charlotte_asia

All of my decisions are in, so I'll finally post this. Reading these helped a lot when I applied so I will provide as much as I can in hopes that this can help others:

Program Applied To (MPA, MPP, IR, etc.): IR, MPA
Schools Applied To: GWU-Elliot, American- SIS, Tufts-Fletcher, Princeton- WWS, Georgetown- Government, Johns Hopkins- SAIS
Schools Admitted To: All except Princeton
Schools Rejected From: WWS
Still Waiting:

Undergraduate institution: Top 10 LAC
Undergraduate GPA: 3.38 (~3.7 major)
Undergraduate Major: Political Science, South Asian Studies
Last 60 hours of undergraduate GPA: 3.6

GRE Quantitative Score: 690 (94%)
GRE Verbal Score: 640 (56%)
GRE AW Score: 4.5 (72%)

Years Out of Undergrad (if applicable): 3.5 when applied
Years of Work Experience: 3.5 (as in, real work experience, not counting summer internships in college)
Describe Relevant Work Experience: .5 years in Southeast Asia doing microfinance, 2 years with progressive experience at international human rights/democracy NGO, 1 year freelance/consulting in South Asia for human rights/democracy NGOs, contributor to major international democracy review.

Languages: English (native), Spanish (intermediate)

Quant:Intro to Econ (oped to pass/fail it-- passed it), realized that was a mistake if I wanted to go to grad school, took International Political Economics, Statistics/Methods of Political Science my junior year (B+s in both), took Micro and Macro after graduation at night school (As in both)

Strength of SOP: I know some feel they inflate the quality of their SOP, and if they think that about my self- analysis then so be it.But it was really, really strong and it's what made me stand out amid my fine-but-not-outstanding GRE and GPA.

I wrote about my passion for democracy work, included an overall vision I have for the field and my role in it. My SOP tied my application together-- where I have been in the democracy field and where I want to go... and more importantly, how I wanted to positively improve my field and why I needed X Grad School to do that.

I wrote a separate SOP for each school, and I wrote very specifically about that school's comparative advantage and why me + that school = a public servant with leadership and contribution to my field. I wrote what I would do with my degree from X Grad School- why investing in me was good for them. I started writing in October and revised each (as in, fully revised drafts, not just edits) upwards of 9 times. My fiance, an MPP grad, reviewed all multiple times and provided harsh (and helpful) feedback. Other friends edited as well.

Strength of LOR (be honest, describe the process, etc): 1 professor from undergrad who advised my thesis on democracy, 2 supervisors from work- one who could speak to my analytic abilities and one who could speak to my programmatic/management/democracy expertise. The latter was outstanding (in part because the referrer is an outstanding LOR writer), the other two would have been strong.

Other: My application told a very clear story: commitment to the field of democracy/governance/human rights. I have been passionate about this topic since I was a junior in undergrad and made this clear. I knew exactly what I wanted to do, not just career-wise, but the impact I wanted to make on my field, the specific ways I wanted to contribute to it and improve it.

I spent a LOT of time on my supplemental essays for SAIS, WWS, and Fletcher. Took a lot of time revising my undergrad paper for my 20-page writing sample from Georgetown. It's my one chance to show them I am actually a strong writer (damn the GREs) so I did it. Took several months to work on all of them.

My GPA was "fine" and my GREs were "fine." It was my work experience and my SOPs which made me stand out. I have always firmly believed these are the most important parts of the application- to prove you have thrived in your field and that grad school would enable you to continue that impact.

I dont know what makes this BendRnBender an expert and the authority to belittle other commenters as dumb. You have an opinion. Other posters have an opinion. Learn to live by it and stop embarrassing yourself.

You would do well to drop the "insider", "those of us in the know" routine. You clearly work in academia, and perhaps in the ivory tower, USNWR rankings actually correspond with general reputation. But among DC professionals (at least in my experience), equating Kansas or Indiana or whatever with WWS, HKS, etc. will get you laughed at. A school's reputation in the academic tribe =/= reputation in the working world.

The fact that you included "faculty that are publishing in the major journals" as a major criterion of school quality is telling. I personally don't give 2 hoots whether, say, Madeleine Albright or Paul Pillar get published in the major academic journals, since their professional accomplishments speak for themselves.

That viewpoint isn't inherently any better or worse than yours, but I am quite sure it is one more commonly held on this forum, and among people who actually practice public policy. And by that perspective USNWR rankings are laughable - find me multiple Cabinet members, World Bank execs, think tank heads, etc. who went to Kansas or Indiana, and then I'll start believing they are ranked correctly.

Dear God, thank you. I don't know how the perception got created that good SOPs involve some "touching" story from your childhood, using the word "passion" about 50 times a paragraph, and acting like a MPA/MPP degree is an emotional fulfillment quest rather than pragmatic professional training. I'm not arguing against fleshing it out with personal touches, but fundamentally you're saying I have skills/experience X, want career Y, and think [institution] has Z classes/professors/programs to make it happen.

Not to mention the importance of "show, don't tell" - you want to tell the adcoms in flowery language how passionate and invested you are about your field, or point to specific real-world accomplishments that speak for themselves about your commitment?

Okay. I'll attempt to answer this question....

I majored in international relations for undergrad, and now I am looking to go to grad school for a MPP/MPA.

The main difference, as far as I can tell, is that IR is theory-centric (it's a concentration within political science). Hence, less of the quantitative stuff. Not to say that political scientists do not engage in the quantitative stuff (they do!), but it's not the back-bone of the discipline. One of my favorite IR professors sum it up this way: IR people are concerned with these two main questions: 1) How does one model the international system 2) Based on the model, how will a state act?

So, for example, suppose an IR student wanted to study the question of humanitarian intervention in a genocidal conflict. He/she would argue whether or not a state will intervene based on both statistical evidence and theoritical/philosophical reasoning (i.e I believe state's act in their own self interests, therefore a state will not intervene if it is not in it's self-interest; to uphold my argument, here is the statistical evidence to prove my point: a higher percentage of states will not intervene. IR is about modeling, predicting how a state will act.

A policy student, however, has a particular agenda. If you are interested in international development, I would lean more towards public policy/affairs. Policy is less about describing the world, and more about looking for solutions to particular problems, and, in that sense, is more "practical". (i.e. here is some data/evidence I have collected. Based on analyzing this data, I believe that in order to fix the problem of genocidal conflict, one must reduce the number of guns sold to country x. Therefore, my policy prescription is to decrease the level of military aid to country X) IR is concerned with how do countries act; Policy is focused on how should a country act

Not to say that the two are mutually exclusive, and obviously the two inform each other. Like the previous poster mentioned, it's good to have both!

And yes, IR students tend to be more on the academic track, while policy students tend to be on the "job" track.

Hope this helps.

Don't be a dick. 3.6 is a low GPA for HKS, if you are coming from an academic background (aka didn't start your own non-profit, serve as a deputy finance minister for your country, or any other of the ridiculously accomplished things HKSers do), your stats need to make up for it. They mostly do, you have good experience and great language skills. You are competitive but standard disclaimers about the statistical unlikeliness of getting into any really selective school apply.

:lol:

Your stats look great. I would bet that- by your own admission- your SOP may have been the deciding factor. I infer by your comment about it being twice as long as the others that you had to add a lot into the SOP that wasn't in your previous SOPs and that due to being burned out by so many apps you may have not revised and edited it as carefully. Multiple typos, not answering the prompt, rambling, etc could have contributed to a weaker SOP than your other ones.

That is good news though, right? Meaning that the rest of your profile is great and you probably submitted stronger SOPs to your other schools. We all have applications that are stronger for some schools than others, and I bet that yours to your other schools are stronger. Bummer that the American result came first, but I bet good news is on its way

Your stats look great. I would bet that- by your own admission- your SOP may have been the deciding factor. I infer by your comment about it being twice as long as the others that you had to add a lot into the SOP that wasn't in your previous SOPs and that due to being burned out by so many apps you may have not revised and edited it as carefully. Multiple typos, not answering the prompt, rambling, etc could have contributed to a weaker SOP than your other ones.

That is good news though, right? Meaning that the rest of your profile is great and you probably submitted stronger SOPs to your other schools. We all have applications that are stronger for some schools than others, and I bet that yours to your other schools are stronger. Bummer that the American result came first, but I bet good news is on its way

I disagree a bit in that the self profiles posted on GradCafe over the past three years (and yes, I admit I have read most of them in the thumb-twiddling between January 15 and now) all rave about their SOPs. I have seen a lot of self-evaluations rate themselves "meh" while others flat out admit they left their SOP to the last minute, wrote the same one for each school, never really felt like they had a firm handle on it, etc.

That said, I think the bell curve is legitimately shifted to the right for GradCafers, folks who may (may, not definitely) put more time into the application process and thus may solicit more feedback, create more drafts, and read more samples of strong SOPs distributed by schools' admissions blogs than the average applicant.

And many of these self-assessed strong SOP writers on GradCafe have been quite helpful. I see posters with mediocre grades and GREs, good but not amazing work experience, who get into top schools. They cite their SOPs as extremely strong and list the reasons why. These posts have been quite valuable to me.

All this said, does inflation still occur? Of course. I think surveys repeatedly show that 80% of the population rates themselves as "above average" drivers.

Have you looked at The Graduate School (formerly known as USDA Grad School)'s offerings? It doesn't appear to offer Econ via distance education, but they do offer math and stats. I just glanced at the price of one class and it was $215.

More info here: http://www.graduateschool.edu/search.php?action=search&searchtype=course&as_ccode=MATH%2CSTAT&as_ttlist=DE

Good luck!

Congratulations on those who have got great offers so far! And, if possible, please withdraw from second-tier schools that have not accepted people yet. This will not harm you since you have already got much better offers, but will benefit lots of applicants who have nothing now.
If you can withdraw early, you will create chances for those less competitive applicants. Thanks for all the kindness!
God bless those who help others!

Working at the district manager for KFC is not the type of experience previous posters are referring to. Living and studying abroad certainly will be a boon to your application, no doubt. Between you and an equal candidate whose only work experience is at KFC and who hasn't lived/interned abroad, you would have a leg up. Still, nothing can compare to full-time post-graduate work experience in the field of IR. That's what MYRNIST and others are referring to.

Working at the district manager for KFC is not the type of experience previous posters are referring to. Living and studying abroad certainly will be a boon to your application, no doubt. Between you and an equal candidate whose only work experience is at KFC and who hasn't lived/interned abroad, you would have a leg up. Still, nothing can compare to full-time post-graduate work experience in the field of IR. That's what MYRNIST and others are referring to.

My fiance is an FSO. A few quick comments-

1. As some have alluded, there is a step between 1 and 2 which requires submitting several essay questions.

2. I would agree that Steps 2 and 4 are the biggest holdups for most people. As Azrou said, you are ranked on the "list" based on a number of factors, including your score on the oral and your foreign language skills. Languages are divided into several categories based on Department need, the most important being Critical and Super Critical (I may have the names of those wrong, but you get the gist). Correct that knowing Spanish/French is not going to get you as far as knowing Arabic, Farsi, Russian, or Urdu, but scoring a 3/3 in Spanish/French is going to help too. Seriously boosting your language skills before you take any language placement tests; it could be worth spending time in a foreign country or doing a rigorous language immersion class to bump up your language placement.

3. The tracks are Pol, Public Affairs, Consular, Management, and Econ. Consular is the least competitive. Though keep in mind if you select this track you will have to serve the majority, if not all, of your posts in consular positions, mainly because of the continued Department need for consular officers. A decade as a consular officer is a very, very different career from a decade as a Pol or PA officer.

I had a coworker who went through the process 4 times over 6 years and never made if off the list. Two years ago he finally made it into the Foreign Service and is now enjoying his dream career. Keep at it, if that's what you really want to do