Jufarius87

Keep in mind I am an MPA applicant, not a grad. So take my opinion as such The first thing to be aware of is that the MPA/MPP is very versatile in terms of suitable content. Depending on school and concentration you can get a degree that is politically or economically oriented. However, as a professional degree most if not all MPA/MPP degrees have some sort of core classes to make sure you graduate with a baseline knowledge of economics, government, and management. How much math involved, again, really hinges on the same issues of school and concentration. There are schools and concentrations (Economics and Public Policy or Development Studies at Princeton really comes to mind) where it seems that the quantitative work is only one or two steps down from an Economics Ph.D (Princeton, Harvard, and Columbia all ask for quantitative resumes). However if you focus on something like Human Rights and Social Justice which is my intent, the most quantitative work you may be required to see is the applied calculus of an Intermediate Microeconomics course (derivatives, integrals, etc.). That said, Quantitative skills can help you land a job. Even in a non-quant heavy concentration like mine, I still intend to take higher economics and/or public finance. I would not recommend an MPP for someone who has no interest in economics. Now if you could adjust that to "I am interested in economics only insofar as it relates to political events, conflict, development, etc" then I'm with you. I took a lot of "pure" economics in undergrad and found myself frustrated at the standard economists disinterest with political applications (Why not just be an Applied Mathematics guy then?) But you absolutely will need some economics for an MPA/MPP. If you are a engineering undergraduate, you should be able to handle the mathematical requirements of most MPA/MPP programs with relative ease. The degree can definitely be useful in a political career. Given the content of the program, I wish we had more MPA/MPP grads and less lawyers in office honestly. Hope this helped!

Your GPA is solid and you have a good UG under your belt which is an excellent start. Your GRE V/Q are competitive for all schools, the AWA was a little low but not so bad that they would consider it (from what I've gathered the AWA has virtually no importance unless your score is terrible [x<3.0] since personal statements and writing samples are more indicitive of your writing ability). The international work and language study will help you alot! Ouch on the Multi. I admit depending on who is looking (and what else you've got on your transcript) I think it could hurt but is far from a killer. Given Economics is studied at a strong intermediate level in most of these schools, your single variable grades and stats work are more indicitive of your ability to do economics. So what did you get in single variable? Do you have any linear algebra / Probability Theory / Econometrics? Stats for social sciences? Good grades in any of these can help mitigate one C+. Your GRE Q helps in this regard as well.

Is there anything we need to do for the "All documents have been checked and verified" section? I applied on Nov 20 and it is still red XD

I think it depends on how badly you need to get the degree. For example as a 26 year old military applicant with a cutoff age of 31, I have time before I have to goto ROTC. So I only applied to dream shools this year (HKS/WWS/SIPA/CIPA) knowing if I go 0/4 (yikes) I can beef up my work profile and try again with a few safeties a couple years down the road. Military is a rare beast though, but basically look at how badly you need a guaranteed spot in an MPP/MPA and apply accordingly.

1. "the discipline"... who decides that, last I checked, if you earn a degree the "privileges and responsibilities" clause is for life. Also my entire career has been teaching high school religion and history, and working religious affairs for the military. I wont bother to ask you what you do in "the discipline", but as someone who has worked as the logistical manager for catholic and protestant-of-all-flavors chaplains, If they espoused the sort of revisionist hyper liberal "I am being oppressed" narrative of religion you get at YDS they would be chased out of the chapel. Nobody is coming for the sunday morning political lecture from the pulpit, or to hear about your latest textual acrobatics around an OT verse that in less than inclusive, they want to hear what the pastor believes God is speaking through the verse. 2. I don't understand what is so difficult about "these people gave me an MAR". I am commenting on my own school. If I gave it a glowing recommendation as the enlightenment of those pesky traditionalists would you then bless off on me expressing a personal opinion *** on a website that exists for the sole purpose of anonymous individuals helping other anonymous individuals get into and select a graduate school***? Are you honestly going to tell me that you think what the early church did, in terms of moral doctrines, and exegesis, is remotely similar to what is being taught today? That the early fathers who primarily concerned themselves with questions of apostolicity and how well Christological formulas lined up with platonic philosophy would be at all approving of Biblical Studies as we've had it since the academy decided that everything worth studying comes out of Germany? 3. This is as much my field, as someone with a JD who didn't take the bar is still a part of the legal scholarly community, more so since all my work up to know has somehow been in religion. They can still comment on the process of law school, because they completed it. 4. Lux et veritas. Light and Truth... The founders of the big names knew what this meant, it is still technically Yale's motto. Pray tell, what do you think the Lux stands for? I never said there would be no academic nuance. Patristics is so reliant on languages and interpretation-by-precedent (much like the legal system) that it is I think academically richer than assigning single letters to hypothetical authors within the OT and trying to figure out how your artificial authors somehow actually affirmed everything Christianity fought against for its first est. 1900 years of life. People by large do not feel fed when presented with the new methods. A look at which denominations are growing and shrinking is enough to see that.

Precisely. Or if not a conservative school, at least a school with a real balance. Also as I said in the first post, given how incredibly long a full seminary education is (M.Div, to Th.M to Ph.D) do that first degree at a place that is actually going to help you along spiritually. Save the controversy for when you are grounded in your own tradition and your focus is knocking out a thesis (where the controversy might actually be useful!).

Really, the first sentence sums it up well. None of this is an issue if a school has balance, or if your denomination has enough representation to act as a balance at your school. I'm kind of amazed that "don't go to a seminary where you are the only one of your church org." + "Big name schools might not be your best bet depending on topic" + "Consider a denominational school" is getting so much pushback. Would you agree that some of the contradictions of terms you've mentioned are part of the underlying issue of my point though. On the issue of Catholic opinions about Jesus you mentioned for example, would you agree that you are going to get VERY different classes on the Bible based which of your friends was teaching it (or comparing that to a traditional Catholic teaching)? Since this is a professional degree in ministry, where you are supposed to uphold the doctrines of your church body (Some form of agreement or oath is taken as part of ordination, more often than not), is not perhaps even an ethical issue to present yourself in one manner (Catholic, Anglican, Baptist, etc.) and then teach future PRACTITIONERS in such a way that is completely contrary to the group's doctrine? As with the prior mentioned idea of vocation/calling being something subjective that can be sorted out later, this seems like a slippery slope and we are already reaping the rewards.

Qualified, I lumped HDS in there based on discussions with affiliated students (who also had YMMV experiences), so that was my bad. So I will say for clarity this was my experience of YDS as a student there.

1. There is a division, or at least an order of priorities. If you assume a traditional position of faith (which is reasonable if you are going to seminary), then the text of the bible *as we have it* is valuable, it is what God meant us to have in some sense. Not individual verses, not parsing out disagreements between J/Y/P/D, there is presupposing faith an underlying message God intended through the human authors, but that is not earthly wisdom in and of itself. But if your scholarship only focuses on the last two hundred years of a two thousand year old religion, you are essentially reinventing the wheel. Ancient commentaries that relied on typology, prophecy, and reading Christ into the text are useful for the pulpit, you wont find them at most big name schools. 2. You don't say, its not like we are on a college admissions board writing between work hours, I think everyone and their mother is guilty of sweeping generalities on these types of boards. 3. "You know, for a guy who struggled with his MDiv and lost his faith before getting through the basic degree" Well, that struck me as a more than a little ad hom, as tempted as I am to pick up the same spirit I think I have said my peace as far your points and will be done with it. And I never claimed a universality to what I was saying, I stated it as my experience of the school, I stated that there were exceptions. To the contrary, I was speaking to a very specific group of people (denominationally conservative minorities with specific requirements) that I thought most likely to have a similar experience to mine.

I think it will largely depend on your prior academics. I cant speak for admissions officers, but personally if I saw a 152 quant score on an applicant who had A's and B's in Calculus, Stats, economics etc. the 152 would become almost a non-factor. The GRE-Q measures your ability to do simple math fast College Math measures your ability to do complex math with a fair amount of time both are relevant, but I think second a lot more so.

Divine meaning is, for purposes of ministry, the only relevant meaning of the text. As a *general* rule, people do not wake up on their off day early to hear the mortal opinions of a man (or woman as the case may be), they attend services on the understanding that the minister is at least trying to give guidance that comes from a higher power. That is not to say there are not several ways to derive divine meaning from the text, we're not hit with an overwhelming divine light every time we turn the page, patristics, canonical context, historical critical, and form criticism can all draw meaning from text. But whether it is a divine meaning or an authorial meaning that is historically interesting but spiritually not the point is a different matter entirely. The general rule of ancient exegesis was a combination of canon and patristics, with philosophy as a debunking tool. There was also a predisposition to view the OT in terms of Christology, which is impossible in a historical-critical context.

I'm actually not protestant, I'm certainly not a literalist by any stretch. I definitely see the Bible first and foremost as a spiritual-holistic text. That there is (in theory) an objective way to read is because its formation was divinely inspired (note I did not say "God wrote the bible and the prophets/apostles were just secretaries"). But YDS, despite being a divinity school teaches primarily historical methods for people going into spiritual and counseling work. I do agree with you on the Torah, and the *facts* of historical critical exegesis. My concern is that these issues were abused in the context of a greater narrative at YDS and similar skeptically oriented schools in order to add a debunking element to biblical studies. As to non-canonical stuff, because you can't have both, they contradict in very fundamental ways about who Jesus was. The non-canon Gospels range in Christology from Jesus being an immaterial Spirit to a sorcerer to a non divine messiah depending on who is writing. Again, All of this is GREAT in a PhD program, but seminary presupposes faith based parameters.

The precedent of the historical-critical method to the near exclusion of other exegetical options (except perhaps gender and colonial sensitive understandings). This in itself would not be too concerning, I personally think the method is more useful to academics then pastors but that is just me. However the general manner in which historical critical was used to validate things that had nothing to do with the method itself was rather egregious: A. Refute traditional understandings of scripture, the Torah was not authored by Moses, the canon is a product of the whims of a bunch of long dead old white bishops, the gnostic/apocryphal gospels "count" in some sense, etc. B. Dissect the passage and break it down into its smallest possible form. Maybe even less than a verse. Cant interpret the verse in the context of other verses, no no, youre relying on the rules of those dead bishops then. Lets consider "authorial intent" (despite disagreeing on who the human author is. Even if they could decide amongst themselves whether "J" or "Y" wrote a verse they know little concrete about these largely made up authors) rather than looking for some divine meaning in the greater context of scripture (which is an infinitely more relevant tool to pastors). C. Now that we've refuted the standard narrative of faith, as to how the bible (and the Torah came to be) insert your feminist/LGBT/post-colonial/ethnic/racial bias here, keep what you like, disregard the rest as the writings of man. Some of these modernisms are valuable. Historical-Critical is valuable on a scholarly level and I enjoy reading feminist OT exegesis. I'm not challenging their worth independently, I'm questioning the misuse of exegetical methods better applied to academia than the pulpit to validate an agenda that overturn moral doctrines that have been assumed within Christianity for centuries. The Bible faculty at YDS is largely composed of agnostics/skeptics and the method of instruction I honestly believe does more to attack faith than challenge it. Again all well and great in a PhD program, wrong in seminary context.

They're definitely well respected schools. Especially when it comes to the "brand name" (looking at the university you attended opposed to the program studied). The issue is that Public Policy is a VERY competitive field in some regards. The degree will not have as wide-ranging an employment base as its private counterpart the MBA. So alot of time it pays to try to get into THE best school possible. An example, I posted a topic about Cornell's Public Policy program. I'd still love to go there and I am applying, but I was shocked to find the response on these boards was "Cornell isnt high on the radar" and "Have you considered Columbia?" Cornell is an Ivy league institution! At the end of the day, we seek political jobs, prestige and networking factor highly. But again, it really and truly depends on what you want to do with a degree. The skills you learn at any program might outweigh connections if you want to start your own NGO or do humanitarian work, but alot of people on these boards are looking at Foreign Service, Three Letter Agencies, World Bank, Elected Office... etc etc etc I guess to an extent I am the one encouraging you to work the math angle, because your profile is excellent. Unless you feel particularly weak at math (which is a problem since most programs have a mandatory economics core) a few weeks worth of high school refresher material and some test taking strategies can get your quant score to the desired threshold. Also given you come from a different academic background, this will help you make sure you really want to invest two years in this degree

It really depends on what you are looking to do. Can you accomplish your goals with a degree from American/GWU/NYU etc.? A lot of *good* schools would accept you as you are I think. The year to take Calc/Econ and get your GRE-Q up would be for places like HKS/WWS/SIPA

Your situation sounds quite a bit like mine (YDS MAR '11). From the (admittedly little) I have seen thus far, those with ministry backgrounds are looked upon favorably *so long as you can tie your work in ministry into skills that will translate into secular public service*. Really, there are quite a few, budgeting, counseling, public speaking, event organizing... etc. That said, while I cant speak to the MBA side of what you want to do, you absolutely need to work on your Quant score and get some math/econ courses in to be competitive to the best MPP/MPA schools. They don't have to be from a big name school. As a Math undergrad (weird jump to divinity school I know) I will tell you that calculus/Stats/Econ core at a community college is essentially the same as at a 4 year. They will know this too. Aim to get your quant score up to at least a 160+, though a 157+ will work for many places as well. Best of Luck

Its a fairly distant concern for me as I will be entering an MPP/MPA program next year if all goes well. That said since I see a possible move into academia in my future, what is the traditional doctoral path for an MPP/MPA grad? I know many schools do Public Policy PhDs, are these well received compared to doctorates in Political Science or Economics? Is it common for Political Science and Economics departments to hire Public Policy PhDs and vice versa? Is the transition from MPA/MPP to Political Science PhD difficult? What about Economics (not my interest but I could see a few folks using the MPP/MPA to boost their quantitative credentials before applying).

1. I went in with a similar mindset. That it is an ongoing and changing process. What happens when that process leads you to something entirely outside the original intended goal? Very few law grads would recommend a JD if you are not going to practice, very few doctors would recommend going for an MD if you don't plan to be a doctor (or do very specific research). This is professional schooling, why is ambiguity accepted in the case of divinity school? 2. With few exceptions, YDS [and HDS] don't think the Bible holds up, lets just be honest about that fact. Most of what the they teach would be anathema in broad spectrum of Evangelical/Catholic/Orthodox circles and only finds a home in the so-called "mainline" churches (and even there the radical nature of the message is toned down as to not offend). That said your point on challenge is true *if it is counter balanced with being in a supportive community, at least partially of your own faith group, where you can actually live the liturgical life of your church". That was part of my point, make sure you are going to get support if you choose an ecumenical context. 3. First sentence is great. Second sentence really doesn't pan out in my opinion. The bigger names are often times bigger because they are attached to a prestigious university, and that doesn't *necessarily* mean a thing in theology. Finding matches for coursework in your topic of interest and names in your field are more important. Sometimes there is a correlation with the big names, sometimes not.

Hello All, To keep it short and simple, I went through this process a couple years back. By standards of the admissions game and academia I did well, I applied to only three schools (HDS, YDS, and Duke) and ended up completing an MAR at Yale. The advice I want to give is not about admissions though, there are a lot of people on the boards that can do that, this pertains to vocation. You see, when I applied I went strictly for big name schools. My motivations for study at the time were murky (do I want to teach, preach, do some sort of culturally-religiously aware NGO work?) and I figured big names would open the most doors. If I wanted to pursue ordination, I could fix my deficiencies at a denominational seminary later. Unlike most professions though, you really only need one door to open. That door is your church's ordination process OR an acceptable PhD program, depending on your path. The pit fall for "big name" Divinity schools though is that depending on your ordaining body and/or academic focus a big name may not be beneficial beyond simply the name. When I studied at YDS, I was a newly converted Greek Orthodox Christian among a predominately Episocpalain/Lutheran/Liberal-Catholic student body. "Culture Shock" would be an understatement of my experience (though I will add that on a personal level I found the student body largely accepting and supportive of theologically conservative minorities). If you have a desire to get ordained, even if your church body will accept an M.Div from your school, ask yourself whether you want your seminary years to be defined by spiritual warfare, because even among a friendly crowd, theological divides will force you to ask yourself some really uncomfortable questions about your faith that may better be left to a Th.M/D.Min/PhD than your first spiritual formation degree. As to PhDs, name is not as important as you may think when it comes to your MAR/MTS prep program. Relevant language study, a strong core curriculum in your intended focus, and *****studying with the right faculty who can provide you with good LORS***** are all more important than "the name". The name of a school can give you access to these things, but often times so can a denominational seminary. After seminary, it took military service and a near death experience to pull me back to faith. I've changed gears as well. I am applying to public policy schools with a human rights focus. This time the correlation of the curriculum with my future goals is more important to me than name. So, with humility, I warn you to consider your application list thoroughly. Add a denominational seminary to it if you have specific needs. Best of luck to all.

I think they will see "top 5 law school" on your resume and that in itself will establish your academic bona fides for all but HKS/WWS. Even for HKS/WWS if that 3.67 UGPA had some math and/or you get a good quant score on your GRE you should be competitive. One thing you might consider though is putting that law degree to work for a couple years though. Law school is not cheap for most (and neither is the MPA!). You might be able to knock of some debt while collecting the work experience MPA schools like to see.

I think it depends on the courses. If they were courses that are not particularly relevant to earning an MPP then I would say you are fine as long as you have an upward grade trend. If they are core courses like economics or mathematics however then yes go ahead and take them again.

Took the GRE today, 166 verbal and 162 math! Relieved to have my scores. I know personal statements and work exp. count for a lot in these programs but will 3.74 GPA /166V/162Q be competitive numbers for Columbia? I've decided to apply to both schools.

Wow. Not sure how I missed Columbia that is a good find thank you! Was trying to avoid NYC if possible but given that the UN is right next door and they do have the concentration I will consider giving them a shot. Cornell is still my top though due to somewhat unique concerns (on-Campus ROTC program, within 4 driving hours of home [which is a major factor for military], already love Ithaca, and being from the Buffalo/Niagara/WNY area Cornell is *the* name brand even more so than NYC schools.

I know that given the diversity of backgrounds for applicants in our field that it is difficult to give an answer to this question but I have been looking for average GRE stats of MPP/MPA programs and found very little. Assuming a candidate fairly recently out of college (2 years work exp) with a competitive academic background (3.7x/4.0, good majors) what sort of GRE is considered acceptable? I am admittedly a little nervous, I've always done "good" on standardized test but never been able to break into the top tier of them. My targets are Cornell (Location and unique MPA Concentration are ideal) and Texas A&M (Huge Army Network that for my purposes would serve better than an NYC/DC locale). Also applying to HKS/WWS/Georgetown/UPenn.

Anyone else applying? Figured we could post stats and results as they come in. Undergrad: SUNY at Buffalo GPA: 3.74/4.0 Majors: Math and Philosophy Grad: Yale Divinity School GPA: 3.5-ish (they don't use an A-F system so this is a rough guess) Concentration: Theology GRE: Taking it on Tuesday, will post when I get results! Work Experience: 2 years Enlisted Army and High School Teacher LORs: Yale Prof, UG Advisor, Army O-3 Extras: UG Thesis, PBK, some student leadership positions and awards, etc. Why an MPA: Academic Program of choice for graduate entry ROTC, The Human Rights concentration seems unique to Cornell and seems especially appropriate given my line of work. Best of Luck (though I hope luck has little to do with it)