GradSchoolGrad

So from a pure baseline perspective, you are what admissions committees have referred to as a star candidate - as in you really check the block for the major categories. Your GRE is a bit lower than normal star candidates, but given your high GPA, I don't view it as a problem. I think for you, the challenge is more so about what works best for your career interests. So some things that would be good to know about you to help guide you. 1. How comfortable are you with Calculus and Calculus based econometrics? Academically? Professionally? 2. I just want to make sure that you aren't trying to target for a PhD... you border line sound like you might be tracking for that as a possibility... but just want to make sure. 3. Where do you want to take you career? Focused on data analysis + research, or being a policy mover and shaker (basically some level of operations of some sort 4. How dedicated are you to K-12 education? I say this because of all the policy areas across grad schools, I saw the highest proportion of policy area pivots from K-12 education to another policy area (including myself) due to how crazy competitive it is + very clique community + oversaturated it is with talent + limited NEW innovation / multidisciplinary aspects with the field which made it rather unattractive 5. How much do you care about scholarships? Of your listed options so far, I would imagine McCourt and Penn to probably most willing to grant you scholarships, but I view those (at this point) as some of the weaker options for you. Right now... my general thoughts are: 1. UPENN MSPP-DA does not make sense unless you are trying to pursue a PhD + are interested in one of their niche programs/projects/connections ongoing. From a pure career perspective, it probably has the least range of career flexibility 2. HKS MPP / Chicago Harris MPP - are probably the top notch programs for your area - broadly speaking. Terry Sanford is great if you want to have a more state and local focus. 3. Another option is to M.ED. program with a data focus at Peabody, Stanford, or Johns Hopkins - again depending on your dedication to K-12. 4. McCourt can be a good option if you want to do heads down in DC area think tanks / research firms with a data focus, but little else besides that (basically not really operational stuff) or innovation stuff unless you want to dual degree. 5. Another option for you is if you want to do a data focused policy program. Chicago, Heinz, and McCourt all have them (I would say Heinz and Chicago are probably tied for quality... McCourt Data Science Policy Master's is a much better organized program than the straight MPP. Lets carry the convo from here.

To answer your last question - the answer is no, and part of the reason is because how programs do update their curriculums and you legitimately want to check one by one. I mean programs don't go from quant heavy to non-quant heavy. However, some programs have gone from Calc intense to software intense quant.

First of all, it is becoming more common, but the people going to any consulting from policy school is still a small minority. You have to understand that the vast majority of those people that you speak of go into 2 types of consulting. 1. US Federal / Public Service consulting - this is the vast majority of the Deloitte and Booz Allen types. It is next to impossible to get one of these roles without being a US Citizen. 2. US commercial sector consulting, this is the McKinsey, BCG, and Bain and really the only 3 schools that you get to this are HKS, Princeton, and Harris. HOWEVER - the pipeline for this pre-Covid is pretty difficult, even if you went to one of those 3 schools. During COVID - it will be only more difficult as their talent demand has decreased. Your chances for consulting will be better for outside of the US, where the competition is less stiff. I have known of people come to the US for graduate school and pivot to private sector consulting outside of the US. That will be your easiest route. If you really want to do consulting in the US, you will be better off doing an MBA, especially now.

4 things. 1. As silly as it may sound, your GRE score can probably be a difference maker for you. 2. One of your weaknesses is that given you have approx average work history/work experience/GPA and slightly below average school brand for the more competitive schools (not trying to be mean about it, but these things matter), is that you lack Calc or more advanced Econometrics (equivalent can be something like Physics or Engineering), so there may be concern about your ability to do Quant for the more Quant intense schools. 3. Your disaffection for leadership is going to be an issue for you. Leadership is something that schools look for and will seek from you throughout a better MPP and MPA program (either way) + what carries you over your peers a lot of terms of landing roles. For example, I didn't have that much quant experience, but my leadership experience + habits put me over for many internship / job opportunities. If you seriously have a disaffection for leadership, then the jobs best suited for you will be analysis roles, and you would be better off doing a data analytics program or going to an MPP program like McCourt (where leadership isn't talked about much and is something that isn't valued as much). Lots of MPP programs I met really index on leadership strongly both for curriculum and for what employers look for. The extreme might be Batten School at UVA... but like I said, all top flight schools do so. 4. You are all over place in terms of Geography. Where the school is determine their network strength (with some exceptions). If you seek to go to Goldman/USC, I really hope you are okay with being West Coast.

So I think the right answer is this: 1. If you can avoid it, avoid it. The reason why is because you don't want to be the grad student stuck in undergrad. It isn't good for your professional and academic development. I knew a 30 year old grad student who went to undergrad parties on the reg and her maturity regressed and wasn't able to socialize with adults professionally. Consequence - wasn't able to get a summer internship because she struck out on every single interview. 2. Love happens in strange and obscure ways. If you just happen to meet a super mature Senior or Junior (mature Junior - preferably of drinking age) that you fall in love with... that might be fine. That is where I would draw the red line.

BOTH... unless my MC/MPA friends lied

Well it isn't job offers. It is networking opportunities. It is often talked about by staff at Georgetown the a shockingly number of McCourt students, especially those who come from a lower rated undergraduate school, acquire the Georgetown brand and develop an entitlement mentality. By that, I mean, they feel that they no longer have to do the work to network and build relationships to get jobs. They just think they can flash the Georgetown brand and have things land to them. I mean that false reality crashes to different people at different times during their grad career. However, I have also seen people be hit by that reality and then loiter in the "I can't compete with Harvard" mentality and then lose drive. Bottom line, time and again, I see that McCourt students lack professionalism and grit. A lot of times, when I try to connect a McCourt person to an opportunity I have in my rolodex, they either: 1. Leave me cold or tell me to scram because they got something else they rather do they think they can easily acquire 2. Go to the networking opportunity totally unprepared (I don't blame them completely... McCourt never emphasized networking skills)... and sometimes I get a follow on call about why I referred a dud.

Well with LinkedIn, I set it up to follow my undergrad and grad school alumni network. So if someone posts that they need a job help, I see if I can do something for them. I have had amazing success with undergrads... However, with McCourt kids... I'm done. Too many struggle buses.

At Harvard, there is extensive collaboration and cross-programming between HBS and HKS (my sister went there + my former boss and I am a regular higher ed watcher). Concurrent to that there is noticeable semblance of program rivalry between HBS and HKS, more akin to sibling rivalry (I mean it is true that HBS gets more money and has lower acceptance rates). However, HKS is still wildly respected among the Harvard community and integrates with the rest of the Harvard academic community quite nicely. I use this as a point of comparison. McCourt on the other hand is at large viewed by the Georgetown community as a spoiled brat (since they got a $100 million endowment 7 years ago or so... it is spread out over decades + major institutional commitments, so it isn't exactly the cash cow people think it is either) whose general student quality bring down the Georgetown brand and as a school has struggled to do well integrating with the rest of Georgetown. As someone who had the benefit of working with University administrators I can say that the backroom thoughts about McCourt playground behavior was not the nicest. Yes, I had a nice scholarship myself, and I know people who got $20k scholarships - it wasn't that hard when the economy was booming and all policy schools were struggling to get sufficient applicants. However, I will say that the ROI of the McCourt experience on average is noticeably less than at other schools they compete with, both in terms of career returns and skills improvement. My three issues with McCourt MPP where: 1. Anti-Career Focused Culture As a professional school, I was shocked by how taboo it was talk about career. There was a strong focus on being nice and that meant that if talked about career you may make other people feel bad that they might not have been targeting their career interests. It doesn't help that much of the core faculty still mostly talk in terms of academic research goals and not how best to target career interests (notable exceptions abound). Career services tries, but when no one wants to play ball, there is not much game. There is reason there is so much career dissatisfaction + below undergrad post graduation salary metrics (last time they published it). 2. Not a Values Driven Community Even though Georgetown as a University emphasizes a lot on doing things for good / humanity and etc., the policy school seems to be a Georgetown values free zone. There is very little sentiment of doing policy for good. There is a lot of supporting XYZ policy because you want to be seen as part of the popular crowd. Consequently, there was little real genuine political discussion about anything, because people didn't trust each other to be honest brokers to have intelligent conversations about anything. Without a sense of community creating student cohesion, you basically have grad students gone wild making Public Policy Cliques. Yes there were Mean Girls' type behavior like Excel Sheets ranking the American men by attractiveness (supposedly Pivot Tabeled and everything). 3. Little Professional Development The coursework was definitely challenging and I did pick up some academic skills. However, in terms of professional skills, I regressed, and probably would have ended up worse off than I started had I not caught myself and took remedial measures. Part of this has to do with how little to no professional development is incorporated into the programming. There was no system for peer career coaching (ad hoc peer coaching was frowned upon per the anti-career culture) and little to no formal guidance and direction for career by the school. The most that was available was guests/alums who came in every now and then at 7PM to talk about their career paths. Consequently, every time I talk to a McCourt student (to this day), I expect and get someone who struggles with holding a professional networking conversation and struggles with professional communication (written and oral) in general. For example, I am talking about LinkedIn messages pretty much demanding a job or when I follow up with a McCourt student about my attempt to get the person an interview, I get sarcastic replies about how the person doesn't care for the opportunity after all.

As someone who recently finished an MBA, I will tell you the 3 most common tool: SPSS - oldie and a goodie, R studio, excel with crazy macros Some schools will use more advanced versions of SPSS.

As to McCourt, they do have surprisingly generous funding, but its a school that the rest of Georgetown kind of looks down upon due to lower than expected student quality and less impressive career outcomes. I'm not talking about HBS vs. HKS type stuff. I'm talking about alumni, grad students, and current undergrad students in Georgetown have told me they have sense of McCourt having one of the weaker grad school reps in Georgetown. Outside of Georgetown, most people don't now, and students hope the Georgetown brand takes them places, but like I said the student quality given the brand quality of Georgetown leaves a lot to be desired. Location only helps you if you can score awesome internships, which is possible, but you don't exactly have a strong peer group helping you out (if anything, they weigh you down). Happy to talk more about this in detail if you DM me.

Hey, I get it, I applied to grad school after being a public servant for 8 years as well. Neither of us are saying you should apply later. However, 3 things: 1. From a practical stand point - applying to extra schools just to get a scholarship means a total waste of a time because unless you are extraordinary talent (former Olympian, former Pultzer prize winning journalist, and etc.) you won't be able to leverage scholarship from a lower prestige school to higher prestige school. Honestly, negotiating with a school threatening that you won't go without scholarship is probably more effective of a tactic vs. leveraging an alternative scholarship from a less regarded school. 2. I get that financial security is important and everything, but one of the most interesting things I saw in policy school was how the former non-profits and public servant folks would be the first to do XYZ questionable activity for cash because they thought they earned the right to from their years of prior service. I am not saying that is you and I understand you are trying to do the right thing. Just saying - hearing some echos to the past. 3. Since you are a strong candidate, I recommend you go where you will actually get the best ROI in terms of career outcomes. So for example, McCourt probably not the best options for career outcomes. Granted they haven't put out fact sheet with average post graduation salary in a few years (and the last one they conveniently omitted some people they couldn't track down / ignored the outliers with extremely high salary), last time they did post McCourt salary was less than post Georgetown undergrad.

In all fairness, that is because so much of HKS' MPA is constructing and interpreting data for policy purposes. This quant focus will differentiate you in the job market / give you more job opportunities. There are plenty of MPAs that are less quant focused.

Again it is more than just being quantitatively concerned, but you have to add on to how those schools simply have less people applying to them than HKS per admissions officer, so it is easier for them to discern graduation ability. Also, HKS broadly speaking has a wider range of applicants in terms of unique professional and international school backgrounds... adding to the level of complexity. NYU is less quant intense though.

First of all, ethically, you shouldn't just be applying to places just to get scholarship offers. Ethically, that just isn't right (you are taking away admissions seats from people who really want to go while you have 0 interest to attend, even as a safety school), and as someone trying to go not public policy, that is concerning. Now in reality, when you do get scholarship offers, there are 2 things to keep in mind. 1. Scholarships generally roll down not up. That means the if you get 30K of Scholarship from Georgia State, at most, Harris school might give you 5K more (AT MOST...), but not much. If you got 10K from Harris, McCourt might swing you 20K). I have known of exceptions for highly vaunted students (like former Navy Seals). 2. Please be aware that school's generally know each other's budgeting situation. They meet each other in conferences and have a good idea if other programs are under budgetary stress or not. THE BIG UNKNOWN. 1. You have to keep in mind that due to COVID - a lot of people deferred their acceptance to MPP programs, so this year's application cycle might be a lot more intense - meaning less money to float around (this is especially true as many schools are under financial duress).

I'm going to speak based off my general understanding of HKS and HBS. The difference between HKS and HBS s the level of quant intensity required necessary to graduate. Bottom line is that the HKS curriculum requires a depth of math that IMO is a shade higher than HBS (in terms of basic graduation requirements). This is why HKS requires you to have quantitative portfolio. Sure, you can live without the GRE to make that assessment. However, given the large number of applicants to HKS + limited pool of admissions support (we can go on and on about how HKS has budgetary challenges - counterintuitive, but true). Taking away the GRE makes their ability to assess that much more difficult. Yes, the quant requirement has been a historic source of struggle for many in HKS - especially those years removed from undergraduate education, and the admissions wants to make sure they get people that can legitimately graduate the curriculum. The system isn't designed to cater towards one individual. it is designed to balance the many types of individuals that apply to HKS. Compared to how primitive I have seen a few Admissions programs be, I would say HKS' is rather robust and done well with competing challenges in mind. Logistics is the mother of all operations... even admissions.

First off, no offense or anything, but usually when when people say MPP or IR without giving further clarification, that gives me a sense that they have no confident idea of what they want to do coming out of graduate school and graduate school was just thought of the "logistical next step". The two programs are decently different, and have different career outcomes (granted there is a fair amount of overlap). I can't speak for Sciences Po, but right now, unless the schools take extreme measures due to insufficient applications, I don't think you'll be able to get into any of these schools. At best, you may be able to get into Georgetown MPP, because they tend to be a bit more lenient with international students. However, at best that is squeak by. Here is the reason why: 1. Top UK schools have a GPA minimum requirement to even qualify to apply for US students. Cambridge and Oxford usually float around 3.7 for their MPP. I know they also have a high GPA requirement for the IR programs too (don't remember it off the top of my head). My sister who got in straight from undergrad at 3.9+ GPA) 2. US schools value work experience. Internships do not equal full time work experience. I have met people that go to US programs straight from undergrad but they had at least a 3.7 GPA + awesome internships. If I were you, I would get some work experience (probably a good 3 years) and then consider grad school at a US program somewhere later.

I think you misunderstood my previous comment. From the perspective of a Non-Profit community, obviously your past matters in terms of getting hired. I'm just highlighting that the advocacy and programming people traditionally will see the MBA grads (no matter where they come from) as strategy and finance folks - somewhat divorced with the issues at hand. I saw this in the education Non-Profit space whereby leaders were almost all former teachers, but since they got their MBAs and worked at consulting firms, they were viewed as part of the machine. Yes, that should be fine in terms of work experience to be competitive for an MBA, and you would be eligible for minority focused scholarships via MBA. However, like I said, the difference between MPA and MBA is that it is more than how shiny your resume is. It is about how you can coherently communicate and explain why an MBA is the right path for you. There are plenty of people who had a shiny resume rejected from an MBA program for failing interviews.

It isn't about how well branded they are as long as you considering a top 30 school. It is about relevant alumni network + programming. If there are noticeable alums (# and level) in the Non-Profit / Social Impact space that works to your advantage. Also, if there is programming that supports non-profit and social impact learning + career paths, that also helps. Also please understand where an MBA helps and hurts. MBA gives you access to Non-Profit management from a portfolio and operations perspective. However, from an issues angle, the advocacy folks (unless it is very business issue oriented non-profit) will look at you with a level of suspicion. Lots of exceptions, but that is historically the case. Also please understand that getting into an MBA is much more difficult than an MPP/MPA - especially since applications for MBAs have already risen for this coming cycle. They might be less of stickler for GPA, but they will care more about your work experience and social skills. Almost all leading MBAs require an interview and a bad interview (or pre-interview submissions) can eliminate you. Wagner does have a really good reputation with non-profits in NYC, but you will likely be slated for more of analysis / programming role. know people that get promoted to a leadership role down the line.

I come from a national security background and I strongly recommend against your trying to go to graduate school as your primary post graduation option if you are truly interested in national security. I recommend 6 alternative career paths instead. a. Apply to the CIA (their applications usually end on November), and they are looking for people. b. Leverage your current opportunities into a full time role c. Go in Federal consulting (Deloitte, Accenture Federal, and even the Boutiques - look around) d. Law enforcement from the analytical side (all the agencies... including ones you never thought about + states and locals) e. State/local law enforcement (I know this might be controversial for some), but this can be a long run Pathway to national security with graduate school later down the road - I have seen it. f. Peace Corps (hey its international experience!) Do I think you'll be able to get into Georgetown SSP or a program at Elliot... Yes - however, just because you can doesn't mean you should. Graduate school, unlike undergraduate is not about grades... It is all about 3 things. 1. Networking 2. Internship/research experiences 3. Getting a job. You might think that because you have some internships experiences you can coherently speak about things, but the reality is that it will be hard to be taken seriously. The going in assumption by anyone talking to you is that you think you want to do national security because of what you learned in class + appeal of it, but the confidence of you wanting to be n the business long-term given no full time work experience will simply be not there. Also, you will be in competition with your peers to get on research projects + internships + full time stuff and etc, and by not having full time work experience, your resume will always be 2nd round consideration. Every person straight from undergrad I met who tried to do the grad school route for national security has landed in a job equivalent to what people get straight from undergrad, and rather uninteresting ones at that. Academically, Georgetown SSP isn't that hard... it is about maximizing the opportunities you get while in grad school that matters. You only have so much time and money to go grad school. Make the best of it and don't rush into it coming from undergrad. I AM SO GLAD I DID NOT!

1. So first off... those MSc programs (which are all over the place), really don't do much for your career unless you just want to chill for a year. Also, given how your programs are over the place, you might end having to explain your grad school choice if you end up seeking jobs that are drastically different. 2. The only Quant class that would help you would be if they involved Calc or Econometrics... I did some low level econometrics before I started grad school, but I had to drop my intermediate econometrics class just because I had a hard time learning it online. I did have a full time job at the same time though. My recommendation is to go with what you got. I did it online via Colorado State - good enough school and relatively lower prices. 3. In terms of grad schools, if you really want to do health area (which interestingly, from what I saw has relatively slack interest despite high job demand), I think you should expand you horizon to MBA (health focused) and MPH in addition to MPP/MPA. MBA especially will help you acquire management positions later in life since it is assumed you appreciate financial management. Advocacy groups generally require a graduate degree in order to promote or be hired onto VP level and above. I met a 40 something grad student once with a Harvard degree who told me that he was only doing it in order to be promoted at his advocacy firm, since his not having a grad degree denied him a promotion. That being said, if you go the MBA route, Vanderbilt is the best Health focused one, and GWU is good to. MPHs vary greatly on the level of quant required, so you should check school by school. GWU does have a good program though. I see MPHs compete with MPPs/MPAs for jobs regularly, especially in the advocacy space. Not that many people go to advocacy from MPP/MPA, although it happens. Surprisingly, I only knew of 2 people who went to advocacy from my Georgetown MPP, and one of them was Canadian. 4. What I recommend you do is try to book coffee chats with advocacy leaders and ask them what they prefer for someone to rise up the ranks in their org. My bet is that they'll say to try it out without grad degrees (I also think you should try it out first). If they were to pick a party favorite of grad degrees, I'm guessing MBA and/or MPH before MPP... but who knows.

So I want to start off with this note - no one has any idea how competitive or not competitive US MPP programs will be this application cycle because you have 4 unknowns: 1. Will applications surge due to the bad economy? - traditionally yes, but there is an aversion towards students debt 2. Will those who deferred seek to return to school? - traditionally yes, but who knows if there are still COVID concerns 3. Will there be a massive drop of international students? - my bet is that it depends on who wins the election. If Trump wins, international student numbers might drop like a rock 4. Will there be a surge of interest in public policy or are people disillusioned with public policy being a solution? Traditionally people get inspired to go policy school when there are major high attention grabbing social problems going on... but I don't know if Americans are becoming increasingly disillusioned of policy as a solution.... That being said, I'll give you a shake based upon pre-COVID conditions. Major information gaps: 1. Top 50 city school in DC? What he heck does that mean? Top 50 school located in DC? - that would be an alternative way to say GWU. 2. What are you trying to do with a policy degree? I ask because schools look for diversity by type (generally speaking). 3. What your actual GRE scores are. Assuming doesn't get you too far... so I'm just not going to consider that for now. By school... a. Harvard MPP - I think your biggest limiting factor is how weak your quant portfolio is. By that I mean, you have no indication of having ever taken any semblance of econometrics or calculus b. Berkeley Goldman MPP - I'll defer to someone else since I honestly don't know the school's admissions that well. I will say from a career perspective, it makes sense if you want to go there to go West Coast, but doesn't make sense if you want to return to DC or go East Coast from a networking and career opportunity perspective. c. Georgetown McCourt - I think you can get in. A big question is if you'll get scholarship or not because I don't have a sense of your undergrad school. I say this because Georgetown likes to scholarship people with big undergrad brands (as long as their academic performance was good enough to get in) or super interesting work experience, even if their academics were less than stellar. For example, even though our 2 Harvard undergrad folks had rather uninteresting work history + extracurriculars, they both got some of the higher end scholarships. Those who came from less name brand schools did get scholarships is they had extensive work experience. Your's is interesting, but maybe not extensive enough. I know people who got scholarships with nearly 3.0 GPAs with interesting 4 years work experience but went to a name brand name liberal arts school. That being said, if you are interested in politics, McCourt is not the place for you unless you want to leverage the Georgetown brand to work on Capital Hill while going to school. The GU Politics is really fur undergrads. It is really for people who want to chase after data analytics roles. Also, if you care about making real social impact or discussing political viewpoints/ideas this is not the place for you. McCourt is culturally about show and tell rather than making a difference or having an academic curiosity. d. GW - Trachtenburg - same, I think you can get in... not that familiar with how they do scholarships though. e. UVA - Batten - I think you can get in - again not familiar with them about scholarship. Batten is an interesting school. I'm really a big fan of how they emphasize ethical leadership + quant in one + have a really strong student community. f. Watson MPA - just don't do it. Its like Stanford MPP... great University, not so great program... as much advertising they might add to it. g. All the MScs in the UK - I'm really confused why you want to do those. Those are not exactly comparable professional terminal degrees. Generally speaking the people seeking them are straight from undergrad. If seek to come back to the US, I don't think they'll have that much brand value for you. What you should consider - what are you career goals coming out of an MPP - that can help determine what school you go to. Schools you should also be considering: 1. Sanford - Duke 2. University of Maryland - strong safety school for you in my opinion. 3. UNC Chapel Hill MPP - also a good safety

I mean I think there is a difference between non-law/medicine professional schools (MBAs, MPPs, MSW, MPH, and etc.) vs. JD/MD vs. pure academic. Professional schools have become more holistic within the past 3 years or so, and I think you just missed the wave of change. One of my former professors actually led the push for making the SAT optional and it has been interesting to see how that has developed of late.

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.

Subject tests would be ideal, but adding more tests to the diverse (in terms of academic matter) US education landscape would be a logistical nightmare. Math and Verbal are decent barometers (emphasis on decent, not great) of two major baselines that having strong necessity regardless of program about the ability to graduate (not to get a job, but ability to graduate and ease of graduation). .