deechi

Without a doubt, go work before going to graduate school. The return on investment will be that much higher. I used to run hiring panels for people trying to get PMF positions in a foreign affairs agency and it was absolutely brutal for kids who had no relevant experience.

I understand that some professors affiliated with the international policy track have left the school within the last couple of years. Can someone talk about the current status of that facet of the school? I.e. current professors, initiatives or trajectory? Thanks ~d

Says the person who was a student at a community college....

IGO pay is in line with US Government salaries. The biggest determinate is going to be things like locality pay and post differentials. NGO's it really depends. They can be competitive at the higher levels but you'd be hard pressed to make a comparable salary at the entry to mid level (depending on what you do).

My post is specific to anyone going into Policy or the public sector with a focus on international relations. If you work at the World Bank and you don't know what SAIS is, then you have your own issues that you'll have to deal with. There's a reason these programs are recognized within their field and it's not just from the Alumni network. If you want to go into the private sector, then well, maybe you should go to Business School. The name of KSG is not going to help you much there.

What people are you talking to that don't know about SAIS and Fletcher? I'm assuming it's people who also don't know anything about international relations. SAIS is the top IR degree in the country and it's not that way by accident. Besides JHU is one of the biggest if not, the biggest research university in the world (depends on what you are measuring). Fletcher is the oldest and one of the most well respected IR institutions in the world and it's program is consistently ranked at the top of the pack for an IR Masters program. In fact, the FP rankings puts Harvard and Tufts 1 point apart from each other and significantly higher than Princeton. Add in the fact that you can cross register at both places and it's literally a wash with the major determinate being what you personally want to study. In either case, I find it hard to believe that anyone important besides maybe your family and your buddies at the bar have not heard of Fletcher and SAIS. I'd caution everyone highly against taking "general" recognition of a university and equating it to the ability of a professional degree from that institution to get you into and prepare you for a professional career. Is Harvard\Princeton known more by the average person? Sure. Is it known more by international relations professionals and hiring officials? No. Not at all. The notion is downright laughable. Also, "Geographical Advantage" refers more to your ability to network with people outside of your institution, your ability to work while attending school and access to faculty that may or may not be able to work in a place like Boston because they are busy with their day jobs. On an application it's all about the same and all major institutions will have more or less the same access to organizations hiring regardless of their geographical orientation.

Yea. You're fine. I meant specifically for international development. I have a degree in ID and there are definitely different approaches to international development in Academia, those who take a more quant focus and those who take a more qual focus. Harvard's program in ID is probably the most quant heavy program and with your background and interests you won't get as much out of it, IMO. You'll have the better choices with the ID program at Georgetown. In general, there is nothing wrong with Quant.

We have similar backgrounds and interests with the exception being that I've been working on this very subject for the past few years. I would personally choose Georgetown. It's a personal assessment, but at Georgetown they have more people working on these issues. Harvard is good, but they literally have about 2 people who have actually been working on this topic and their major projects revolve around mass atrocity response. Meanwhile, at GT you have people like Elizabeth Kvitashvili Who is in charge of USAID DCHA and is making this intersection happen right now or you have others who have been involved in the evolution of "Smart Power". The perceived difference in name and network is absolutely false and I'd be curious to see some objective measure that puts the quality of courses at Harvard substantially better than Georgetown. Also, as this is literally something that is being revolutionized in Washington right now it's very hard to imagine that you'd be better off in Boston when you can attend all the lectures on the topic and can work in the organizations doing these things. In terms of breadth of courses, you don't get better in statecraft training than the School of Foreign Service and their international development program is more holistic as opposed to quant focused..which is about worthless for what you want to do. You'd also find some of the courses on war and conflict management very relevant to the subject, which frankly, Harvard does not have. If you go to Harvard you'll most likely end up at fletcher to take a lot of these courses. So yea. Georgetown. Just my opinion though.

What's your field?

Have you asked about deferring or are you going off some posted policy? Exceptions are made in PHD programs all the time, especially for extraordinary situations like getting a fulbright. I'd talk to the admissions people and maybe a professor to see if they can make an exception. Between the two, the PHD is obviously going to set you up for your career more, but I'm a big proponent of enjoying your life. Teaching english with everything taken care of could be a pretty sweet deal. At the end of the day people won't care if you were a professor for 47 vs 46 years.

You may also want to look at the percentages of people going into the "Consulting private sector" which trends upward along with the stock market, topping out at about 12%. It's unreasonable to assume that the graduating class in 2009 will be going into these sectors at the same clip, with the same salary. As is, a minority of students are making 100k and the vast majority are in the 45-60k range. It's also not reasonable to assume that everyone who goes into a program is capable of getting the same job as everyone else upon graduation. Often for professional degrees (especially IR\PP) your ability to get a job is a function of your education AND experience. If you're so sure that you can buck the trend and float to the top by virtue of your superior intelligence, prudence and work effort, then I'd say that you don't need to risk 130k on a degree from Harvard when you can reasonably do the same thing from the University of Pittsburgh.

I really doubt this number is arbitrary. Actuaries get paid a lot of money to find out numbers like this and I'd bet money that their reccomendations have some pretty hefty statistical analysis behind it. That's not to say that you couldn't theoretically live more frugally, but there's something to be said for going to harvard and then eating peanut butter and jelly sandwiches for dinner because that is all you can afford. I'm just saying.

While the numbers you quote are right, I'd caveat some of the things you are saying. There are very few USG organizations that will hire you on as anything beyond a GS-9 (DoD being a notable exception), in which case you really won't be having a "laughably easy work schedule". The only way to even really get that is through the Presidential Management fellows program (unless you have connections prior to grad school). This program is highly competitive and at best it only gets your resume a consideration which isn't much of a guarantee (I've seen only 200 finalist resumes go towards one position). Also, other than the PMF program you aren't really guaranteed promotions in the Civil Service and it only works that way in the foreign service to a point. In fact, you often have to openly compete for promotions and the opportunities in the some of the smaller organziations are few and far between (some will have a handful to zero SES positions).

It probably depends on what you would do in the interim. If you aren't neccessarily doing something to make you more competitive then you're not likely to see any additional funding. However, if you're working in a relevant job, re-taking the GRE's or making enough money to put something aside for grad school it can be a good idea. That all may be worth it if you honestly believe that SAIS has the best fit for your interests. In regards to Cost of living. SAIS is by Dupont circle. You won't find anything within walking distance that is cheaper than about 1000-1100 a month (unless you like, share a studio..which a lot of people do) and when I was living around there and in school I was spending about 200 a week, give or take, on expenses. Factor in whatever other bills you have to pay and I think you'll see it's around the 58k over the two years.

I'm curious. Why do you think my perspective is so much different? I also work a federal government agency where individuals rotate from assignment to assignment every few years. Maybe it's been because I've been on the side of actually looking at those personal work histories and making decisions? I'd argue that what you have done within the organization is vastly more important than where you went to school 4-6 years ago. No one is going to look at your record and say "Well, this guy has been toiling away in mediocracy for the past half decade but..oooh he went to Harvard". In regards to Georgetown Prestigue, I'm pretty positive you'll find all you need. I work in IR so I'm more familiar with the MSFS program, but you'll make enough connections in DC and in DC Georgetown is generally considered the most prestigious.