policywonk64

If they ask for you to report your salary -- whether or not people on this board did it -- you should report it.

Hey -- For letter's of rec, do the authors need to sign the letter if they're submitting the rec electronically? Or can they just sign it with their typed name? One of my recommenders is asking -- if he has to actually sign it, he has to go find a scanner and figure out how to use technology. Haha.

I, too, took my test on July 21st (in California). My phone scores were available yesterday (August 3rd). They still are not available online, so it's true that scores are available by phone first. ETS loves to make money and they get over-anxious suckers like me to give in.

How helpful are 800score.com tests for the math section of the GRE? If I took like 20 of their tests and worked on understanding those problems, how helpful do you think it would be? Also, how close an indicator are their scores to the real GRE math section? P.S. I'm scoring between a 500 and 600 right now. I'm also working with the Nova book. I get the math but I seem to forget it when they give me the different styles of questions / time pressure. When I say "I get the math" i mean that when i look at the answer explanations I go "Oh, duh." Thanks!

Hey -- Quick question for you guys: How do the "HARD" questions in the NOVA GRE MATH PREP stack up against the math problems on the real GRE? Difficulty wise. If you could provide a number (example: Nova Hard questions are about a 700-difficulty level on the real GRE) what would it be? I'm able to get through Nova's Easy and Medium questions pretty easily. I'm trying to see what level of difficulty that compares to approximately on the GRE. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks!

I don't think I'd go so far as saying that what globalsun said is "one of the most ridiculous statements I've heard in a while" -- but I do disagree with it. It really just depends on what type of job and which sector you want to end up in. There are certainly jobs out there that prefer sciency backgrounds. Examples that come to mind include numeruos Federal and State Agency related jobs i.e. DOE, EPA, DOA, DOI. There are certainly policy jobs there that prefer candidates to have strong comfort with science. It's an important skill to have when you're working on that side of policy. That said -- and I can only speak from my experience -- if you're interested on the political-policy or legislative body side of policy, you certainly do not need a science background. Frankly, I question how much you need as graduate degree at all. Policy in the political sector is all about work experience, networking, and investing time in an office. I remember the Chief of Staff at the US Senate talking one of my bosses (a Legislative Correspondent -- one step below Legislative Assistant) out of going to graduate school. He said, "Why get a graduate degree when once year in the Senate is the equivalent of a MA in Power Politics?" Also, note that the COS only had a Bachelors. Out of my two other bosses -- who handled enviro issues -- only one of them had a graduate degree and it didn't have any science background. Compartively, when I was interning at the White House -- I was working in one of their offices that handled environmental/energy issues. One of my bosses had an MPP from the Kennedy School and the other had a Masters in Environmental Management from Duke. The current Chief of Staff for that department within the WH just has an MPA. The large majority of people I met working there did not have a sciency background. But almost all of them did work on Obama's campaign. You want to get to the top fast? Jump on a campaign early. Oh how I wish I was precinct walking in Iowa in 2007... My point is: it really depends on where you want to work and what you want to do. Whether it's a think tank, a nonprofit, an Agency job, or policy in the poltiical world -- it all depends.

Hey Everyone -- I was looking at Princeton WWS's data on MPA admissions. Specifically, the relationship of those who applied with certain levels of GRE scores versus those who were offered admission. Maybe I'm looking at this wrong, but it seems like the GRE isn't as significant at the WWS. Check it out: Applied with GRE Score of: 700 – 800: 57% 600 – 699: 27% 500 – 599: 11% Admitted with GRE Score of: 700 – 800: 66% 600 – 699: 26% 500 – 599: 6% If having a high GRE score (defined as 700 and above) was really that important in WWS admissions, wouldn't we see more of a lopsided relationship in this data. 27% of applicants had a GRE between 600 and 699. Yet, when you look at the pool of people they admitted, 26% had GRE scores from 600 to 699. Now, if it were 26% of the 27% percent who applied with scores between 600 - 699 -- that would mean something. But, it's 26% of the total applicant pool which is pretty consistent with the lower number of people who applied with that range of scores. As for the 700 - 800 data. It's not like applicants with that range of GRE scores did exceedingly well in their admission rate. The difference in the applicant to admit pool is +9% points. Definitely better than the -1% difference in the 600-699 pool -- but still not huge in my book. The one caveat that I can think of is that these ranges are still pretty large. Not so much the 700 to 800 range -- anything beyond 700 is pretty much "max points in that category" range. But maybe that range had a bunch of 690s and not too many 610s. But, with the data presented -- it certainly doesn't seem like Princeton cares too much about your GRE so long as you get above say a 650. Thoughts?

Hey -- I posted here under a different username a while ago (forgot what that was) -- so I apologize for the new username. I'm fine-tuning my list of where I'd like to apply this Fall. I'll be taking my GRE in July. I was wondering if any of you knew the admission rate / selectivity for Stanford's IPS program. Specifically, I'll be applying for the joint MIPS and MPP program. Here's what Stanford says about joint-degree admission, "Applicants should apply to the Ford Dorsey program, indicating an interest in the joint program. There is one admissions application and one fee. When a decision is made by the Ford Dorsey program to admit such a student to the MIPS program, that student’s file is forwarded to the M.P.P. program director. " I'm not sure if that means that there's some degree of separate consideration for those interested in the dual-degree program or not. Secondly, I wanted to see what you all thought about my chances for this dual-degree MIPS / MPP program at Stanford. For MIPS my area of concentration would be energy, environment, and natural resources. I'm also applying to Princeton's MPA, KSG's MPP, and Berkeley's MPP. So, your thoughts on those schools would be appreciated as well. Here are my stats: Undergrad: UC Berkeley (College of Natural Resources). Major: Society and Environment GPA: 3.9 GRE: Taking in July. What would you say about 650s in both? Too low? Age: 22 (23 at Time of Application) Pre-Req Courses: Political Economics (A); Macroeconomics (A); Microeconomics (A); Statistics ( B ) Work Experience: San Jose City Council Policy Analyst 2 Years (at time of application / post-college) My policy portfolio includes: budget, education, housing, water, park funding, labor, economic development, redevelopment agency, BART, airport, marijuana, tobacco, and environmental issues. It's a pretty substantive and un-embellished role. U.S. Senate Legislative Intern (Energy / International Narcotics Issues) 6 months (post-college) The White House (Council on Environmental Quality) Legislative Affairs Intern Summer Intern (post-college) Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice Public Outreach Consultant 3 Months (contract position -- during college, paid job) Fund For Public Interest Research Field Manager / Campaign and Lobby Coordinator 1 Year (30 hours a week during college -- paid job) Organized grassroots campaigns for Environment California's campaigns on toxic run-off, climate change, and public transit.