GradSchoolGrad

I think you are going after the wrong degree. If you really want to do what you say you are doing without living abroad, you should get an MBA and focus on Oil and Gas industry and/or energy talent (trust me they will murder for talent, and they working on transitioning to green - even if half heartedly sometimes). Alternatively, you can work in energy space. It will be easier to go into consulting and even energy management government side with an MBA than any MIPA degree. Also, the MIB from Fletcher is basically a money grab (since they don't have an MBA program, nor do they have the means to start one) to expand their graduate school offerings (grad students are a profit center to make up for the financial losses from undergrads). Basically, it isn't as good as you think it is in terms of academic quality. There is a Fletcher mafia, but it won't be that strong in the energy space. If you going State dept or non-profit space, yes there is one, but not energy.

So from a pure competitive jobs outcome perspective I think of Heinz and Harris as opposite extremes of the same tier. Harris is at the top of 1.5 (and you can argue validly it can belong in the Tier 1 group). I view Heinz as in the bottom of the 1.5. The reason is that both its alums and student hit highly competitive jobs, but has strengths different areas. Harris hits MBB (and its probably 2nd to HKS in terms policy schools that can hit MBB) and the top competitive jobs I mentioned. Heinz uniquely hits policy innovation initiatives and competitive Tech in a policy related space (excluding Tik Tok which has an out of control hiring process IMO). I have seen Heinz people hit major think tanks, but not Brookings, CATO, or CSIS - at least not consistently. Bottom line, Harris has a wider range of strengths and is stronger in what is considered traditional policy jobs (as in within the past decade). Heinz is trying differentiate itself as more of policy innovation school, so its students have done well landing in "new age policy grad jobs".

Okay, I'll make that Episode 3 then (no promises on when that will come out - maybe end of this week - depending on work).

That is what I'm getting at. For Policy Grad programs, there are some numerous exceptions to the way I tier, so some level of broad tiering is viable. I would be very uncomfortable to do that for IR grad programs because exceptions are the rule. If I were to make a PodCast about categorizing IR schools, I wouldn't tier them but talk about the Big 7 (HKS, SIPA, Fletcher, MSFS, Elliot, SAIS, SIS) and what pathways they are best suited for and what pathways they aren't as advantageous for.

I purposely excluded IR programs because the choices in concentration can drastically change things. For example, if you want to focus on Nuclear non-proliferation, Monterrey can arguably be seen as on par if not even better than Fletcher. Another example is National Security, whereby SIPA would then fall below Fletcher.

After some nudging from people who have DMed me on this forum, I have started to create a Podcast about Policy and IR Grad Programs. My inaugural podcast episode can be found on Spotify here: Episode 2 will be about Cohort vs. Free For all System in Graduate Schools I haven't planned beyond that, so suggestions are welcome.

The programs are very different. HKS MPP is interesting because its probably the only MPP school that can legitimately say they produce MPP students focused on international relations (that isn't IDEV). However, your core education will be the same as people doing domestic policy. So if you don't care for a core that that doesn't get to the chase of focusing on IR, that is a ding against MPP. Another thing to realize is that although there is a sizable IR focused group at HKS MPP, you are small sub-section of people within the graduate program. You are going to have to network your way into an IR field/job you are interested in - which is pretty easy because HKS is very career focused (culturally). Another great thing about HKS MPP is that it is very easy to coordinate and collaborate with the Harvard Enterprise and they have lot of potential synergies to play with. Georgetown MSFS is basically a big blast of IR and you have lot of awesome opportunities to do live projects with the DC IR infrastructure. I will say that they also have a fair of collaboration with the business community (especially along trade matters). Your peers will simply be all IR focused rather than a hodge lodge of policy. So things to think about: 1. Who do you want your peers to be? Diverse crew interested in government or IR focused 2. Do you feel like you need live project experience to enhance your professional goals. If you want to do something more niche, the answer is probably no. If you are a major career pivoted, the answer is probably yes. MSFS will give you a lot more live project opportunities. 3. How much do you want to collaborate with MBA, Grad programs, and etc. Collaboration happens in both, but Harvard has greater depth and breadth than Georgetown. However, if you want to focus on trade issues, Georgetown does take the cake 4. Posses - if you go into the foreign service or defense establishment, there are lots of Georgetown posses that will help you out. As an HKS person, you'll be well respected with a few high end connections, but you won't have a posse. If anything, you might have a target on your back as the Harvard person.

I count HKS and Princeton as Tier 1, Harris and Heinz as 1.5, McCourt, Tractenberg, Sol as Tier 2, Batten as Tier 2.5, More regional focused programs like University of Kentucky MPP as Tier 3. I think that works for now.

How you define limited? Generally speaking the rule of thumb is 2 years of work experience as a minimum for an MBA only (exceptions have been made at top schools for people with unusual/unique backgrounds, and I have seen 1 year work experience people make it). Getting into an MPP does kind of help you with having it count as 1 year work experience equivalent. That being said, MBA schools tend to be more competitive than MPPs to get into. Given how competitive U. Chicago Booth MBA is, they would really put the microscope on your packet for your potential competitiveness for MBA career outcomes (career outcomes is generally not that intensely considered for MPP applicants). I do know plenty of JD/MBAs and MD/MBAs with 1 year work experience. As long as you tell a coherent story and you have a competitive background to begin with, I think you should be fine. That being said, I have found 2 year and less work experience MBA students to be less informed and contributing students within such programs.

It is my understanding that many policy schools have shifted their international student strategy from a reliance on Chinese international students to India and Latin America. I am just wondering if people are seeing/hearing the same out there and if that has had any impacts of curriculum, peer experience, and etc.? *I realize this is more relevant to Tier 2 schools and below. Tier 1 and 1.5 schools have generally ensured a diverse international student population.

I know the Harvard brand is shiny and all (I have family who have it), but you might want to look on LinkedIn or something to see where Indian students that went to HKS have ended up. Assuming you want to stay in the US, your best shot is focus on something data oriented, for which HKS is good at, but not the best at for MPP - actually the quant instruction quality is probably the greatest weakness from HKS from close friends and family that went). U. Chicago Harris can be more quant intense and help you wiggle through a policy data job that way better than HKS can (unless you are crazy enough to try to get a PhD from MPP). Unless you want to do something in IGO or non-profit Fletcher doesn't make the most sense.

How did Georgetown McCourt get on your list because they don't really do anything international other than IDEV?

I had a conversation yesterday of famous alumni of certain schools to have gotten convicted of crimes. Looks like, my policy school just got one. Thought it would be interesting to share. I'll kick it off. From Georgetown MPP (now McCourt): https://www.npr.org/2022/03/25/1088715862/nebraska-rep-jeff-fortenberry-is-found-guilty-in-contributions-probe

I would say in terms of think tanks (at least the big national ones) and multi-laterals (I'm assuming you mean IGOs and stuff like the UN), its a wash. Its not like Georgetown exactly has much of an advantage. Yes, people do enter think tanks, but the best I have ever heard someone recently get is Urban (and is like one person that I have ever had). Mathmatica is more Georgetown's level of think tank access. Also, please keep in mind that Think Tank work is relatively low paying and not the best professional development culture (at least from the research side). I think there are so many better ways to make impact than working at a Think Tank. Also, as a non-PhD, you'll be a 2nd class citizen at the major Think Tanks. That being said, going to Berkeley opens you up to the West Coast area Think Tanks. They might not be as big branded, but by going for focus, they arguably have more impact. As for multi-laterals. Stuff like the UN is next to impossible to get in unless you know someone. Your GPA can be perfect, and no one will care. World Bank is doable from Georgetown ( like 2 people a year), but you basically have to be a Professors sidekick for 2 years or so and ride his/her coat tails and get a Consultant position that you hope will convert full time. I don't know of an MPP covert full time yet as most people burn out from frustration with Consultant experience.

Its two very different schools. McCourt grads generally stay in DC (even International students) and generally focus on things related to the Federal Government. Berekley is a California school with a good DC presence but is strongest for California jobs + West Coast. Believe it or not, it might actually be easier to find a job serving state and local government (since they generally pay less and are less prestigious, but often don't have a US Citizen requirement) as an international student. That is especially true for things Data related or tech related. It is next to impossible to work the in the US Federal government and things associated with US Federal government contracts without at least a GreenCard

DU Korbel is interesting in that they have some really strong nitche areas (the ones I know of are Security related), but by in large, they don't have the size, depth, or reputation. Its actually kind of similar to MIIS, although their niche from what I understand is Asia and nuclear non-proliferation. I mean, if you follow their niche, you really get a boost If you don't, you are generally on your own. Your issue focus area is like one of the biggest shot gun blasts I have ever seen. The UN is insanely hard to get into (especially as an American), unless you really know someone. State Dept is a bit school agnostic, but as I mentioned before, it is helpful to run with a posse once you get the foot in the door. Multi-laterals again about networking, - job outside of DC/USA is super all over the place. I known people who did business and international development and etc. who went abroad. Bottom line is that DU Korbel is a solid school and you can probably vagabond it on your own fine, but if you want the advantage of the network and posses, Fletcher and SAIS are going to be much stronger.

The only reason that makes sense for you to go to Duke is if you really really love State & Local Government and or Domestic Non-Profits and that is what you see yourself working in/doing research for graduation. Otherwise, for general career opportunities and PhD potential, Harris makes sense. That being said, only about 1 to 5% of MPP graduates (depending on school) end up pursuing a PhD (that I have seen among schools). Most of people I know who entered MPP saying they want to do PhD get burned from academia and don't do it. Please also keep in mind, if you want to go to a Tier 1 school for your PhD, your GPA better be no less than an A- at MPP. I have yet to see a Georgetown MPP grad (who didn't previously already have another Master's degree from somewhere else) pursue a PhD at a tier 1 school.

Every school has a different process and different pool of cash AND mostly importantly, they often change year to year. Its on you to at a minimum ask admissions how to execute next steps (if it isn't on the website or material... assuming they have a means for negotiation). That being said, don't be surprised if they don't budge for you.

If you want to touch transportation policy at all - you go to Harris. McCourt doesn't do infrastructure or transportation academically (as in good luck finding a professor to mentor you). As for international development, if you want academic angle with lots of support - Harris will be better. If you want to network your way into the Fed on your own. McCourt will be better.

I have no idea why you applied to Walsh MSFS. You would basically be the younger student there and would have trouble distinguishing yourself among your peers - so you would be one of the least competitive students in your program, no matter how well your grades are. Also, I don't see that many people go into communication roles from MSFS. So it is really between McCourt MPP and CCT. Assuming you want to continue to do communications related stuff, CCT totally makes the most sense since it is the only real program that actually focuses on communication and have experience helping international students. If you go to McCourt MPP, they wouldn't know what to do with you in terms of professional support. Also the program isn't really geared towards anything communication related. I probably had 15 min mention of communication in the policy management class. There might be some elective classes on communication you can take, but you could take that as CCT person as well.

Ultimate question is where do you really want to end up. California is a unique beast, if you go to LBJ and try to go back to California, its doable but it will be less smooth. Bottom line is that California public policy is in many ways different from the rest of America (both in stakeholder involved, stakeholder concerns, and incentives). If you go to USC, you are basically supercharged for a California job. On the flip side, its pretty easy to go to LBJ and do Texas and the rest of the East Coast, but you may have a harder time doing it from USC. Basically, California is pretty much like a whole other country.

I could probably have a podcast discussing this, and there are LOTS of exceptions out there (based upon policy interest). But a sample of my personal take based upon career outcomes for MPP/MPA and equivalent (not US News because that is beauty contest among academics rating their peer academics purely on academic esteem... so things like professional outcomes pretty much don't matter). This is not exhaustive whatsoever Tier 1: All opportunities are open, including the most competitive (top PhDs, Brookings, public sector MBB, White House staffer for a competitive administration). PMF and Deloitte Gov. Ops is pretty run of the mill. - HKS and Princeton Tier 1.5: Tier 1 opportunities are accessible, but student might have to work/stretch harder for them. - Harris/SIPA... you can make a good argument for Goldman, Heinz, Ford, and Terry Sanford Tier 2: Competitive for good opportunities like PMF, Boren, Deloitte Gov Ops, Mathamatica. Top Tier 1 opportunities are an extreme reach but doable with extenuating circumstances (like extreme networking, internal referrals, specific diversity circumstances, and etc.) + top performance potential. - Price, Trachtenburg, Wagner, Syracuse, Indiana, McCourt Tier 3: Top opportunity would be PMF and Deloitte Gov Ops. Could be prime for local stuff - American SPS - UVA Batten There are some really weird schools here that hard to put in tier due to some interesting higher ed. strategies. The most extreme example would be Cornell Brooks Policy School. They have probably one of the most extreme range of outcomes I have ever seen. This is due to how they spend money on a targeted group of top talent with scholarships/military veterans who do generally well in the job market and have a really long tail okay talent. Penn Fels is another example. Also please keep in mind policy interest exceptions. If you cared about environmental from State/Local perspective, then I hope Indiana is top of your list. If you cared about the federal budget, then Syracuse better be top of your list

Also, if you have Harris down, why would you even consider Georgetown MPP? It’s a tier 2 policy school.

Understanding that Harris will be the more academically challenging school, unless you are afraid of academic challenges, Harris is the slam dunk answer. They gave you lot of money and they are generally good at most things. That Columbia program is a money grab to have a profitable grad program. Columbia isn’t event that good in environmental policy (Yale Forestry, Duke and Michigan grad programs are). Also if you care about student experience, don’t expect one in Columbia… community is always pretty bad. NYC is also less fun when you have to pay for things without scholarship.

Based off of everything you said, AU SIS' regional program might not be a great option, and it is the only non-bad option that you have. Your ideas of what you would do to improve resume aren't exactly what would really help you get scholarship in a general IR program. They really love to see 1 year of high performance at a start up, 1 year as a speech writer, or 1 year consistent something really cool in anything. The language requirement for most programs us to be proficient by graduation (or near graduation). You don't have to come in being fluent. All that being said, it sounds like the sooner you get structure, the better off you'll be in the long run, and AU SIS is the only discounted shot you got. Just be smart and network like hell the moment you get your AU email address. You will already be coming from behind because the 8 to 9 okay but not impressive peers won't probably be the best influence, pushing you to be better. You'll really have to push yourself to be better. Unless you think you would fall flat on your face self-motivating, it sounds like AU SIS is the clear better choice. I will say this is especially unique for you since you have an edge in a high demand area.