MD guy

Fels is intensely domestic, very Northeastern-oriented. Some would say if you don't plan on pursuing jobs in the Northeast to stay away. Very different from the internationally oriented Lauder.

I always assume double-spaced for anything application related. Nobody wants to read single-spaced printed text imo

I see, thank you! So here I am again hoping/praying that my MD will be the strongest bait for good money. I'm not going to add to my med school debt load for some public service degree lol. Woody Woo it is!

If the amount of debt you have to take on exceeds the average salary you'll get coming out of school, turn it down. I have a huge number of friends in the env space and they'll all tell you that there is no rush for a graduate degree. Especially if you can't get into one of the big 4 env schools, it's a no-brainer to turn it down imo

How hard is it to get and how rare are full or near full scholarships with or without guaranteed teaching requirements? Talking about MPP

It's about QS. Fletcher is a solid school. Tufts just doesn't have the goodies that the other host universities have (name of Harvard, Gtown, Columbia, etc.) But Fletcher is known

When do you want to go to school? 2017 or 2018? If you are okay with going to school next year, apply int'l now. If you actually only want to start school in 2018, wait. If you'd only be willing to start school earlier if you get into the top int'l programs, apply now. You're overthinking this a little I think.

Don't think you'll have a problem as long as your SOP is coherent and exudes maturity, as well as strong LORs. Straight through people are expected to have top marks which you obviously do, so the biggest hurdle is done I would say.

Yes I can. One cannot say that since the JD is so prominent in people holding these positions, the JD must have some intrinsic advantage over other degrees. That is inaccurate in our current state of affairs. In a past generation, when those people went to school, there were not established MPP/MPA or MA programs they could go to. Interested generally in policy? JD it was. Interested in running for office? JD it was. Now? There is no reason to advise someone who has no interest in being a lawyer to go for the JD with the plethora of other options. It is a monumental opportunity cost that could be much better spent elsewhere. Also, the JD is not a versatile degree. Ask anyone on TLS forums (top-law-schools) this and they will say it is the first myth one should get out one's head. It is a trade degree and pigeonholes you into practicing law and teaches you nothing but how to practice law, save for a couple of the top schools that actually incorporate real policy work into the curriculum. We see a lot of prominent folks with the JD strutting around because 1) of the past education market as mentioned and 2) the literal act of practicing law blows a lot of balls and many people don't realize this until their first job as an attorney, so they leave. What does it say about a degree where so many of its graduates want nothing to do with their professional trade and decide to leave? That's certainly more of a wake-up call about the practice of law than it is an endorsement of the JD being versatile. With the Masters market as populated as it is currently, many "JD advantage" jobs are preferentially given to people who don't command as much salary as JDs typically do. Are there employers who get wet upon seeing the stacked resume of a T6 JD? Yes, there are. Do you want to bank your future on being one of those rock stars to break into government? No, you don't. You don't want to be the guy with dreams of public service that ends up in a 50 lawyer corporate shop after graduation in order to pay off the debt and hate your job of practicing law. It happens all day every day. You want a low cost degree that will get your foot out the door of education and into the door of employment ASAP. If you do not want to practice law, do not get a JD. If you think you may want to practice law first before jumping to whatever job it is you truly want, make damn sure you know what practicing law is like before you make the commitment. Unless your family is rich and can pay it all for you anyway, then this is all hogwash and you should do whatever your trust fund allows you to.

Taking out loans to fully finance any public service degree is a bad idea for anyone. If you don't get any money this year, try the next. Grad school's not going anywhere

At the very least people generally won't doubt your quant skills. Not that all finance people are great at it, but it seems like you would be.

IME you don't become a specialist in school. You pick up the skills every generalist needs and get some specialized knowledge in order to move into a highly specialized job to further hone your concentration. I wouldn't be concerned about a school's specialty in a country at this stage quite so fervently.

You're concerned that Fels won't be applicable if you want to go into public service? The entire curriculum is built for people who want to go into public service. Which of the core classes don't you think would be helpful for you?

Everybody checks the funding consideration box. You're looking for an explanation of something mysterious and ultimately non consequential.

Also, every single U.S. citizen can pay for the entire program themselves. It's called guaranteed federal loans. "Cash cow" programs are those that are widely known to not give out any aid precisely because there is little excuse for anyone to say they cannot afford it; the answer is to go into debt. It's not necessarily that they're making estimations as to who will pay the cost and who will not. They just don't give out aid and you can either suck it up or go for the degree. Plenty of people prefer the degree.

How would they know? They would just be guessing based on demographics, which make for pretty inaccurate guesstimations. Financial aid is often completely separated from the admissions offices.

Just do well and you'll be fine. Plenty of people do online courses and they turn out just fine

Yup you should, get a good grade!

Hard to say whether/which programs would be willing to cut him some slack. Stanford IPS doesn't look too bright though, IIRC work experience is highly valued there and it's a tiny tiny class. The answer for him is quite simple, though...contact the admissions offices and ask them how they see someone in his situation since it's too unique for many on GradCafe to be of too much help. The bigger the school, the more likely they'd let someone like him in. So Chicago is good, UCB is a little small but idk, UCs do like their own. Georgetown might be good too and there's always HKS as the esteemed diploma milll where anyone with strong grades has a chance.

Putting in the time to get better in this dept is better than settling for programs just bc of your quant background. Much better dividends in the long run.

If you want to do policy research whether in gov't/NGO or think tank, you need the appropriate degree (MPA/MPP here, MSc in UK). That is the baseline qualification for full-time research associates in these organizations, at least in the US. No idea about the UK. You will not be "aimless" because you'd be pursuing a professional degree with a professional goal in mind. That is good! A research MSc from LSE will translate well in the US. Everybody who knows anything about anything will know about LSE. However, there are better options in the US if you're 1000% sure about social policy studies. I studied abroad at LSE and it's basically an economics/accounting school with other departments attached. The upside of the research MSc is that you will actually learn research...most MPA/MPP programs in the US are not so intent on teaching methods. Either option works wonderfully! (Hint: come back to the US! It's better here. The extra year of school is fun :P) Or go to LSE and take your research seriously, pick a relevant topic that's not stuck up some ivory tower ass because employers like that touch to policy-oriented research, which sounds like is what you're after anyway.

Harvard MPA/ID. All they do is feed World Bank/IMF

I know an IWP grad who works at State. IIRC they have strong ties to the DC intelligence and security sectors, but much less so elsewhere in the U.S. and abroad than Gtown or SAIS. The faculty is all "adjunct" in the sense that they're practitioners who teach part-time. I don't believe it has many connections to the private sector. For that purpose, definitely the better the name the better. It's a small place, consider reaching out to the school and ask them for a couple of alumni contacts so you can get a better idea from the source. One odd thing to note – the school has a not-so-subtle ideological focus on being militarist/hawkish in a neoconservative fashion.

This is an easy one. Go to Yale and don't look back. Your conclusion that Yale and UCSD cost the same is incorrect; UCSD has an additional year of opportunity cost of being away from work, so you need to take the lost income into account as well. With the 1) brand name program that matters a huge ton overseas, 2) legit econ dept, and 3) less opportunity cost, go to Yale. Edit: this is from March...OP likely already made a choice. Hope it was Yale

Both of these sound like good options. I wouldn't worry about being too early for contacting professors