GradSchoolGrad

So the schools in my opinion that have as good if not better Social Policy (well maybe not as good as HKS) are --> 1. Duke Terry Sanford (You should be able to take classes at UNC's Public Health School) 2. U. Michigan Ford (They have a neighboring Public Health School you can take classes at) and just maybe... just maybe --> if you are okay as a strong independent researcher 3. Princeton's Policy School (probably the hardest quant program out there) 4. Syracuse Maxwell

If you interest is health (and you are married to it), I honestly think you are looking at the wrong degree. I recommend you look at MPHs instead. The big MPH programs are Johns Hopkins, Harvard Chan School, and Columbia. You also learn the same quant skills but get more area specific focus and attention and network. The reality is that there is a major market imbalance within MPP programs whereby you do have a fair amount of professors interested in health policy + and labor market demand for it, but I have never really seen strong health policy interests and I doubt you would have as meaningful or sizable a cohort. LBJ and Price are seen as a good Policy programs, but not the best. I think you could get into the BEST MPH schools and serve your career interests much better.

It sounds like you are doing a shot in the dark strategy and honestly even if I was on a fly in the wall in every single admissions committee, I honestly don't think I could coherently tell you which schools would likely or not likely give you a shot. Your situation is just rather unique to begin with. Here is what I recommend you do: 1. Rock the GRE (all 3 categories)--> Thiswill get rid of any concerns about your ability to graduate + you can more easier chalk up the less than stellar GPA to youth indiscretion. If you don't do stellar, you chances in an established reputable program may likely be game over. 2. Have a coherent story with why your undergrad GPA is so bad. If you don't have a compelling story, at the very least chalk it up to being young and dumb and how you have matured as an adult. 3. Figure out how the school is relevant to you. You seem to have done a scattershot of every single program and I struggle to see how some of these would even be relevant to you. Maybe I am missing here, but I fail to see how any IR program like Johns Hopkins SAIS or Fletcher is relevant your tech interests. You need to differentiate between how a class might have been relevant vs. how a program might be relevant. This is because though GDPR has international influence and ramifications, at the core of it, it is domestic public policy interest. That being said, from the outside looking in, a policy program is best suited for you. That being said, you probably want a program that actually has some meaningful engagement in tech, so that in my mind kills of Brown, William & Mary, McCourt (ya they have a tech club, but beyond that, they don't really do anything in tech or collaboration in tech) Lets be honest, you are not going to have recommenders send a dozen or so LORs. You are better off just applying to 4 schools which in your case would be a. super reach, reach, less reach, and target. Among the ones left, I would figure out what those 4 will be.

You are insanely competitive as a candidate based on basic stats. Just highlight illness in the addendum. The only thing that concerns me is your lack of explanation on WHY you want to go to policy school. Your school choices hereby don't exactly have the most coherent pattern which confuses me.

1. If you want to be the FSO (I'm assuming for the US), there are essentially 4 big "fraternities" so to speak. a. HKS b. Georgetown MSFS c. Fletcher d. Columbia SIPA Beyond that, you'll have chances, but you really won't be going in with any major built in network advantage. 2. You'll find very quickly that gender and development are two of the most disproportionately over represented interests in IR/policy world. Traditionally schools want people who are passionate about things + social impact, but increasingly, schools are focused upon your ability to get jobs, and those two areas are ULTRA competitive do to high demand low supply of jobs. 3. Yes, you seem lost on what you really care about. I recommend you tighten up your messaging. You don't want to make it a shotgun blast of random things you care about. You want to have a semi-focused message. 4. European schools (with the exception of UK schools) generally don't do the best with interdisciplinary academics and experiential learning. Obviously, you'll learn what is local really well, but they will be the first to tell you from a thematic and programatic perspective, the US schools have them beat. Also, even if they are cheaper, you may struggle with actually being able to get a job in the US.

1. So I'm just going to imagine that you went to Boston College as a point of reference. 2. I think you are generally fine with the exception of HKS MPP + JHU SAIS. These programs are exceptionally quant heavy/focused and like people with prior quant (specifically things involving calculus and/or econometrics). 3. I actually think your biggest weakness (and it might not be a weakness because you just haven't expressed it) is a clear idea of WHY you want to go to grad school for and what type of IR are you most interested in. IR schools try to balance 2 things - diversity you can't control (ethnic, national, and background) and diversity you choose (area you are interested in). I think you are in good shape with diversity you can control, especially having a tech sales background - which is more unique. HOWEVER, I have no idea what is your purpose for pursuing grad school. Failure to express a meaningful purpose can really put your application behind even if it shines elsewhere. Once you express you purpose, admissions will then weight you against the rest of the student population. If you are something more unique, it helps you somewhat. If you are less unique, it goes against you a bit. From where I have sit, there always seems to be a disproportionate number of migration, refugee, and IDEV folks. HOWEVER, that can vary by school. 4. Don't worry about leadership as long as you did it as an adult at work. Grad schools care about showing leadership, but care less when you did it as long as show involvement. 5. Other schools thoughts. a. I'm really curious why you want to do Hertie MPP. Like any MPP school it has a wide range of academic opportunities, but it makes more sense if you want to do Euro oriented stuff (or maybe appreciate their angle towards technocracy) and less sense if you want to do general IR / IDEV. b. I can't speak coherently to Sciences Po, but I will say, I have never encountered any American in the non-academic IR space from Sciences Po. I'm sure someone else can speak better to its value for job portability back to the students (or anywhere else). c. Columbia SIPA is an all around great IR school, just be warned that it is notorious for having less than cohesive community - since everyone has their NYC lives. d. I really like Georgetown MSFS due to its extensive interdisciplinary opportunities, but not everyone appreciates DC land e. I know this is super controversial --> I am not a fan of Fletcher Tufts. I wrote about it previously here: f. Other thoughts - there may be programs in LSE the might fit you well. Also if you are more interested in the tech side of things with an international flair - an MBA might be better suited for you.

Lately, I have been hearing about this argument that our hyper-partisan + divisive society is attributed to how we have too many people with graduate degrees given the marketplace demand. Article in the economist is here: https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2020/10/24/can-too-many-brainy-people-be-a-dangerous-thing Just curious about what people think about this? Anecdotally, I have noticed an expectations frustration gap. This is whereby people get admitted to a graduate program and think the brand of the degree + school should carry them through, but then get really frustrated when they realize the potential outcomes mismatch their expectations. As someone with two graduate degrees (and having contemplated a 3rd), I realize this is ironic for the question coming from me. However, I'm all about listening to all perspectives, even if is critical of my own choices.

So the honest answer is that 2 things have to match 1. A Department’s outlook and 2. Each individual person’s background and story. I isn’t that common but I have seen some MPPs go PhD route (the stats I have heard among various schools range from 1 to 2% to any PhD program. If you have the grades and background to apply to PhD now as a concurrent program attendee. I recommend you do try it. You don’t want to stress out with PhD applications during MPP. At the end of the day it helps if you have a relationship or discussion with someone from the program to understand what their perspectives are. I have heard of programs that respect professional degrees (Harvard being one them), but others view it as extraneous.

Oh I forgot to mention, since you haven't graduated yet, I recommend you take at least one more quant oriented class to improve your chances. Something with tint of econometrics would be great. I mean your GPA is so high, its not like you can go much lower. A more advanced micro-econ would be great. Anything that involves Calculus would also be helpful.

Wow! You are in such an advantageous position. Lets focus on 2 things. 1. Your 1st Undergrad I view your first undergraduate (and all the things you did with it - extra curricular and classes) as irrelevant. However, I'm not sure as what is the best tactic for doing it so. You could check with each admissions office and get there take. I view them telling you to do one of two things. 1. (What I think might be the smartest thing) Send them your transcript for your both schools - but prioritize the good one up top) + send an academic addendum to explain how you fixed yourself - they usually love a turn around story 2. Basically start your resume + application from enlisting in the Army onwards and work as if you never went your first undergrad HOWEVER... you always want to be honest, this is why I would check with admissions. Stay something along the lines that you went to college as a child prodigy, but it didn't work out for you at all so you pivoted your life. 2. Schools with a Good Community (AKA: Avoiding the George Mason undergrad experience) a. Lets start with what schools are very well known for having terrible community engagement. 1. Columbia SIPA 2. NYU Wagner Bottom line, most people have their own NYC life and aside from niche policy specialities (that are really tight with each other), there really isn't much greater community spirit b. The size problem at HKS HKS is interesting because they have a very collegial culture. HOWEVER one problem with it is that the program is so big (they have their own mega building in Harvard Square for crying out loud) it can be logistically challenging to build a community, and I have met quite a few people that fell through the cracks (I have family members who went to HKS btw). c. The culture problem at Georgetown McCourt MPP Georgetown McCourt has the benefits of a centralized confined space for people to meet each other regularly (even when they move to the partition in the downtown) and a smaller program (about 120ish per year group --> all degree programs). HOWEVER... McCourt has this really interesting clique culture which the thing to do is to a join a following (usually this built upon clubs). The problem is that by spending time with building social cliques and which powerful person you align yourself to (or the many people you influence), people de-prioritize career, meaningful social impact, and etc.. Hence the more career successful people from McCourt are either the those who avoid the clique system. What is very interesting for me is that the people that ruled the cliques were people who never really held leadership or glamour roles previously and viewed this as their chance to shine. Most people who were previously Newspaper Editors, Class Presidents, Social Chairs, Sorority/Frat Chairs in college, aged out of that stuff and didn't care. I have written extensively about McCourt here: d. GWU Trachtenburg and the intern system GWU is interesting because they are all about having experiential learning and sending people to internship experiences throughout the year. That naturally means a more diluted community from what I seen. 3. Schools with Amazing Community So the schools I know with amazing community (and great programming too) are: a. Duke Terry Sanford b. Carnegie Melon - Heinz (especially the DC campus option --> they all seemed rather tight for going to the DC campus) c. UVA Batten (although this skews young) d. Oxford MPP (rather unique cultural experience --> I really love the British style of no holds bar open conversation education + pub learning 4. What you should know about being prior military So although you are in advantageous situation, how advantageous your situation is depends on how many other military apply (and the diversity of their background). You can never really predict that. However, being prior-Enlisted generally goes in your favor. HOWEVER... be warned in that a lot of times schools just want you so they can add up their stats of # of diverse students (which veteran often counts was) + will give your scholarship. I would say just be smart and don't be hood winked by we are pro-military pomp and see if each school serves your true interests. I have been in meetings where admissions Officers openly discuss how they needed more veterans and were strategizing how to modify their advertising to appeal more to veterans (marketing, not substance). This is especially true since the Chinese international student market has shrank and they need alternatives to achieve markers of diversity. 5. If you can help it, don't got to American SPS The school spent a lot of money investing in infrastructure + new programming, so it will look all shiny and special. HOWEVER, the fact of the matter is that American SPS simply is not that good of Public Policy School in terms setting up their students for success. I rarely (if ever) see their students in policy challenges, case competitions, symposiums, and research presentations (even one held at American University). Nor have I seen them at ANY of my internships (and I had 4-5 in Policy school). One thing that is sad is where I have seen a lot of recent SPS alumni - working as waiters and hosts at restaurants (seen them in Boston and DC, with recent grads overhearing my convos about MPP and they chime in that they went to SPS --> happened a few times now).

So I think you might be misunderstanding your strengths and weaknesses. So your strengths may very well be that you come from a non-policy background + you are an international student (as long as you don't come from an excessively over-represented country). Both factors make you diverse University brand matters, but given how you got a 4.0, you have done your best to mitigate any brand factors. What is more concerning is how you haven't taken hard quantitative classes. Coursera isn't viewed as equitable as a accredited institution. I made up for my quantitative gaps by taking online classes at Colorado State and getting As. Especially as an international student + concerned about university brand + potentially less difficult college curriculum, I strongly recommend you take the GRE. Doing really well on the GRE (85+ percentile gives the schools you are considering strong signals about your ability to graduate. Right now, I think you might have the most trouble getting into Ford --> they are a math heavy MPP program. The same is also true for Harris --> but they will take risks on people by having them go to math camp (I really hope you don't mind learning a lot of math). I am not that familiar with Evans, LBJ, or Glenn's curriculum and admissions. I really love the Batten MPP program, and it might be the best balance for you (mid-Quant, but they do a good job of teaching people to get up to speed).

It is better to have some takes than no takes at all. I was sick and tired of seeing so many graduate students going in with 0 visibility or guidance, so I decided to be part of the solution. Feel to agree or disagree as much as you want and discuss in the forum. Takes coming from a diversity of perspectives for a very expensive and time-consuming endeavor is enormously helpful. I never claim to be the end all and be all, but I do have a diverse array of experiences that lend itself to providing meaningful perspectives. You are welcome to join in the conversation rather than be destructive and a source of negativity.

Some things to think about. 1. With Biden going in as President, I think the US just became more attractive 2. As for COVID - I think broadly speaking, you can expect a return to normalcy by Jan 2022 and likely in person classes (with some restrictions like Facemasks and etc.) in Fall 2021. 3. Maybe not this application cycle (entering Fall 2021) but next application cycle (Fall 2022), I expect US grad schools to be exceptionally favorable for admissions for international students. This is because US schools emphasize diversity categories and being international (as long as you aren't over-represented) can work in your favor

Granted every school has a distribution of quality of students and SIS does have some bright spots (American does well in PMF historically speaking), from a pure hirability perspective, I find SIS last (and in some cases way behind among the IR Power 7 (HKS, MSFS, SAIS, Fletcher, SIPA, Elliot, and SIS). 1. Career outcomes: If you look at the numbers of students going to the harder career tracks (both traditional and new age pivots) vs program size --> FSO, Consulting, PMF,Tech StartUps, Major Brand Name Research Organizatons, and Big Tech, SIS is simply behind if not non-present. I have been at an International Trade Office for a Fortune 50, Major Defense Research Organization, and Major Silicon Valley Tech Company --> not a single SIS person (at least that self-identified as SIS) 2. Graduate school experential activities (competitions, conferences, symposiums, and etc.) in the IR space --> I do occasionally find SIS people, but not really 3. Alumni Depth and Reach - Don't get me wrong, there are definitely high flying SIS alums out there, but their numbers and stature pale in comparison to the others of the Power 7. One IR internship I had was to put together the bio books of the China experts for a symposium on Chinese trade. I made a mental note of how few SIS people there were. 4. Collaborative opportunities: In today's interdisciplinary world, a program is sometimes just as good as their relevant sister grad programs. American's MBA and Law and Policy programs are respectable, but far from top tier. Other schools mastered how to have their IR program sync and collaborate much better 5. Anecdotal experience reading SIS resumes. As someone who is in the position to recommend hiring, I will point blank tell you that removing grad school attendance, the average SIS person is less impressive professionally compared with Elliot people - period. I understand SIS to be pretty strong when it comes to community. However, community experience and access to the most competitive career opportunities are two separate things. Also - I will highlight that this year, the age of COVID did make things weird and different schools are having different pains. However, I highly doubt it will do any major reshuffling of the Power 7.

Age works in your favor. It makes you diverse. On top of that you are Brazilian, that makes you extra diverse (since you are coming from a less common country). Although that boasts your chances significantly, I don't know how much it boasts your chances especially since I don't know your GRE (which I recommend for international students, even if it is test optional) and TOFL. Assuming you are 85 percentile for each... I think you have a strong chance of getting to all those schools you identified except for Princeton (that is a challenge for any candidate because they have such a small program, they can be hyper selective). Also, I don't know how Oxford or Cambridge would count you because they require at least a 3.7 GPA to be eligible to apply (British schools are more annoying about GPA minimum standards than American schools).

I'm going to give some thoughts with two major assumptions: 1. Next year will be a much more relaxed application cycle 2. You intend to take the GRE and will get 85 percentiles and will share it. So thoughts: 1. Harris and Ford are both solid options, but please understand that though plenty alums do go to DC from there, it still leans towards more Midwest in terms of overall alumni network. 2. Unless you have a specific interest in anything related to California, I recommend you don't go to Goldman. I love the programs and I love some of their star professors. HOWEVER, California non-profit and policy perspective is a decently different beast / out look from the rest of the country. Also, more realistically, you wouldn't be taking advantage of its VERY STRONG regional strengths in West Coast. 3. The schools you should give more thought to from most promising to least: a. Duke Terry Sanford - this is probably the best MPP program in terms of Local, State, Non-Profit focus. The core curriculum isn't as quantitative as Harris or Ford... but you can easily fix that by taking more quant heavy electives. b. Carnegie Melon - Heinz - (there is a general option and a more quant option). I really love this program and everyone I met from there have been innovative go getters. (note there is a DC campus 2nd year option) c. Columbia SIPA - so normally, I wouldn't really recommend Columbia SIPA for domestic public policy... however NYC does have a rich environment for non-profit engagement + journalistic opportunities. Again, not as quant focused as Harris, but you can take care of that via electives. Please note that SIPA has historically struggled with have a strong community d. NYU Wagner - pretty much same deal as SIPA + same problems with community bonding. 4. Also, I challenge you think of a wider range of career opportunities. I see one of two people in public policy schools. a. Those that realize the range of opportunities and explore options rather than settle with something --> where I recommend you be b. Those that die hard about a limited range of career goals and ignore the actual career opportunity realities + what they might actually make them happy

Each of the programs has different strengths and weaknesses. Key things: 1. Harris MSCAPP will by far give the most resources and opportunities to leverage the latest and greatest in data science models mathematical capabilities. If you want to emphasize as being the most quantitatively proficient - MSCAPP is the way to go. 2. Georgetown McCourt MSDSPP will give you the best opportunities to engage in live public policy data sets and Federal level policy practitioners via the Georgetown empire + compacts it has. That being said, if you are big on the technical side, don't expect to do anything too technically novel and innovative. They kind of built this program from scratch as a collaboration between the Data Science Masters, Policy School, and Business School without the benefit of having strong computer science/math department institutional support because Georgetown is not driving this based upon technical prowess but policy connections. Also, if you have dreams of being in a management role, this is not the program for you (at least in terms of priming you to go from grad school to management). 3. CMU - First and foremost, this is a policy management program. The Data Analytics is focused on trying to help you conduct policy management whereas the other programs broadly teach you data science for policy analysis. Lots of cross over, but the emphasis is different. I really really like the how CMU Heinz does business in having a really innovation driven and go getter attitude. 4. U Penn - M.S. and Social Policy - never seen these people from this school in the policy universe - period (and I am decently plugged in with the policy community as practitioners). This program could make sense if you are trying to prepare for a PhD, but if you are trying to go straight to workforce, I would skip. I believe this is part of Penn's effort in the past decade to make all these cash cow Grad Programs and bank on the Penn name but they got programming struggle. Also, this is a 1 year program and it looks pretty basic. 5. USC - don't know enough to talk about it coherently.

This is a Master's focused thread. I don't think we would be that helpful for PhD guidance

1. So here is the thing, the two schools I think you have the highest chance (make that really good chance) of getting into and maybe give you the most scholarship, I recommend you DO NOT GO TO (even with scholarship, because it won't get you to where you want to go + maximize your career opportunities). A. Georgetown McCourt --> doesn't really have a good track record of Non-Profit / Policy Think Tank career track record (other than International Development via it is MIDP program). Also, in the MPP, people are pretty much allergic to "management" career tracks. Most people end up in analytical/advisory roles and there is a general program aversion for development management skills (outside of the military folks). B. CIPA --> small program the has limited connections. Cornell is trying to build it up, but it is programmatically and resource challenged 2. I think the best school options for you that you have a good chance of going to are: a. Duke - Terry Sanford b. Michigan - Ford (if you don't mind the calculus) c. Carnegie Mellon - Heinz (they have a 1 year Pittsburgh and 1 year DC campus option) d. University of Oxford - MPP program (unique option, but I think it is a great holistic learning experience and you really meet a lot of interesting people who come from all sorts of different industries). 3. I think you could have a shot at these schools, but it would be reach. a. Chicago - Harris 4. I don't know enough of this program, but it has very strong regional bent so unless you want to stay in California, I recommend against it. a. Berkeley - Goldman

I for one cannot give you an honest assessment because although urban planning is connected with public policy, the curriculum is still decently different (i.e. design aspects in there) and attracts other populations that I am not familiar with. I think it might just be too niche of a program for anyone to fairly assess you. Maybe someone could, but it would be difficult to.

congrats. I'm assuming Harris? get scholarship too?

If you are waitlisted, you are up to the discretion of the institution. I know places that have called up the waitlist a few months before classes start. There is no standardized timeline per se.

Okay now that you have given more clarity, I think we should reframe this. 1. If you top priority is about picking up data analytics skills, in addition to SAIS/MSFS, I think another great option for you would be U. Chicago Harris (they also have a decent extent of China related subject matter experts in at U. Chicago that you can cross-register with). 2. In terms of FSO --> Doing so without a Pickering and Rangel Fellowship means no guarantees. HOWEVER!!! --> It does help to go to a school where they have strong alumni histories SAIS/MSFS/SIPA/Elloit/Fletcher (although I think Fletcher is a terrible option going in the future I will warn that though American has been lumped with MSFS and Elliot previously, I recommend you avoid it. In my opinion, despite the massive infrastructure spend in American, programatically been losing the academic arms races in IR. 3. PMF is interesting... you can honestly do that from ANY grad program. No idea what it will be like next cycle, but during the Trump administration, competitiveness for PMF fell off a cliff compared to what it used to be. I know tons of people non- brand schools get PMF. Also, please keep in mind that with PMF, area specialty can be very helpful, but it doesn't 100% mean you will be working in your area of interest. It is a rotational program after all. If you need to add some safety schools, I recommend you think about UK --> Area studies in Oxford or MPP at Oxford. There are other opportunities with LSE. I personally don't like Cambridge because their program is simply not as developed. They all have opportunities to connect on Asia/China policy in various ways. Also,

Your post basically says that you are open to any and all job opportunities that a leverage an education focused on China and Southeast Asia, which no offense isn't really helpful. I recommend you think about things in a different way. What about China and Southeast Asia are you most interested about functionally speaking? 1. Trade -->JHU SAIS and Georgetown MSFS would be great for that 2. Defense --> GW Elliot School and Georgetown MSFS would probably take the cake for that 3. Human Rights --> Not sure what school would be great for that 4. International Business --> you might want to think about dual degree. I could go on. One thing I want to highlight is that with the exception of Harvard Kennedy School's MPP/MPA (and Princeton to a certain extent), you don't really directly do international relations with the degree (don't get me wrong, many people do, but it isn't directly structured for that). If you really want to do Asia focused domestic policy, then you need to go to policy school in Singapore to get topical.

Here is the thing, your experience is sooooooo good, I think you should be able to get into all these programs. HOWEVER... my concern for you is the lack of scholarship you would otherwise normally be afforded. If you can have another year of work experience and try next year (more likely a less competitive application cycle) to get scholarships + admission, I would do that if I were you.