kreitz128

So on paper you a decently strong candidate to get in. Funding could get interesting. With so many programs having financial issues and a surge in applicants + expect funding to lower end ($10K ballpark per year) to none. 
I think you need to appreciate where your weaknesses are:
- Not taking the GRE. Bottom line, if your clone applied with a 85 percentile GRE or above and compete for one seat, that person would get in and not you. The GRE is simply confidence of your academic performance. 
- Pure speculation here (and I could be totally wrong) --> but I'm assuming you my have struggled to clearly and concisely explain what policy area you are interested in. Usually when someone says socially policy broadly without highlighting an area of interest (Education/Housing/Food/Healthcare/and etc.) that to me is an indictor that your essay may have you all over the place. Admissions offices like to brand someone so they know what diversity or policy area bucket to place people in the interest of "building a class". Being difficult to bucket, can create problems for that system.
Schools In Particular: 
1. U. Chicago and Ford are the most quant challenging programs here. If you have Calculus and/or Econometrics in your transcript with a B+ or higher, you should be fine. If you don't have Calculus or Econometrics, you are in a more challenging place. Chicago will take risks on people with interesting background since they have a robust summer school program. You might fit that bill though. However, I really hope you like doing calc based econometrics (in my opinion it is a moot point in today's era of software) with these schools.
2. UVA Batten MPP - I love this program a lot. Just keep in mind that there is a noticeable cohort straight from undergrad. Historically, they have also been open to giving scholarships as well. 
3. George Mason MPP? - WHY? So this program has some cool professors that do research in really obscure yet interesting areas. However... the program experience is sub par + has major brand and career struggles. I actually knew people who went to this program just so they wouldn't have to socialize with their peers, knowing that have a non-existent community experience.
4. GWU MPP - this is an interesting program because they strongly emphasize doing internships in DC while you go to school. Helps with building your resume and dilutes the community experience.
5. NYU Wagner - great program - also struggles with community since NYC people generally have their own NYC lives. When I do the grad school talk with any Wagner person, biggest gripe is how there is little school alumni/peer support. 
6. American SIS - I wrote extensively about SIS before.
 
2. Schools I recommend you also consider
a. Duke Terry Sanford
b. UNC MPP (if you need an ultimate safety that is still respectable)
c. USC Price (if you have any interests in going out west)
d. Syracuse Maxwell 

Since all of you must have graduated a while ago, what do you think of Uchicago now?

I am rejecting it, in addition to the other answers (no funding, etc):
1) Thesis advisor is a U chicago alumn and really didn´t recommend it, in fact she refused to write my LOR to there because in her words it is a cash cow for the university with terrible reputation with in.
2) Do not like that core classes have an average of 100 students vs 30 for GPPI or LBJ (sorry this might be the LAC mentality but if I am paying 60 k a year I want a personalized education)
3) Bad weather (already spent 4 yrs in upstate NY and they say it is even worst in here)
 
in fact the only pro I could see was that in some neoliberal sectors of my governement the Chicago name sounds a lot (currently work in that type of place), yet in others they compare you to the chicago boys (which is very associated with the dirty wars in LatAm and is a terrible rep to have). Just my two cents!

Let me try to simplify you life:
*First off - you are EXTREMELY competitive, and I can see you be competitive for almost any school you apply to
1. Figure out if you want full time vs. part-time.
I strongly recommend against part-time because the bottom line is that you will get a sub-part experience just by virtue of time limitations alone (let alone school programming challenges). If you want to go the financially conservative route, feel free to apply part-time. However... you will have could ofs... should ofs for the rest of your life. Also, expect next to no meaningful networking from the part time programs. I knew 0 McCourt part-time folks who didn't work for Georgetown who managed to work for the community.
If you do part-time --> Its between Georgetown vs. GW... you basically snagging a brand, so you might as well go for Georgetown
If you decide to full time -->
2. Decide if you want a quant heavier or quant low experience. 
If you are okay with quant low (or quant lower, then Oxford, Cambridge, and NYU Wagner should work for you (I don't know LSE well enough). Just appreciate that you won't really be gaining any meaningful marketable technical skills. You are just doing theory and getting case study exposure. 
I strongly recommend a quant heavier program because if you go to grad school, you might as well come away with a meaningful marketable skill.
If you go quant heavier route -->
3. Get rid of the schools that don't have robust programming to help you with your career (as in they don't have the world's best track record with putting their people in the most competitive public policy careers). 
Get Rid:
- So get rid of McCourt MPP (on their website, the career outcomes is actually misleading if you read in between the lines because they only advertise those that they keep track of.... approximately 25% to 33% (depending on year) they conveniently don't have data for or do not care to publish. What this allows them to do is mask those who aren't employed or have employment the isn't cookie cutter/desirable to publicize. Its interesting how the career trajectories (or lack there of) of people I know + myself (I am employed, but in an function and industry that is not a traditional MPP pathway and in no thanks to the program) is not advertised. Oh and the McKinsey guy is a support person Chinese international student and not a front line Consultant. 

- If you don't want to live in New York City  area / Northeast after school, get rid of NYU Wagner. It has a strong national brand, but its career trajectories are strongly regional
- GW will give you an awesome scholarship, but if you do care about brand prestige, it won't do you any favors from a brand prospective, especially since you already have an awesome undergrad brand.
I recommend you Add at least 2 of the 3: 
- Carnegie Melon Heinz (look into their DC campus options too if you don't like Pittsburgh)
- Duke Terry Sanford - probably one of the best options for domestic policy. They also do really well for State and Local
- U. Michigan - Ford Schools - this for you would probably be a good safety (I don't normally say that ever for anyone, but I think you are an exceptional case. Note - this is probably one of the harder quant schools). 
 

You have great qualifications, for sure. Even with those, the lack of full time work experience is a major problem for you. I know it's really hard to find relevant jobs this year, but this is a major hole in your credentials. Even if this year's pool of applicants is not as competitive as we think it will be (which is unlikely) and you get in to one of those programs, I doubt that you'll get any financial aid. 
 
Regardless, you still might have a chance at some of the programs with larger cohorts, like SIPA and SAIS. That being said, you'd probably be stuck paying full sticker price in tuition. If I were you, I'd tough it out and try to get 2 years of full time work experience. It's probably not what you wanted to hear, but doing this will put you in a better situation two years down the road and will likely lead to less debt. These programs are not worth $100K or more in debt.

bro, this OP is from 2012...

Hey MAB1980, what a coincidence. Seems to me we are looking for the same programs. I've found a couple of joint degrees that may interest you: 1. NYU Journalism Global-Joint Program in International Relations (Arthur L. Carter Institute of Journalism); 2. The Elliot School's program in Global Communications; 3. American University's SIS-Journalism and Public Affairs joint program, and 4. the Public Diplomacy joint MS/MA degree program at Syracuse that OregonGal mentioned. Of course some Journalism masters have courses in politics or international reporting.

Let me know if you if you've found something else and good luck.

Just to add on to @kreitz128, in addition to course load, you want to look at what the career trajectory trends are.

Generally speaking, if you want to go into IDEV as analysis person or program evaluation person, MPA/MPPs are the way to go (assuming you have a strong quant foundation at those programs). If you want to go into IDEV as more a relationship based or management type person, you are better off with professional IR based masters (and increasingly - MBAs as well). 

The confusion comes in how a lot of MPAs and MPPs assume roles that are relationship based and management based roles (either straight from grad school or a year or so in). This is common, but it is somewhat of a career pivot and not a direct career progression. This generally doesn't happen the other way around whereby an IR professional master's program person goes into an analysis/program evaluation role (NOTE* a huge and notable exception is Johns Hopkins SAIS given its highly rigorous quant nature).
In the end I recommend you go with what works best with your life goals. If you are cool with sitting at a desk crunching numbers and coding + doing presentations whereby you translate technical language into simple English, a quant heavy MPP/MPA or JHU SAIS works best for you. If you like working with people and managing teams and IR Masters/MBA is for you . 

Hi, 
I recommend comparing core coursework & whats recently offered, and look at what faculty are doing/publishing/focusing on. I dont know enough about Yale's program to comment specifically.  I would say they are generally different in that MPP is generally more analytical & quantitative than some IR pr public affairs programs. That said, there are still many MPPs that also may have more focused context area, such as  International/global development policy, or offer the ability to take programs in other specific policy areas.    
If you are more interested in performing analysis across programs/policy, applying quantitative methods, then MPP programs or similar core establishes foundation for this.  Yet some top MPA and MAs and related may also offer similar coursework and be considered analytical (resembling MPP) than other MAs or MSWs.  Unfortunately theres no easy way! 
The Government affairs forum can be helpful in distinguishing programs fitted for specific career paths.  Do you know what field do you want to work and what do you want to do?  
 
 
 

Program Applied To (MPA, MPP, IR, etc.):  Georgetown SSP, Harvard Kennedy MPP,  Princeton WWS, Yale Jackson, UT Austin LBJ, Johns Hopkins SAIS
Schools Admitted To: Georgetown (25% tuition), Harvard (no aid), Yale Jackson (50% tuition), UT Austin (full tuition plus $10k/year stipend), SAIS ($20k/year)
Schools Rejected From: WWS (Waitlisted and chose not to remain)
Still Waiting:  None
Undergraduate institution: Top 10 LAC 
Undergraduate GPA: 3.89
Undergraduate Major: Religion; Arab Studies minor
GRE Quantitative Score: 168
GRE Verbal Score: 170
GRE AW Score: 5.0 
Years Out of Undergrad (if applicable): 3
Years of Work Experience: 4 (counting internships)
Describe Relevant Work Experience:                                                                                                                                                                                                                             
Internship/contracting with international humanitarian/development org. (both domestic and in Mid. East). Independent, grant funded research in Mid. East during undergrad (nothing published). Short term position (3 months) in refugee resettlement. 1 year nonprofit journalism fellowship, including articles published on Mid. East politics and conflict. 2 years at national nonprofit focused on domestic policy issue. Critical language skill (low-mid intermediate) from 3 years of undergraduate study, semester abroad in Mid. East, and semester of language class post-grad 
Strength of SOP (be honest, describe the process, etc): 
Strong; I provided a cohesive story about moving from general humanitarian/international interest, to regional specialty, and then to a particular type of peacebuilding/conflict resolution work. I address particular career paths that fit well with this journey, and particular classes/professors that would prepare me to get there. Wrote fairly unique SOP for each school.
 
Strength of LOR's (be honest, describe the process, etc): 
Strong LOR from undergrad advisors (2). Hopefully fairly strong LOR from supervisor(s) at past 2 positions, though not in area of interest. 
 
Other:
Very thankful for this site and all its members. I ended up choosing Yale Jackson for its flexibility and the ability to work closely with faculty and fellows. A couple things that helped me in the application process:
-Talking extensively with current and former students, faculty, and practitioners in my area of interest. I was able to weigh different schools' reputations, career prospects, course offerings, student experience, and more. This site is helpful, but the anonymity means you can't take everyone's opinion as gospel. Going to people who have career trajectories you'd like to emulate, or who can give you unfiltered truth about these programs can make a world of difference.
-I think many people emphasize this, but if you have time really write your SOPs specifically for the program you're applying to. I worked with current and former students of some of the programs to refine mine and speak specifically about what the school could offer me in my development as a scholar and practitioner.
-Taking time to plan specifics about attending the school. For me, it was helpful to look at specific course offerings and chart out my degree path, or plan out my budget based on what the school was offering in aid. These plans helped me see what my life would be like for the next 2 years, and allowed me to make decisions.

Thank you a ton for this insight and the time you spent answering! Very grateful to you!

I think you need to understand how they are quant heavy. They are quant heavy on data/economic analysis, which only really gets at on part of math. The reason is because in a more data centric world, in order to be fully competent in understanding the details of the policy formulation/performance side of the house (emphasis on policy... not politics), there is a strong argument for understanding analytical methods and processes.
Quant should also be understood in terms of two ways. Depth of quant and scope of quant. A program like NYU Wagner is not too deep and not that broad. My program at Georgetown McCourt, was moderately deep (we had to understand Calc principles, but not do Calc per se), but really intensely broad (5 mandatory quant based classes). A program like Chicago Harris is intensely deep, and moderately broad. Some programs at Johns Hopkins are intensely deep and intensely broad in terms of quant.
 

Hi there! That's really awesome! I'm applying to the MSPP program at NYU Wagner as well as Georgetown and a handful of other scary universities. Wagner is my top choice though!

Right, I didn't mean to imply that you would be studying IR, but guessed from your profile you would be interested in a degree that you could apply in an international context. I applied to programs that will connect with the international development field. They go by a variety of names. Some of are MPP, some are MPAff, MPA, or Master of ID. As someone pointed out in another thread, the degree title does not matter so much, it really comes down to the courses you take and the focus of the faculty/school.

I would suggest you take a hard second look at SAIS. Maybe reach out and look any friends/friends of friends/etc who are alumni that you could talk to.

Beefmaster,

Left you a reply here: I'd wait out the year and retake the GRE if I were you. However, you can always defer for a year if accepted and reapply anywhere you didn't get in. Then you have better chance at (limited) funding.

There seem to be a lot of threads asking the same thing popping up lately and I figured it might make sense to make an overall guide thread and then those who feel their answers still haven’t been adequately answered can post below for an idea of what their chances are. Here is a brief rundown of factors affecting your likelihood of getting into top-tier and well respected programs. If you fall below par in any one of these factors you can bump it up by being stellar in one of the others. I'll add to this if others point out other things I've left out.

School requirements:
Your first stop should be the school admissions website – this will tell you what prerequisites you need, give you an idea of GRE and GPA requirements and what work experience is expected (if any)

GPA:
From what I’ve seen/read over the years any GPA over 3.4 and you should be competitive. That’s not to say if your GPA is lower than 3.4 you’ll have no chance, but if you have a GPA above 3.4 you should be in good shape.

GRE score:
GRE scores seem to be most important for schools with demanding quantitative programs and for securing the top financial aid. Most schools will state the average GRE scores for their incoming classes on their website – use these to see how competitive you are. By and large you should be competitive if you score over 650 on verbal and quantitative and over 4.0 on the AWA. For the top schools over 700 seems to be closer to the mark.

Work experience:
For most programs it will be expected that you have at least 1-2 years of relevant experience in your field. This can be lowered a little if you have other pseudo-relevant work experience (management in the for-profit sector etc.) but you should have shown some level of professional interest in the area you hope to study at grad school. Applicants coming straight out of undergrad may find it very hard to get into the programs aimed more at junior/mid-career professionals such as Johns Hopkins SAIS and Princeton’s WWS.

Language skills:
For a lot of programs being able to speak a second language is a must, while for others it is just a very good selling point. If you can show experience working in a foreign language this will show adaptability and will endear schools looking to enrol a diverse group of applicants.

Quantitative requirements:
A lot of schools will want you to show experience in micro/macroeconomics and some maths/statistics courses. You can fullfil these through undergrad classes or by taking courses at a community college/diploma program.

Overseas experience (work, study and teaching):
Work overseas and study abroad are also viewed extremely favourably by admissions committees and if you have taught English abroad, worked in the Peace Corps or otherwise gained experience living in a developing country this will really strengthen your application. It also shows you to be a go-getter, and that you can bring this outside experience to grad school study.

Statement of Purpose:
This is where it all comes together. This is your chance to impress the admission committee and show how your personal 'arc' has brought you to this point - being the perfect addition to their grad school. This more than any other part of your application will determine how admit committees view you as an applicant and it's also one of the only application variables that's completely under your control. Having a cohesive narrative that brings together life experience, past academic history and professional experience is a must. It also gives you a great chance to showcase your writing style - so make sure no grammar/spelling mistakes make it into your final revision.

Great list of SOP pitfalls

If your profile matches at least 3 or 4 of the criteria listed above then you are competitive to apply to an MPA/MPP/IR program.

What is most important about any grad school application is showing fit – that is how your profile matches the speciality of that school and its program. If you can’t articulate compelling reasons why you are a good match for them and vice versa, question whether you should be applying to that program.


A note on applying to top schools:

It is worth noting that nobody here can tell you what your chances of getting into a top program (Harvard, Princeton, Georgetown etc.) because getting into a top program requires a certain amount of luck as well as a great profile. Some people get offers from Harvard with a 2.9 GPA, but also happen to have singlehandedly retaken an allied command post in the Korengal valley. It’s down to who reads your application and what they happen to be looking for with the current application cycle.

Spend time improving the elements of your application that you can (GRE, work experience, languages) and don’t waste time freaking out about the things you can’t change (GPA).

If you’ve read all of the above and really still can’t tell if your application is competitive, post your profile below.

The smartest thing to do is actually to talk to real students or recent alumni. Most schools have student ambassador like programs. However, to be really smart about it, it helps to talk to someone who isn't a student ambassador, who is pressured to sell the school and not exactly give the 100% honest opinion (I know, I was one).
The problem with the website and virtual events is that they are ultimately sales events (in fact a lot of the people who run it are PR/marketing people. You do get interesting insights and structural understanding of a program. However, there is a lot under the hood that won't be mentioned.
In terms of knowing, I think that depends on if knowing someone relates back to the school and the depth of "knowing". For example, I know my family members who gone to schools and done a lot of comparing and contrasting, and I think they are amazingly insightful "knowing someone". 

I guess I can answer this for you, been seeing it for a while but felt like the answer does not really help you. Just curious then ok sure 
Research has shown that the GRE is not a good indicator of graduate school success. However, studies have shown that students who were raised affluently have a tendency to do very well on the GRE, while lower socioeconomic, underrepresented students did much worse even with intense studying. Heck, I got 162/154/4 with two months intense study, but you didn’t ask about me. These studies highlight that the GRE actually act as a barrier to students from underrepresented backgrounds. 
That’s great and all, but you know.. these ad comms and professors are too busy to read papers about GRE. So us poor, first generation, English second or even third language students etc. are screwed! 
But then, hope came upon us. A hero at SFSU in the bio department began a program that accepted these students into masters and mentored them into other PhD programs. These students started with low gre and mediocre gpas. Over the course of many fricken years, this uncaped hero acquired a grand list of these successful “poor” test score students, their high gpa at the masters level, the top universities where they are going/went for PhDs, and those who went onto professorships. Essentially, he shown how amazing these students can be, regardless of a test score. Dreams do come true.
So he has the data... low gre score means nothing. But yea, so what? So what?! Professor hero goes around to different bio departments, and gives hour long talks about his work and why the gre is useless. As a result, some bio departments throw out the gre requirement. I was in one of his presentations in the past, he even said if we apply somewhere where they require it, we could let him know and he may try talking to them. I forgot his name though, or I don’t want to share it with you, idk. 
Anyways, every professor I’ve talked to says they don’t care about gre anymore. Just don’t bomb it. Why it’s still even there, heh... that’s a story for another time kiddo.