2711383

Message one of the admins on the Facebook group? They'll be happy to help or direct you to the correct person(s).

Man, the people saying 90k+ on a Government Affairs forum sure are optimistic lol

So I actually don't know any current McK folks among my friends. I know former McK who are close friends who and happy to get real with me. Long story made short... the cultness might be a bit too much at times, but you are legitimately in a very collegial and supportive culture (though you are under the gun) + a great professional learning environment. 

Yeah, imo they should at least publish 5-year averages. The fact that we don't even know the ballpark for nearly any top programs is kind of absurd. Like you said, could be 5% (or less), could be 20% (or more). I understand that they fluctuate from year to year, but surely an average of 5/8/10/whatever years is better than literal radio silence since 2010. 

Even a statistic with a 5 p.p. margin of error would help out with the stress (not to mention that if they published these stats yearly like MBAs do, the historical trend would give us a pretty good idea of the competitiveness of the program). I know literally nothing about how competitive the program I'm applying to is. You always hear that the MPA/ID is more competitive than the MPP, but how much more competitive? HKS listed the MPP acceptance rate in 2010 as 20%. Assuming that is still the case (which it almost definitely isn't), what would "the MPA/ID is more competitive" mean? 18%? 12%? 5%? 
If I knew I was applying to a program that has an 18% acceptance rate I'd feel pretty confident about being above the cut. However, if I knew the acceptance rate was 5% then I'd be happy just kinda forgetting about this until March because admission is pretty much gonna be sheer luck regardless of the strength of my app. Regardless, in either scenario I would know pretty well how comfortable I should be with entertaining the idea of getting into HKS.
As it stands now, I'm pretty much completely in the blind. I have no idea if my application is strong or not, or whether my chances of getting in are decent or if I have no shot. 

In the US, yes. In Europe, no. 
OP that's a bad list, starting with the fact that UCSD doesn't even have a terminal MA program in economics. The standard US MA programs that have good placements into PhDs are Duke, UT, Wisconsin, and Chicago MAPSS (econ track). Tufts and BU are good but not as good as the ones I mentioned before. Columbia is decent but from what I understand you mostly take classes with adjuncts which will not be good for your LoRs. 
Take a look at programs in Europe as well. Doing a masters before your PhD is much more common over there.
Also this isn't a good forum for econ advice. I'd suggest asking for help in Urch, which is much more active.
EJMR is filled with racists and trolls but if you can tell between what's trolling and what's genuine advice it can be an ok resource as well (just confirm that what they've told you is true because sometimes it's hard to tell when they're just messing with you). 
 

From what I can tell, that prompt was there last year as well, but they have slightly altered Prompt 2 from previous years. 

A little, but honestly I don't care. What bothers me is that this feels like the third time I (or someone else) try to start a conversation about a program and you come in and make it all about the GRE. It's really the only thing you seem to ever post about.
No, HKS hasn't changed their GRE requirement yet. And you would know this if you took the 5 seconds it takes to open up their website and check. Even if they did get rid of it for other programs, there's a 99% chance they won't do it for the MPA/ID because they've made clear that it's an important part of the application for this specific program.

I really don't know if you're a troll, but you really need to find something else to comment here besides this. Really, anything.

They have a schedule here: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/admissions-aid/masters-program-admissions/admissions-events/virtual-sessions
They do several versions of every type so hopefully one will fit your schedule!

A little, but honestly I don't care. What bothers me is that this feels like the third time I (or someone else) try to start a conversation about a program and you come in and make it all about the GRE. It's really the only thing you seem to ever post about.
No, HKS hasn't changed their GRE requirement yet. And you would know this if you took the 5 seconds it takes to open up their website and check. Even if they did get rid of it for other programs, there's a 99% chance they won't do it for the MPA/ID because they've made clear that it's an important part of the application for this specific program.

A little, but honestly I don't care. What bothers me is that this feels like the third time I (or someone else) try to start a conversation about a program and you come in and make it all about the GRE. It's really the only thing you seem to ever post about.
No, HKS hasn't changed their GRE requirement yet. And you would know this if you took the 5 seconds it takes to open up their website and check. Even if they did get rid of it for other programs, there's a 99% chance they won't do it for the MPA/ID because they've made clear that it's an important part of the application for this specific program.

A little, but honestly I don't care. What bothers me is that this feels like the third time I (or someone else) try to start a conversation about a program and you come in and make it all about the GRE. It's really the only thing you seem to ever post about.
No, HKS hasn't changed their GRE requirement yet. And you would know this if you took the 5 seconds it takes to open up their website and check. Even if they did get rid of it for other programs, there's a 99% chance they won't do it for the MPA/ID because they've made clear that it's an important part of the application for this specific program.

This is a really odd post. You've listed a lot of general points that don't display much knowledge of Fletcher specifically and that could apply to about any international affairs school, so I'm a little confused why you chose to create a post specifically about a school with which you don't seem to have much personal knowledge or experience and list a lot of generic negatives about IR in general, framed as a critique of Fletcher in particular. For example, the cross-registration with Harvard is a tiny part of the school's offerings and has very little to do with the overall educational experience or its interdisciplinary core competency (Fletcher's curriculum and faculty are entirely built around an interdisciplinary education; it's generally *not* about drawing in profs from other schools or doing partnerships).
I am as much of a critic of these schools and degrees as anyone - see my post history about the mismatch between degree price and perceived prestige vs actual career outcomes and earning potential - but not seeing how this conversation has anything to do with Fletcher in particular. For example, the renewed entry of Yale to this market is a challenge for all higher-end schools, not just for Fletcher.
If you've heard anecdotes or are in touch with a large number of recent grads and are picking up this buzz from them, I'd be curious to hear about that, but didn't see anything about that in your posts above.
Also, you say that MSFS has managed to pivot to getting its grads into other government programs apart from the Foreign Service. I haven't seen any evidence of that and don't even know how that would work given that the path into government service is pretty set for everybody (except Princeton grads who benefit from a legally shady arrangement to get in), but am open to hearing evidence of it. Finally, you seem to be under the impression that Fletcher is primarily a training school for the nonprofit sector. This would be a far more relevant critique for a place like SIT in Vermont. If anything, the primary career destinations are government service, multateral institutions, international security, defense consulting, and finally international development.

UN agencies, development multilaterals, IMF, etc.. 
I think I'd be a good fit for a few of their programs but I'm concerned about the lack of STEM designation.

I think you are conflating your personal experience with what I am putting down in terms of order of magnitude.
1. First and foremost, undergraduate transcript and work experience performance is and should always be prime for the graduate school experience.
2. I am not disputing that those who have the time, money, and natural aptitude for test taking can improve their performance for standardized tests. However, it is undeniable that standardized tests are another metric point that indicate some level of performance and I think there is a right way and wrong way to use the metric for graduate school admissions for some level of academic performance (and yes, being able to use tricks is a demonstrable skill). That being said, there is a right way and a wrong way to use this metric IMO to tell a more nuanced story.  
The wrong way: This person has a 4.0 GPA from top public + and stellar work experience, but because he/she is 33% percentile of applicants, we should deny admission
The right way 1: This person had a 2.9 GPA from college 7 years ago, but has stellar work experience and recently took the GREs and earned 90 percentile. Indications show the person's life has changed and probably do well academically. 
The right way 2: This person had 2.9 GPA from college 2 years ago, but has a statement saying that there trauma suffered during junior year. Grades were As/A- Freshman to Junior year and Ds Junior to Senior. Recent GRE shows 80 percentile and one year of work experience has been stellar. Lets figure out more during the interview.

Realistically, the problem isn't you, but what is going on in undergraduate education in the US. Undergraduate education is too often being commoditized (even in historically more competitive schools) and with rampant grade inflation, it is becoming more more difficult to decipher actual academic potential based upon an undergraduate transcript. 
Some schools are waiving it in order to acquire sufficient number of students when many students are logistically challenged from taking it during COVID times. However, the bottom line is that not sending it means not providing a data point. I'm not saying the GRE is perfect as a test and point of measurement. However, in my opinion it is rightfully viewed as having a reliable means of verifying the validity of a good transcript and possibly allowing the telling of a more complex story behind a not so great transcript. 

Just take the test, it's never been easier to take it.

I would add to this that given recent.. complications.. for international students to stay in the US post-graduation, STEM designated programs are looked at a lot more favorably. I know I'll personally only be applying to STEM programs. A lot of policy schools have already smarted up and achieved STEM designation for at least one of their programs: HKS has the MPA/ID, SAIS has the MIEF, Heinz has the MSPPM:DA, McCourt has the DSPP, Harris has the MSCAPP and the MAPSS QMSA, etc.
I like Fletcher and the MALD program, but it's not worth it for me to study IR or public policy without the chance to stay in the US and maybe network in DC or New York. Same goes for SIPA. I consider myself a great fit for a couple of their programs and I know I would easily get in, but it's not worth it without the two year OPT extension. 
Going back to your point about UK schools, the UK is now allowing students to stay in the country working for two years after graduation, and after that it's much, much easier to score a work visa in the UK than an H1B in the US. Sciences Po is also in the competition, and if you manage to find a job in France after the completion of a two year master's, you're allowed to stay there indefinitely. 
To be honest, if it wasn't because of how much some (not all) US schools blow European schools out of the water in terms of program quality and network, I wouldn't even bother with applying to the US. I probably won't if Trump gets elected to a second term because not even STEM grads will be safe then. 

Seriously think Harvard is the only program that hasn’t made any changes to their gre requirement 

Just take the test, it's never been easier to take it.

The two options would lead to extremely different outcomes. If you enter into UCLA's Applied Econ program, most likely you will never be admitted into any decent econ phd program (let's say top 30) as the preparation is just inadequate. You might be able to get into business phd programs though, if that's what you could accept. In terms of job prospects, of course the UCLA brand is good enough to send you into decent industry jobs.
On the contrary, MA at UT Austin provides rigorous training and the phd placement outcome, as far as I know, is great. However, industrywise it doesn't provide as much value added as UCLA's MAE, at least in regions outside Texas. Hence choose the program based on your career aspirations.

I think it's a bad idea if she discloses her personal connections. That would make the letter completely useless, and would probably turn off the application reviewer in the process.