MYRNIST

Hey Stefania! Doing poorly on the GRE is never good, but as you correctly identified, the damage can be mitigated by composing a really awesome statement of purpose, writing sample, etc. I recommending having a professor who is a native speaker of English (more accurately, is a native speaker of IvoryTower-ese) look over all your stuff, because going solely off your post I can see why you got a 2.5 on the AWA. Forgive me if that is harsh, since you clearly do speak English at a quite good level (and far better than I can speak Italian), but there are a number of grammatical errors and awkward constructions. If these mistakes were also present on the GRE, then the 2.5 was honestly earned. Luckily, for writing samples and SOPs you have the advantage of time for revision. Getting some quality editing from an educated native speaker, if you haven't already, will hopefully smooth out the linguistic bumps and let your actual ideas shine through. PS - the GRE AWA is not graded solely by a computer. There are always at least two human graders as well. Source: http://www.ets.org/g...ral/scores/how/

1) I don't know why someone would downvote your post. 2) This is probably the wrong forum to ask your question. This forum is primarily focused on 2 year masters in professional programs (MPA, MPP) etc. that are specifically career-oriented. PHDs, with their longer duration and academia-oriented curricula, are an entirely different beast. I would ask in the Political Science forum. 3) Now I see some professional programs mixed in with your PHD ones, which begs the question of why you are applying to both? Everything you've said indicates a desire for doctoral studies, which is entirely NOT what MPP/MPA programs are about.

I think this is something Georgetown staff could answer way better than this forum. Have you tried emailing them?

I would seek work experience that broadens and deepens the knowledge of the field you want to enter, and gives you practical experience in it. So the "best" work experience is entirely dependent on what you are interested in and want to do. Rather than approach it as "well, I want to get into grad school, so I should do X", I would suggest identifying what career path and goals you think grad school would help you achieve, and then try to get your feet wet in that general direction. Lots of DC think tanks offer remote internships, where you can do research and whatnot for them regardless of where you are. Moving abroad for a paying job* while contributing to an organization in such a manner on your free time would be a good move, IMO. Teaching English can be quite lucrative and allows you to do professionally interesting things in a foreign country. Good luck, and keep at it!

I actually think CaptainCrunk is a visionary exposing the unknowable nature of the universe, and irrelevance of material attachments. He is so committed to working in int-dev that he doesn't even need experience in int-dev to show the degree of his commitment to int-dev. That whooshing noise we're all hearing? That's the sound of a Buddhist koan flying directly over our unenlightened heads. Open up baby birds, mama's about to drop some wisdom.

Agreed. It's never a positive to be worse than average on a application metric, but if you were going to pick one to do so it would probably be the GRE. You can show quant proficiency in many other ways - through quant coursework, work experience, ancillary classes, etc. - that mitigate a low GRE quant score. Work experience, good undergrad GPA, etc. are not nearly as replaceable.

Sent in my app today!

Here's the thing though: why should I (or more accurately, an admissions committee) believe you when you say you know what you want to do? Or that you would be good at it, good enough for a graduate school to accept you? There have to be some hard facts - you spent X years doing it, you have been at Y organization, you have had Z experience - to provide proof that you are as sure of your path, and dedicated to achieving it, as your words claim. I don't think it's fair to label this as a "bureaucratic requirement" akin to making sure your visa is in order or FAFSA filed on time. There's no law saying grad schools and employers have to prefer people with work experience. The reason they do is for the reasons I outlined. I totally empathize with how much the "must have experience, but no wants to give you it" complex sucks. But that doesn't change that relevant experience is like the most fundamental quality in how organizations assess candidates, and for good reason. If the "staple on forehead" line came across as condescending, I apologize - I was going more for humorous.

How is it snarky? Almost all reputable business schools don't accept students right out of undergrad for the exact reason Fenderpete mentioned: most 22 year olds have little experience in the professional "real world." Both their field/career choice and dedication to it are suspect. Without experience, how do they know that what they think they want to do is, in fact, the right choice? How can they claim their "dedication" to a particular discipline without having worked in it? MPA schools are slightly more lenient, but still massively prefer candidates with actual professional experience. Keep in mind, both b-school and MPP/MPA programs are NOT academically oriented. Their goal is to put alumni in careers, not on tenure track. If there is one piece of wisdom this forum should staple onto the foreheads of every new poster, it is "get professional experience before grad school."

In the professional world, a lot of places ask you to cap your resume at one page. Since it's academia and it's de rigeur to blab on about yourself, I would maybe extend that to 1.5 or 2 pages for grad school apps. Certainly no more. I completely understand the desire to give a crystal clear picture of your experiences and skills, but you really don't need to write a novel. Pick 3 bullet points that sum up your contributions at each job post, and stick to that. To quote another poster on a different thread, your future job may depend on the ability to sum up complex information in few, understandable words. Turning in a sprawling, indulgent resume gives the exact opposite impression of what you want to be giving.

Making identical posts under different user names is not "similar backgrounds" - it's either (a) one person with different sock puppet accounts b ) someone taking another person's personal information and posing it as their own. Either one is creepy and deceptive. People aren't bagging on you because you went to Oxford (as you said, thousands of students do), it's because clearly you either are ClayMade or are copying her information.

What is your question?

I mean, its never a positive to do poorly on the GRE. So it certainly will hurt you. But there are many other ways you can demonstrate quant proficiency - the math minor, lots of quant classes, LOR from professor, emphasizing its use in your previous jobs. All of our applications have warts on them, it's all about you minimize them.

Because it's the Internet, so random people feel the need to be dicks.

You and GradNov have very similar profiles: international, undergrad at Oxford law, already have a masters, looking to get a MPP and work in international orgs. Apparently some people think/thought there is only one person, and the other account is a sock puppet. GradNov, your points are going down because someone is systematically voting them down, which is dumb since your posts are fine.

You already did post it here, 2 or 3 posts up. Anyways you seem like you'd be competitive most places.

You're competitive basically anywhere.

A lot of financial aid is merit-based - i.e. how good of a candidate you are compared to their average student. So, I would apply for a wide range of schools, including some you might be overqualified for. Throw in an app to American, Pitt, etc. along with the big dogs like WWS, HKS, etc. The credentials that might result in zero aid at Georgetown might get you half tuition elsewhere. Also, if you get another school offering you financial aid, you can use that as leverage to try to convince other schools to do so as well - it's not at all unheard of for schools who really like a candidate to match a different school's funding offer.

Thanks for the kind words. I think you are looking at it a little narrowly. Yes, the Jackson program itself is fairly small, but in terms of networking and access to an alumni base Yale as a whole is amazing. It's a freaking Ivy League, it has its tendrils wrapped into every major power institution in the US.

First page, halfway down.

I also am applying, and also have not received an answer to any of the emails I sent them.

Too little info to comment. Post your profile in the appropriate thread and people will evaluate you.

Ni3 shi4 zhong1guo3ren2 ma? 1) I think you would be a great candidate capable of going anywhere - in about 2 years. Work experience related to IR is an absolutely critical part of admissions. It shows your dedication to the field, indicates what areas you'd like to professionally specialize in, and generally makes sure a candidate has had some professional and life experiences before tackling grad school. According to the above profile, you have zero IR work experience. This is a problem, especially as you are coming directly out of undergrad. Exactly for the above reason, most MPA/MPP schools admit very few people coming straight out of undergrad (check individual schools' admissions stats if you don't believe me), and those that do managed to gain very substantial work experience while in school - multiple governmental internships, started own NGO, deployed to Iraq, etc. I strongly recommend you take a few years to try some different IR-related things before going to grad school. You can make sure you know what field you're interested in, will be a much stronger candidate, and a generally more mature, well-rounded person. 2) For financial aid, which is probably the area where international/domestic matters the most, you are international.

Good GPA. Good GRE. Relevant work experience. Foreign language ability. Lots of foreign travel. With a good SOP, I'd say you're competitive at most places. Disclaimers about the top schools being a crapshoot still apply. (oh, and it's definitely "shoot" - comes from the game of craps, where victory depends on a random roll (shoot) of the die.)