Mppirgradschool

Fletcher is the most traditionally academic of the IR schools. Popular amongst prospective students that want to eventually study a PHD. Not sure how Fletcher is going to be able to adapt to the cross-functional, data-driven international policy world of the XXI century. Tufts isn't known for having strong accompanying graduate schools to cross-register at, which makes me think that Fletcher's brand may hurt in the coming years. It'll be interesting to see the how elite tier of IR schools fares in the future. I do think that having strong accompanying graduate schools is essential, as one can tailor courses to their goals.

Are your other degrees from outside the U.S. as well? A C average in the U.S. is a 75% -- which is dismal -- but in some European countries, a 75% could put you in the top 10% of your class. Do you know what your class rank was?

I am familiar with the MC/MPA and know that they really look at the Q portion of the GRE. More than one would think for a mid-career program. How they'll view GPA in this case is hard to determine -- do well in the GRE.

I wouldn't get a dual degree as the costs are exorbitant and outside of getting an MD, JD or MBA -- pretty much worthless when coupled with a policy degree. You can easily cross-register at the School of Journalism -- or other Columbia graduate schools --- as needed. I think all policy schools are going to make standardized testing optional for at least next year. Ivy League Schools have already adopted this approach for undergraduate admissions. I would still take it and present scores if you hit the 75%+ percentile combined. You'll find more people interested in journalism in the MIA, and the tech + media will probably be evenly distributed. Evan Hill, a 2019 MPA, won the Pulitzer Prize this year for his work with the Visual Investigations Team at the NYT -- so both programs should set you up for it. Yeah, the HKS MPA requires 4 graduate level courses as a prereq. Check the MPP employment snapshot to see if these outcomes interest you, as the program is more domestic and about 1/3 of grads stay in Boston: https://www.hks.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/OCA/files/20 DPSA OCA Employment Snapshot_web.pdf Out of those 3 schools, think Georgetown may be the best fit for you. Berkeley is far from the epicenters of IR (DC and NY) and JHU SAIS is primarily geared towards setting graduates up at the WB/IMF. SAIS and SIPA are different in that the outcomes at SAIS are more narrow, and the outcomes of SIPA tend to be broader -- much of them falling in the journalism/media/tech spaces that interest you.

Your second GRE score is good enough. 4 years is still a ways away but given what your stats are + current employment -- and supposing you do well at work -- I'd say you will get in at HBS, for sure. HKS MPA-ID is tough to assess, as it's primarily intended for folks from developing countries, and the cohorts are small. You would definitely get into the MPP/MPA, though. Your odds at Stanford are probably 50/50. I'm not really seeing any social entrepreneurship in your profile -- you may have not mentioned it -- but your profile looks more HBS than Stanford GSB, imo.

That being said, I do think Terry Sanford is a solid policy school program for domestic policy (they have good strengths in IR and IDEV too, but their unique strength is domestic policy). I would say it is equal to Ford and Goldman (unless you have a regional preference). Kennedy and SIPA might be a minor leg up, but at the end of the day, especially in the areas you are looking into, you end up in the same career opportunities. You compete based upon work experience + networking + problem exposure. I agree, Sanford, Ford and Goldman are all great programs -- but less portable than HKS/SIPA. Before IDEV, I worked in social/education policy -- outside of the beltway/tristate area-- and my bosses had either graduate degrees from the local state university or from top Ivy League schools like Harvard and Columbia -- in policy or education. Goldman is probably the strongest of those 3, and has a great social policy rep, but its student body is largely in-state -- which may limit you to CA to an extent. Also, definitely get some experience, it'll enhance your job prospects and make you competitive for scholarships.

Yale is obviously a great brand, but I personally wouldn't go to Jackson. Jackson graduates small classes of about ~30 people, a Yale trademark -- of which only 10 are international. It's impossible to develop a footprint at multilaterals by graduating such small classes. Personally, I am not a big fan of Yale/Princeton school cultures either -- especially if you are coming from abroad for graduate school.

As you mentioned, regarding dual-degrees, I think SIPA protects its MIA students a bit more. I know Dr. Ian Bremmer only offers courses to those in the MIA program -- and this happens with other professors as well. The most similar program to it is JHU SAIS' MA -- also SAIS' flagship. MSFS is not as intl. development focused, but also a peer school. Course structure is very similar between both (MIA and MPA). Intended outcomes are not, however. MIA is geared towards placing its graduates at multilateral organizations. MPA is focused on placing graduates in government/ministry related roles in the student's country of citizenship. Both programs place into international NGOs, although the MIA has more name recognition. I believe most diplomats at SIPA also favor the MIA. Anecdotally, just doing a quick LinkedIn search, the MIA students hailed from better undergraduate institutions than MPA students. The MPA is 70% international vs the MIA, which is only 40%. I am guessing that average GREs are probably higher for MIA because of this, as U.S. domestic students have been taking standardized tests all their life. I am going to assume that MPAs are also going to favor the urban and social policy concentration more than MIAs, while more MIAs will favor economic development and security policy -- just by virtue of each program's intended outcomes.

SIPA MIA has decreased its class from 200 last year to 130 this year, per their website. The MIA was 350 people in 2010, and has been getting smaller ever since. Coincidentally, this change took place when SIPA became its own independent program, free from the Columbia GSAS umbrella, which helped improve its image and enhance its autonomy. Their data from 2017 indicates that they get virtually the same number of applications for both their MIA and their MPA -- which tells me that their MIA is more selective, although hard to discern whether marginally or by an order of magnitude. The MIA is SIPA's flagship program, so it makes sense that they would keep it more exclusive. See that you are also thinking about applying to HKS MPP. As an international student, I'd highly advise you to apply to the MPA or MPA/ID instead, as these programs cater much more to international students -- with a much greater representation of them, >50% -- and have a much more worldly focus. The core MPP course material is very US domestic-focused, and the students that attend are interested in local government/domestic issues. They are definitely less worldly than the MPA, MPA-ID or SIPA MIA students.

Your profile says you are in Germany, so I am assuming you are international. Would be interesting to disaggregate GRE score averages between international and domestic students. Those numbers seem fine/near average at SAIS/SIPA for an international student, but below average at HKS as they seem to disaggregate less for MPP admissions. This was a whacky year, and there is a chance that schools lowered their bar for admissions, especially when pulling international students from a waitlist, as schools are trying to achieve a diverse class and visa issues/external funding may have barred some international students from attending. If policy/IR schools have followed the MBA decrease in application trend, the next couple of years will be incredibly competitive, as people try to ride this incoming economic crisis out.

https://sais.jhu.edu/academics/degree-programs/master-degrees/master-arts-ma/class-profile-ma SAIS MA's 75th % for enrolled students is 163 V and 164 Q. The numbers the webinar showed were for admitted students, which are always slightly higher than the values for enrolled. One thing you have to understand about a school like SAIS -- i.e. an elite, large IR program -- and programs similar to it -- i.e. SIPA -- is how their student body is composed, and what that means for funding. To make a breakdown that is easy to understand, let's suppose that there are 3 tiers of SAIS students -- which is probably accurate. a) Tier 1 is comprised of the top students at SAIS/SIPA. These are students that have multiple, well-funded offers from several elite schools. They have strong WE, great GPA/GRE and chose the program they are at because the funding was generous. They will contribute greatly to the class and can draw from their experiences to elevate discussion. The only exception to this are Rangel, Pickering and Payne fellows that will get additional funding to their scholarship (i.e. full funding) and many come with little to no prior WE. I think these programs should have a full time WE prerequisite in order to apply because the best FSOs are those with perspective and humility that comes from experience, but alas, that's a different conversation. b) Tier 2 is composed of solid students that have one blemish on their application, either weak WE, GPA or GRE, but excelled in the other portions of their application. They will get minimal funding, if any, and generally contribute to the class. They will also be ready to hit the ground running and have a bit of a "chip on their shoulder", attributes that I think are very positive, and encourage healthy competition. c) Tier 3 are students that barely made the cut and were accepted because schools have to pay bills, and view these students as ATM machines. They pay full sticker price and the class would not hurt, some can argue it would be enhanced, if they weren't accepted. My advice to you, if you want to get into SAIS and potentially get some $, is to get full time WE for 2 more years and knock the GRE out of the park. Having to pay $160,000 to join one of these programs is nuts.

Agree with @GradSchoolGrad in the assessment, will add a few thoughts... Personally, I wouldn't bother applying to WWS MPA or HKS MPP. The former is free, attracting strong competition -- individuals with solid WE and high GPA/GRE breakdowns. Anecdotally, I don't know the positions WWS MPAs end up accepting, as I have never met one on the job. Have met several WWS undergrads, though. HKS MPP has shifted in the past years from a program that values public service over everything else, to one that values prior private sector experience. I believe the new dean ushered this change. It also seems that WE is slowly becoming less important in favor of high GPA/high GRE -- making the process akin to law school admissions. SAIS, SIPA and Fletcher are stretches. Someone that I know attended a SAIS webinar this year, during which they shared the MA admitted students' stats. They are as follows: GPA 25% - 75% range is 3.35 - 3.8. The average GRE is a 320 (pretty even splits). SIPA and Fletcher probably have somewhat similar numbers, except that SIPA applicants have stronger work experience before applying -- probably more in tune with the WE reqs at HKS. Honestly, I would take a look at UChicago Harris, as they give preferential treatment during their application process to Americorps alums. I would accept the Americorps job and position myself to apply to Harris, but that's just me.

If financing is equal, it's an easy choice, SAIS. SAIS and SIPA are the programs that send most graduates to IOs. SAIS is closer to the policy-drafting process -- although PHDs reign here -- whereas SIPA graduates are more "hands-on" and implementing the policies abroad -- this being a general distinction imo. Fletcher is also a solid program, albeit more humanitarian focused. Georgetown MSFS, typically lumped into the elite tier of MA in IR programs, has a heavy federal government/diplomacy focus -- and its brand is hurting from the federal government's hiring freeze/over-reliance on Rangel/Pickering fellowships to fill State Department ranks. CIPA is relatively unknown in the field. I understand why the Ivy League brand may be pushing you towards CIPA -- as these things do matter abroad, but unless better funded, it's SAIS all day. Shame you don't have SIPA as an option, as it would have checked the boxes you are looking for.

I think policy schools are beginning to resemble law schools, in that GPA and GRE are quickly becoming the most important factors. It's a shame, as classes benefit from the diverse perspectives individuals bring from the workplace and from leading in ambiguous situations/environments. You only really start getting that with ~3 years of experience.

HKS is a very stingy school and is probably running a considerable deficit. HBS is actually facing a $22 million shortfall this year. I'm guessing all these zero-funding offers are coupled with a very strict no-deferral policy. Unfortunately, many schools solely view admits as a revenue stream and are hoping that some of you bite and make the mistake of paying full tuition, to then be greeted by a terrible job economy in 2022, where many policy grads will be vying for entry level gigs.