narius
-
Posts
42 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by narius
-
-
All three are known as programs with a more domestic focus.
Good to discount USN rankings -- they're even less credible for public affairs than usual, since they're based solely on peer review. That means they can be gamed really easily through a branding campaign.
Fels is quite a bit older than Taubman and CIPA (one of the oldest public affairs programs in the country), but is unique in that it traditionally had a more state/local focus than other older programs. Specifically, Pennsylvania. That has to do with its original benefactor, Samuel Fels, who had that put in their founding charter. It's not nearly the regional program it used to be, but those are pretty clearly its roots.
Taubman is similar in the sense that it's small and was clearly founded with benefactor money, but it's quite a bit newer and lacks the same sense of place as Fels (which is housed in Samuel Fels' mansion on campus). But both programs are clearly small and don't seem to intend to grow larger (class size-wise) as a deliberate strategy.
CIPA is small, too, but more because they're the youngest (if I recall). They, however, do seem like a program with ambitions to eventually be one of the bigger programs. Also, they don't seem to be particularly concerned about focusing only on domestic politics.
Each of these are pretty well-respected programs, though they may not have the names that HKS/SIPA have. I know personally that Fels has longstanding career pipelines into government jobs in PA, NJ, NY, and DC as well as in public sector consulting. But I don't know about Brown or Cornell. Another nice/unique thing about Penn is that they allow students to take classes anywhere in the university, which means Fels students often do electives at Wharton or Penn Law or Penn Design (etc.) and vice-versa.
-
Hi guys,
I have admits to the the following MPP programs:
Chicago Harris
Cornell
USC
UPenn
Georgetown
My primary interest is economic development and public funding but I think I would be best served to get into private consulting initially to gain some experience and follow my dream from there.
Any ideas as to what would possibly place best in public sector consulting in firms such as McKinsey, Boston Consulting Group?
Thanks guys
Hard to say. Chicago is famous for being quant heavy, which the consultancies really like, but Gtown is in close proximity to a lot of fed contractors, which can't hurt. No idea about USC. I've heard Cornell is a fine program, but they are having trouble placing people with the economy the way it is. A buddy of mine went to Penn and says their econ dev side is very strong and regularly sends people to Public Financial Management, HR&A, and smaller, similar boutiques.
-
<br /><br /><br />
Thanks a lot! But it seems there are not many people interested in this program... Still hesitating
Did you decide? If you get funding, I say go for it. But I wouldn't break the bank just to go, either, unless you have money to burn. It's reputable but not so much that you couldn't get a comparable education for much cheaper in Australia, NZ, or Singapore. Good luck!
-
I'm finding my interests lie in the intersection of poli sci and sociology, but I want my work to be practical. I'm interested in topics of diffusion and the role of networks as they relate to national security. Do I belong in sociology, Poli-sci, public policy? I was introduced to social networks through sociology, so didn't really think to look in other departments, but have since been speaking with a lot of people in different departments who all (shocker) think their department is the bees knees.
Ultimately, I want to apply my research first and teach second. I am wondering how my potential advisors in sociology/poli-sci would feel if I didn't go straight to academia. And if I belong in a public policy program, which one? Network analysis is key for me. One person recommended UMich with their join PhD in Public Policy and Poli-sci.
Stats:
Undergrad: solid, well known research university
UGPA: 3.56/4
double major poli-sci/sociology (a theme?) GPA: 3.76 and 3.81
GRE: V: 680
Q: 620
AW: 5
Solid research in networks, political theory. Solid Recs
Worked in large consulting firm doing health care (don't want to focus on healthcare). Two presentations at international conferences.
I'm assuming you want a PhD. I would avoid pure sociology departments as they do not often have qualified academics that can properly advise on national security issues. Though your research might very well be sociological in nature, the topic is certainly not a traditional sociological strength unless you are approaching the topic from a structuralist or marxist standpoint or something. If you want something practical and close to security studies practitioners, you're much better off in a public policy or political science or security studies program. These are all inherently interdisciplinary (and particularly public policy and sec studies), so you can often bring in advisors from different disciplinary and topical backgrounds. Michigan would be a terrific place for this, as would almost any of the DC schools, Chicago Harris, etc.
Only caveat is that if you want a successful application in a really highly rated program, you will need to boost your quant GRE scores somewhat. But at the level you're at, you could still get in a very decent program at someplace like George Mason or even have a shot at Pitt GSPIA. Good luck.
-
http://www.publicpol...es/default.aspx
Anyone here knows anything more about the MPP program at U of Toronto? Like the reputation of the program?
I'm planning to apply for it and I wonder the chance of getting an admission.
By the way my background:
major: pubilc administration and political science, Peking University (I'm a Chinese.)
GPA: 3.63
3 recommendation letters, one of them from the former minister of health of Norway.
Thanks a lot for everyone's help!
It has a very strong rep in Canada. In the US, fairly or not, Canadian schools are just not known as well. However, Toronto and McGill are probably the best known Canadian schools. Can't say for internationally, but I am sure it will suit you very well if you intend to return to China.
-
So I want to do diplomacy at the NGO or governmental level, and I currently hold a BA in psych/english. I want to switch fields, and I have two questions:
1) Can an anthropology Ph.D be practical for the above work? I don't want to finish 6 years and be like, "Oh, hm. Should have majored in something else." (reminiscent of my current situation haha!)
2) IR seems more applicable to the above professions, but I'm not a fan of number crunching beyond what is necessary in anthropology/social science. Any interdisciplinary programs or recommendations about this? Or maybe I can get training at a local college in econ before applying to grad programs?
Thanks in advannce!
1. It can be ... but only if you are very careful to tailor your dissertation to direct application of ethnography. However, it will be hard for you to do that in most anthropology departments because that's really not their focus. You will have to get in touch with professors first before you apply. But even then, it's not like it will launch you into an IR career, since most IR positions will be looking for professionals with an understanding of IR theories that you are unlikely to pick up in an anthropology department.
2. Since you'll be doing a LOT of stats and methods courses for any half-decent PhD, particularly in anthropology, there's really not much advantage to going for an anthropology PhD unless you really want to be a proper anthropologist. If you want to do professional work in IR, go into an IR master's program. Only do a PhD if you are absolutely sure that what you want to do is research. If you are worried about your preparation and/or grades in math/econ/stats, it's definitely worth taking a community course to brush up.
-
Thanks folks!
What do you intend to focus on? I know you said environmental policy, but a lot of policy programs have different approaches to different things. For example, some schools may be well suited for students looking to do research in specific policies, while others are better at helping research that researches the methods used towards policies. That may seem like an academic distinction, but it can be significant. Whether you are looking at political processes and how they affect environmental legislation (a more politically-oriented, DC school might be best), or on challenging prevailing analytical methods for measuring environmental impact (could be a policy analysis school like Rand or Carnegie Mellon) will have an effect on what kind of place fits.
As far as specific schools, you should definitely look into Indiana University, which has a very good reputation in environmental studies and a top notch public policy reputation overall. I don't know many other schools with great environmental policy programs, but I would imagine the UC schools, USC, and Washington are all very good in that area.
More generally, strong 'second tier' schools to consider are places like Pitt's GSPIA, UMD-CP, UNC-CH, UWashington, GWU (Trachtenberg), and George Mason (particularly if interested in a public choice econ-related topic).
I'm actually (casually) looking into policy phd programs myself, so if you want to PM me for a more in-depth discussion, feel free.
-
Hi everybody!! I'm not from the US and i'm not very familiar with all the craziness and francticness associated with applying for gradschool, but I'm starting to get into it...
This is my story: i graduated (BA in Political Sciences and International Relations) 3 years ago from the best school in my latin american country with a pretty mediocre GPA but I did great with my thesis. I wrote about censorship to art during war times in my country and won a national award for it and it was published.
After graduation, these 3 years I have worked for a non-profit in a good position with a lot of fieldwork involving working with poverty, community development and education. I have been coordinator of several teams of volunteers in my country and travelled around a lot doing this and started getting in touch with high-level politics related to volunteering and social service.
I've been doing great but I really want to study more. I want to do something related to what I did in my thesis (cultural studies - latin american cultural studies) but also keep working with non-profits fighting poverty and "making a difference" for my people (development? international relations?)
The only way I could go to gradschool (even in my own country) is a scholarship or a fellowship. I work 10 hours a day here to barely make my living so i can't work less and study here, so i thought of looking for gradschools in the States or Europe with funding available. Not even partial funding is an option, i need full tuitions and stipend, so I've been reading everywhere and found that only in PhDs I could get that but I don't think I could gain admission to one without a master's degree or with a low GPA (or could I?). Are there any fully-funded Masters available? Would an american school value my experience and thesis or my low GPA would destroy all my chances? Should i get really good GRE scores?
Forgot to mention, i'm 23, finished high school at 15 and college at 20 (very uncommon around here). Thanks in advance for all your time!!
d
I can't think of any full-funded Master's programs off the top of my head, but Princeton's public affairs program makes a commitment to ensure that the people they accept can afford to go. So, in effect, they would make sure to fund you if you can't fund yourself. Princeton is the only place that has this expressed policy, but lots of other schools may help you once they see your application and like you enough. You are also at an advantage as an international student. Because you can't take out federal student loans to pay for admission, many programs will subsidize your education (with a tuition waiver and stipend, sometimes) to ensure you can apply. I would just find programs that interest you best and contact them to tell them your situation, apply, and see what happens.
Best of luck.
-
I know there's been a lot of talk about the top schools (SIPA, Maxwell, Harris, etc,) but I was wondering if anybody could comment on MPP / MPA programs at some of the lesser known programs at reputable schools.
Hi there,
This is my understanding: Cornell is an up and coming program that compares very favorably to the 'top' schools. It has less of an alum base but it's supposed to be rigorous and robust. Brown's Taubman Center is best thought of as a boutique program. A friend of mine went there and really enjoyed it but said that he was a little put off by the fact that the Center was virtually unrecognized not only nationally or regionally, but even at the school itself. But he enjoyed the professors and environment. Can't speak for Northwestern but I would expect it's probably geared entirely for part-timers, run on a shoestring, and taught by adjuncts. That's not necessarily a bad thing - I am sure you could get a perfectly good education there - but continuing studies programs tend to be done for a profit or at least to break even. The fact that you can also get the degree 100% online only supports my suspicions, and I don't think you could expect to have much of a student life over there except through other university offerings. It's definitely not the best public affairs program in the Chicago area (Harris wins, hands down), and almost certainly not #2, either (UIC and DePaul's programs are both older and more strongly funded). But Northwestern itself does have a good brand.
If you're looking for other strong boutique programs with good regional reputations, I would definitely check out Fels Institute at UPenn, the College of William and Mary's MPP, and UNC-CH, to name a few of the best (that I know of).
Good luck!
Michael
-
I think balderdash gives a good explanation, but I'll throw my 2 cents in too, for whatever its worth.
- Economics and Development?
Economics deals with trade, modeling, and circumstance. Generally, international economics is not necessarily application-based, but attempts to explore economic phenomena and propose explanations for how and why things occur. Development is obviously more application-oriented. There is development economics, which uses the tools of modeling and econometrics to assist in formulating policy, and there is economic development, which is the practice of applying policies, financial instruments, and management tools to stimulating development. Of these, the latter is the most 'practical' (I'm not using this as a value judgment), and the first is the most theoretical.
One needn't study international economics with the intention to assist in development, and being involved with economic development doesn't always imply that you have any clue about mathematical macroeconomics.
- Diplomacy/Strategic studies and Security/Military stuff?
These are sometimes conflated with one another because of how close they are (other cousins are 'peace' and 'conflict' studies or conflict resolution). Diplomacy tends to imply the strategies and tendencies of engagement and discourse. The art of diplomacy, though it may include the threat or use of war, is by no means a qualification of military knowledge. Studying diplomacy is about interstate interaction, cooperation, and (to a lesser degree) competition. Some programs include modules on leadership and management as well to equip diplomats and would-be diplomats with the skills to take leadership roles in diplomatic positions.
Strategic studies is closer to diplomacy, but tends to focus on the competition between states rather than their interaction. However, again, this doesn't mean that warfare or military affairs is the entire curriculum. Strategic studies is about great power competition (whether the program focuses on one country or global trends depends on the program), which can involve military power, energy power (a biggie), water rights, exclusive economic zones, economic power, etc.
Security studies is a lot like strategic studies except that the focus is more explicitly on balance of power issues and the use (and non-use) of military forces. America's recent wars have introduced a great deal of coursework in recent years on homeland security, counter terrorism, and nation building, but most programs will stay true to traditional power alignments and the various uses of military force (including non-kinetic operations).
- Communication and Journalism/media?
While they can mean the same thing, international communications usually is geared more toward public relations and public affairs. That is, everything from international advertising to various kinds of lobbying.
Journalism/media is more on actual reporting and media coverage.
---
I hope this helps somewhat. I'd caution against taking this at face value since a lot of programs don't always delineate their programs so sharply, and you will find pieces of other disciplines in all of these. Still, I think this should help you get a clearer picture on what you're getting into.
-
Okay, brief background: I have a BFA in Theatre Management. I did 4 internships in arts/cultural organizations in college and then worked in fundraising for two years at a museum. I just started a new fundraising position at a human service agency, and I'm loving it. In undergrad, I did a philosophy minor and was a course away from a public policy minor; my senior year I developed a very strong interest in social and educational policy. By the time I will start school in fall 2011, I will have 3 years of work experience (though with my internships I've been told it's more like 4 or 5).
So, now I'm looking at graduate programs on the public policy side of things. My ultimate goal would be to work more on the programmatic side of a nonprofit or advocacy organization, or even in government, but not necessarily doing direct service. I'm thinking more policy analysis and evaluation. My interests are educational and social policy.
Here are the programs I'm looking at now:
- DePaul Master's of Public Service Management
- Loyola Chicago MA in Urban Affairs
- UIC MPA
- Northwestern MA in Public Policy & Management
Here are the questions:
1) As you can see, I'm in Chicago and I'd prefer to be doing part-time so I can stick around at this job for awhile. But I'd also take recommendations for great full-time and/or out-of-state programs. Anyone?
2) Anyone have a similar career goal, and if so, what degree did you go for?
3) Are these degrees too different from each other, i.e. will my recommenders have no clue what to be recommending me for?
Let me ask you a question: you want a great public policy program? You should really look into UChicago's Harris School, which some might argue is the best in the country. Now, that's by no means a consensus, but no one will dispute that it's a top-notch program in a terrific academic environment. And if you want policy analysis, well, you probably can't find anyplace better.
If policy analysis is your goal, I would jettison the urban affairs stuff. It's cool, but it tends to be a much narrower brand of policy analysis (if at all) and injects a lot more humanities-type of stuff. Not to pooh-pooh it, because there are some very find programs, but it doesn't seem to match well with what you're aiming for.
Another thought - if you're looking at part time, you should really consider Notre Dame's Master of Nonprofit Management at their biz school. Their business school is quite highly regarded at an elite, beautiful campus and is designed specifically for part timers. If I recall, their program is distance-based during the academic schoolyear with on-campus classes during the summers. It's not pure policy analysis - and is more organizational management - but I could see it opening a lot of doors.
Hope this helps!
-
Hey, what about Sipa?
I noticed that an increasing number of people tend to mark it out of their wishes/rankings. Any ideas why?
Just as an aside - I think people might not be considering SIPA as much because of their reputation (fairly or not) for being a very large program that gives little aid. I never considered it for my master's just because moving to NY wasn't feasible at the time and I didn't want to jump in the deep end of international policy stuff. Like I said before - that stuff is interesting to me, but there seems to be a particular abundance of unemployed or underemployed people carrying international development graduate degrees, including from top schools.
Of course, for all I know, every SIPA student gets a six figure job before graduation, a personal tutor, and a tuition waiver. But the perceptions are there, nonetheless.
-
Hey, what about Sipa?
I noticed that an increasing number of people tend to mark it out of their wishes/rankings. Any ideas why?
Well, I actually didn't include several good options - Duke, NYU, LBJ, Pitt-GSPIA, Indiana, Berkeley, Maxwell - all of which I would definitely consider going to (particularly Duke, as I like the South). But this was a preliminary sort of thing and I plan to refine the methodology soon so I'll put together a more objective and more exhaustive ranking of public policy PhD programs.
SIPA, unfortunately, only has a PhD program in Sustainable Development or somesuch. Their program is also more exclusively foreign policy-oriented, which is very interesting to me (I work overseas), but I am more focused on deepening my policy analysis skills and getting into innovative policy development. That said, if they did have a public policy PhD (last I checked, they didn't), I'd certainly be interested to take a look.
-
I did a little ranking exercise for myself recently and I thought I would share my 'methodology' and results with everyone here, as I think it may prove to be useful to others who are having some trouble choosing a best fit program for themselves.
I took the top 8 schools that I have been considering (for PhD someday, maybe) and put them into a matrix and marked each school on a point basis with various criteria that I felt were important.
Here's my 'data':
As you can see, I took each category and rated it on a 1-5 scale (5 being best). It's a cumbersome measure, and extremely subjective (and not always well informed, I'll admit), but it has at least helped me get a better picture of what I'm looking for. Just to clarify, the categories are (in order): Rigor - qualitative but especially quantitative rigor; livability - as I see it, based on climate, urban area, etc; career - how much will that program help me get a good job that I like; fam/fri - do I have friends or family nearby?; admission - how likely am I to get in, relatively speaking? (higher is better); prestige - in relative terms, how prestigious are each school's programs?
Taking the quantum for each school, the results were surprising:
1. Sanford (24)
---Heinz (24)
3. Harris (23)
---UMD-CP (23)
5. UNC (22)
---WWS (22)
7. Rand (21)
---KSG (21)
I arranged the rankings according to their score and, in the case of ties, according to whichever one I had a better 'feeling' about.
What I really liked about this exercise was that I had begun thinking that my 'first' choices were the usual: KSG, WWS, and Harris. The others were programs that I had seen as good (ok, VERY good) alternatives. But now, I'm actually really thinking that Duke or CMU may be much better options (assuming they don't laugh at my yet-to-be submitted application) than a place like Harvard, even if I could get in. I was surprised at how low Rand ranked on this list, because I was recently starting to see it as one of my preferred choices, but I'm reassessing that right now.
A few qualifiers. Obviously, this is not much more than a back-of-the-envelope methodology (which means it's only slightly better than US News, haha!) and there are many problems. First, as I noted, it's very subjective. I have scored schools here in ways that many others may disagree with (many people, for example, would much rather be in Boston than the Triad region). Also, and I think more importantly, there are areas which I think are more important than others. I'm thinking about updating my methodology to include: 1) more specific categories, like quantitative rigor vs qualitative rigor, climate, key faculty, and maybe a cross tabulation with the US News rankings (for the hell of it); and 2) to weight categories - I think I might make some categories a 0-10 range while keeping others 0-5, etc.
Obviously, this is hardly perfect, but I think it's a neat way for anyone trying to rationally categorize their preferences and sort out their decisions to possibly clarify things a bit. You shouldn't use it as your guiding star, but I think it can help.
Welcome any thoughts, ideas, and feedback.
-
As someone who kind of cherry picked his program to tread the line between prestige and affordability, I'd have to go with ... no. I agree with the above. I'd contend that there is functionally little difference in quality between most programs (not to say that there isn't one, but it's an issue of marginal value) and the greatest issue is one of name recognition/access to opportunities. If you're happy where you are - absolutely not. One should try to go for as little debt as possible anyway (as a general, but moderately bendable rule), and even more so for you. Best o' luck.
- dant.gwyrdd and Jae B.
-
2
-
Seeing how there's a strong interest among these organizations' members in MPP/MPA/IR I'm interested in how adcoms really view RPCVs and AmeriCorps/TFA alum. I'd appreciate any insight from alumni, non-alumni and people who've sat on committees. Do alumni have a distinct advantage in the admission process and in graduate studies in general?
Answer is yes, although they are all assessed differently. Although schools that give credit, $$, or other perks for one of these are likely to also give for the other two, schools tend to have a particular focus on one of these. TFA IS more selective - in a sense - but TFA people aren't as much in demand in a place like Kobel or Evans, which vastly prefer RPCVs. On the other hand, programs like at Indiana and Fels often prefer TFA people because they're programs are a little more domestic oriented. This is not a clear cut list with solid columns, but its worth going by. That said, by the way, I do not know Americorps people who have done especially well in their grad school applications. Except, of course, people whom you'd expect to do well anyway.. However unfair, the impression I have gotten is that Americorps is kind of a poor man's Peace Corps. This is obviously not a nice thing to say, considering that there are some very smart, good people in Americorps, but I think it is justifiable to say that your average Peace Corps Volunteer is noticeably more impressive. Then again, it might be a self selection thing.
Are you thinking about serving?
-
Hi all,
I am admitted to both Harvard KSG PhD in Public Policy and Wharton PhD in Applied Economics. How do your compare these two programs? I don't know which one to accept.
My research interest is industrial policy. I am currently a master student at the Kennedy School. Harvard PhD will be a bit shorter since I took several core requirements of PhD program.
Your advices will be greatly appreciated.
Although KSG is obviously 'more' of a pub policy place than Wharton, I'd say that you have already assembled your policy bona fides while at Harvard. Also, the business and public policy program at Wharton is top notch and, to be honest, the name can't be beaten for applied economics. I'd say you'll have more doors open to you if you match your Harvard credentials to a Wharton education. Plus, it's always nice to go to two different places for your masters and PhD.
Good luck! Do you mind sharing your stats with me? I've thought about these programs before myself.
-
Hello this is my first post on the board. I would your input on my chances of admissions to programs that are frequently discussed on the board. Hopefully you can offer some advice and thoughts of my chances of admissions to Public Policy/Administration PhD Programs. Thank you!
Program Applying To: Public Policy/Administration PhD – Health Care, Aging, Disaster/Emergency Policy
Schools Thinking of Applying To:
University of Washington - Seattle
University of Texas at Austin
Duke University
University of North Carolina
North Carolina State University
Arizona State University
University of Arizona
University of Colorado at Denver
University of Georgia
Undergraduate institution: Top 20 Public University
Undergraduate GPA: 3.2
Last 60 hours of Undergraduate GPA (if applicable): 3.8
Undergraduate Major: Psychology/Communications
Graduate institution: Top 10 School of Public Health
GPA: 3.4 – worked full time
Degree: Masters of Public Health – Health Policy
GRE Quantitative Score: 720
GRE Verbal Score: 680
GRE AW Score: 5.5
*Scores older than 5 years; need to retake
Years Out of Undergrad (if applicable): 8
Years of Work Experience: 8
Describe Relevant Work Experience: Entire work experience has been with two Universities either in Schools of Medicine or Public Health. I have managed pediatric clinics, large graduate medical education training programs and large research programs focused on health services research and policy.
Strength of LOR's: Will have strong LORs from prominent professors and researchers with whom I have taken class with and worked with
Please offer any thoughts or suggestions. Thanks!
Hi There.
I think you have a pretty fair shot at any of those school. I'd say Duke is by far the most challenging, but it's definitely worth a try. The only caveat I'd note is that you don't seem to have a lot of direct research experience yourself. You said you helped managed research programs, but did you contribute to any research or take part in any writing or analyses? That kind of stuff will be very useful for padding your application and demonstrating not only your capacity, but your interest in conducting quality research, which is extremely important to a PhD.
Still, I'd say that you certainly have a decent shot. Good luck!
-
All, First post on the board. Appreciate this as a resource as I conduct my grad school search. I’m seeking your input on my admissibility tovarious programs that are frequently discussed on the board. I recognize that you’re not the admissions committee(s); however, perhaps you can lend me some perspective on my MPP prospects. First, some background:
- Undergrad: Graduated from the University of Washington’s Jackson School of International Studies with a degree in International Studies (2006)
- Work experience: Since 2004 (started 1.5 years before I graduated), I’ve worked at a policy consulting firm, working my way up to one of the lead analysts. My job is fantastic, takes me all around the world, and permits me to engage in substantive international policy issues. However, the job is no longer the challenge it once was, I feel a deep desire to learn again, and I would also liketo upgrade my skill set and resume with an MPP. I believe this counts as strong work experience in an area directly related to an MPP. Also, all of the colleagues that I work with have Masters or PhDs.
- LOR: Very strong LOR from professors that I continue to keep in touch with as mentors (one of which thanked me for my research assistance in abook recently published by Stanford – not trying to be a jerk by mentioning this, just trying to provide some perspective on the quality of the reference), as well as LORs from the Chairman of my firm, senior leadership of high profile trade lobbies in DC, and, if needed, policy specialists I work with in various federal agencies. Also, many of the letters of reference would come from Gtown and JHU grads.
- GPA: Horrific. I had my fair share of struggles in undergrad (mostly medical), but the bottom line is that my cumulative GPA is 2.65. For perspective, the last four quarters came in at 3.645, so I can show some significant improvement relative to earlier years. Also, some of my best grades toward the end came from graduate-level courses.
- GRE: Unknown. Going to take it later this year.
In terms of schools, I am targeting MPP programs at GPPI, GWU, American, Sanford, GPPI, JHU, UMD, and any other decent MPP program. I'm focusing on staying in the DC area.
So, can you all please provide me with some perspective? Am I hosed based on GPA, or will my nearly 6 years of policy-specific work experience, plus very strong LORs carry the day? From my perspective, I would hope that admissions committees would take the “proof is in the pudding” approach seeing as I have multiple years of working at a level where many MPP grads would start after they graduate. However, I do get thrown by many of the “You need a minimum 3.0 undergrad GPA”-type statements one frequently sees on admission FAQs.
Many thanks in advance for your input. Please let me know if there are any other details I can furnish to paint a more complete picture.
Assuming you do well on your GREs - like at least the 1300/5.0 area - I think you are not absolutely disqualified from those programs. That said, I wouldn't absolutely count on getting into any of them. If I were you, I'd drop Sanford (not in the DC area), and add a couple of regional safety schools with quality programs like GMU, UMBC, and maybe VCU (in Richmond). While those three schools don't have the same name pull (although GMU has the most of the three) as a GWU or a Georgetown, they're all supposed to be relatively high quality with decent career pipelines. It might be a reach and a little out of the area, but the College of William and Mary also has a new but very well respected, and DC-oriented, MPP program as well. And the W&M name is very strong on the East Coast.
This isn't to say that you WON'T get into your choice schools, but don't kill yourself if you don't and make contingency plans.
-
In addition to what has been mentioned, you may want to check out the Heinz school at Carnegie Mellon.
UGA, Fels (Upenn), and Albany
-
i am a senior at college and have been accepted to my top choice for mpp program . however, i realized that it may be better for me to take a few years off school to work and find out what i really want.
but i have already accepted the offer of admission. can i tell them i don't want to attend anymore? what if i apply after a few years to the same program, would they still take me in? i can only imagine my profile improving with a few years of relevant work experience. what about my letter writers? will they still be willing to write the letters for me? they helped me get into a whole bunch of schools and now i telling them i am not going to attend grad school....
Cappa - lots of good points being made but if you don't feel ready to go to grad school then don't go. It's not unethical and you certainly shouldn't go just because a perfect job isn't waiting for you right now. Admission committees will not look on it unfavorably later - they'll either be indifferent to it or, in some cases, impressed by your discipline of turning down a good school to go get some work experience.
Like others have said, there's nothing inherently wrong with going to graduate school without work experience (obviously, since you just got into your top choice), but a lot of people (like myself) find it instructive to have been in the 'real world' before going to graduate school as it can have a major effect on what you decide you really want to do. The MPP is a fortunately versatile degree (though not as versatile as some), but you may find that in the next few years that you actually want to go into neuroscience or business or physics - who knows?
And being unemployed can be just as instructive as being employed. As many people with social science undergrad degrees have discovered, specialization and specific skillsets are crucial to getting work, especially in today's economy. Many people who might have gone on to getting IR or pub policy degrees have turned to public health or economics - or some other growth industry - because of their time in the job market (or not).
What I'm trying to say is that if you don't feel like you're ready to jump into graduate school, it's ridiculous for anyone to tell you that you're wrong. Go when you're ready - you'll do better and you'll be better set up for employment because you'll be closer to knowing (most likely) where to focus your interests and career path. Feel free to PM me if you want to chat more.
-
I was accepted to University of Pittsburgh GSPIA for the MID program and University of Denver's MID program through the Josef School of International Studies and the CGA at NYU for a MS in Global Affairs.
I've gathered some information about Pitt; however I am having a hard time comparing the programs. Anyone have any insight on Denver/ NYU specifically. I'm worried because I can't find more concrete data on their rankings because of the inter-disciplinary nature etc, that I won't be able to gauge how scholastically rigorous each program is. But if anyone has info on UPitt I'd love to hear that too, especially if you attending the Preview in April.
Thanks in advance
I think, for all intents and purposes, Korbel and GSPIA can be considered peer institutions. They are both considered high-quality, if somewhat more 'blue-collar' than the Gtown-SAIS-Elliott axis, and share a DC campus with Maxwell. They both have produced some very notable alumni, but many others have graduated and been forced to find work elsewhere; from what I understand, trying to break into the IR industry without the biggest brands can be pretty difficult. Still, they both maintain rich alumni networks around the world.
I'll say this for GSPIA, though - I've been told that there's a fair amount of cross pollination between GSPIA and Heinz, which is something you just cannot find at Denver. Carnegie Mellon's Heinz school, while a bit lighter on the IR and development stuff, is unparalleled when it comes to things like policy analysis and innovation labs, etc. It's also, as far as a friend there has told me, really a great place to get recruited. If you can take advantage of this proximity - whether by cross-registering, attending events, or even just mingling with Heinz folks - I think you'll find there's a very real value add. If you're particularly entrepreneurial, I am sure you could build some kind of joint organization (if one doesn't already exist) with the Heinz folks.
Also, Pittsburgh is really a special little city. It's really a cool place and, from someone who is more used to East Coast attitudes, the people are shockingly nice and helpful. It's also a pretty town, though cold, with some architectural gems. Many cool neighborhoods and spots to explore. It's also a ridiculously cheap place to live because of the massive housing surplus, owed to the rust belt phenomenon in the 80s-90s. However, the city is a textbook case of decline 'done right,' and the city is considered a success story in transitioning from a steel town to a wired, idea city.
Denver really loves touting their Foreign Policy Magazine ranking, but my impression is that it hasn't translated into a massive recruiting effort at Korbel itself by international development contractors, think tanks, and international NGOs - those are still reserved for KSG-WWS-SIPA-SAIS-Gtown-Elliott and, in a different kind of way, Yale-Harris-Stanford. Not to say that they don't have great placement - I'm sure it happens - but I don't think there's a career pipeline from Korbel (or GSPIA, for that matter) to the Eurasia Group or Economist Intelligence Unit, etc.
NYU's program ... I don't know. I'm sure you'll get a perfectly good education there, but the SCPS thing tends to dissuade recruiters from even knocking. Plus, you can be sure of going deeply into debt, as I heard the school is a for-profit arm of NYU. That said, your professors may be day-to-day practitioners, which could theoretically help you land a good job, but I haven't heard anything (anecdotal or otherwise) to confirm that.
I hope this helps somewhat! Good luck! If I were in your shoes, however, I'd choose GSPIA.
-
Congrats!
This one, unlike many others, is a no-brainer if you're serious about getting a PhD and doing research. CMU. Among those whose opinion will matter, CMU will actually give you more credibility. To distant relatives and old acquaintances from High School, yes, Yale will mean more, but that really shouldn't matter. It's like passing up a PhD from Chicago for a MPS degree from Cornell.
-
Congrats DCApplicant... glad you have made your decision. i'm still undecided between CIPA and JHU IPS, i'm leaning more toward CIPA because it has the cornell brand name and its a more flexible program... but i've heard the research opportunities at JHU are better and easier to procur while they are almost non existant for masters students at CIPA... i really need to make the call soon.
Yeah ... career-wise, I'd go with JHU. And it's still a terrific brand.
MPA: Maxwell (Syracuse) v. Fels (UPenn)
in Decisions, Decisions
Posted
Strongly disagree with the above. The only people who pay any mind to the USNWR rankings tend to be the students of the "top ten." Outside of this narrow group, no one really cares, because most know that rankings are 1) silly anyway and 2) particularly so for public affairs, which don't even pretend to be quantitatively derived.
Here's an analogue: if you had a public affairs grad from Indiana or SUNY Albany VS. a student from Brown, is the Brown student going to be tossed into the 'no' pile because it's not 'ranked' as well as USNWR? That's ludicrous. From what I hear, Fels isn't easy to get into and has a pretty rigorous curriculum - plus is very generous about cross registrations w/ Wharton/Law/Design. It's probably not the best place to go if you hope to go into IR or something (though not sure Maxwell really is, either), but the Penn name/alum network will carry far.