riz1

Which schools have highly-regarded tech policy programs? As for whether people with technical backgrounds can make the jump to the soft side, here are two people off the top of my head who have made that transition successfully: Vipin Narang Michael Best

Last year, I went with option 1. I spoke at length about my parents' struggles as refugees to come to this country, and the impact their experiences have had on me in shaping my personal identity and influencing my worldview. I think it worked all right. Going with option 3 is definitely walking a thin line, because as you now know, you shouldn't simply rewrite your resume in paragraph format. However, if you can extract a couple of specific examples from your experiences, and then expand on them to tease out any threads or themes, you might be able to make option 3 really work for you.

My suggestion is to not rule out all other options. A great fit for you might be Fletcher's concentrations in human security, humanitarian studies, conflict resolution and development economics. You can get the full listing of concentrations here. The Fletcher experience would be a good fit for you, I think, for two particular reasons: first, the curriculum is very flexible, allowing you to choose those classes that interest you most; and second, many Fletcher grads go into human rights work at both the field and policy levels -- which means the network of Fletcherites in your areas of interest would be strong. Not to say other schools couldn't offer the same thing, but it is something to keep in mind. Consider other schools as well that offer some flavor of MPP or MIR, and research their course offerings carefully to make the most balanced decision. Good luck!

Should add that until you asked about it, coolclouds, I had never heard of it ...

Has MSCHE accreditation as of June 2006, which is fine and dandy, but nothing from APSIA or even NASPAA. First master's candidates received their degrees in 2002. List of recent guest lecturers is impressive: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Institute_of_World_Politics#Notable_past_guest_lecturers

At the end of the day, you're neither 8 nor 13 years out of undergrad. Three years ago is recent, and my feeling is that you should use some of the tips presented here on how to approach professors from days of yore. However, be careful in how you balance this decision: you are being recommended by your schools to include an academic LoR, but you don't want to include one just for the sake of meeting a quota, especially if it's from a professor who wouldn't strengthen your application. Be sure you find that sweet spot between getting an academic recommendation (because if you don't, it may not reflect well since you're recently out of university) and presenting your candidacy most favorably. With all that said, every applicant has a different story to tell, and if your story includes three brilliant recommendations from non-academics, then do that. Be sure to carefully craft your story in your SoP, in order to help the adcomm understand why your circumstances are so unique. Best of luck!

Also -- just came across this great post on the Fletcher Admissions Blog. The question is: Why would I pursue graduate work in international relations? Click the link below for answers from four current Fletcherites: http://news.fletcher.tufts.edu/admissions/?p=1164 Hope this helps!

Thanks to Leica and f-man for clarifying points. I don't mean to say that admissions officers troll these threads to connect an online avatar with a warm-body applicant; rather, those of us on the forum who are on adcomms can provide new insight into the amorphous grad school application process. With that said, I do know admissions officers monitor the chatter on discussion boards to see what people are saying about their schools -- especially when April rolls around and people are posting results. Just FYI. Last, Leica said it best: deciding whether or not a grad degree is "worth it" is indeed a highly personal reflection; the experiences of others on this forum only serve to address the more objective or quantitative qualities of the application process. Getting a good ROI on your degree is much more than getting a solid job and working off those loans -- your degree should pay emotional and intellectual dividends as well.

Remember that while hardly anyone on here is actually an admissions officer, some of us are on admissions committees. Many if not most adcomms today are composed of professional admissions officers and students who currently attend that school. Who knows, maybe someone in this thread is an adcomm member! Moreover, this forum is composed of prospective students as well as admitted students, along with a handful of alumni. For prospectives, the experience of current and former students can be invaluable, since their statistics, experiences and ideas can help form guidelines or benchmarks for those applying to grad school. Meanwhile, current and prospective students can always learn from alumni, who have seen it all and can now impart their wisdom. And alumni, of course, can stand to learn a thing or two from us young whippersnappers! With that said, a caveat: no one here claims to be an expert. We simply share our opinions, provide honest feedback based on our own experiences, make ourselves feel like we have a fighting chance, and provide hope to those sometimes despair of getting into grad school. "Government Affairs" is not intended to be a cutthroat sector. All is based on (1) what you know, (2) WHO you know, and (3) how much you're willing to work with others, often whom you've never met. These are the things that will sustain our race and ensure a future that's slightly more peaceful than our past.

Nehru University is a fantastic school and I'm sure your experience there was excellent. Your statistics and experience are equally impressive; however, your career ambitions seem vague. Could you provide more clarification on what your long-term objectives are, and how your graduate education will further them? Also -- MPA and MPP degrees vary considerably, and those are often quite different from MAIR / MALD / MSFS programs. Because your experience has varied considerably, a little more focus would be of tremendous help, both to us and to yourself.

I don't think it's bragging as much as providing sufficient information on the individual's background so that we can all make a more accurate assessment of the candidate's strength. Perhaps some of the bullet points could be condensed, or maybe some are not relevant -- I can see that. But overall, this forum is one of the best places to get honest feedback from people who think just like we do and who have the same overarching "save-the-world" ambitions (because let's face it, any grad degree in policy / government / IR isn't gonna pay for that sweet sports car). The OP here sounds quite accomplished, and it's all very impressive. Be sure to include salient details and keep things concise, and all will benefit.

So far, it sounds great -- decent GPA, good overseas experience, now working for State. Perhaps a few more clarifying details would help: When did you finish undergrad? How long were you in Turkey? What are your responsibilities at State currently? Most importantly, what is it you want to do? What aspect of security studies interests you most? How do your experiences fit into your broader career goals, and how will grad school advance those ambitions? I think if you can start generating the answers to these questions, often achieved through extensive introspection, you'll be able to present yourself as an even stronger candidate. Also, as you move through the application process, feel free to leverage this forum to bounce ideas off the community as you prepare your personal statement, which should thoroughly address the final question above. Good luck!

While few schools require at least one academic LoR, most *highly recommend* it. Quoted from Fletcher: "We suggest that at least one letter come from a faculty member, academic dean, or an advisor familiar with your academic performance." And from SIPA: "While not a requirement, we prefer that one letter be from a member of academia."

You sound like a competitive candidate! Use your statement of purpose to tie together how your extensive media and journalism experience ties into your concurrent interests in human rights, suffrage, women's education, and you'll present a unique and compelling case for why you would be a good fit for any of these schools, and particularly for an interdisciplinary program like that at Fletcher. Your GRE scores could be a little higher, especially for someone who graduated recently, but with solid letters of recommendation, a brilliant SoP and your record of achievement both in university and afterward, you should do well in the admissions process. Best of luck!

Maybe not your entire statement of purpose. Just tell us in less formal terms what you want to do professionally, and how your graduate studies will help you fulfill your goals.

Superb academic record, appealing international background, unique experiences on Capitol Hill and with the DoC ... If all this held constant, and you had graduated in 2006 or even 2007, you would probably have fewer barriers to admission. However, unique and accomplished fresh graduates are accepted to the schools to which you're applying -- they're not just myths. Often, what will set them apart from older comparables isn't the GRE scores or GPA, but rather the subjective elements of the application, particularly the letters of recommendation and the all-important personal statement. Based on your post, we don't know what your field of study in grad school will be, and it's important that you articulate your goals and how your graduate education will advance those objectives. Younger applicants often are able to synthesize well their limited experience, tease out a theme or two, and expound considerably in the personal statement. Be sure to do the same -- it will help! You are an otherwise strong candidate and would be a good fit at any of the schools on your list. Best of luck!

I agree with the Green Diplomat. That you've taken classes at Fletcher and done well indicates your aptitude and capacity for handling a full Fletcher workload, and your human rights experience, if substantial, will look good to any school. Hopefully your marks from today's GRE re-take will be significantly higher than the first time around -- let us know how you did! Good luck!

I don't think any American university would say 'no' to a Fulbright! That's fantastic -- congratulations! Overall, your experience thus far sounds wonderful, and your GPA (which isn't too bad to begin with) is definitely offset by the work you've been doing. I think your application is quite strong, and you'd be a competitive candidate at any of these schools. Best of luck!

My time in private sector included two years cumulative with Bank of America (business development internship rotations) while in undergrad, and about a year and a half with an IT consulting firm after graduation, including six months with the company in India. For my application to grad school, my time actually working for them had less impact on my academic and professional goals than my experience abroad. So I explained in my application that my IT consulting gig wasn't really relevant to what I intended to study in school, but my time in India catalyzed my ambitions because of certain elements I experienced while there. The truth of the matter is that I only took the job in the first place because the company was paying me a princely sum to send me to India for a half year! And now, in retrospect, it might have been one of the best decisions I ever made. To get the answers to your other questions, you can get my full background here: http://forum.thegradcafe.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=16905&p=105942&hilit=georgia#p105942 Good luck!

Joe, I'll answer your question in a separate reply, but first let me address something neocon just said: While this is true, you shouldn't think it's a trend that public policy schools want to encourage any longer. There is more emphasis on people going into government and MPP programs for the RIGHT reasons: serving the common good. Evidence, aside from what I've learned from friends who are students and in Admissions at WWS/HKS/SAIS, is the LRAP, or Loan Repayment Assistance Program, now offered by multiple schools. Here's an excerpt from the HKS page, which can be found at http://www.hks.harvard.edu/degrees/sfs/student-resources/lrap: "The purpose of Loan Repayment Assistance Program (LRAP) is to assist graduates engaged in public service in paying their monthly student loan payments. Graduates working at public sector and non profit organizations with missions consistent with the mission of the Harvard Kennedy School, and earning up to $60,000 for single applicants or $80,000 for married applicants, may apply to the program." The trend is towards equipping students with the tools to serve the people, and while there will always be grad students in MPP programs with an eye on lucrative consulting contracts, the schools themselves are working harder to screen applicants who are interested less in personal profit and more in public gains.

Are you in a position where you could take the GRE now AND apply? That might be best. Even if Wagner doesn't require GRE scores, I imagine the majority of applicants in your pool will be taking the test and submitting their results. That relative disparity might hurt your chances.

Age is less a factor than is relevant work experience; the caveat, of course is that solid W/E only comes with time and age. Schools aim to create a well-rounded class, covering the gamut of diverse characteristics and experiences. Private / public sector, academic / professional, young / old ... and so on. Your chances might be affected less by your age as an absolute factor, and more by the opportunities (or lack thereof) for unique and relevant W/E that have been afforded by your age -- making your age more of a relative, or indirect, factor. If you feel your internship and other experiences have been really solid, and you are in a good place with your GREs, letters of recommendation and personal essays (not to mention your own courseload as you prepare to graduate), there is no harm in applying, and we wish you the best of luck. With that said, a few years of full-time work experience will only serve to enhance, not hinder, the strength of your application.

Accreditation certainly does help. For NASPAA, the list is so long that the chances of you enrolling in a program that does not have NASPAA accreditation are slim. Here's the VERY EXTENSIVE list of NASPAA schools: http://www.naspaa.org/accreditation/document/Official-RosterAccreditedPrograms09-10_9.1.pdf There's also the Association of Professional Schools of International Affairs, or APSIA. Some schools, like the Kennedy School at Harvard, are members of both organizations. Learn more about APSIA here: http://www.apsia.org/apsia/members/allMembers.php?section=member Hope this helps!

Can the mods please block aabchuan? And any others who feel World of Warcraft is relevant to government / international relations? Whoa, I just said a mouthful there. Ha!

The language you choose to study should be based less on pronunciation difficulties and more on utility. If your interest in Spanish is driven primarily by professional ambitions and academic interests, go with that. Worry less about whether you can pronounce a certain sound, because that can be learned/mastered/overcome eventually. You're certainly right in that French is the language of diplomacy and of many international organizations -- but if you don't foresee yourself working in that kind of environment, there's no point in taking that language. If you're still exploring languages, consider learning a language that would (a) present a good challenge to you and ( might prove itself useful to you in the future. High-priority languages right now include Arabic, Dari, Pashto and Urdu. Arabic being very difficult to learn (and least of all for its alphabet!), I would personally recommend this language. Bottom line: take the time to figure out why you'd take any language, without considering any personal pronunciation problems you might encounter.