MYRNIST

I'd study up for the GRE and get such a good quantitative score that it erases any doubts about your lack of formal mathematics training. It's honestly not that hard - it's all basic high school math. If you have the work ethic, it's masterable. I went from 640 to 800 by studying about 20 hours a week for 5 months. In regards to the whole paid/unpaid thing... it's all about how you spin it. You could easily frame it as, "look how dedicated I am to my field - I'm putting in a big time commitment and staying involved despite not being paid." Adcoms aren't stupid, they know the main (only?) reason people go to a MPP/MPA program is to advance career prospects. Treat your current situation as a way to show them just how committed you are, and how awesome of a grad student you'd be

Yes. The education, faculty, resources, and networking at WWS dwarf UMD-CP to such an extant where, in my opinion, it would be worth it. That said, I wouldn't get your hopes up or even consider it a "realistic" plan. Even for highly qualified applicants, WWS is basically a crapshoot. Maybe look at other options that have admit rates higher than 10% (and that is culling from a highly qualified field of applicants)? Ford School, Goldman, UChicago, etc.? That way even if WWS doesn't happen, you still have options and are not stuck somewhere just because that's where fate tossed you.

Your best shot at getting detailed information is just to directly ask American's financial aid department. They should be able to tell you what % of grad students get need-based finaid, merit based finaid, average award size in both cases, work-study opportunities, etc. Obviously this is only for awards they themselves give out, not third party ones.

Program Applied To (MPA, MPP, IR, etc.): Security Studies type stuff, exact degree depends on the school. Also want some graduate certificates in Russian Studies, Chinese Studies, Homeland Security... again depends on the school. Schools Applied To: Princeton WWS, Harvard KS, Georgetown SFS, G.W. Elliot, Tufts Fletcher, Johns Hopkins SAIS, American SIS. Schools Admitted To: n/a Schools Rejected From: n/a Still Waiting: all Undergraduate institution: University of Michigan Undergraduate GPA: 3.8 Last 60 hours of Undergraduate GPA (if applicable): 4.0 Undergraduate Major: Double major: Political Science, Russian and Eastern European Studies GRE Quantitative Score: 770 GRE Verbal Score: 800 GRE AW Score: 4.5 (lolwut) Years Out of Undergrad: 1-2 Years of Work Experience: 3-4 Describe Relevant Work Experience: Executive Board, Michigan Journal of International Affairs Russian-English translator Research internship at the Hudson Institute, Center for Political-Military Analysis Freelance writer (published in a couple academic and professional journals) English teacher in China Languages: English (native), Russian (advanced/fluent), Chinese (will be intermediate/advanced by next year) Quant: Macro, Micro, Stats, Modelling Political Processes, Political Economy. No calculus, but hopefully my GRE quant should convince adcoms I can handle the work. Strength of SOP: still working on it. Besides, this question is a little pointless: who is going to say their SOP sucks? Strength of LOR: 1) Professor who was my advisor when writing my senior thesis in undergrad... knows me well, and is quite a high profile academic. 2) Senior Director of the think tank I interned at. P.H.D, direct involvement in the field, and again knows my work well. 3) Founder/CEO of a company I worked at post-undergrad... not related to IR, but should be a good endorsement of my analytical abilities, work ethic, etc.

Thanks for making this. I was one of those people who recently posted an "evaluate me" thread, and in retrospect it is just clutter. Hopefully we can consolidate such posts to this thread. I also would add some stuff on SOP, as it is a major major part of the application and is something you certainly can control.

Good school, but not top tier. No no no, apply for Spring so I don't have to compete against you for Fall 2012!

Just to echo Fenderpete... From Georgetown HKS, Fletcher, SAIS, and SIPA all will take GMAT in lieu of LSA. SFS, GWES, and WWS do not. Your choice whether you're willing to forgo those schools.

Good question. I think from a pure personal fulfillment perspective, you don't necessarily need to focus on one specific area. If a smorgasbord of development, human rights, security, law, etc. is what fulfills you, more power to you. That said, I think that approach is very poor for actually developing expertise, both academically and professionally. Basic time limits and the sheer amount of knowledge required to be "expert" in something rules out doing a little bit of many fields. You need to pick something and delve really deeply into it to gain that proficiency level. It's also a pretty poor job strategy. No organization, private or public, wants a jack of all trades. They have specific needs that require a specific knowledge set. That extends beyond just IR into any field, actually - 90% of what any career counselor will tell you is pick something you have an aptitude/interest in, and become expert at it. If you know a little bit about everything but are not expert in anything, you will have an incredibly difficult time getting a job, accepted to a PHD program, or whatever else you want to do. Factor in the time and cost of grad school and it's even more damaging. I think there are a lot of interesting things in IR, but I personally find one area far more interesting than the rest. My decision to specialize in security issues (even more specifically, in Russian and Chinese-related security issues) is not based on some professional calculation like I outlined above, it's I'd far rather do security than any other branch of IR. I think you need to do academic exploration and personal reflection to decide what career/skillset is something you'd be happy to devote most of your professional life to before you go to grad school. How do you think having well-defined professional and research interests is artificial and counter-productive?

Simple question: is it acceptable to use common, semi-official acronyms for schools and degree programs (ex: "WWS" for Princeton Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs) in a statement of purpose?

As it is yours; my scorn was referring to the law students who communicated the "sentiment that is shared around the law schools i visited", not you personally. I cited the arguments against that view as reasons why you shouldn't believe the law students.

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.

Thanks for the advice. The following is not meant as an attack on you, just putting something out there for forumites. I am adamantly opposed to the idea of joining the officer corps as a resume booster. I think it's a disgrace to the ideals of honor, commitment, and service an officer is supposed to exhibit. The military is not some NGO or a quick internship. Also, joining the military is not as simple as many people think (even more so for prospective officers). Here are some words of advice for people who are thinking about this option, from someone who's been through it. - There are three basic ways to become an officer: the service academies (Annapolis, West Point, etc.), ROTC, and OCS. OCS is the only option you can do post-undergrad, minus direct accession (if you're a doctor or medic) or the very rare circumstance of graduate school ROTC. OCS is also by FAR the least important source of officers - 95% of the military's needs are met through the academies and ROTC. All the thousands of OCS applicants are gunning for a very limited number of slots. - A bad economy means retention rates for all military positions are unusually high. AKA, people already in the military are not leaving at the normal rate, as the job stability is quite attractive in this economy. So there are fewer open slots. - The bad economy is also causing record numbers of young people to apply for OCS. - There are massive defense budget cuts coming down the pipeline, so most branches are looking to shed personnel, not add. The combination of all these factors means OCS is extremely competitive, in fact much more so than any of the graduate schools on this forum. For Naval Intel, what I was going to do, it is in the single digits. Kind of makes WWS look less intimidating, eh? It also is extremely drawn out in terms of adding you to the force pool. I applied just over 1.5 years ago, and my application just got handled. The earliest I would go off to OCS would be 2013. Earliest entrance to active duty late 2013 or early 2014. 4-5 years of active duty means the earliest you are looking at grad school is 2020. It is NOT realistic to think of OCS accession into the military as a quick thing. It's brutally competitive game of hurry up and wait.

The irony of someone attending law school calling out another degree program as being an unwise choice in terms of finding a job is rich indeed. Original poster, you are aware that there is a massive over-supply of lawyers, particularly young ones, in the US right? ABA has accredited so many schools, and so many humanities majors see a law degree as a ticket to a sinecure that there are simply too many candidates for too few jobs. I forget the exact stat, but something like 40% of law graduates do not find meaningful legal employment within 2 years after graduation. It's probably more accurate to say it's a tough job market for any young person right now.

Concentrations I'm interested in depend on the school, obviously, but basically comes down to international security, particularly in the former Soviet Union and China (you could just generalize to say post-communist states.) I will also be applying for graduate certificate programs in Russian and Eastern European studies and Asian Studies at all my applied schools. HKS - International and Global Affairs WWS - International Relations SFS - Security Studies program ES - Security Policy Studies Fletcher - International Security Studies ASIS - dunno Career goals are intel community, DoD, relevant house committees, etc. Definitely government, security, public service-oriented. I am quite patriotic and know I want a career serving and defending the U.S. If it helps understand me at all, I actually was slated to go to Naval Officer Candidate School as an intel candidate until budget uncertainties led to major delays in my processing, causing me to leave - no way I want to sit around during my prime years hoping something will happen rather than just being proactive and making it happen via an alternate route. That's actually a main source of why I don't have a ton of post-graduation professional experience (other than, y'know, being 22) - I was planning 100% on the Navy, so when I chose to leave that I was kind of fucked, as I hadn't applied ahead of time for jobs and internships. I hope that the undergrad stuff, think tank internship, and China teaching can help overcome that but it is a main source of worry for me. The problem is that paid entry level jobs for this sort of stuff basically don't exist, especially with just an undergrad degree and not enrolled in grad school. If you're a student there are precious few paid internships, but without good luck. I've done a research project on the SCO but do not particularly focus on it.

Appreciate the thorough response! Everything you said makes sense.

Yeah I did well on the GRE, but from what I heard (and this may just be Internet scuttlebutt) HKS prefers people with high quant scores (all other things being equal), and 770, while good, is not exceptional. I guess we'll see. I agree 100% on the part about top schools being a crapshoot, I am okay with that. Just needed a reality check on whether my package will even get a chance to be fed into the admissions roulette wheel or not. In regards to the improving my chances by applying to safety schools... I am torn about this. The philosophy behind applying to safety schools is clear - you want a decent back up option if you don't get into your dream schools. That said, it's not like WWS (or whoever) cares or even knows about your application to a second tier school. You're not "increasing your chances" to get into your dream school by applying to your not-dream school. Also, the idea of safety schools presumes that going to a second tier school is a better alternative option than just not going to school at all. If we were talking about undergrad, I 100% agree. But since these are professional graduate schools that are a much bigger time and money investment (when you take opportunity cost into account), I'm not sure going to a school you don't think matches your goals and interests is better than doing something else field-related for a year and re-applying to the dream school. Maybe my research on SAIS, Fletcher, American, etc. has been subpar, but based on what I've seen their options for security/intel scholarship are not that great (even if they are fine schools in other regards), and I might be better off sticking to my guns and trying for the schools I really want that are great in my concentration (SFS, WWS, HKS, GWES). Thoughts?

I would look more into SIPA, as from what I hear there is quite a pipeline between Columbia professional schools and financial sector firms. Columbia law is like a breeding ground for M+A lawyers, and SIPA international econ-focused students get placed with firms all the time. If you are interested in HF (now I can use the cool lingo too!) jobs, I would give SIPA a major bump up largely because of its location and aforementioned connection to the field. NYC obviously blows away any other city in the world in terms of being in on the action for financial companies.

That's an interesting take. I was basing my premise of the GRE being critically important based on what some undergrad professors told me: that for all the fluff given to statements of purpose and recommendations and whatnot, grad admissions mostly come down to a composite of undergrad GPA + GRE. Then again, the profs making these statements were not in professional degree departments, they were pure-academic humanities and quant-based fields, so as you pointed out it may not be applicable to public policy schools. Just out of curiosity, where are you getting this information on the relative (un)importance of the GRE in admissions for public policy schools? Inference based on the profiles of successful candidates you've seen on forums like this? Straight from an admission rep's mouth? I am slightly skeptical that (a) one can make such generalizations about a wide range of schools with distinct admissions philosophies (b ) one can accurately discern a school's weighting of different admissions criteria without full access to all applicant data Maybe I'm just being grouchy because I got a high GRE and hope it can compensate for my app's weaknesses, but I would like to know the basis for the "GRE not important" stance.

a) If you are interested in Economic Development and, more broadly, international economics, Columbia SIPA and Johns Hopkins SAIS are among the best (I know you already tried to defer SAIS, right?) b ) You want to do an MBA too? What would that put you at, 5 degrees? Undergrad, law school, previous masters, upcoming public policy masters program, MBA? That is intense. c) What is a "HF"?

GRE score has a huge impact on your attractiveness as a candidate, so it's tough to evaluate your chances right now. Based on the grammatical quality of your post I assume TOEFL shouldn't be a problem, though. SAIS has a very, very pronounced international economics focus, so that seems like it should be right up your alley. I am curious how you think it doesn't fit your interests.

It is a roll of the dice, but not in the way you mean. The point of studying is to increase the median and reduce the variance of your score. If you get a bunch of words and concepts you happen to know, it's easy to do well. The GRE has such a wide range of potential questions that it's unlikely for this to happen naturally - you have to increase your knowledge so that no matter what they throw at you, you're prepared for it. So, without meaning to sound harsh, if you're getting that big of a deviation on your verbal score it likely means you're not quite prepared enough. You might still get "lucky" and see material you know, but then again you might not. If you're comfortable with that uncertainty, go ahead. If not (aka you want to be sure you'll get a good score), you probably should study more.

What are you interested in doing? Not just in grad school - in your career and life? I would spend a lot of time thinking very hard about this, because I'm getting a sense you're a little undecided on this. You've mentioned your background, targets, etc. but not actually a specific field of study that interests you. If you are interested in security affairs, your list of best schools would look very different than if you were interested in international development, or international law, and so on. Your applied schools are all over the map - you're applying for a Security Studies program, and an Economic Development program, and a Public Policy program. These are all quite different fields, and suggests you haven't really picked a field you're sure you want to be in. The fact that this is coming after deciding another field wasn't for you (the law degree and masters) only strengthens this impression. In terms of professional goals, you want to do "consulting" or work for a "multi-lateral organization." Again, these terms are really broad, and don't help much in narrowing down your best options. What do you specifically want to do in your career? Financial stuff? Security stuff? Human rights stuff? There are consultancies and agencies dedicated to all of these, but you need to know what you're aiming for. Please don't take this as harshness or insult, just trying to help. Grad school is a huge financial and time commitment, and if you are not sure what you want to do, it's very tough and VERY risky to make a decision about it.

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.