mapiau

My sense is yes, though significantly more in California than in NYC (this is due to a combination of a stronger network in CA, proximity, and choice, since many people attend UCSD rather than an east coast school because they want to work in CA). Placement is pretty variable though, and while most find a job by the end of the summer after graduating many get jobs in the private sector without the international component that they may have wanted, or program administration jobs at NGOs that you may not need a Masters for. This unsurprisingly seems to be concentrated among younger students without major work experience before starting the program. The DC alumni network is definitely weaker than schools like SAIS, but students do get jobs there in the public sector, multinationals (especially foreign students), or research firms. My not-entirely-trustworthy impression is that the alumni network's comparative advantage relative to other programs is strongest in the development and energy sectors (the latter mostly in CA). There is more information about job placement on the school website, though it's fairly vague and as far as I know they don't report median salaries by sector.

I don't think it's very informative to ask the schools themselves. While you can ask things like how many counselors work in their career services departments each school is going to tell you that their career services offerings are great, and teasing out useful information from these responses will be difficult. Instead I'd ask former students (since current students haven't actually applied for and gotten jobs for the most part), though since most students have nothing to compare their schools' career services to it can still be confusing. Many alumni are happy to chat if you reach out, in my experience. Despite what I just said about current students, I can speak a bit about UCSD GPS' career services. I have found the department to be quite good, and a major draw for the program. GPS has three full-time and one part-time career counselors, which for a program of ~300 students is a good ratio and in my understanding higher than other international affairs programs (I can't speak to MPP programs). I've been able to have career services employees proofread resumes or hold mock interviews on very short notice, and they are usually available for one-on-one meetings within a few days. Each year career services hosts trips to the Bay Area, DC, and NYC (though at the students' expense) to visit employers, and are very involved in finding summer internships. Career services has good relationships with seemingly all Masters of International Affairs alumni (there are not yet MPP alumni at GPS), and will often reach out to alumni on students' behalf. Their advice is usually very good, though I've had employers give different feedback on resumes than career services The quality of career services is only one part of getting a job of course (unfortunately alumni networks probably matter more), but my impression of GPS' has been good.

I'd avoid talking about reading foreign affairs magazines in high school. You want to demonstrate an abiding interest in your field, but my sense is that admissions committees get a lot of similar SOPs that talk about how passionate applicants are while not focusing on what makes them a strong candidate. I'd recommend that you focus more on your actual achievements while living and working abroad. I would strongly recommend trying to get your quant score up to at least 160. I know your situation is challenging, but the GRE is a test that can be learned, and I was able to raise my quant score significantly studying with the online course Magoosh. Given that 150 really is quite low for the schools you are targeting I think it would be worthwhile to do everything you can to raise this score, including even waiting to apply if you aren't able to retake the test before this application season.

I personally can't give you much guidance which to cut, but I agree that it's a good idea to narrow down where you apply. I spent roughly $800 applying to six schools, and it was a waste. Spend a lot of time talking to alum in development (most are happy to chat if you reach out) and pour over the course offerings (make sure classes you're interested in are actually regularly offered) to apply to the schools you feel you're competitive for and that fit your goals.

I worked as a program administrator-type at a foundation in my field, but it's wrong to say that this job "led" to me receiving funding. There are a lot of other factors that admissions committees take into account beyond work experience when considering funding.

I couldn't even get a full time job for two years after I graduated undergrad, and two years later got full funding for a decently-ranked program that's a very good fit for me. Don't panic.

I think you can definitely aim to increase your quant score to 160+. It can be intimidating, but the GRE is a fairly simple test that relies a lot more on trying to trick you with its specific format rather than the actual difficulties of the problems. Even if you haven't done math for years, if you spend two months practicing with an online test prep course (I had a good experience with Magoosh) raising your quant score by 15-20 points is a reasonable, achievable goal.

I think reaching out to the French professor who actually knows you is a better idea. The point of an academic LOR is that is written by someone who can speak to the quality of your work. Even if the IR professor agrees to write you a letter, it won't be a very good one if they barely remember you and can't speak to your academic abilities firsthand. Admissions committees see a lot of generic letters from professors who obviously don't have a close connection with the student they're endorsing. If the French professor is familiar with your work, they're likely the better choice. I think the standard operating procedure for the LOR by a non-English speaker is to have it translated by an official translation service, which can vouch for its accuracy. In any case this is something admissions departments will be able to direct you on.

I agree with the other posters. (Disclaimer: I do not work in foreign policy, nor plan to.) I think it's important to also remember that 'playing a role in US foreign policy' is an extremely broad category, and that the day to day experience of a career diplomat/analyst in a federal agency/think tank scholar/government lawyer are very different. This diversity includes things like compensation, job security, and so on. (For example, once you get them government jobs are decently compensated and tend towards security, while the think tank world seems more boom and bust and sometimes brings limits on the positions you can take, and so on.) How you view frequent travel might be different in ten years than you do today, and it's good to try and anticipate what you want professionally might change. I would recommend that before going to graduate school you make an effort to talk to people working in jobs you find interesting about what they actually do, and how their education helped them reach their position. This will help you focus your ambitions more tightly. Similarly, I would caution you against pursuing especially a PhD or JD right now. You sound very lukewarm on both, and no matter how driven and disciplined you are I suspect it will be difficult to stay motivated and perform if you outright see the degrees as only a means to an end. This is particularly true for the PhD—the problems you cite are true, and even if some political science PhDs end up working in government, it's a very long, uncertain, and expensive (in foregone earnings) path. Finally, the MPP/International Affairs MA is a "soft" degree. Despite what some recruiters say these programs are, for the most part, not intended to produce data scientists. If focusing on data analysis is what you want these may not be the path for you, but I would not discount the importance of soft skills like writing well, being able to give a good presentation, and knowing the code of how people in these types of positions tend to talk and behave. It's easy to dismiss these skills, but I've found them to be the most important thing to get out of professional school.

I can't speak to the competition at the schools you mentioned specifically, but I'd guess you're pretty competitive. For both the MPP and the MPA applications I would really stress your interests in electricity markets and policy, and play up your economics and electricity markets coursework in addition to your engineering background. I don't think this engineering background would be seen as a weakness, especially if you make it clear that you are interested in policy. Both Stanford and Berkeley Goldman would be good fits -- the Bay Area is a really good area to be in if you are interested in the electricity sector, with a lot of cleantech startups, the California regulatory commission, and the state capital and Cal-ISO fairly close by.

I really liked Magoosh. It is an online service that is far cheaper than the in-person classes, and helped me really raise my scores (though it is a bit less helpful on the analytical writing section, though a lot of that supposedly comes down to just writing as much as possible). The GRE is an exam that tests your ability to learn its format more than anything else, and there's no reason you can't do well if you complete the course and leave yourself two months or so to prepare. GRE scores are often thought to be important in determining merit aid, so it's worth putting in the time to get your score as high as possible even if you already feel that you're in the range that sufficient for your target schools.

I strongly recommend working for at least a few years before attending grad school, even if you are confident that you know what you would like to do. Work experience will increase your likelihood of receiving funding, and working in your preferred field will let you gain out-of-the-classroom experience that admissions committees want to bring to the classroom. Even if you are admitted to your preferred school now, work experience will help you after graduation. Students who go straight to Masters programs often lack experience in things like interpersonal communication, office etiquette, how to run a meeting, and personal time management/task tracking that employers value (even after you are hired). I don't mean to imply that you don't have these skills or that you can't learn these things in school or internships, but I believe that these skills are much stronger in people who have at least a year of full-time work experience, and will substantially help you land and succeed in a job and succeed in your field after you graduate.

I recommend working for longer than a year or two before applying not because the work experience will impress an admissions committee, but rather because it helps you pick a career. You may have an idea of what'd you like to focus on in an MPP program, but actually working in a field—in terms of the actual work, quality of life, security, and so on—is very different from studying it. You grad school experience will be much more rewarding and secure if you can really focus on an area you have prior experience in, which lets you not only focus your studies but also network more successfully.

I want to second what other have said about realistically considering the costs of the programs your considering, and how you will pay down the debt. It's commonly suggested that you shouldn't take out more debt than you expect to make your first year, and while you can play around with this guideline (for example, by resolving to live really cheaply for your first few years out of school), this is more difficult than it seems. "Living cheaply" is hard with in an entry level IR position forces you to live in an expensive city, and living with three roommates and having no spending money looks one way when it's a future that's wrapped up in the excitement of considering grad school, and another way when you're actually living it. If you can't estimate what your starting salary would be, I'd advise thinking in more detail about your career. I'm in a comparatively low-cost program, but I'm still surprised that there are students who have only hazy ideas of what'd they'd like to do, and then apply to basically everything when they graduate. You should have a focused idea of the jobs you'll be applying for before you start school, which allows you to really tailor your classes and networking.

Relatedly, I have had a good experience with Datacamp's R courses. If you are preparing for a program that includes statistical programming (Stata is the most common, I believe), I think their introduction and intermediate R courses would be a good way to start to wrap your mind around programming (and R seems to be a more common job requirement than Stata for non-academia positions.)

I'm a current first-year student in the Master of International Affairs degree at GPS. If anyone has any questions feel free to ask!

I think the UCSD GPS career services is one of the strongest parts of the program. There are three full-time career advisors, with one focusing on the energy, environment, and corporate social responsibility spheres, another the rest of the private sector, and the other the public sector. At the start of the program the advisors host a dedicated career 'boot camp' that covers basics like resumes and cover letters—it's kind of redundant if you've worked before, but is very useful for people straight out of college and foreign students less familiar with US culture and norms. Students can usually have a 30-minute meeting with an advisors on a few days notice, and they're happy to review and revise cover letters or other application materials. I don't have anything to directly compare GPS' career services to, but from what I've read on this forum this level of responsiveness and advisor-to-student ratio is rare in other programs. Of course GPS puts this level of emphasis on their career services department in order to offset the relative weakness of their alumni network. The network is smaller than other schools (the first graduating class was roughly 25 years ago or so) and is definitely concentrated on the West Coast. That said according to Linkedin there's around 200 alumni in DC (and not everyone has a Linkedin profile, especially older and more senior alumni), and the career services department has hosted DC-focused alumni events where DC alumni visit the school for panel discussions. Career services hosts trips to DC and NY every spring break where students can meet alumni and visit potential employers, but students have to pay for these trips themselves, which is of course not cheap. One of the most useful pieces of advice I heard when applying to grad school is to choose a school where you want to build your network, and while attending GPS doesn't limit you to careers on the West Coast the network is certainly stronger there.

UCSD's MPP program is brand new (their first class graduates next year), so that's why you've never met a grad or heard about it. To the OP, the quality of the faculty and teaching in the MPP program seems high (I'm at the school, but not in the MPP), but I have nothing to compare it to and the program's lack of a network and and name recognition is certainly worth keeping in mind. UCSD GPS emphasizes quant skills in their development-related courses but also has no Africa focus at all, if that's a region you're interested in.

I don't think there's any reason to write about a completely different part of the world, particularly if you have a professional interest in Burma. The content and tone of the analytical essay is different from your personal statement, so even if both discuss the same region or issue they shouldn't end up too similar. When I applied to SAIS last year I talked about my interest in energy issues and Latin America and experience with both in my personal statement, and wrote my analytical essay on electricity generation in Brazil. Since my personal statement basically just explained why I was interested in these issues it didn't overlap with a more focused essay discussing a specific issue. Additionally, I think my overall application benefited from the subject of my essay being related to my professional interests, since it not only demonstrated my research and writing skills but also showed that I had a clearly-defined professional interest that I was knowledge about.

Like others I benefited from this forum, and want to pay the debt forward. Program Applied To: Masters in international affairs with coursework focusing on energy policy and finance. Undergraduate institution: One of the higher-ranked UCs Undergraduate GPA: 3.45 but “peaky,” with lots of As in my majors and some failing grades in my first two years. Last 60 hours of Undergraduate GPA (if applicable): 3.63 in the last two years Undergraduate Major: Double major in International Studies and Economics Languages: Advanced Spanish and intermediate Brazilian Portuguese (better at reading than speaking) GRE Scores: 159 Q, 170 V, 5.5 AW Years Out of Undergrad (if applicable): 4 Years of Work Experience: I spent the first two years out of undergrad working part-time for a number of professors, and then a year working in energy policy. While it’s not work, I’ve since spent an extended period of time living abroad. Schools Applied to and Results: American University SIS ✓ (60% tuition) Georgetown SFS MSFS ✗ (waitlisted) Johns Hopkins SAIS ✓ (50% tuition for first year) Syracuse Maxwell School MAIR/MPA ✓ (no funding) Tufts Fletcher MALD ✓ (30% tuition) UCSD GPS ✓ (full tuition + stipend) Final decision: UCSD GPS. While I had an agonizing time choosing between UCSD and SAIS, ultimately I decided that the ability to graduate with no debt outweighed the SAIS name and alumni network. Both schools offer strong classes in my field, and I’m hoping with aggressive networking I can stand out at UCSD and end up in much the same place as if I had gone to SAIS. Strength of SOP (be honest, describe the process, etc): I think my SOPs were strong, and played a large role in my success. I was able to tell a story that supported my professional ambitions, pointing to my work experience, undergraduate studies, and language and writing skills. I also applied to the least-selective schools first, which I think is wise: even if you’ve extensively reviewed and edited your SOP, it will get stronger and more focused with each iteration. Additionally, tailoring your SOP to each school is a great way of finding out where you don’t want to go: when I started writing a SOP for GW I realized that the program didn’t really fit with my personal goals. Finally, the opportunity to write an additional essay is very useful and I don’t think it is a coincidence that I got into SAIS, which requires applicants to write an analytical essay, and not Georgetown, which doesn’t. (Yeah, I know SFS is more selective than SAIS, but I'm telling a story here!) In my essays for SAIS and Fletcher I was able to showcase not only my research and writing skills but also demonstrate how my professional experience and languages skills support my professional goals. Strength of LOR's (be honest, describe the process, etc): I haven’t seen them, but probably pretty strong: one was written by a former boss, and the other two by professors I had authored substantial research projects under. Due to both hands-off laziness and a phobia of being too demanding I didn’t provide my letter-writers much guidance, which probably reduced my letters’ strength. Don’t be afraid to tell your writers exactly what you want from your graduate experience, and how they can best support these goals in their letters. Also, I had sent holiday cards to all potential letter-writers every year since I graduated. Good tip for staying on people’s radars. (Though honestly you should be doing this anyway!) Advice for future applicants: My applications were more successful than I had hoped, and I hope that my experience shows that you can overcome bad undergrad grades. My main advice is to know why you are going to grad school, and be able to show the admissions committee how your interests, work experience, and skills support these goals. You should seriously research programs, faculty, and course offerings before applying. In retrospect, if I’d spent more time researching the course offerings at SIS, Georgetown, and Maxwell I probably wouldn’t have applied to these programs, which are of course strong but don’t really fit my interests. More research earlier in the process could have saved me hundreds of dollars. I’d also recommend that you put serious time and effort into studying for the GRE—I loved Magoosh and it is worth the money—and while I’d hoped to have less of a spread between my quant and verbal scores I think my perfect verbal score contributed to me getting the funding offers that I did. Similarly, your SOPs are very important and take a long time to get right. Start them early enough that you have enough time to make many, many revisions. I started writing in October (after having taken the GRE in August), which was enough time to submit by December. If you have a demanding job or other time constraints start earlier. The whole process, from researching schools to writing SOPs to making a final decision, can take much more time than you expect.

For what it's worth, I interviewed lots of former and current SAIS students during my decision process and everyone said the Latin American Studies Program is almost bizarrely well-funded and managed. I was also told (and again I have no first-hand knowledge of any of this) that SAIS' econ courses are not particularly rigorous for those with undergrad econ educations. Again you should take this with a grain of salt, but I'm not sure SAIS econ requirements would necessarily prepare you for a PhD.

I applied to six. In retrospect if I'd spent more time researching the courses offered by each university I probably would have applied to only four schools, or even three. Similarly, I don't think the concept of a "safety school" is very useful for grad admissions. You should only apply to the schools that offer the courses and networking which will help you in your career and align with your professional goals. One of the two schools I'm deciding between is less selective and prestigious than the others but it's strong in my field, so I don't consider it a safety and am glad I applied.

Is anyone planning on doing the Summer Prep? I wasn't required to, but since I graduated from undergrad four years ago and haven't really done math (besides studying for the GRE) since it seems like a good idea. I'm really nervous about still remembering how to study, and I'd much rather get over that hump in the Math Camp rather than the actual graded courses. I was an econ major in undergrad, but even so I think that the Econ and Math Camp session would be a good idea and worth the investment, given my own opinion of how much econ I remember!

Thanks for the suggestion about hopping on the housing list. It wouldn't be the end of the world if I lived off-campus (and I think living off campus is generally pretty good for your mental health, in fact), but the on-campus housing is hundreds of dollars cheaper than comparable apartments off campus. The waiting list looks brutal, though. If the wait times are anything like what they list it doesn't look like I could get on-campus housing until the second year.

I just emailed their admissions office about this, and they said that the fellowship covers tuition and all fees, including the professional degree supplemental tuition. Obviously your specific fellowship may differ, but it may cover the professional degree tuition too, being a full ride.