troika

You published in The Onion? I'm can't think of another journal I read for fun.

I am interested in international security affairs. The top 4 schools I want to go to are Georgetown SFS, Princeton WWS, George Washington ES, and Harvard KS. All of them have specific programs, professors, and reputation that fit what I want to do, both academically and professionally. Based on the below stats, am I being realistic in my targets? Obviously no one here is actually an adcom, but your feedback is greatly appreciated. If it matters, I'm applying for fall 2012.

Age: 22, almost 23

Undergrad: University of Michigan, 3.8 GPA
Double major: Political Science and REES.
Quant classes: Micro Econ (A), Macro Econ (A-), Statistics (B+), Modelling Political Processes (A), Political Economy (B+)
Got scholarships, multiple departmental awards, and won a national award.
Studied abroad in Russia.

GRE: 1570 (800V, 770Q, haven't gotten AWA back yet).

Work Experience:

Executive Board director at an international affairs journal (undergrad)
Russian-English translator (undergrad)
Research intern at an international security think tank (post-graduation)
Marketing analyst at a large corporation (post-graduation... had to pay the bills somehow!)

Currently: English teacher in China (I start in just a few weeks), freelance writer (have had national security-focused articles published in multiple academic and professional journals).

LOR: Undergrad thesis advisor, senior director of int'l security think tank I interned at, CEO of company I worked for.

Languages: English (native), Russian (fluent), Mandarin Chinese (currently beginner, but should be intermediate or better by the time I get back from China!)

Diversity: White male, so no help here!

My main concerns are a low-ish GRE Quant and my relative lack of professional experience.

I'd just start over with a whole new draft. Try something different. You've got this approach out of your system, now try something more professional, less emotional, and less story like. Your writing has a lot of superfluous stuff in it, so I'd work on cleaning that up. Every sentence is important and should stand on its own. As far as content, spend more time on where you're going rather than where you've been, and be as specific as you can. I get that you may not have intended it to sound like you view your law school experience was a mistake, but it really does read like that.

Previous Schools: well-known large private university, consistently ranked in top 90 North American universities.
Previous Degrees and GPA's: International Studies, Spanish minor, 3.93 cumulative and in major GPAs
GRE Scores (Verbal/Quantitative/Analytical Writing): V 680, Q 680, AW 5.0.

Previous Work Experience (Years, Type): 0, applied as a senior in undergrad.
Math/Econ Background: Calculus, Principles of Macroeconomics, Principles of Microeconomics, quant-intensive intermediate Micro and Macro.
Foreign Language Background: Fluent Spanish
Strength of SoP: Very strong. Had many friends and professors read and provide feedback. Revised upwards of 20 times. Individual statement for each program I applied to (This was more work but I think they expect it now).

Intended Field of Study in Grad School: security policy
Long Term Professional Goals: Foreign Service, Intelligence, Analysis

Schools Applied to & Results:
ACCEPTED: University of Denver, Korbel; American University, SIS; George Washington University, Elliott School;
WAITLISTED: 0
REJECTED: Columbia, SIPA (letter said I was one of the few they recommend reapply after a year or two of experience); Georgetown, SFS (no explanation... letter didn't even come from SFS); Yale, Jackson (letter was signed by some guy from the chemistry department?); Tufts, Fletcher School (generic letter with no explanation); Rangel Fellowship; and Pickering Fellowship

Ultimate Decision & Why: Elliott School at GWU! Best location, best faculty, and best program. Thanks to external support, it's also the best price!


Advice/Stuff I Would Have Done Differently:


CALM DOWN! Yes, at the moment it SEEMS like the mistake is life-shattering, its consequences unavoidable, and your future destroyed, but in reality, it won't.


Fact I did not know: Some schools accept revised essays and resumes after you submit them online. All it takes is an email or a telephone call. If you're nervous abut them knowing it was you who called, have a friend call for you. The admissions administrative staff was very nice and very understanding to me.


Also, if you're thinking about applying right out of undergrad, as I did, I would probably recommend that you don't. On the one hand, most programs want you to have x amount of experience, and your not having it puts you at a disadvantage; even if you are lucky enough to get into the program, this disadvantage makes your chances for receiving funding much slimmer. On the other hand, it consumes your entire year, starting at least in the summer before you apply (researching schools and studying for the GRES). Understand that the application process is by no means over when you click submit during Christmas break (or whenever you apply).


Finally, apply for as many things as you can find for which you are at least loosely qualified. I am talking jobs, internships, scholarships, fellowships, essay contests, and of course, graduate programs. It's worth the work to be able to have choices.

This is your own choice, so no need to explain to us. Honestly I think very few people on this board would really care about your decision. As long as it makes to you, it should be fine.

::stands on soapbox:: I would think very carefully about what $1200/month loan payments will mean in terms of your future, whether it involves having a family, wanting to travel or the types of jobs you will be able to take. Massive loan debt could very well impact all of these things. I have more than a few friends in this situation now and in this economy especially, it is not pretty.

I agree that a masters is very helpful for some people at some points - but the loan debt can be a huge burden, especially in this field. Personally I think taking out this much in loans is a very risky decision and that a masters from a state school (or in Europe) at 1/10-1/2 of the cost can be a much more worthwhile option. I would also consider whether it might be wiser to take another year and spend literally 6-9 months studying for the GRE at nights and on weekends, or spend a year working in the field, to improve scholarship chances.

It doesn't simply have to be 140k or no grad school at all, there are many options in between and many programs that do not require such a large debt burden. There is also the option of working and saving money for a couple of years. If you are wealthy and/or have family that can support you should things get sticky, then that's a different situation.

Personally I've decided I will not spend that much, I'm looking to take on $60k max.

Minimizing your student loan debt balance is crucial and requires (1) open, frank appraisals of future earning capacity against debt loads and (2) academic performance and networking strategies that afford the graduate a broad range of choices to evaluate at the end of each stage of education. It is easier to ask these questions in a systematic way than you might think.

Before you choose, do two things:

I. Understand your costs.

You are essentially wrestling with four distinct tiers of costs: UG, UG+PHD, UG+MA, UG+MA+PHD. ("UG+MA" could mean either working after the MA or continuing to a funded PhD.)

It should be easy to get a handle on these costs. Create a sample budget (SB), add the costs of tuition at the average target institution (T), multiply by the number of years you plan to spend unfunded (Y) and add 30% for inflation and inevitable cost overruns. Y(SB + T) * 1.3

This provides a worst case scenario of your total exposure. You may win scholarships, get jobs or get late funding, but deal with that once you've chosen a path. You should use this number to estimate your monthly payments in each potential future, which will give you and understanding of what type of wage you need to pull down to service the debt and stay comfortable.

II. Examine your opportunities.

The OP's opportunity tiers are much the same, with two major exceptions. One, at any point she could decide between academic careers or professional careers. Second, assuming she chooses an academic path after the MA, her PhD maybe funded or unfunded. Using these pivot points as a guide, map and evaluate your available outcomes, discounting less likely alternatives. You should gather information on these outcomes from two places.

First, examine the target school's placement record and ask faculty and students about the range of occupations graduates aim for and achieve. For MAs, look at percentages that get funded offers.

Second, research the futures revealed by your investigations into placement. Network aggressively with people that hold the jobs you discovered during step one. Find out what those career paths look like financially.

Now you have the information you need to link each cost point with a set of tangible outcomes. How much income will you make? When will you start making it? What opportunities stay open down each path and which close off?

While you will like some outcomes better that others for non-financial reasons, don't count any of them out unless they are clearly not financially viable. Keep an open mind to a wide variety of careers after you:

III. Make your choice and plan for success.

Whether you choose academic or professional life right off the bat, keep in mind that quantitative performance is only half the battle. Networking is extremely important to later success. I will tailor my advice for academic paths, but there are obvious corollaries in the professional world.

Remember all that networking and investigation you did about possible career paths? While you were investigating the financials, you should also have asked about what skills and achievements those employers look for in potential hires. Develop those skills. As many as you can. Give yourself the opportunity to to appeal to a diverse set of employers and don't give that up until success is really assured in one arena or another.

Make and maintain relationships with people that can help you. Professors can and do network eager students in both academia and industry. Your classmates will disperse and work places that will be of interest to your career. The professionals who told you about their careers can continue to advise you and might one day be the hiring manager or internal champion you need to get your foot in the door and firmly planted.

Normally I pop into these things to offer the occasional rational yet ultimately consoling word, but here I simply have to say: we are adults now. We do not need the admissions committee holding our hands and looking out for our delicate feelings. The fact that these forums are anonymous allow us to spew our nervousness on to a lot of strangers without fear of embarrassment, but (I certainly hope) none of us would do this in front of a real, live stranger, and certainly not one whom we are trying to convince that we have the chops to make it in an ass kicking environment like graduate school. We will have to spend the rest of our careers waiting. Waiting to find out if we got the grant. Waiting to find out if our journal article was accepted. Waiting on job applications. We will realize that we are not nearly as smart as we think we are, we are not the smartest person in the room anymore. Sometimes, it will make us doubt ourselves. But we will do it anyway, because we love our research, students, or lives. We have to, because that love is the only thing that will make up for the otherwise unpleasant things we must endure. As awful as this process is, if you cannot ultimately stomach it, if not knowing it is worse than your love for the work, then please do yourself a favor and do not try to brave grad school, because it will eat you. Cold. Ninth circle of hell cold. And eating.

Good luck to those of you on pins and needles this cycle. My advice, though no one will take it, will be to never check that list as it will start taking over your life.

I think thegradcafe should change its name to thedreamcrusher....
 

There's no reason to throw away perfectly good political science skills just because the topic is bread.

Rational choice theory: this is, in fact, the best loaf of Italian bread you are willing to bake, given the marginal costs of producing a better one. If you valued the product of another baking method more, you would have used that.

Classical realism: get used to fucking up your breadbaking, man; it's just part of human nature.

Constructivist realism: insufficiently chewy bread is inevitable given the anarchy of the kitchen. Perhaps you should improve its feng shui?

Idealism: first, make sure you and the other breadbakers are organized democratically. Then invade the bread and reorganize the yeast along the lines of a parliamentary republic. If you and the bread can't cooperate after that, one of you wasn't really democratic.

Critical race theory: what else would you expect? Just like the bread, the reigning ideology adopts a mix of whites and browns on the outside, while remaining just as white - and as dense - as ever in substance.

Instrumentalist Marxism: how nice of you to complain about insufficient chewiness when the real purpose of the bread is to poison your neighbor!

Structuralist Marxism: wait, stop! I'm sure you don't know this, but the bread is poison!

World-Systems theory: asking questions about "the bread" is meaningless. After all, the bread was produced from other things in the kitchen with other things in the kitchen for other things in the kitchen. The proper unit of analysis is the kitchen-system.

Positivism: can we really say that your baking the bread in the way you did lead to insufficient chewiness? Keep baking bread just the way you did until we can get the p-value down to to at least .1.

Joe Sixpackism: Unenchewment up again??? I say we throw the bâtards out!!

For the past two months I'd developed a montra: just wait till February, then it will be "any day now". This morning, I woke, rolled out of bed, opened my computer and email and noticed the date. No, no e-mails from departments but, it is February! AHHH! Any day now?

I need a new montra!

Also, where the heck did January go? I think I blinked and missed it.

In speaking with several KSG admissions staff and former students, I would say that Harvard KSG MPP admissions statistics are the following (disclaimer - purely my opinion since Harvard doesn't publish admission stats):

GRE: V: at least 650 Q: at least 700

Ask yourself is your score high enough rather than how high it needs to be. In general, you have to be in the top 20% of GRE takers for that year to make you competitive without admissions looking twice at your score. Typically that range is at least above 90% of test takers on the verbal (~650 and above) and 70% on the quantitative (~700 and above). I honestly don't know how important the essay score is but I'm sure it factors more in cases where verbal competency is not easily demonstrated in other areas such as your GRE verbal score and your personal statement. I did hear that at least 700 is expected on the quantitative since KSG's core curriculum is math-heavy. They will also look at any math courses and your performance in them in undergrad on your provided transcript with your quantitative score to assess whether they think you will succeed in their program. In addition it helps to have one of your letters of recommendation speak to your math prowess such as a professor.

Undergraduate GPA: at least overall 3.5

Enough said. All schools and majors do differ in their difficulty. It helps to have fared in the top of your undergraduate school.

Career experience: at least 2.5-3 years

It helps to have a more substantive position in your field and can demonstrate some professional accomplishments. In forming a student body, KSG looks at professional diversity to see what kind of experiences you will bring. It helps to have moved up your career ladder or to show some leadership potential in your career trajectory in the time you have spent in the workplace. Put in another way, it helps to have a more senior title and show career commitment. It helps to have a letter of recommendation come from a professional source who can speak to your ability to succeed and what you have accomplished thus far as a young professional. Brownie points if the professional source is someone in a leadership position (e.g. Executive Director, Director, President, Chair, etc etc). There are many more things that can be said but keep in mind the MPP is geared toward young professionals in their mid to late twenties who have gotten their feet wet in their career passion.

Personal statement

My hunch is if you pass muster on the three aforementioned things, admissions will read your statement carefully before looking at anything else (just like how an employer looks at the cover letter before closely looking at the resume). There is no foolproof strategy to this. My advice is to 1) tell a story about yourself that is complementary to and cogently ties things in your CV together and 2) identify and elucidate some x factor about you but always in modest fashion. Make sure at least 2 other people read your statement, especially former or current MPPers. Unless you're an amazing writer, be prepared to rewrite it at least a dozen times. Don't forget to explain why you are pursuing an MPP and why Harvard specifically (do your research on the program). In fact, dedicate 2-3 paragraphs to this which could mean 500 words to your story and 500 to why the program. More importantly, this statement also shows your writing skills which is crucial to Harvard's PAE and the program. There is also that extra essay you can write to explain something about your application that you feel is lacking.

Letters of Recs

I would say two things: the importance of letters of recs should be what they are qualified to say and what they say about you. So do not just look at who to get but also what they can say so they are not saying the same things. Most recommendations will want your guidance anyway in what to say. One should come from an academic source who can speak to your academic skills, specifically anything to do with mathematics. Another from a professional source who can speak to your leadership potential and professional success. The third is up to you but make sure the third is not going to repeat what the other two have said. You want a well-rounded recommendation.

Diversity/X factor

One of the more important things that KSG provides is qualitative learning that occurs outside of the classroom among your peers. If you get into the program, you'll be attending classes with world leaders pursuing different degrees sitting next to you, studying with you, competing against you, etc. Think of the relationships and connections and things you'll learn from each other. Do you have something to contribute to them? You have to ask yourself assuming KSG's admissions rate is ~20% and 80% accepted will be admitted: do I have something four out of five other young professionals do not have? Have others been in my position before and therefore my professional history looks the same? Have I been a leader in ways others have not been? Have I done things others have not done that make my life experiences unique to the program? KSG's applicant pool continues to increase making it more competitive and you know they love that.

At the end of the day ask yourself: Am I proud of my application AND am I qualified for KSG?

Applicants who spend time to make sure every i is dotted and t crossed stands out in the mix. A certain amount of dedication does come across if your application is polished. If you feel insecure about something you said or did to your application, you shouldn't have submitted it. Make sure someone proofreads your entire application once complete, not just your personal statement but CV as well.

For the most part we never know why we do or don't get into things and Harvard is no exception. A lot of applicants don't ask themselves if they are qualified for KSG and apply out of a dream or a whim. It should be a strategic and calculated effort that in some way shows in your application. Do your homework on the program. Admissions will have a historical and general perspective as to whether they think you are a good fit including what you will bring to the student body they are assembling.

You should feel proud of your application and feel qualified for KSG. Then at least if you do not get in, you will feel like you did everything you could possibly do and control, and unfortunately were not selected. If it's any comfort, the MPPs I have worked with and worked for do not care so much about what school you went to but what professional experience you have for the job. Sure the H-bomb is nice to drop, but so are 20 or 30 other top MPP programs that are also more affordable.

My two cents.