GradSchoolGrad

Something I recommend people think about is how COVID-19 could possibly create massive resource issues for their graduate program / University for the next year or so. For elite programs like Harvard Kennedy School, Princeton's Woodrow Wilson, Columbia SIPA, this will likely be less of an issue since resource wise they tend to be relatively sheltered. They have the combination of A: A crazy war chest of endowment money, B: a name brand, and C : A persistent large pool of applicants (even if it shrinks, it will be fine) to deliver high quality students. All other policy schools (even other well-regarded ones) may struggle because COVID-19 has A: hurt their endowments and B: Massively shrank their applicant pool. The applicant pool shrinkage issue is particularly relevant if a grad program has become financially dependent on Chinese international students paying full cost. I have encountered some MPP programs that were approx up to 40% Chinese international students. With everything going with COVID-19 and all the related consequences. That population will likely shrink drastically. That means less resources for the program to spend (especially after fulfilling scholarship funding promises to students) on programming. What does this mean? If you were sold on a graduate program that had a sales pitch of "we are investing lots of resources into XYZ - like a new building, a new center, a surge of famous faculty" + the student population is not diverse, that program will suffer the most with COVID-19. If you were thinking about enrolling in that program, I recommend you think of alternatives that are more COVID-19 durable. As for deferring, I think that all depends on how stable your job is now and how much you want to gamble on when the recession will end.

There is no competition. 1. UC Berkeley is far and away the winner. They have a research center dedicated for tech policy. If you care about this policy area - UC Berkeley is a no brainer pick. https://ctsp.berkeley.edu/ 2. McCourt is a distant second. They are trying to get their hands on figuring out tech policy, but DC isn't a tech hub (outside of defense, and that is its own story that realistically doesn't apply to most international students). 3. I have known and heard about CIPA for a while, but I have never seen any CIPA student in any policy student event, conference, or activity (even in New York City). Being in upstate New York, you are simply removed from both the industry and government side of things.

What are your other options? I am concerned with both options. CIPA is a school that is far away from the action is about to undergo an aggressive reorg (not a good thing to be part of in higher education most of the time). McCourt has lots of cultural and programming issues (happy to talk about it more in detail. Please message me).

Bottom line... call the admissions office and ask to talk to current students. They will give you the best perspective.

Instead of ranking them, I recommend you think about it based upon considerations. 1. How much quant do you want / handle? I personally didn't apply to Harris because I knew I did not want to do Calculus based statistics. If you are okay with that, then it should be an issue. Honestly, if you look at career outcomes, Harris people probably have the broadest range of career outcomes. Harris has the benefit of having the most diverse cohort (in terms of background) and wide age distribution. 2. I know the money from CIPA seems tempting, but honestly, being in upstate New York, away from society and probably the oldest person in your cohort (or more like top 5%) will be super annoying and drive you crazy. I can't speak to CIPA because I have never ever met a CIPA student or grad in my years of attending public policy competitions and events (that should give you a hint about how small their footprint / impact is). Good luck building your network from Cornell. 3. I recommend you see if you can boast your scholarship with Batten (just try). Here is the deal, most people in the real world have no idea what Batten is. They just see UVA and get excited. UVA also has an extraordinarily large network with DC, so that is something you can tap into. Do understand, you will still be the oldest 10% at Batten regardless. 4. Avoid McCourt if you care about being in a professional environment. Feel free to message me directly.

So I actually hear that question a lot. I'm going to answer this from two perspectives. 1. Program Qualities: With area studies, you don't have to go through the pain of some of the annoying core course that you would have to in MSFS and get straight to what matters for the area. Generally speaking, I find the area studies people to have thinner resumes and to be younger. Interestingly, I also find a lot of them competing for the same jobs as MSFS people (granted they can market their area speak skills and languages). Obviously from a prestige factor, MSFS takes the cake. 2. Personal Perspective: Ultimately it comes down to personal preference. If you really really really love a region and want to dedicate your life it, area studies is the way to go. My personal preference is to go broad because: A: I personally like to compare and contrast and believe a lot could be learned by comparative analysis. For example, I think there is a lot to be said about comparing China's coronavirus response vs. Italy's. B: The world is getting more multi-disciplinary period. I think there is a lot be said about functional knowledge C : Broaden our network!!!! Also just something random to throw out there. You don't know what you want to do for the rest of your life. Most don't, even those in their 50s. I met a lady at conference who was really interested in Asian foreign affairs and been in the area for 7 years. This was 3 years ago. What is she doing now? Local governance issues in Portland, Oregon. She made the life switch for personal reasons. A broader education gives you more flexibility in the long run.

I mean those rankings are broad rankings that essentially made by opinion polls floated around about "supposed influential people". They do base it off of the whole of Georgetown... but realistically that rests mostly on SFS. Your professor is correct, in terms of specific Master's Programs in International Security, SSP is the best. However, there is relatively small group of programs that offer that narrow of a academic focus. The only other schools that event remotely competitive with SSP is George Washington and Northeastern. HOWEVER... there are many roads to Rome, and an alternative way to get into the security business is through a broader MSFS, MPP, MPA, M (use your imagination). You'll be competing against these folks for jobs period. Again, I want to highlight that I totally respect the academic chops of SSP, and they have have amazing resources. However, just to highlight how they are separate from the rest of SFS, consider how their program center is in a separate stand-alone building that is not part of the ICC (where SFS is housed).

Hi everyone. In the absence of an SSP student or recent grad give perspective, I'll chime in. Of course, their perspective would be much much much better. I can speak to SSP because I worked with SSP students in Georgetown, been in programming with them, and I know people from my last job who went to SSP. The awesome things about SSP: 1. Brand weight: Without a doubt SSP program carries a lot of brand weight between Georgetown and SSP specifically. 2. Caliber of People (for the most part): Most people I know who has done SSP has done either been A: a totally great human being that has done awesome things (scoring high profile Fellowships like Boren, high quality jobs, and and etc.). I have pretty much been impressed by every SSP person I have ever met. I will say that the average MSFS person is more impressive, but I still hold the SSP people in high standing. 3. Connections: Bottom line, SSP has a lot of connections (like defense consulting firms or research organizations) that offer its students an opportunity to grow their network + build their resume while in grad school. 4. Flexibility to Do DC Internships: SSP is structured to basically make your life super super easy to do internships semester side. So you have no excuse to not get the opportunity to do it. The interesting things to know about SSP: 1. Its interesting relationship with School of Foreign Service (SFS): I think it is interesting that everyone calls it the best program in the world etc. etc. It is true that the best IR grad program is the Master of Science of Foreign Service (MSFS) in the School of Foreign Service (SFS). Yes SSP is part SFS, but it is not the MSFS. Among the other major grad programs housed by SFS are SSP, Global Human Development (GHS), and all the area studies programs. That being said, nearly all of the classes, lectures, guest visits, and career opportunities are open to all who occupy SFS. HOWEVER - MSFS general has the best dedicated resources and budget. SSP is in relatively good position, but not nearly the prestige and full resources of MSFS. Also, SSP is seen as the little brother of MSFS, and within the SFS cultural environment. 2. Unique social dynamic of SSP: What I always thought was crazy was that most of my SSP friends never knew each other (some never heard of each other) even though they were in the graduation year. This is because, SSP has lots of flexibility of when and how you take your classes. As consequence, there is not strong community bonds that take place as everyone moves to the best of their own class schedule / research / internship. Ultimately, what I'm trying to highlight is that what makes or breaks your SSP experience is the internships you have and the community you grow, which is rather easy in DC + how they schedule the programming. However, from an academic perspective, its good, but nothing to special.

FYI to all. The US News rankings for grad programs just came out: https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-public-affairs-schools Yes... to a certain extent this is a beauty contest (not as rigorous as the undergrad ranking or med school rankings), but will people you engage in the real world check this out. You betcha.

Just something else for people to think about as it looks like this corona virus business will be bringing forward a likely recession (I really hope I am wrong). In some ways, going to grad school in a recession is pretty great, because you are riding out the misery of lower incomes / job hunting in the first place. There are also more opportunities for cheap / free labor (internships / projects you could get in grad school). HOWEVER... depending on how long a recession lasts, your job prospects at the end of the road can look pretty rocky. As you are thinking about grad school, I recommend thinking about two things. 1. Put greater emphasis on considering which program / school have the greater potential return on investment. The great way to look at this is actually see employment numbers and where people end up (most schools publish them. If a school doesn't, that should be a warning sign). Another part is asking the hard questions of if the school (not the brand) actually prepares people for a better job (emphasis on better and not just any job). Ask students/recent alumni about that. 2. Scholarships matter more. A penny saved is a penny earned at Ben Franklin roughly said. Also tied to this are money making opportunities in school that have concurrent career advancing value (TA / RA / Paid Semester side internships). I give this advice from two perspectives. I graduated college in the last recession and I saw people who went to MPP programs immediately after college struggle a lot. Some of them just had the ill-conceived notion of going to any grad school to ride out the recession rather than thinking about how their grad school selection supported career stability and their career goals. Hence, I know people whose MPP's were basically throwaway degrees as they worked at a restaurant or did something completely not related to their degree for a year or so after graduation due to the recession. The other perspective is how I saw so many people from my MPP program not have a job at graduation (in a middle of a booming economy). The jobs some ended up taking (sometimes many months after the fact) were at times equal, if not a step below their careers level pre-grad school (I understand this to a certain point is subjective).

I completely agree. HOWEVER... I recommend people think about this as an opportunity to evaluate a grad school in an alternative (if not even more focused) way. That is to talk to people who are in the programs or recently graduated the programs you are looking into. I always recommend at least 3 - A. someone from a similar background that you are from, B. Someone with similar career goals as you C. Someone totally random. The reality about official student visits is that at the end of the day, they are essentially live demonstration that serve to give a sales pitch about the best of what the program has to offer (I know, I used to be part of them). After all, there is a business side of every grad program and that is to amass the best human capital (students) at a target window of numbers. What these visits don't do necessarily is identify how a program fits you (pros and cons) + growing pains / persistent challenges. Talking to students / recent grads, especially those you know or have a common bond (i.e. sports, hometown, boy scout alumni - anything) that are willing to give a comprehensive and honest picture can be just as good, if not more insightful than a visit. Some ways to start these conversations. 1. Ask the admissions office for people you can talk to. 2. Ask people in the forum if they know anyone and they are willing to connect (I connected with two people already) 3. Check out your LinkedIn network. You will be surprised

@Ajo1797 if I were you, I would email the admissions office and ask them to talk to a current Duke MPP student that is international and in the general policy area that you are interested in. Most admissions offices have a roster of current students that you can talk to.

I think another thing I should have asked you to give you better feedback is what area (or areas) of policy / type of non-profits you are interested in. Also, do you have specific regional interest / location interest? I say this because different schools have different policy area strengths and weaknesses, and it could be nuanced. So for example, Georgetown McCourt MPP's top strength and weakness (they have more than one, and this is also my opinion of what I view it to be): Top Strength: Academic Policy Area: Health Policy Policy Function: Data analysis Geographic Location: DC Broad Focus Area: Domestic Policy Type of Policy Utilization: Federal Powers Unique Career Factor: Semester Side Internships Top Weakness: Academic Policy Area: State and Local Policy Policy Function: Qualitative analysis Geographic Location: California Broad Focus Area: International Relations Policy (non - IDEV) Type of Policy Utilization: Non-profit (non-research) innovation Unique Career Factor: Comparatively limited employers who target McCourt as a core hiring school

Look, the reality is that at Georgetown MPP, just like any other graduate program, people get to know each other and become friends and do stuff together. There is no denying that. What I want to highlight is that Georgetown MPP is not the place where classmates push each other professionally and make an effort to make each other better. For example overheard, at my sisters' different public policy programs (in addition to the lets go out and eat/hike) are things like, "hey, I hear you researching IDEV in Columbia, I know a conference is coming to town and my friend is really into Latin America IDEV who will be speaking, let me connect you". The lack of professional emphasis at McCourt is what bothered me. Keeping in mind that there are lots of things going on --> academic rigor, semester side internships, and extensive fun things to do in the DC area (because it really is fun place), it was professional development that was highly absent. When I say community, it is more than just about friends hanging out, I mean a professional community where people professionally grow with each other and professionally develop each other. The consequence of this are things like my final project team of 4, I was crazily the only one who had a job waiting for me at graduation. The rest of my team were all scholarshiped students + "student leaders". However, because of how poorly McCourt (as an institution and as a community) prepares people for the professional policy environment, it took them 6 months or so (in a booming economy keep in mind) to get a job. My sisters' friends from her MPP programs all had jobs at graduation. Sure - I get it is a small sample size, but these are important things to think about.

I want to highlight, that I absolutely agree - one of the strengths of Fletcher is a very tight community within Fletcher and they have an amazing academic program + awesome alumni. The Fletcher people I knew went to each other's weddings. @Bubba94 I'm also glad you got a great experience out of Fletcher people while you were at Tufts. I hope that is more of the common reality. It just so happens that in my social circle of Tufts undergrad people (people I knew in grad school, intramural volleyball, met at conferences and etc., that was not the reflection they had. As context, their impressions upon Fletcher people were when Fletcher people went to classes outside of Fletcher and engaged the greater Tufts academic community. @Bubba94, it sounds like you come it as someone who actively engaged the Fletcher community, which I think is great. However, the point I want to make is that when I checked out Fletcher, I didn't see efforts of Fletcher have that much opportunity to actively collaborate with the greater academic community outside of some course offerings that Tufts had. Part of this is the reality of how Tufts doesn't have a Law, MBA program, and its Public Health program is in downtown Boston (logistically harder to get to). These are things that matter to me. It may not matter to other people.

One of my friends from college did NYU Wagner... exact same feedback on community (or more like lack there of)... This is the reality of New York programs. NYU is much more focused on domestic policy (or at least domestic policy related issues). SIPA is basically this conglomerate of IR + Policy school in one so it is rather segmented. Most people I know from SIPA did do IR related stuff. Everyone I know from Wagner has done domestic policy.

Admittedly, this is a rather weak view, because I only had indirect exposure to Duke MPP... so an actual student / alumnus would be so much better. Yet, I hope this suffices in the meantime. Context: 1. A. One of my best friends from undergrad went there, B. one of my best friends from grad school almost went to Terry Sanford MPP, and C. my a good co-worker friend of mine got accepted --> but chose to stay at her job for personal reasons 2. Academically, Terry Sanford is hands down a star act + a really strong community + great institutional support (lots of robust programs) 3. It core area of strength is domestic policy, especially state + local and domestic innovation. They definitely do have strong faculty in IR, national security, and etc. But at a certain point it becomes more difficult to do those being in Durham, NC and not being able to actively engage as if you were in DC, NYC, or even Chicago (limited extent). 4. The only compliant I have ever heard was the lack of diversity in terms of perspectives and view points + life experiences. Interestingly, it was my more liberal friend who complained how she felt that she was frequently in an echo-chamber (not in terms of extremeness just that there were just limited voices for alternative views to the mainstream). I mean MPP programs generally lean left, but I have only heard people complain about lack of diversity in thought from Duke MPP.

I looked at SIPA once upon a time for a domestic policy based program. I will admit that every program has its own nuance, so I would check in about what MIA is about. However, the people I knew at SIPA (including someone who once worked there) highlighted how school was just where people went to class + did some projects, but their social lives + community was based upon their legacy NYC friends, and this was the norm. I will say that my friends were purposely looking for a school that made it easy to continue their NYC lives. I decided against Fletcher (and I went to classes there and have two really good friends that went there) pretty quickly for a very me reason. That is, I don't want to be in an academic environment where I would isolated from other disciplines. Tufts Fletcher simply doesn't have other grad programs geographically nearby or collaboration with undergrads (actually undergrads pretty much despise Fletcher people). Yes, true Fletcher is part of the consortium with MIT and Harvard so you can take classes there, but given the geographic distance + logistics, there isn't true collaboration. I really enjoyed leading, managing, and coaching undergrads in grad school, and I felt like we made each other better. Admittedly, SAIS has this challenge as well, but the bottom is that you are in DC and dong work with real world institutions super easily buttresses that pretty easily. If any school has a weak (or at least very hyper clique community) that is McCourt. For admitted students day (and I was part of it once), they bring on the smiles and anointed popular kids (or popular kids of the moment). The most successful people had to strike it out very much on their own because McCourt provided inadequate institutional support/management/community.

He definitely correct. MSFS is generally speaking the strong IR program. From a pure academic perspective, SAIS does have some advantages in economics analysis for IR (for example one of my friends from SAIS does international wheat trade analysis based IR work and her super heavy quant background in SAIS definitely launched her).

If your heart is into IR, I would say its wash between SAIS and SIPA MIA from a pure academic perspective. I recommend you think about where you would build community. SIPA in general has reputation of everyone having their NYC lives and the study body not being that cohesive. SAIS generally is better in terms of community. Honestly, you need to visit the two to really get to know. As for McCourt... go there if you want to do IDEV program analysis work or ride the Georgetown mafia to get into Capital Hill... but short of that, it is a pretty poor option to get into most other international relations oriented jobs. In terms of overall MPP quality Harris wins academically hands down. Obvious downsides to not being in DC as well as pros.

MPAs and MPPs compete for the same jobs, but MPA is generally speaking more administrative / management focused. MPP is more analysis driven - so more data classes. Different programs run their MPAs/MPPs very differently, but MPA will have a greater focus on management/leadership and process (very broadly speaking). Doing non-profit management is from grad school is competitive, because taking an MPA route is legit, but you'll also be competing with MBAs (yes... some really do do no-profit), lawyers, and non-grad degrees experienced people. It is basically a catch all for so many different types of qualified people.

@indianIRguy is correct if you want to get set up with a career focused on shooting towards the research based work side of the house in a niche area (hence you have to give up the food area). If you are interested more in the intersection of food + trade + ag as a function of policy engagement via policy programming (private sector or public) or policy related program management, an MPP is a very logical decision. I have to warn you though, food / ag policy that rather unpopular to pursue in some policy schools. At McCourt, I only knew of 1.person interested in food / ag policy. That 1 person transferred to UT Austin after a year when she found herself so frustrated with lack of support / interested peers. At all the conferences / competitions I have been to, I have yet to encounter another food/ag policy person. Hence, picking a school with professors in the school or partner schools that specialize in the area is super important if you want to play this game with an MPP in mind --> Duke. Duke MPP has a World Food Policy Center: https://wfpc.sanford.duke.edu/ There are other programs that support food policy consideration: A class they have for example (it isn't in the MPP program per se, but you can cross-register): https://nicholas.duke.edu/academics/courses/food-agriculture-and-environment-law-and-policy

If you are interested anything remotely related to food policy (which I'm assuming is more from a Domestic light) --> Sanford at Duke is a way better option. McCourt is better for program / data analysis on Federal powers + other DC-centric related issues (which your topic does have a lot of Federal involvement... but lets be honest, a lot of the innovation and excitement in this space is not happening at the Federal level). The reality is for you, North Carolina (i'm from there) actually becomes a huge gain academically, because they have so much related to exporting agricultural products and there will be bound to be a professor at Duke (or even UNC, which is a 30 min drive away), to help get you laser focused in the area. Also bottom line, Duke is simply better at state + local policy + grass roots policy matters than McCourt. Happy to chat with your directly virtually. Feel free to direct message me.

I think this comes down to that you really have to go to each school and visit and see what floats with you the best + what partnerships + collaborative opportunities Harris and CMU each have. Academically - generally speaking, I think they are nearly a wash. Chicago is more exciting that Pittsburgh. I would probably say Harris has a bit more opportunities by default programming historically... but it would be really nuanced on what relationships the program + professors have. CMU is aggressively trying to investing in its student experience from what I understand for its grad programs. One thing to consider when you visit is what the community looks like.

I eliminated Wagner from my list early. I had a friend who went there and bottom line she highlighted that there was a very weak student community and culture since everyone had their New York City lives. This is a place where the majority come to live in New York City and go to school, not so much to go to school and thrive and the graduate community.