multivariable calc class, which i would like to do.

no need for apologies, i'd rather know now what the perception of a dual masters is like rather than when im several thousands of dollars in the hole. actually, i just have this year left. i already have an offer from cambridge (waiting on oxford), and i'd be starting this fall. however, that doesnt preclude doing something over the summer, and that's something i'm working on right now actually. would that go a long way in bolstering my quant credentials? the umich program looks solid and the type of thing im looking for. i do nonetheless prefer the stronger names and networks of hopkins sais and stanford, but umich does seem like a decent safety option

this is the only bit of advice i would contest. as someone that took a few years off from a foreign language and also from calculus before starting back up again, it is an excruciating nuisance to get back "up to speed." obviously, it is true that most people do get back up to speed eventually, but what is equally true is that stop-and-go is not the most ideal or efficient way to learn. but obviously there are several things you have learned and experienced through your professional life that fresh undergrads have not, so there are pros and cons associated with both waiting and jumping straight in.

an MBA does seem attractive because, from the class profiles i've seen thus far, a plurality of entering students do not hold a business undergraduate degree (nonetheless, they've obviously all taken some quant and math classes at some point). so the graduate b-schools do a good job of training people from a variety of non-business academic backgrounds. but like i said, if that's the path i want to go down, it's not something i really need to think too heavily about at this particular juncture, and therefore isn't something that i'm trying to focus too heavily on in this post (other than to acknowledge that an mba is a solid option considering my goals).

oh i'm not wedded to a duplicate IR masters or anything. it was just one of a few options i brought up in my first post for getting a more rigorous education in economics, along with the mief and IPS. it came up some more in the subsequent responses, so that's why i went into my rationale for that particular pathway. i wanted to get a feel for whether that seems like a viable option, or whether it seems to redundant. it seems like it's more the latter, so i'm leaning more towards more econ programs, or an mba down the line if i can get employer sponsorship. but an mba would be a few years down the line, so i would have plenty of time to prepare if that's what i decide to do. however, if i want to do an econ or econ-heavy masters in 2017-2018, that's something i would have to prepare for before the application season starts again this fall. that's what i want to get out of this post: do you guys know of some more econ-focused terminal masters that aren't PhD stepping stones? i'm not a statistics or econ major, so i'm looking for a way to bolster my quant credentials to be more competitive in things like PRA, and i'm looking for programs that are geared towards students that don't necessarily already have an econ or business bachelors (like LSE's one year MSc requires). i mentioned the MIEF masters at sais and the IPS, and i think duke might have a program as well, but i think it would be unwise to bank everything on just two programs, so i wanna see if there are other things out there i can apply to as well. (if there's an IR spin to the program like MIEF, that's a plus since i'm obviously already familiar with IR, but it doesn't necessarily have to be an IR-linked program. it could be at a graduate school of arts and sciences, a business school, etc etc.) i mentioned auditing at oxbridge as a potential way of getting some more quant under my belt, but im uncertain if that's something they let students do, and even if they do it doesnt compare to a solid full-year of econ. so i just want to see if there are any other options available, just in case the auditing option doesnt work out

oh i wasn't trying to denigrate the people that worked at an NGO in africa, i was trying to say the same thing you're saying: i.e. how competitive would i be against someone that has already done real world stuff abroad, even with my strong undergrad academic credentials. my personal preference would be to do grad school stuff when everything is still fresh from undergrad and i'm more enthusiastic about school, rather than wait some years and then force myself to get back into the swing of things as a full-time student to learn material that i know as a fact i could easily handle today. i'm not saying spending some time outside of the ivory tower would not be valuable, and my interning experiences thus far have provided some useful perspective. but it's just a matter of personal preference. good luck with your elliott application! that's my school, and i think we really do have a top-notch faculty.

i have work experience on capital hill and in diplomacy as an undegrad. however, i want to pivot towards more private sector stuff and PRA, hence the desire for some more quant training and practice. i want to get an academic IR experience, as i want a more in-depth understanding of the international political system. (such academic, research-based IR programs are rare, only quality ones i can think of are U Chicago, Oxbridge, and the london school of economics.) also, i genuinely enjoy learning this stuff, i'd do it even if inherited a billion dollars. plus, i think i'd have a hard time getting into most programs at my age. i think i'd likely get one of those "rejected, but apply again in two years" letters ive seen other people on here talk about. if i doubled up, i think i'd get the very best of both worlds: more in-depth understanding and research on the one hand, and a quantitative, econ heavy professional experience on the other. if i did hypothetically double up, that would be my response to why not do the US quant degree first. i dont think i can juice up on quant in a way that would be reflected on the degree itself. i could perhaps audit courses, as i did at lse. but i dont think that would show up on a degree. nonetheless, would auditing be viewed as beneficial from the perspective of employers? the only person i know that got into sais straight from undergrad was a wealthy international, so they (1) obviously had a ton of international experience growing up in a foreign country and (2) had the money to pay up front. how much funding do the freshies usually get at sais? i dont know if the younger students would get a lot of money. i was also advised by the career advisor at my school not to apply right away, because, in her words, i would look lame next to the kids that have been working at an NGO in Central African Republic or something for the last 3 years. however, i dont think she was taking consideration the academic strength of my application. but how much does that matter for sais? sais is the 2nd best ranked IR program, but the 75th percentile gpa is only 3.76, which i exceed by a mile. contrast that with the 2nd ranked law school for example. as a professional IR degree, i think they would value postgrad work experience more for admissions and for financial aid/fellowships. SAIS's one year MIEF on the other hand is for early career individuals, with a big proportion of people straight from undergrad. i think i would be very competitive there, and especially have a leg up on the direct from undergrad kids with my masters. however, i really really don't want to put all my eggs in one basket, which is the raison d'etre of my post

as someone who has done hiring from IR circles, would you be less thrown off if you saw something like M.S. Foreign Service (Georgetown's creative name for their IR degree) or M.A. Law and Diplomacy (Tufts Fletcher) paired with an MPhil in IR on a resume, or would you still fundamentally recognize these as two of the same degree? ya the difference is purely semantics, but in practical terms, could it still help with differentiation with someone who is reading through resumes? i do want to emphasize that the difference between most UK IR degrees and an American IR degree is somewhat comparable to the difference between an economics masters and a MBA, just to give a very rough/crude example. if i were to hypothetically go the double masters route, is there any way to differentiate on my resume without having to provide an explanation in every single cover letter and interview? if it's always going to come off as redundant without a proper explanation, i would likely be more inclined to steer clear of the regular IR programs and seek out more pure econ programs like the MIEF

because i want to do my masters after undergrad, and the average age of incoming of incoming students for the MPA/ID at Harvard is 28 years old. slightly lower average age for the regular SAIS 2 year, but still roughly comparable. i know it sounds kinda snooty, but 28 sounds like an eternity away haha. i looked up the program you mentioned at u chicago, and it seems pretty solid and roughly fits what i'm looking for. however, their website says that you either need a masters from u chicago in order to be eligible, or a PhD/MD/JD from another university. perhaps i can talk to the admissions dean though, a politically-oriented degree from one of the oxbridge schools seems like it would fit the mold of the type of students they're looking for. based on what i've read from IPS students on gradcafe, you get the best of two worlds with their program. since the program itself is so small, you generally become tight with your cohort and get a very reliable network to draw upon. even if you have a large program at HKS or something, it is highly improbable you become tight with most of the kids in your class. on top of that, since some of your classes are taken at the business and law schools, you get another very potent and powerful network to draw upon. (plus you get access to the university's overall strong professional resources and networks). everything is fairly consolidated together. contrast this with a program like sais, which isn't even located remotely close to the main johns hopkins university campus in baltimore (sais is just 2 office buildings in dupont circle). the famous stanford name doesn't hurt either. these things, in addition to the quantitative focus of the coursework, are what drew me to their program. however, unlike the MIEF, it is two years long, which is somewhat bothersome.

i know im just starting out, but based on the PRA job descriptions i've seen thus far, MBA doesnt seem like a common requirement at all. is it really that ubiquitous? most of the ones i've looked at just require a masters. seems like they recruit more from the quant-oriented IR or policy programs i've mentioned above

@publicaffairsstudent i already did part of my undergrad at LSE. their econ MSc requires applicants to hold an economics undergraduate degree (otherwise you have to do an extra year of coursework), and my undergrad is IR/poli sci. plus, it's more of an academic econ degree leading to an econ PhD. it's not really they type of econ degree i'm looking for. also, the straight-up IR masters in the UK aren't policy degrees like HKS or SIPA or something, generally speaking. they're largely academic and often come with a research component, so they're more akin to a political science advanced degree than a professional IR one. my question is, if i were to hypothetically do two masters, would people be able to differentiate between the two on my resume? they technically would both read as "M.A. IR," (unless i went to tufts fletcher or something, they have a funky name for their degree, M.A. Law and Diplomacy) but they are fundamentally different degrees in terms of content, coursework, or focus.

PRA is certainly what i'm drawn to the most, but i also want to be able to keep my options open. would an MBA afford me that kind of flexibility? it might be harder to say no to certain things staring down the barrel of six figure debt. this is why the one year MIEF or the generously funded stanford and princeton programs seemed attractive. ive even heard that several of stanford's first year IPS courses are taken at their business school. it just seems like an economic way to get comparable skills with a great degree of flexibility. now, i'm in no way saying that i'm guaranteed funding. but given that i've crushed it in IR in undergrad, i think probability wise, i have an exponentially greater chance of getting funding at a policy program than an MBA (unless i find an employer willing to pay), particularly those programs designed for early career professionals

i'm thinking i want to do something in political risk analysis, which would require a solid grasp of both international politics and econ/finance

mief* not meif

i'm probably going to be doing an mphil in IR at cambridge in the fall (or oxford, havent heard back from them yet though), because i'm not down for the whole "work for 3 years at an NGO before applying" jam that most US programs have going on. the uk programs let you apply/are designed for immediately after undergrad. however, aside for some possible research related statistics, the uk programs aren't particularly quant heavy. so i'd like to compliment it with another, more quant/econ heavy masters. i was wondering if you guys knew of some good programs for this particular purpose. thus far, i've found two programs that seem to match nicely first is the master of international economics and finance (or "MEIF") at SAIS johns hopkins. this is very ideal because it covers the exact stuff i want to learn, it's targeted towards young, very early career individuals, it's only a year long program, i'd be able to take some IR electives just for fun, and it's at a stellar school. second is the IPS program at Stanford. also quant heavy, covers the stuff i want to learn, get to take some cool IR stuff on top of the quant stuff. it is a year longer than the SAIS program, but i think the Stanford name and network in general could make it relatively more valuable than SAIS. plus, ive heard that it is possible to get generous funding in the second year, more so than most schools aside from princeton's woodrow wilson. other economics masters i've found are academic and often lead to a PhD track, which is not what i'm looking for. so you guys got any suggestions/know some other programs that would fit? i dont want to put all my eggs into two baskets. i also wouldn't be opposed to doing a regular IR program with an econ concentration at SIPA or something a few years down the line (just cuz i like learning this stuff and i feel it would be useful), but i wonder if it would look weird to have two IR degrees on a resume. would employers be able to differentiate that one is an academic, research degree and the other is a quantitatively oriented professional degree?