makingtheleap.back

HKS, Chicago, Georgetown, Duke. I'm heading to Duke in the Fall and started a domestic policy thread in the Government Affairs forum. Come and join the domestic policy wonkdom!

Agreed, but I'd hesitate to say the politics of fear have been monopolized by a single party or political faction. The various government innovation programs, especially the ones focusing on applications of behavioral economics, seem very interesting, but I doubt I'll pick one of the pre-packaged concentrations. There are two overarching policy questions I'm interested in: 1) How can we democratize economic power? (Sub-problems include the oligopolization/monopolization of a variety of sectors, the decline in entrepreneurship, impact of automation, AI etc.) 2) How can we make government more effective at a lower cost? (Given the impact of long-term debt on budgeting, we are eventually going to have to refashion government for the 21st century, designing a system that embeds information connectivity into its DNA as opposed to building an interagency task force on top of the existing architecture. What does that look like? How do we do more with less?). Eventually I'll settle on some hyper-specific topic to dive into (I have a few contenders in mind), but for now, those are the big-picture issues I care about.

Yeah, the logic of reducing money's role in politics as a necessary first step towards solving broader concerns has always made sense to me, but on some level I think the broader challenge, especially with the environment, is attempting to effect policies with concentrated losses and distributed gains. Any policy solution with very clear losers and vague winners will be difficult to advance in the American political system. Interestingly, the problems of mass incarceration, poverty, and unnecessary war have concentrated costs (among minority and military communities, predominantly, the latter being limited to an increasingly small, Southern and Midwestern profile), but the challenges are faced among groups disenfranchised by the money-in-politics system. Is there a cause and effect here? I don't know; it seems to me that policy solutions in these categories have received sufficient attention, but are consistently framed in ways that are susceptible to fear-based efforts -- Willie Horton in the first Bush campaign, "class warfare" and a zero-sum economy where someone winning necessarily means someone else losing, the War in Iraq and WMDs come to mind. Still, taking money out of politics can only help advance progressive-populist causes.

@av122 My instinct is an Econ course would be more for your own skill-building, development, and would not have a significant impact on your application profile. And yes, getting to that Top 25% on quant would definitely help, particularly with SIPA.

Hey @av122. You have a pretty competitive profile for both schools, but here are a few of my thoughts: 1. Use your private sector experience to make up for the spotty quant background. Data analysis and operations experience in the private sector are going to be very valuable in your program and career thereafter. Regardless of the reasons you chose the job, it can be a big positive now if you emphasize those skills and integrate them into your broader resume/sop. 2. Spend a lot of time on your sop. Your grades are above the threshold for raising eyebrows and your gre is pretty average (for the schools you're interested in). Your recs are solid but not amazing. Your sop will determine whether you are memorable to the adcomms. If you are having trouble, try to return to your purpose. Why grad school? Why is school x a perfect fit for what I want to accomplish during and after my program? 3. Your GRE quant won't kill you, but if you scored better in practice, it might be worth thinking through exam strategies, doing 2 test-condition practice runs, and going for it again, with the pressure off. You don't have to do better, but a 161-163 would do wonders for your profile.

The state policies are already starting to get creative (thinking about Nevada's Medicaid for all reform, California's single payer legislation on healthcare, among others). I think NC is taking a look at their gerrymandering issue right now, and there's a concurrent class on the topic at Sanford. What got you interested in those topics?

Cafe-ers, cafites, and connoisseurs of quality conversation! Thought it might be interesting to create a space for folks interested in pursuing domestic policy jobs/research, particularly given the general conversation here in Government Affairs tends to lean IR. Come, introduce yourself, explore specific policy interests, what you're doing/looking forward to/worried about, or predict where you feel the field is headed under the Trump administration and beyond... For me, I'll be starting my MPP program at Duke in the fall, believe the United States is due for a serious re-tooling of government's organizational structure to reflect the third-industrial-revolution economy, and think state government and action-oriented think tanks are where most innovation will take place in the next decade-plus. What about you?

Hey, just went through the process in 2016-2017, and as someone who was also concerned with my lack of "traditional" policy/public service work, here's what I found: Certain programs will not ring true to you. You're a relatively unique candidate, which means you won't gel with every program. Contacting the admissions director is fine, I did it for two schools, Georgetown and Berkeley. Ended up only applying to the former, but was accepted with some funding, so I can't think the visit hurt. That said, in-person visits at the universities are infinitely more helpful than the simple phone call. On a related note, don't feel the need to apply to 8 schools. Certain schools provide funding, others do not. If funding is a concern, make sure you apply to at least 2-3 within the funding pot, but remember: these programs aren't law schools. They aren't nearly that competitive. Find a place you feel a good fit. When you find that fit, write the hell out of your Statement of Purpose. I spent close to three months drafting and redrafting, which was helpful because it 1) Gave me a much clearer idea of what I wanted to achieve in/after graduate school 2) Allowed me to create completely different essays tailored to the few schools to which I applied. This will also give you the chance to address your career shift. At the end of the day, you're going to be fine. If you're really worried about your GPA, apply to one or two extra schools to increase variance, but I would feel confident in the position you're in.

I'm pretty familiar with his ideas, but never read his texts. Looking in particular for public-choice readings. Any recommendations?

Define success through the lens of various criteria, develop metrics of success for those criteria, and a plan to achieve those metrics.

I completely agree with asking for help or assistance, but I think at the end of the day the Statement of Purpose is yours -- and personal. The most important questions, in my mind, are audience and purpose (does it connect with the intended people with the intended message). But yeah, all advice is coming from somewhere. Even if you don't agree with the comment, there's probably something going on with the section.

I'm going Sanford yonder. An exciting end to a long process.

Was that an intentional Python joke?

Writing the Statement of Purpose is hard. It's supposed to be. It is a synthesis of years of experience and intellectual development, but, depending on your program, it is also a very purpose-driven document. It forces you to think clearly about why you want to take this next step, and how best to communicate that vision to different stakeholders. The Masters of Public Policy was my program of choice, and I can't think of better preparation. Before the process I considered myself a strong writer; my personal Bible is Strunk and White, and my work has performed well in the professional contexts it has been tested. Still, the Statement of Purpose is hard. So, I thought I might offer a few pieces of advice. They may not be helpful, but they're what I wish someone would have told me. Disclaimer: I realize the hard sciences and research-driven SOPs have specific research requirements. While my SOP didn't require that, I'd venture to guess the creative processes are still similar. 1. If you feel like your first drafts are "perfect", you're doing it wrong. It's relatively easy to string together a narrative and slapdash a philosophy into a few relatively coherent paragraphs (or pages, as the prompt may be). You're applying to graduate school. Everyone can do that. Play with structure, from narrative to thesis driven, always understanding writing as the aligning of audience and purpose. Figure out what works best for you and why it works best. What are the weaknesses you are compensating for, the strengths you are accentuating, and how can you do that with a "show" rather than "tell" execution? How can you set a tone? How can you be different while still being you? These are the questions behind the white page and blinking cursor, and by answering them through writing exercises or more "informal" writing sessions (I prefer pen and paper), you can begin to create a fully functioning draft. 2. Give yourself time to sit on a "fully functioning" draft for two weeks before doing anything with it. I'm terrible with time management, so the first school I applied to also happened to have the most worked-over, crafted SOP. By being able to shelve it and come back with fresh eyes, I could do a re-write as opposed to a revise, emphasizing certain parts and cutting others. Once I felt comfortable with this document, I started sharing it among my network of LOR writers, peers I admire, etc., which leads me to... 3. Listen to all of your advice, but also none of it. Everyone who has a note is pointing something out that isn't working, even if their identification is off or their diagnosis doesn't work. So be open to potential changes. That said, if you're taking the road less traveled and are truly being a little original, a little novel, a little -- dare I say -- interesting, some people will hate it. One of the people I admire most said of my final draft something along the lines of "It's well written, but it's certainly not what I would have written." At the time it felt like a slight (or a huge blow), but I've grown to appreciate the sentiment. Only one person really understands your Statement of Purpose, so while constantly looking for a better execution is a virtue, being confident in your basic construction is essential. Unfortunately, you're still an academic, which means... 4. You're probably going to hate your SOP by the time you send it out. It's never going to be a perfect distillation of your potential as a graduate student or professional in your field. It's never going to talk the adcomms into admitting you. It's never the all-powerful document we make it out to be in our minds when we are obsessing over dependent clause construction. Still, it's the one-thing (outside of maybe the GRE) you can really control heading into admissions, which makes it a lightning rod for doubt and self-loathing. So, unless your mental health is much better than mine, you're pretty much destined to hate your SOP until... 5. When you finally know where you're going to go, take a look at the SOP you wrote. Most people tell you to tailor your SOP to the school, and while I agree with this sentiment wholeheartedly, I also felt it was important to be honest about my study and career aspirations, even if they didn't align perfectly with the school. That's not strategery out of the "How to Write Your Way Into Grad School" game plan, but at the end of the day it led me to a school with a great fit that also happens to be Top 5 in my field. Also, I'm surprised to report, outside of one typo, one misplaced however, and one flawed introductory clause, it was a document I can be proud of. Good luck, and remember. It's supposed to be hard.

Accepted, but with limited funding. It's either 1 or 1A among my top choices -- perhaps they will be willing to negotiate on funding?

That's well above the minimum, even for less quantitative fields, so I'd go with the 170 and knock the statements of purpose/letters of rec out of the park. Disclaimer -- I'm by no means an admissions expert.

This might be bad advice, but if your GPA is between 3.7 and 3.8, I wouldn't mention it. If it's a well regarded school in the field, the reputation will likely be known by the adcomms -- bringing attention to it could sound like complatining. Instead, I think you're being strategic with the letters of recommendation, which is proactive, and you should simply ensure your interests/goals mesh well with your intended audience. In sum, focus on the other areas of the application, and recognize your GPA is probably not what will keep you out. At a certain point, your research, accomplishments, and other "whole applicant" criteria (like the SOP) become more important. It's just a question of where that line in the sand is.

For Carnegie Mellon's MSPPM program, the instructions state "The résumé MUST be current and include all part time and full time work experience, the dates of when the employment began and ended and a brief description of your responsibilities under the title of the position. Click here for an example of a résumé." On a resume, I usually only include the pertinent details (why does it matter if I worked for a pizzeria), but CMU also states in the same section "Submission of false or plagiarized material as part of the application for admission may result in automatic denial of admission to any degree program." I don't want to submit false information by omitting work details, but it also states to keep the resume 1-2 pages; it will be hard to include everything and also be comprehensive in the descriptions of the applicable jobs. Advice?

How is your TOEFL? If it is really good, I would go with the 170. If not, I'd go with #2, since the Q is still top tier and the V isn't question-raising for an international student.

Your work experience is good, GPA is fine, verbal GRE is great, and your Quant score is above Georgetown's average (which is known to be a Quant heavy program). You might not get in everywhere, these are competitive, best-of-the-best mpp programs, but you'll more than likely get in somewhere. You're competitive, just try to think about how you can organize your application, resume, SOPs to be as strong as possible. If you feel like you absolutely have to go somewhere this cycle, apply to a lower ranked school where you feel you'll be happy as well (mine is the University of Kentucky). I think GW has a strong social policy program.

@correlatesoftheory Pretty sure it is. I got a 169V and it was considered 99%. Then again, he could be using non-ETS percentiles. But we are definitely in agreement re: using the higher quant score.

Assuming your 170 is Quant, I'd go with that one. You'll get a bit of a pass on the verbal because you're an international student...and those are not mediocre scores.

I'm by no means an expert, but here's what I would say: 1) You are going to get better advice on these forums if you say what your breakdown is (Q/V) , what you are going to study, and at what level (Master's PhD) 2) A 327 is a very good overall score, particularly combined with your nearly perfect GPA. 3) All admissions at top US universities are both a crapshoot and holistic -- it's not just numbers getting you in -- so I would focus on other areas of your application.

It's hard to do a raw score conversion, because the GRE is section level adaptive. That said, your probably looking at low to mid 150s on verbal and just below 150 on Quant. If you use the actual ets book, or, better yet, do powerprep, you'll have a better, and more exact idea.

My dad always said to never go to a school that puts as much money into advertising as academics. That said, if you need the degree for the jobs you want and have no other options, you can either attend or wait another year. The other possible option is going there for a year, killing it, and applying for a transfer so your institution of record is somewhere else. But that option depends on what would be considered transferable. In the end, going there might be a waste of money, and has an associated opportunity cost (what work experience are you passing up on that could help you overcome that poor CGPA?)