yo_yo86

Beefmaster,

Left you a reply here: I'd wait out the year and retake the GRE if I were you. However, you can always defer for a year if accepted and reapply anywhere you didn't get in. Then you have better chance at (limited) funding.

I'm a current SAIS'er, here's my two cents on the school. I relied on Gradcafe a lot when I was deciding and thought an inside view might help. Note these are only my views, other SAISers may disagree.

Overall, I've been really happy with the school and highly recommend it. First, being in DC is a huge plus - you are in THE global international relations hub - IMF, World Bank, US Govt, and a thousand think tanks / NGOs are all right around the corner. If you want to work at the Bank, SAIS is the place to go. It is the biggest source of Bank staff - basically, if you want to work there, you will. SAIS also has great networks, particularly at the IFIs, but also in US Govt and across the NGOs and Think Tanks. Living in DC there are conferences, seminars, talks, panels going on constantly - you can't get to everything. On top of that, SAIS gets top speakers in. In my time - Hank Paulson, Tim Geithner, Stanley McChrystal, Zbigniew Brezinski, Madeleine Albright - are some of those who have come through. But you'll get lots of foreign heads of government, ambassadors, CEOs, etc. And as a student you get to attend a lot of candid closed door talks, which are great.

Second, SAIS has fantastic course offerings, if you haven't seen them already follow this link: http://www.sais-jhu....urses/index.htm (see the bottom of the page). It has a lot of fantastic teachers, and a few not so fantastic teachers. But if you do your research when picking classes, you can avoid the poorer classes with ease. Be warned, this isn't business school, you will work hard. SAIS students tend to be pretty hardworking - especially on the DC campus - while also squeezing in lots of seminars, conferences, clubs and societies, and happy hours.

Third, SAIS can prepare you for any job. The Econ syllabus is fantastic - if that's what you like, if not, you can avoid it (aside from the mandatory 4 subjects). The Finance program is also top notch - the head of the department, Gordon Bodnar, is ex-Wharton and runs classes of that standard. He also has put together a really solid faculty. Whether you want to go into banking, consulting, government, third sector, media, SAIS can get you there. If you're not sure, SAIS is even better! Note that a lot of private firms, esp. the consulting firms, don't treat SAIS as an MBA - you will enter at the pre-MBA salary.

Fourth, there are GREAT people in the student body - military, government sector, private sector, media, NGOs - there are a lot of interesting people at SAIS, most of them really smart too. The social side of SAIS is a real highlight.

In terms of downsides, there are a few minor shortcomings, but I'm sure they're not unique to SAIS. First, overenrolled classes. In recent years, the student body has grown, but course offerings haven't really adapted. A lot of classes are over enrolled and you have use bid points (everyone given the same amount) to try and get in. The upshot is you simply cant take a lot of classes you might like to. This is becoming a problem - over 20 classes went to bid this semester. Other classes are limited to concentrations, or give concentrators priority - i.e. you can't take a class with Eliot Cohen unless you are in Strategic Studies. Second, the student body seems to be getting younger. If you've got three or four years of real work experience, you'll find a bunch of people like you, but there is an increasing number of students either straight out of undergrad or with 1 year worth of internships. This can be frustrating. Finally, career services isn't what you'd get at a top business school, to a large extent you're on your own, especially if you're interested in private sector jobs.

One other issue to consider is branding. SAIS is THE brand name in DC, but the further you get away from the US, the less well known it is. If all you're worried about is brand name, columbia and harvard tend to resonate better overseas than SAIS. But this is slowly changing.

Looking at concentrations, in my view (and this is only my view!) the better concentrations are:
- Strategic Studies: Very well run by Eliot Cohen, with great faculty. It has a conservative bent.
- China Studies: Headed by David Lampton - one of THE China guys. Great classes, good language program.
- American Foreign Policy: Michael Mandelbaum
- Energy, Resources, Environment: Great course offerings, very practical.
- Latin American Studies

The SAIS International Development program is traditionally good, but has been in a state of flux. Francis Fukuyama left in 2010 and a new director has only just been appointed - Deborah Brautigam from American University. Will be interesting to see what happens.

A final point is that SAIS has just appointed a new Dean - Vali Nasr - who seems like a good pick, but only time will tell!

Again, I would highly recommend SAIS. I've had a great time here and talking to people from other schools, I'm more confident I made the right choice today than when I first accepted (over HKS, SIPA, MSFS, LSE, HEI Geneva). Happy to try and answer any specific questions.

Could you clarify re: SFS-MSFS or SSP?

Speaking as a SAISer, we do send a quite a few people into political risk firms. Eurasia Group and Oxford Analytica, among others, recruit here and hire interns from here. Speaking as one who has an interest in working for the USG in a national security capacity, a lot of people work for government agencies and contractors because they want to, not because they are forced into in for a lack of options. If anything, the default SAIS immediate post-grad job is a short-term contract at the World Bank. I know at least one person who works in the WB's political risk unit (MIGA) on a short term contract, or at least was working there as of January.

In terms of the private sector, there are a number of firms in the DC area that kind of function as "farm teams" for SAISers. Places where recent grads can get some experience in international business and finance before moving on to larger firms. If you message me, I can give you some names. Those places and the World Bank seem to be the places where SAISers tend to end up if they want to get into international finance and business and haven't gotten a position at larger firms for some reason.

If you want to do political risk at SAIS, talk to Charles Doran. He's the head of the IR department at SAIS, along with Global Theory and History and Canadian Studies, and teaches a career course on political risk.

From my perspective, if you want to get into that, I'd take courses in finance and a region of focus in which you have or are gaining proficiency. I'd look into an Emerging Markets Specialization, so you could note that sort of coursework on your resume. One thing I've noticed, noting things on your transcript is next to useless, as people really look at those at the end of a hiring process to verify that you are what you say you are.

If you are really interested in international business and have the means, you could look into doing a dual degree with INSEAD-it's one of the top business schools in the world and it's just an additional semester.

If you want to work in DC or internationally, go to GW and don't look back. You are comparing a near-elite program with TTT. If you want to stay in Florida? Stay at FSU. You want to leave or go anywhere on the East Coast (DC but also Boston or New York), go to GW hands down.

Additionally, the quality of student and the network of GW vs FSU is not even a contest. Also given the night classes offered by GW, you can pursue an internship or other job and gain invaluable experience and access to DC.

Here's the 'Beta' version of my loan spreadsheet. I think it has some good features. It calculates deferment options, and the interest accumulation while in deferment, along with other features that you'd expect. You can compare up to ten programs. I recommend copying and pasting (values) from the results of each school analysis (i.e. the green cells in the Dashboard tab) into a separate tab or workbook.

Sorry if all of the colors are confusing, I got a little carried away. It uses a pivot table and a lot of referencing, so I hope that everything translates when you download it. Don't use it in Google Docs, it won't work. I'm still refining it, so shoot me suggestions/bugs. I think the next step is to factor in up to $8500 in subsidized stafford loans we might be table to take out, and to build in undergraduate loans into the monthly payment and monthly take-home pay figures.

Link: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B476rg_hUjpiUHhwSGg0bi1Ubk9Xa2RKcmhuZkZEdw

Agreed with piquant777, nearly every single SIPA grad I know (and I lived in NYC for over five years, so it's a fairly large number) expressed disappointment with SIPA. I would second going to Fletcher, which has a stronger brand name in the field and a stronger alumni network, for less money.

IMHO Fletcher is by far the better program. SIPA is huge, impersonal, and kind of has a cash cow reputation (maybe bc they give no aid!). I talked to multiple grads from both places when applying and Fletcher grads always raved, whereas SIPA grads always were lukewarm, gave caveats or were even downright out to warn me. My impression was so strong that I didn't even end up applying in the end, despite having submitted recs. Don't get sucked in, esp. when as I said before in SIPA's case, reputation in your field of study is NOT better. More people get into the program than don't, for heaven's sake. When you finish with that much less debt and a stronger campus and alum network, you will indeed think back to this moment and tell yourself you were being an idiot.

That's good advice for current undergrads and people not applying this cycle, but it's incredibly obvious and has little to do with the questions of the OP. Of course you should work your ass off to get the best applications possible. I think the better question for discussion is, assuming you have done that, what is an acceptable level of debt for a given program? Should you really go into $60k of debt for this program or that program, or should you take the money and some other program?

People underestimate the degree to which they can avoid debt if they are willing to put in the work to improve their admission profile.

I would argue that many critical admission/fin-aid metrics, including GPA, GRE, obtaining internships/jobs (not necessarily your performance in them), and foreign language boil down to who cares more. Not inherent intelligence, not your financial resources, not where you were born. Effort, pure and simple. Put in the work, and you get paid for it (literally).

If you spend 4 hours a night studying in college, you're going to have a great GPA. If you spend 500+ hours studying for the GRE, you're going to have a sick score. If you are willing to troll online for hours to find relevant internships/jobs and send out 20+ applications, you're going to get one. If you take time every single day to study a foreign language, you will become proficient in it. Polishing your SOP, researching your schools to detail exactly how you are a fit for them - so much of apps (and life?) comes down to desire. There are trade-offs involved: time you spend doing those things means time not spent with friends, lovers, a good book, a sunny meadow on a spring day. It might not make you happier, or well-rounded. But if you put in the work, I guarantee someone will give you admission + serious funding.

I'll be attending one of my top schools on a full ride. It didn't just happen - I did all the things mentioned above, and more. Sometimes it sucked, GRE prep particularly so, as I ended up at about 750 hours prep time. But the thought that kept me going was that not being able to attend grad school, which I wouldn't be able to sans major funding, would suck infinitely more. So I put in the work, and now I get to go to school for free. Not because I'm smarter (guarantee that's not the case), not because I'm richer (my bank account laughs at this): because I cared more, and did the work other people weren't willing to do.

You can write this off as self-aggrandizement. Or get upset because you didn't get the financial aid you wanted and think I'm insinuating you're lazy. But fundamentally, grad school admissions and fin-aid are not mysteries. Everyone knows the things they look at to make decisions. It's your choice whether you invest the time and out-work competitors.

I came across a booklet made by SIPA that contained admit rates for what they deemed were "peer schools" (I think the booklet was for SIPA admin eyes only, though). While these numbers are a bit old, I think they give a rough idea.

SIPA (MPA) [2008]: 51% (336/661)
SIPA (MPA) [2007]: 58% (337/578)
SIPA (MIA) [2008]: 40% (732/1,815)
SIPA (MIA) [2007]: 49% (804/1,626)
HKS (MPP) [2007]: 26.9% (340/1,262)
HKS (MPP) [2006]: 28.7% (386/1,344)
WWS (MPA) [2008]: 15% (116/765)
WWS (MPA) [2007]: 13% (103/792)
Maxwell (MPA) [2008]: 67% (243/361)
Maxwell (MPA) [2007]: 71% (281/394)
SFS (MSFS) [2008]: 29% (268/922)
SFS (MSFS) [2007]: 26.4% (220/834)
SAIS (MAIA) [2008]: 52% (791/1,521)
SAIS (MAIA) [2006]: 39% (640/1,639)
Fletcher (MALD) [2008]: 43% (699/1,620)
Fletcher (MALD) [2007]: 34.1% (558/1,636)

Accepted by Elliott (MA International Affairs). Was a bit nervous when I got the email, as my previous acceptances (Maxwell and LBJ) sent emails announcing the decision and Elliott's just told me to log into my account. Anyway, got the result that I had hoped for and now I have at least one option in DC.

Congrats to everybody else too!

Mine is similar to understatement700's. I relate the topic to me in about five or so sentences, but mostly focus on the issue and course of action. SAIS Bologna has posted an example, which can found here: http://saisbolognaadmissions.blogspot.com/2011/11/analytical-essay.html.

Not to sound rude (my numbers are fairly similar), but based on your numbers and limited professional experience I doubt you would get much funding from Fletcher, SIPA, or SFS (SIPA does give more money out to second year students, so there is a chance you could get some...eventually). Your best bet is Maxwell. However, I could be wrong, and since you have already applied you'll find out in the next six to eight weeks. No reason to stress about funding until you get in, anyway.

his situation is slightly different in that a master's and phD in sociology is not a "professional degree". at the end of the day, you pursue a professional degree for career advancement more so than intellectual stimulation. it is easy for him to say that since it worked out for him, but it is really foolish to take on a six figure debt with that mentality. it frustrates me sometimes how some ppl really do not comprehend how much of a burden a debt to that degree will enslave you if you do not have the income and job to pay it off somewhat comfortably. more important, the age in which your professor lived in and we live in are completely different.

i think there is really no place that is worth 100K+ of debt for an MPA/MPP. just do some time calculating your monthly payments based on a 10 and 20 year repayment plan and realistically look at how much income you will probably earn after graduation. it is a different story if you have money saved up, have relatives help you, or get some financial help from the school. there are so many ppl out there (even HKS graduates) who regret their decisions to go to a school at the sticker price because they never took the time to realistically analyze their financial outlook and just focused on the excitement of the school experience.

Not to be a downer (and congrats on the GRE, by the way), if I were you, I'd wait to apply. Your scores are good, but as Mal83 mentioned, you have little relevant international experience. Best case scenario, you get a degree from one of those schools and have to compete for jobs with graduates that have professional and/or relevant international experience. Doesn't sound like a winning formula to me. However, feel free to give it a shot if you really want. It just seems like there is no reason to rush into grad school when you could get some valuable and relevant experience beforehand (and make a little money too).

I think you have plenty of relevant work experience. Your financial analysis background would be highly useful in public policy consulting, which often boils down to "what should we do with our money, and what's the most efficient way to do so." Relevant work experience doesn't necessarily mean you have to already been doing what you want to - if you were, why would you be getting another degree? Just make sure to emphasize in your SOP (1) exactly how the skills you've acquired in finance will transfer to your desired public service career (2) what skills you DON'T have that a MPA from School X would teach.

Actually, I think the fact that you're coming over from finance without a ton of previous involvement in public affairs could make fora very compelling SOP. Fair or not, there's a certain popular perception of people who work on Wall Street and their concern for other citizens in this country. Spinning your SOP along the lines of "I'm giving up the $$$ and prestige to do good" could play very well.

Bottom-line, I would polish your SOP to get exactly the right point across. It also would not hurt to seek volunteer opportunities with roughly the role you want to play at a consulting firm.

Also, reading WWS student bios is a great way to question every life decision you've ever made. I assume there must be a factory somewhere churning out people with 4.0 undergrad GPAs, fluency in 6 languages, and a dual career of nursing crippled refugees to health + managing sovereign wealth funds. Just remember that out of a self-selected pool of elite applicants, WWS admits like 10%, and there is often no real distinction between those who got in and those who didn't in terms of competitiveness. If admission is essentially a lottery (which I would argue it is), there is no sense trying to make yourself into an "ideal candidate", since that concept doesn't actually exist in reality. There are just really qualified people who got in, and really qualified people who didn't.

I think "second-tier" has negative connotations that the original poster isn't intending. From what his post and others following suggest, this thread is about high-quality programs that aren't as difficult to gain admissions to.

Basing our discussion on that definition of high-quality and (relatively) lower-selectivity programs, I think GW (Elliott), American, Denver (Korbel), and UCSD fall into that category. I would probably add UChicago and Syracuse to that list as well.

To focus this conversation on your seeking advice, cowboy, what area of IR are you interested in? A great way to ultimately choose among the safeties that we provide would be to find a school that's not as selective but happens to be strong in that particular area (e.g. UCSD for the IR of the Asia/Pacific region).

Mine is similar to understatement700's. I relate the topic to me in about five or so sentences, but mostly focus on the issue and course of action. SAIS Bologna has posted an example, which can found here: http://saisbolognaadmissions.blogspot.com/2011/11/analytical-essay.html.