AGReyes

We had an awesome intern for 6 months in my office who went to the UT Austin in D.C. program and loved it. It's very small and very new, but the cost of tuition is cheap, LBJ is generous, and the school has a good reputation.

Have you considered the UT-Austin in D.C. program? There's a surprisingly big LBJ network in D.C. and the new D.C. program should definitely help on that front. Don't buy into the "second year funding" snake oil that schools try to sell. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. If they wanted to give you two years of funding, they would have done so. To me it just seems like a really underhanded tactic to get people to attend by pulling on their hopes/dreams. And you don't need SFS/SAIS to become an FSO. You can meet all of the 13 Dimensions in Austin. I don't think SFS/SAIS are worth six figures extra for an FSO career path.

I went to SAIS straight from undergrad and chose classes based on sheer interest. Russian Economic Policy in the 90s? That sounds like fun! Now 3 years out from grad school, I wish I had had a better understanding of the skills I needed. I could have learned Russian Economic Policy in the 90s with $1.50 in late fees at the public library - to quote Will Hunting. Not only will you get more funding, you'll also get a more beneficial education. In hindsight, I would have taken classes in Public Finance, Public Sector Economics, Political Economy of Inequality, Mediation, Conflict Management, U.S. Constitutional Law, Policy Writing, etc. Historical courses are way more interesting to me, but you can learn about Belgian Independence on Wikipedia. You can't learn effective policy writing or substantive public finance knowledge on Wikipedia. That said, if you know for sure you want to join the Federal Government, $80,000 in debt is manageable if you do income-based repayment with the Public Sector Loan Forgiveness Program - what I'm doing. If you want to do private sector, then be a lot more worried about debt since there's no way you can make that disappear in a decade other than paying them off in full.

Your last sentence is important. The SAIS name is great and the education was solid, but I have to say the "life in Europe" was one of my favorite things about the entire experience. First, Bologna is very cheap, so your rent cost is 1/3rd of D.C./NY, and that extra cash goes a long way in travel. I would stack all of my classes over 3 days and then would have four-day weekends each week. Getting to Bologna Airport is like 5 euro from the train station - which was a 5 minute walk from my apartment - and you can catch a Ryanair for less than 50 euros round-trip to dozens of European cities - I visited 25 countries during my 9 months in Bologna. I would read about the Cold War in American Foreign Policy Since 1945, and then would fly out to Berlin for a weekend, visiting the Berlin Wall in the day and reading at night. Taking The European Union and its Institutions? Take a weekend trip to Brussels. Studying colonialism and its global implications? London and Paris are right there. My year in Bologna wasn't solely an education. It felt like my little bildungsroman. I was too old - mid 20s - to be worried about drinking and partying - but also too young to have lost my sense of adventure. So my year felt like a very immersive, interactive learning experience. That isn't to say that I was the average student. There were certainly people who preferred to learn with a book in the library for 5 hours. But if you learn 'interactively,' then Bologna is a special place. Also, you're stuck with 150 others in Bologna who speak horrible Italian - though most won't admit it. So there's a bonding born out of necessity because you have no one else to befriend other than your immediate classmates. There's a reason why the Bologna students in their second year in D.C. are attached at the hip. And since 70 percent usually stay in D.C. long-term, you not only have an amazing year of European adventure, but a network in D.C. that can help tremendously - even if geared to certain areas: World Bank, IMF, IADB, ITA, USAID, State [to a lesser extent], OPIC, ITC, etc. I will say, you didn't detail what you want to do - just what you've done to date. And I can't piece together a narrative based on your paragraphs. Business School and International Relations are not the same. Before you drop six figures into a program, really plot your path ahead. As great as SAIS Bologna was for me, debt is debt, and accruing debt for something that will not advance your career is a non-starter. Woodrow Wilson, Jackson, SAIS and HBS are also quite distinct. Jackson and SAIS are both in the IR bucket, and offer similar courses, but SAIS is a long-established program with 950 students. Jackson is a fifth the size and is much newer. SAIS has a much better network in D.C., but Jackson is undoubtedly more financially generous. SAIS has more courses, but Jackson has better individualized attention. SAIS is in D.C. and Jackson is in New Haven. Network, location, financing, and curriculum are notable differences, and both schools are different in those respects. Woodrow Wilson is also completely different - disclaimer: I studied there as a PPIA Fellow - from SAIS, with more of a domestic public service focus than SAIS, which tends to send far more students to the big international organizations, a tranche to State/DOD/Intelligence, a tranche to Treasury, a tranche to the finance industry, and some to the EOP. The SAIS Bologna crew is also disproportionately European, of which many can only stay in the U.S. long-term by finding World Bank/IMF/IO positions in D.C. Which you noted above is something you're not huge on. And HBS is a completely different chimera. A student who thrives in HBS could be bored by the curriculum at SAIS. If I went to HBS, I'd probably be miserable. Are you just chasing prestige with HBS, or is that something you're actually interested in for your career trajectory? In any case, I think you need to scope out your path before you make such a life-changing decision to shell out money for a graduate education.

10 years of your youth paying $1600 per month. That is a massive, MASSIVE, hit to your financial, mental and career well-being. You may think it is doable, but you are one unexpected job loss away from things turning sour quickly. And you are in an even less stable footing being an international student from India which presumably limits your loan options. While your colleagues are building home equity and investing more into retirement, you are going to be bogged down paying student loans for most of your 30s. If you want to live in D.C., New York, or any other major U.S. city, also tack on another $1600 for rent. At 70k salary, your take home pay is probably around $3,600. That leaves you with $400 discretionary for food, transportation, healthcare, emergency funds, savings/retirement, travel, hobbies, etc. Suffice it to say $400 is not enough. So you'd have to find money somewhere else. Are you prepared to be that 38-year old still living with roommates simply for the perk of being able to say you have an Ivy League degree? I should also say, for better or worse, Columbia SIPA has developed somewhat of a reputation for being an impersonal cash cow program. Can't speak to how valid that is, but it's been mentioned enough times in casual conversation that I imagine that is also giving some people pause. And to answer Q3, no, international students on a student visa cannot work for the U.S. Government. Per Sec. 704 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2019: Sec. 704. Unless otherwise specified in law during the current fiscal year, no part of any appropriation contained in this or any other Act shall be used to pay the compensation of any officer or employee of the Government of the United States (including any agency the majority of the stock of which is owned by the Government of the United States) whose post of duty is in the continental United States unless such person: (1) is a citizen of the United States; (2) is a person who is lawfully admitted for permanent residence and is seeking citizenship as outlined in 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3)(B); (3) is a person who is admitted as a refugee under 8 U.S.C. 1157 or is granted asylum under 8 U.S.C. 1158 and has filed a declaration of intention to become a lawful permanent resident and then a citizen when eligible; or (4) is a person who owes allegiance to the United States: Provided, That for purposes of this section, affidavits signed by any such person shall be considered prima facie evidence that the requirements of this section with respect to his or her status are being complied with: Provided further, That for purposes of subsections (2) and (3) such affidavits shall be submitted prior to employment and updated thereafter as necessary: Provided further, That any person making a false affidavit shall be guilty of a felony, and upon conviction, shall be fined no more than $4,000 or imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both: Provided further, That the above penal clause shall be in addition to, and not in substitution for, any other provisions of existing law: Provided further, That any payment made to any officer or employee contrary to the provisions of this section shall be recoverable in action by the Federal Government: Provided further, That this section shall not apply to any person who is an officer or employee of the Government of the United States on the date of enactment of this Act, or to international broadcasters employed by the Broadcasting Board of Governors, or to temporary employment of translators, or to temporary employment in the field service (not to exceed 60 days) as a result of emergencies: Provided further, That this section does not apply to the employment as Wildland firefighters for not more than 120 days of nonresident aliens employed by the Department of the Interior or the USDA Forest Service pursuant to an agreement with another country.

I heard from a friend who went to their info session. To phrase it, it's a hybrid of traditional Executive MA and a traditional Doctorate. It is not geared for those seeking academia. Those with previous SAIS degrees can finish it in 2 years. It's not a PhD though so I wouldn't think of it as a PhD.

When someone asks me this, I always look at their GPA. GPA and Test Scores are both general measures of aptitude and when one is low, you can cancel the negative impact by having a much higher score of the other. In other words, a low GRE score is not a deal-breaker if your GPA is high. Your GRE scores are 65th percentile in Verbal and 51st in Quant. I would say anything below the 70th percentile is low - which would be 156 V, 159 Q. Since you didn't crack 70th on either V or Q, you can't use a high verbal to assuage concerns about a low quant either. Your GPA of 3.33 is also quite low for a top-tier program. Your GPA is relatively low, your GRE Q is relatively low and your GRE V is relatively low. Does this mean you can't get it in? No. But for Chicago, Michigan and Duke, these scores would place you in the bottom quarter of students, if not even lower. I would recommend you retake the GRE and aim to boost each section by 5. Your chances would definitely go up when coupled with your work experience.

Excellent GPA, great GREs, great work experience, and you are confident about LORs/SOPs. So I'd say you have as good of a chance as anybody. I can't see how "lack of economics coursework" is enough to significantly impair your chances. Worst case you get in and have to take some refresher econ courses. I can't say I've heard of the Kroc School, but you are definitely competitive at Keough/Jackson.

My concerns about your GPA aren't erased by your GRE scores, but they are definitely eased by it. So the bad news is, yes, your GPA is a black mark. The good news is that your GRE scores are a plus. You'll drag down the GPA average for most of these schools, but you'll also raise their GRE average. So, in the end, the two might be seen as a wash. Outside of that, your experiences are a major plus and definitely make you competitive at these schools. Which isn't to say you are favored at any of them, but simply that you should definitely apply because your GPA alone isn't going to determine whether you get in. Your GPA is the only discernible black mark I see and you should never back away from applying based on one black mark. Two or three black marks and that's when the Admissions Committees probably start to feel heartburn, and I'd say you're in the danger zone. That said, I would add a few safeties. From an IR perspective, you are applying to four of the five top programs in the world. And SIS is Top Ten as well. Even those with 170/170 GREs, 5 years of work experience, a 3.99 GPA with summa and PBK and tearjerk SOPs should hedge their bets. To answer another question, your undergrad school will have zero - none - zilch impact on your application. My UG was in a non-flagship state school and I ultimately was accepted, and graduated from, one of the "top-tier" schools on your list.

For what it's worth, I went to an admissions presentation with Matt Clemons from HKS a few months ago. He told the group that 70th percentile was the cut-off where if stops being a concern. HKS is usually pretty good about mumbo jumbo "we look at the application holistically" gobbledygook, so I was a bit surprised how direct the GRE guidance was. 154V is 65th percentile, below that cut-off. I don't think it's a major negative in that it will kill your application. But it is definitely a negative mark. The only question is does the rest of your application mitigate the concern raised by your low GRE V score, or magnify it? To the extent you can tout your publications, that's a mitigating factor. But the best form of mitigation is removing the negative mark completely. The benefit for you is that the GRE score is the easiest part of your application to strengthen. All of the other posters here with 3.2 GPAs HAVE to mitigate their GPAs because the GPA is a cumulative reflection of performance and even nudging it up to a 3.3 GPA - for those still in college - can be difficult. Your GRE is a one-off performance indicator. All you need is a good test day and you're golden. My recommendation is you study and try the exam again. That said, people do overestimate the impact that one black mark can have on admission. In a pool of 500 applicants, most will have a black mark somewhere. Even the perfect candidate has to take a gamble on his/her LORs. Where black marks hit is your funding topline. To be competitive for the full-rides and the half-rides you need to be a spotless, coruscating gem. This is double the case for HKS, SIPA and Harris, which aren't renown for their financial generosity.

Your work experience is a bit below average but, outside of that, your GPA and GRE scores are golden. ~1.5 years of full-time experience is going to be enough that it won't be a black mark on your application, but it definitely won't be a boost when it comes to funding. That said, you are competitive at all of the IR schools and should definitely aim top tier - SAIS/SFS/SIPA - there. You could get into HKS or WWS but I'm not seeing your application as a natural fit - it seems largely international in focus - and your work experience might not cut it, especially at WWS. I don't think the Middlebury financial aid package was also very generous, so another safety might be a good idea, since I think your challenge won't be admission, but sufficient funding. A lot of those schools are the type that will admit you and give you the full sticker price - SIPA/HKS/GW especially.

You have to explain your low GPA, but your high GRE scores mitigates that somewhat. To answer your questions, I think if your GRE scores are at the 70th percentile or higher, they're not an issue. If they're at the 85th percentile or higher, they are a plus. So I wouldn't worry there. I actually don't think your work experience is a big barrier. You have work experience, which shows maturity. Just try to weave together why your work experience has led you to applying for grad school. I would say you're below average for SIPA, SAIS and Fletcher, but very competitive for the rest. But you could definitely get into those first three as well, but likely with very low funding if you were to get in.

Your low GRE scores notwithstanding, I think you're competitive at all of these schools. I would say you're above average for Elliott and SIS and average for SFS, SAIS. I assume you don't have much work experience given you tout your internships. Your internship experiences look fantastic, but lack of work experience is always the black cloud of uncertainty in terms of gauging your odds.

Too soon out of undergrad is what's going to kill your financial aid package, not necessarily your admission. But it is a concern. Your GPA is also a bit low, though it's somewhat mitigated by your high GRE scores. I would say you're slightly below average for SAIS, SFS, and SIPA and average at Tufts and UPenn. That isn't to say they're out of your league, since you're competitive at all of them. But I would say your application doesn't stand out enough for me to say you're a shoo-in.

Stormaggedon, I went straight into grad school after graduating from college and, while having a Master's degree made it so much easier to find a job than if I would have started job hunting with just a B.A., I do feel I missed out on an important part of the experience. There are definite pros/cons. I grew up in Oklahoma and got my Bachelor's in PoliSci from the closest big state school, and knew that if I started job hunting for a policy/government job in my state (because I couldn't just move to D.C. live everyone else and have the money to pay rent while unemployed and job hunting there - I was definitely not upper middle class), I was going to get into State Government making $25k a year with no job security and would hit a dead end quickly, shuffling paper in some god-forsaken government brutalist building in Oklahoma City. I took a calculated risk and decided to go straight to grad school at SAIS in D.C. (1 year in Bologna/1 year in DC with a little $) and use that year in DC to scope out what jobs I wanted. I wanted to be a Diplomat (hence SAIS), but the Foreign Service process is long and difficult, and the more I learned about it, the less convinced I was it was the right path for me. So I used my year in DC and cast a really wide net. Did three internships while in grad school (State Department, The White House (Office of Legislative Affairs), and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs). When it came time to job search, I again cast a wide net (because I need A job, any job - rent in DC is horrific!) and used my time at the White House to help land a position at OMB. Now I do policy analysis and development, budgeting and management. So for me, the whole gamble paid off in the end. But there were multiple points where it could have ended horribly had I not planned out everything well in advance (i.e. starting to job search 9 months before you graduate, not just 2-3 like many students do). All of that said, I do feel I missed out on grad school though. I wasn't sure what skill sets I needed to have so I just took classes that interested me, whereas others with experience knew exactly what skills gaps they had and took courses to remedy those deficiencies. I would say without work experience, you're also looking at grad school as largely a pipeline to a job. Which means you're less invested in the education itself, and more invested in the careers it opens up. That's not a negative thing by any mean (I mean, the whole point of shelling out $100k+ is to ultimately land a good gig. You can get an education for a $1.50 in late fees at the public library, as Will Hunting would say), but people who have previous work experience know they are more competitive in the job market and thus aren't so 'worked up' about finding work post-graduation. I also felt they enjoyed the experience more. And, to the extent grad school is as much about who you meet than what you learn, being constantly in stress about the future means you miss out on the 'networking' part of grad school (which to me is the #1 ROI on your grad school investment). The other big risk is that coming in straight from undergrad likely means no funding. So unless you know you want to work in Government and have confidence in PSLF being there once your loans are disbursed, you are taking a big financial gamble. A lot of people come into grad school with lofty dreams of joining the Hill or an NGO and being change agents, and then the crushing burden of student loan debt stovepipes them into consulting and contractor work (far removed from the social change they wanted to effect in the first place). Moral of the story: There are pros/cons. You can make it work, but going straight to grad school does have risks.