smirrah

Hi alchyna, Congrats on making a decision. While I'm not going to argue that the MPA is better for you, because that depends on many personal things, I just would like to make a few points regarding your last post. The MSc in Development Management is not necessarily more practical than the MPA, and it is certainly is not not-theoretical. Yes, the MPA is quite theoretical in comparison to MPA's at places like Colombia SIPA, but I argue that all LSE degrees would be deemed pretty theoretical by most people. Being theoretical doesn't make a master's better or worse, it just depends on what you're looking for. Also, a dissertation is optional in the MPA whereas it is required in the MSc, and to me any degree that requires a dissertation is pretty theoretical. The MPA does require applied courses in economics and quantitative analysis that prep you for working as a policy/research analyst at places like a regional development bank (which is why that latter course is not called "econometrics" - we gloss over the more nuanced statistical theory that isn't necessary to do most policy analysis). It's really just basic calculus and statistics that's required in the courses, but people can opt to make it much more quantitative if they want. Furthermore, while the MPA doesn't require an internship over the summer, the majority of students do one between their first and second years. What the MPA does require in the second year is a six-month long consulting project with prominent organizations (Bank of England, Boston Consulting Group, the World Bank, UNICEF to name a few regulars), which is quite a professional requirement. That said, the MSc in Development Management may very well be the right master's for you - I just don't think the reasons you listed above are the right ones (just honestly trying to help). p.s. to ease your nerves, 10% intake doesn't mean that they only accepted 10% of applicants! It means that 10% of applicants received AND accepted an offer. I'm not sure what the statistics were, but it's very safe to say LSE gave out more offers than spots available. But do apply early, makes it easier to get in and gets it over and done with

Hi Alchyna, Many people come to the LSE MPA from non-quantitative backgrounds like yours, so we are certainly not all economists (including myself). The program is quite focused on economics, but applied economics, so the required courses may not be quite as math heavy as you think. You won't be doing complex mathematics, but you do need to have an understanding of basic statistics and calculus. That said, a calculus class is a prerequisite to being accepted, so I would suggest you take that if you are serious. Most public policy/international development master's programs in the US also have prerequisites of one of each of the introductory economics courses, which would mean you would need to take a microeconomics course as well if you want to apply to those schools. A lot of programs, like the LSE MPA, will give you a conditional offer which means it is not a full offer until you complete the required prerequisite, so look into the requirements of programs to see whether you need to take the courses now or if you can wait until you've been accepted. Whether or not you should apply to a one-year course (which certainly won't simple, just shorter and more qualitative) really depends on your experience prior to the master's, what you want to do with the degree and where you want to work. I think the skills gained in more well-rounded programs, like the MPA or other quantitative-qualitative policy programs like SAIS, SIPA, etc., give you the skills needed to work in development - most jobs require some quantitative skills, especially if you want to do field work, program management or research. I also think the two-year MPA competes better with US programs in the US job market than some of the one-year LSE qualitative degrees, but this is just my speculation. As a suggestion to end on, contact admissions for programs you're interested in, because they will be able to tell you exactly what you would need to or should take. Hope this helps!

I think I missed most of the decision deadlines, but I thought I would come back with a post. I ended up choosing LSE MPA over JHU SAIS and some others, and I'm very happy with my choice. The academics are excellent, and although it's more theoretical than some would like (referencing the Wendy Lee blog), they really drill into your head how to think analytically and problem solve - two skills I think are very applicable to actually being good at whatever job you land once in the job market. I agree with everything that abaravelli said before. Very demanding course, and well worth it as your'e surrounded by high calibre, very diverse classmates (I think North Americans make up the largest proportion of my class, around 15-20%? Diversity is definitely something US schools would struggle to beat). The only real downside would be that I wish LSE put more of an emphasis on having 2 or so years work experience prior to the course, as a bigger chunk of people are straight out or a year out of undergrad than with American schools... but maybe that will change as it continues to get more popular, as it seems to be gaining a lot of momentum in the past few years.

Thanks, BB84, and congrats on the offers and funding! I had got a good international view of how people view the LSE (I was out of the country when looking into programs and applying), but I had only really started looking into the US view once I had been accepted to the LSE... late start. To add to what you said about applying to the LSE, I also recommend applying early, but really only at least as early as you would apply to the US schools (maybe earlier if you're applying to something super competitive like Econ, Finance). From what I hear, they didn't really release many offers at all until just before Christmas, but they did start giving them out pretty full on in early January. I applied in early December, got all of my recommendations in by early January, and heard back in mid February.

*bump* !

To the best of my knowledge, those schools are all good names in different spectrum of public policy, so you need to get a little more specific to really say which ones are better. What industry are you trying to go into and where are you trying to work? If you want to work in Europe, LSE, Sciences Po and Hertie will have better prospects. If you want to work in the States, then Chicago, Michigan and CMU are better. If you're looking for employment elsewhere in the world, I would argue that Chicago, LSE and then CMU/Sciences Po would be better, but that's just my speculation. I would say that if you're trying to work for an international organization vs local government vs private sector would all make a big difference, not just in the course offerings but also in the global rep of the schools. From my perspective, trying to work in international economic policy anywhere (US, Europe, Latin America, etc...), I would say LSE, Chicago or Sciences Po - that could change dramatically depending on which industry and continent you want to work.

Hi arehman, I'm in the same boat, deciding between SAIS Bologna and the LSE MPA. I am interested in anyone with more thoughts on the LSE MPA (not the one year programs) in comparison to SAIS. SAIS obviously wins by miles on networking and location if you want to work in the US, but how does the LSE program stand internationally? Is it still pretty decently regarded in the States besides having limited networking and US career services?

In case anyone stumbles across this post for next year's applications wondering the same thing, relatively lowish verbal is by no means a deal breaker if all your other stats are good. In at all I applied to. However, higher scores would have probably made for more room for funding. Also, boo the forum grammar police.

I've been accepted into the LSE MPA and am trying to decide between this course and Johns Hopkins SAIS MA in IR/Int Econ. I can't speak much for reputations in Europe, but I can give some insight on the rigor of the LSE MPA. I've heard that it is tough and takes a lot of work, but it is only particularly tough for those who don't have much of an econ background. Also for your concerns that it is too professional, in comparison with courses in the USA, it is more theoretical/academic (compared to Harvard's MPA, but that's in a league of its own) and some people go onto to do PhDs after - not sure if in econ though. This is the opinion of someone on the course, and I'm pretty sure this person is European: "Hi I am a current MPA student in the PEP stream.... [to person asking about the program] You have an econometric background and therefore I suppose you also have an economics background. In that case 50% of the first year courses will be repetition. Think about it. The MPA teaches you to be a critical consumer of economic research. If that is something you don't have then come. Also, it is very theoretical and highly demanding. The quality of the students is very high. The LSE MPA is very well regarded amongst faculty and students. We have a very active MPA Student Association and I believe that only the MSc Economics students are more hard working that us, although probably more "nerdy". Non MPA core courses, from other MSc tend to have weaker students/content. We are very well at the top of what LSE offers. I can't speak for other Top MPA but this one is certainly not a joke. We have around 15% dropping out every year cause they were not well aware of how rigorous the program is. Question do you have working experience? A good chunk, say 20% don't. I believe that is not a good decision, but if you where admitted you are probably exceptional." - abaravelli on gradcafe

I don't know if it's much of a factor, but cost of living in Chicago is at least slightly if not solidly less than DC (I'm from the Chicago area and don't know DC all too well besides reading and staying there for an internship). Apartments in Hyde Park, from what I've read, are around $900-1300 for one bedrooms, $1100-1500 for two bedrooms. If you don't care about living near campus, I know people that live in Wicker Park in two bedrooms for about $800-1000....but that's a big hike to school.

Hey, congrats! I'm trying to read mine but am a little confused. On the ISIS page mine says: Bologna Fellowship - US $12,000.00 Federal Direct Loan $20,500.00 Sorry if this is an incredibly stupid question, but this mean they're giving me 12,000 for the first year to go to SAIS BC? Or is this something different. My brain is fried.

Thanks very much, I really appreciate having an employer insight. I know its econ courses are world famous and that its IR courses are Europe famous, so I wasn't sure where my program might come in being a mix of the two. It is definitely difficult to get funding whatsoever, which is a shame as I'm sure that deters some really quality students that get merit awards from great programs. I didn't get a penny based on need, not surprising as a US student, but they don't even announce their few and far between merit scholarships until past US decision deadlines. Anyways, as I'm not sure if I want to work in Europe (much easier said that done) or the US and have non-academic factors to pull me to London, I have lots of thinking to do. Grateful for the help!

Anyone have input on the LSE's weight in the US job market? Mainly the MPA?

Hi, does anyone know how the LSE MPA holds up in the States? I know it has a strong reputation in the UK, Europe and maybe Asia?, but it has competition with big names like SAIS, SIPA in the US. Any info would be great!