GradSchoolGrad

Government consulting in the US with Deloitte, yes if you are the top 25% or so professional readiness. Boutiques - varies greatly Other consulting opportunities (especially private sector) - No to not really

That is arguably the best program (tied with Duke MEM - granted the two are very different).

You should probably get work experience and then apply for MPP, but you might be a graduation risk if you go for DSPP to the admissions office. Please appreciate that both DSPP and MPP best cater to quant focused jobs coming out of McCourt.

Would you say they are a bit more forgiving to international students for work experience? In the past I have seen a lot more international students with less work experience.

1. Let's talk about what really matters here. IDEV jobs desirable and fitting for IDEV policy grad students. Yes, you can have a post-grad school IDEV labor shortage (as you see in your workplace) and decrease in demand for IDEV jobs at the same time. Bottom line is that there is extreme leakage going on among graduate students going to policy/IR schools for IDEV to actually pursue a career in IDEV. IDEV students are simply graduating and not entering IDEV or quickly departing IDEV after short stints post graduate. I view this as consequential to how clear and visible IDEV (just to be more clear, things involving program evaluation and design) career pathways (e.g., USAID, NGO/non-profit) has shrank in demand. People self-select out once they realize how the IDEV job options and experience doesn't meet their hopes and dreams. I want to highlight that there is definitive big group of IDEV related jobs I am not connecting with here, and those involve PhD level economic research, business development, and capital management roles that I done by economists and investors. Not saying no one from MPA/MPP/IR has done those roles, as even I know some that pivoted towards there, but it isn't a natural fit per se. However, even towards those, people are self selecting themselves out when it is IDEV related as there are more lucrative options (personally, financially, and some would say impact wise - I know because I hired former IDEV talent a lot). 2. To quibble: The emphasis here was not about total money flowing to developing countries, but IDEV specific jobs befitting MPA/MPP/IR graduates. a. By US, I mean US government funded. It's between government, IGO, and non-profit funded for which by and large you have development primarily as a public good and/or with governmental objectives in mind, and more applicable to MPA/MPP/IR grads. b. The world bank data is proxy of grants and loans and it is indistinguishable which one changes hands with private sector and someone who may need more IDEV experience. Also, it doesn't cover 2021 - capturing the effects of COVID. c. It would also be unfair to call all private flows of capital to a developing nation "development". That is tied to how much money is circulating globally. Granted some private flows of capital can be deemed as "IDEV", I'm not here for a taxonomy debate

There is also policy interests (they try to make a diverse class), country of origin (also diversity matters here. If there there are 4 others from your country of origin with better stats - they will likely get in and you won't. But if you are from a unique country, you are better off), and other signs of ability to get a job. Keep in mind this is all dependent on who else applies. Since the economy isn't doing great, people tend to hide in grad schools (at least in the US - so that doesn't help you).

Lets talk about a quick Google search. https://foreignassistance.gov/aid-trends Look at US assistance in 2015 ($54B) vs. 2021 ($35B) all in 2020 dollars. This follows a generally slow and steady decline since peaking in 2010. This is just one of many indicators. Please show us data to contrary please.

Then please share with us your macro narrative from your world.

The real world whereby: 1. COVID paused a lot of IDEV activity for 2 years or so 2. The US’s gradual pull back from IDEV (overall) since the Obama administration (hallmarked by the withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan) across the world. 3. The slowdown of China’s belt and road policy and global lending dried up capital. 4. The increasing cost of capital (granted this is since COVID). Those are the macro that has led to less IDEV jobs both sourced from the US and broadly speaking outside of it. My friends have had to change roles, leave IDEV, or slow down their career trajectory consequently. Now as a civil adult, please tell me how you see things differently?

1. About PhD - as long as you go to a graduate program that has some level of quant and get good grades (like As), it doesn't hurt you and helps you. That being said, you might have to start the program from scratch. By that I mean, do the basic level quant classes required of the PhD. You don't get to escape out of those. 2. Regarding Jobs - I'm seeing two interesting trends about IDEV. A. Because jobs are getting harder to get (across the world), people are self-selecting out of IDEV connected career paths via grad school out of concern that it might not be a viable pathway to pay their student debts upon graduate. B. You are seeing so many super competitive candidates because they can easily pivot from IDEV (if it doesn't work out) to an alternative career because their backgrounds are so robust, and they have the luxury to try out iDEV. 3. Your Opportunities: The question is not about you ability to get into Grad School for IDEV, it is about how elite of a school do you need to get into. You might not be able to get to the most competitive school, but you could probably get into an IDEV related masters as a less competitive program. Getting a job is on you (regardless of where you go).

A big picture you are missing is that Development jobs overall (for lots and lots of reasons I can make a podcast about) have decreased in the past decade, so there is overall less demand for people interested in development. So naturally, the pipelines going through IDEV have only become drastically more competitive,

1. As to MPP/MPA programs, most of them have Student Ambassador programs. I recommend you talk to one - especially an international student. 2. As for PhD programs for PP, the reason why they don't have stuff on the website because it is based on connectivity with a Professional. You shouldn't blindly apply, you should have at least networking relationship with a professor who knows of you and is interested in your talents and background. Unless you have earth shattering prior research or your name is well known in an area of interest of a particular professor, I would argue that you are already behind the game. Also, the numbers they can take in each year can vary greatly, depending on funding available. 3. You don't need to be a former MPA/MPP from anybody's department to go onto a PhD in PP. Although that happens and can help marginally, it is not remotely a requirement. If you want to go the PhD route, I recommend you think about Economics, Political science, as well as public policy (if it is relevant).

Assuming your essay is good (and trust me a lot of people's essays become their down fall despite good stats and good background), you should be fine for MPP. Obviously, the top schools are always crap shoot no matter how good you are. I strongly recommend you explore which school fits your interests (academically, socially, and professionally) the most. The worst thing you can do is pay a lot of money for a school that you aren't happy at. Given that you have a high GPA in a quant field from your Masters, I don't think you need to worry about undergrad grades. You might want to note the grading system or any difficulties you had in your supplemental write up in the application.

As I have been socializing with my friends in academia (social sciences - Econ, Public Policy, Sociology, History, and Political Science), I have been hearing a consistent theme that there is misalignment between the academic research that has public interest and funding vs. what people in academia want to research. Basically, there is an oversaturation of topics that have already been well explored or have little public interest and the topics that are of public interest/funding are not well served due to lack of interest among academics. Apparently what this is supposedly driving .a. PhDs switching their academic field or leave academia sooner or later to be marketable (after much sunk cost), b. PhDs finding themselves with diminishing opportunities within the academic concentration they are in given high competition for supply and lowering demand, and c. overall academia being viewed as less relevant by society in general due to lack of connectivity (I'm talking about beyond the usual Ivory Tower stigma). We can quibble about what public interest and funding definitively means (I can highlight a few examples, but I rather start the conversation first), but I would like raise this question to the masses for some reflection about the concept in general.

Bottom line, if you want to get a PhD in IR (or something related), I think that could work well for you. I'll let someone who did the straight to PhD route to give you better guidance. However, although professional master's programs are becoming incrementally more friendly to straight from undergrads. I STRONGLY recommend you get professional experience first (to be real, only full time professional experience counts. Internships might be nice, but they Arne't full time professional). Basically, it will be really tough for you to compete against those with work experience to get those middle manager roles without work experience. Please appreciate that international develop policy isn't just popular with American policy/IR grad students, but its popular internationally, so you are competing globally. You want to come in strong, rather be branded as the straight from undergrad. There might be exceptions out there, but I don't know of anyone coming from a US institution matriculate into a middle management role appropriate for a post-grad school role without prior work experience. Also, not to sound like an annoying older person, but looking at my friends from IR and MPP, there are scores that sounded like you starting grad school, but changed their mind during grad school once they realized the total range of opportunities their degree could provide them. Only 1 of my friends have stayed the multi-lateral institution route (and I don't know how long she will last 3 years after graduation). Bottom line, those institutions don't have the best professional development and growth culture (at large), and the impact (granted they do make a fair amount in a global setting) can be difficult to appreciate. Also, the level of competition more often than not doesn't exactly make it a collegial workplace for those without a PhD. That being said, if you are dead set on those multi-laterals, I strongly recommend a top notch program that has the alumni base and institutional connections. Yes you got HKS and Princeton, Georgetown MSFS, and Johns Hopkins SAIS, which are arguably the best options for you to go that route, but once again its really difficult to get in without prior work experience. The more direct options for your would be GWU Elliot School or Georgetown MPP. Columbia SIPA is a very unique case, basically - yes you have strong potential, but it is a type of school that lets you succeed or fail on your own, and especially as someone without work experience, it makes it very hard for you to do so - especially in an international and competitive city as NYC.

To discuss Georgetown McCourt School of Public Policy

Your continuing with the unanswered question about quant is making it challenging for me to advise you. What is your background/interest/and desire for quant? You can have a low GPA, but if you have a quant background, or want a quant based career that changes the conversation (potentially drastically). I am going to assume that you don't have an interest in being quant heavy (as you have yet to express so), and advise you accordingly. However, if that is not true, and you do want to lean quant, please let me know. 1. Unless you have more quant background, I don't see you getting into HKS, SPIA (Princeton), or basically the Tier 1 of graduate schools. I know people with 3.8 GPA with 0 quant background and lack of quant experience compensation from work (and most schools are willing to take loose definitions of "quant experience"). This is because if you don't have indications of being able to handle the quant heavy course load, you may struggle to graduate. 2. At this point, I would say schools like Georgetown MPP, George Washington Elliot IR would probably be the higher end of school options for you in a normal year (however, as long as the economy is doing good, admissions should be in your advantage). A more reasonable target would probably be like American SIS or SPA. I do know people who did get into Georgetown MPP with 20K scholarship with sub 3.0 GPA, and since they are flush with money from a rich donor, they have the ability provide funding. 3. You don't need to know exactly what you are interested now, but you should have an idea, because your policy interests can determine how easy or difficult it is for you to get a job. The reality about Immigration policy is that it is generally not a popular policy area (for both policy schools and for funding in general) to study or work in (not to get confused with migration and refugee policy, which are policy). The most feasible way to get a job tied to immigration policy is be a lawyer, labor economist specializing in immigration, or immigration enforcement, but it sounds like you don't have an interest in those routes. However much the American right or left may be loud about immigration, neither really pay that much attention to exploring immigration policy making as it is the 3rd rail of American politics, often reduced to grand sweeping political notions rather than careful policy solutioning. This is important to know because if you aren't sure what policy matters really interest you, you want to apply to school with a really strong professional culture, or else she can be screwed in getting a job, despite having worked in FAANG (I worked in FAANG prior to my graduating my MPP, and no one cared in the policy space). 4. Georgetown MPP - good for getting a quant role, not much else. Unless you want to be a quant person, and seek a quant focused career role, Georgetown MPP does not make any sense for you. a. Since the curriculum is heavily quant, you could easily lose your scholarship if you struggle with quant and get below a 3.0 GPA (It happens more than people think). b. It does not have a professional culture and outside of quant roles, Deloitte, and PMF, people generally do not get good jobs or get jobs disconnected from their graduate studies. c. As a person of a color myself, I will tell you that I encountered a fair amount of prejudice (that I did not encounter in my other graduate schools) at Georgetown MPP. Ironically, most of it came from the international students. Georgetown MPP is more willing to get international students with less work experience and world experience (mostly straight from undergrad) and bring their biases to campus without the good sense to keep it in check as professionals. However since international students mostly pay full price of admission, Georgetown MPP values their presence and protects them, regardless of the behavioral issues that arise. When I highlighted behavior issues of select International students to the administration, it was pretty much implied for me to excuse them for cultural misunderstanding and that I should watch myself or else I could be perceived as being biased against international students. The prejudice against me made it harder for me to get international students to work with me on problem sets, since they preferred those from their own region of origin or Americans they assumed had physical characteristics that suggested intelligence. 5. There are no schools you shouldn't apply to, its more like know each schools pros and cons, and what you are willing to risk - even Georgetown MPP.

I know nothing and nor do I pretend to know anything, I'm asking just out of curiosity as I mentor college students of academic career pathways. One of my best friends is a Sociology PhD on his 5th postdoc (yes 5th - no joke), and he was telling me that the Sociology discipline faces 3 problems in America: 1. Oversaturation of interest (stories of applying for tenure track positions in R2s just to hear that there are 50+ or 100+ better applicants. 2. Decreasing money to fund research for sociology at large 3. A philosophical civil war that is dividing faculty and PhDs (basically those that put primacy on individual identify vs those that emphasize class or collective economic well-being... sorry if I'm hitting in broad strokes as I'm sure its is more complicated than that) and have scared away prospective PhDs who care about sociology angles that don't fit neatly in either camp to other disciplines (economics, history, public policy, political science, psychology, and etc.) What sociology PhDs are doing now to avoid being stuck in Post-Doc or Adjunct hell if they want to stay in academia is apparently seek opportunities with business schools, leadership institutes, and ethics programs. Again, just the view conveyed from one Sociology PhD from a top 35 ranked sociology program (per US News) who went to an ivy for undergrad. Could someone give me a fair shake about what is accurate, less accurate, and dead wrong about what has been conveyed to me?

Not for sociology. Sociology programs across the country are essentially struggling to survive these days due to structure challenges that I can make 2 podcasts about. If I were you, I would look for something sociology adjacent like economics, public policy, or health (assuming you care about any of them), since they have much better funding and might actually be more relevant to your end goals.

Okay a few things. a. In terms of getting in, your background is Golden... I just don't know how bad your GPA is and if you might be flagged as potential academic graduation risk (people get washed out of MPP programs academically - most often for failing quant... it doesn't happen a lot, but it does happen). If you got weak quant grades or no quant grades (stats, calc, engineering - whatever), unless you do quant directly at work, I recommend you get a strong GRE at quant and maybe take a few online college classes at a public university (state school minimum) in stats and get an A in it. b. So if you want to do Foreign Service, MPP is an option, but honestly, you would be better off doing an IR degree. The most non-quant one (but still sufficiently quant based) is Georgetown's Walsh School of Foreign Service. There is also GW Elliot School. c. If you want to work at a Federal Agency, the easiest way is to get a PMF - it used to be really competitive, but it is much less so. Honestly, you can go to any top 20 policy or or IR school and achieve that. d. If you want to do immigration reform, if you are doing it from the political side, you don't need a degree, you can jump in now. If you are trying to do it from the law reform side, it helps to go to law school. If you want to do it from the research angle, you need to be a numbers guy. Bottom line is that MPP can get you your basket of options, Foreign Service, Federal Agency, or Immigration reform, but you aren't going the most direct route except for Federal Agency - which you don't need to go to the best schools for, just a good enough one. What are you willing to risk?

Why are you seeking an MPP? I am asking to understand how I can better advise you.

1. I think you are conflating academic competence and target job, which can be related but not necessarily. I still don’t know what type of job or career you are interested in within the broad category of politics, so I can’t more precisely advise you. Yes a grad degree can help in certain respects, but more so for campus hire roles into the federal government, consulting firms, and research orgs. Also, let me tell you point blank that it is pretty rare for a career switcher to land a Associate Director, Director or CoS role after policy grad school at a major organization (not counting small shops with title inflation). You will have to start as an Associate or Senior Associate and then work your way up. If you are referring to politics as in campaigns, lobbying, and political management, that is definitely networking and grinding it out although a grad degree can grease the wheels. You might get away with being a Manager if you do something tangential to your current job, but the further away you switch, the less you can expect. 2. McCourt is where ethics and ambition comes to die (exception for the MPM program since that has a much better program management). As an alum, I would be wary of hiring a McCourt alum unless there are significant mitigating factors that show ambition and ethics. Also if you want to go into politics, political power players don’t really go to McCourt. GU Politics program they brag about caters to undergrads and will matter less when McCourt moves downtown. The few McCourt alums that are elected to federal office are either unremarkable or arrested for crimes. My recommendation is to figure out what jobs you really want to have and then I can recommend school options.

1. If you are looking for a career in politics, you do not need to go to grad school - period... Figure out a way to get involved in local politics and rise up. If you want to go the work in DC for a fed government politics for a little bit route... grad school can help, but it is really easy to burn out that way, and I know next to 0 people who did it and lasted. 2. I don't think you would qualify for MPMs unless you have 7 or 8 years of non-intern work experience. Even if you did, you should not go to them unless you have a deeper resume. MPM programs are really for people to add some grad school shine to their resume + advancing in their current industry and not really for job switching. 3. You can and should do much better than McCourt. If you hate quant so much, I recommend more suitable academic options than McCourt. 4. The fame or prestige of your recommender doesn't matter beyond being an established professional who knows you well. The recommendation is about understanding how you would fit in the community, your employability, and compensate for any of your weaknesses.

Honestly, you just need an A micro from any respectable state school. I took online courses via Colorado State. As long as your transcript doesn't differentiate between online or in person schools, you'll be fine... For schools that are more quant intense, it helps if you have intermediate micro... but it doesn't help if you get like below a B+ from it.

There was a CNN report of a JHU SAIS recent grad - 2020 exposed as a Russian spy (allegedly). https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/24/politics/russian-spy-johns-hopkins-classmates-accent-suspicious/index.html Just wondering if anyone else has interesting stories of classmates who seemed a bit too good to be true (or too interesting). Let's keep identities out of this and speak generically.