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.

This is an honest question: What people are you dealing with overseas that they haven't heard of Yale, Stanford, MIT and Princeton? I'd conjecture to say that these aren't the people you are going to be working for. Now, if 50k is worth being able to impress people in some backwater bar then by all means, but in places like DC, you get asked "What you do" not "where you went to school".

I'd actually say it becomes less and less applicable as you enter the workforce, especially for the public sector. At that point the most important things are, what you have done and who you know, in reverse order. You have to keep in mind that the DC, Boston and New york consortium of schools are pumping out a thousand or so freshly minted MPA\MPP\MIA's a year. It's not as is you're doing something remarkable and\or extraordinary. So, if you're relying on a Harvard degree ten years in the past to set you apart from all of these people then chances are you aren't doing well as is. I'm not saying don't go to Harvard, but what I am saying is that you need to make sure the program will give you what you want out of a graduate education and that you won't break the bank doing it. There's something to be said for being able to make some decisions without having to worry about if you're going to be able to pay off your 800 bucks a month in student loans (and on an entry level civil service position, that is not fun). At the end of the day, an education is like anything else in this world: What you make of it. As an example, I've seen just as many people in the foreign service with degrees from State U or second tier private institutions as I have seen people with degrees from the "Harvard, Princeton and SAIS" group. In fact, I know a Deputy Assistant Secretary with a masters degree from an online institution. It's all relative. Another example: See if you can tell me where these people went for their education: Senator J. William Fulbright, current Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Senator Mark Warner, House Minority Whip-elect Eric Cantor, former First Lady Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy Onassis, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, General John Shalikashvili, Allen Dulles, John Foster Dulles, former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover and President Faure Gnassingb

I was having this discussion with my director (who was questioning why I was even going to grad school in the first place) who just came over from the NSC at a young age. She related to me why she chose the University of Maryland over HKS, SAIS and GW. She said when she went up to the HKS admissions director and asked if a Harvard Degree is going to cost me $500 bucks a month down the line, will a harvard degree help me get a job that pays $500 bucks more a month? The response? No. Of course not. The reality is that as long as you go to a top ten school you have just as good a chance to break into the "field" as you would anywhere else. It all depends on you and the effort you put into it. It's definitely a "check mark" on your resume but so is going to SIPA, WWS, SAIS or anywhere else and it's one of many, like work experience and foreign language ability. Then you have to consider that it is only that, a check mark. That definitely won't help you in the interview and chances are it won't give you that much of an edge your first year on the job. My office has more alumnus from Fletcher and American than Harvard and Yale, and trust me when I say there is absolutely no distinction made.

Sure. I'lll caveat the following response with the fact that I currently work in a pretty desirable place within the government within my field and have a pretty significant network in DC already. That said, I'd say I'd rather go to Fletcher because of the flexibility of curriculum, the fact that they seem to provide a more personal environment for their students and that their network is more dynamic and lateral e.g. the students take a big interest in taking care of their own as opposed to "getting the hook up" from their professors. This to me is essential. That's not to say you don't get that with GT, but I think people look @ all the wrong things when evaluating schools. To be realistic, Madeine Albright probably hasn't gotten anyone a job. In my experience those type of people seem to be too caught up in providing you the "insight" of their life, as opposed to the skills and abilities to create your own. So, in my opinion it's moot trying to take her class as you'll most likely be able to get the same experience by reading her books. Whereas, you can take a class with people who will be in the organizations you are trying to work in, and who have a vested interest in helping you out. That said, having DC connections is invaluable and if you're trying to break into the field, you may not worry about this too much.

Keep in mind that the night classes are such that you can take full advantage of all the "outside" learning to be had in Washington DC. You can use that time to internship or go to many of the ongoing discussion, presentations etc that are going on on a daily basis which is hard to replicate in Boston. That said, I'd pick Fletcher over GT any day of the week, but for entirely different reasons.

Did you apply to the MPA or MIA at Science po? And why would you rate SIPA over it? I'm just curious. I was accepted into Fletcher and Science Po (I didn't apply to SIPA because I really don't like the program, and have had bad experiences with the staff).

UG GPA: 3.48 (2BA: Math Econ \ IR + ~1 year of graduate course work) / 3.33 (AA - while on Active duty) GRE: 760Q, 600V 5.5 AW Numerous academic awards, scholarships and fellowships 4.5 Years Active Duty Military, 2.5 years reserves 1 year non profit \ Research WE Semester abroad in ME 2 yr - Government in new office @ cutting edge of field. Intern to Mid level (GS-12\13) in under 6 months. 25 years old. Applied: HKS, Fletcher, Science Po

Science Po Tufts HKS In that order. HKS only because of funding possibility.

I wouldn't worry about the brand of Fletcher. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who works in international affairs who hasn't heard of Fletcher and if they haven't then well..there's probably something wrong with them. Besides, in a field like Micro-finance people are not nearly as impressed with the name of the school you went to but rather the field experience you have. About six months into the first job you get after graduation it won't matter what school you went to. The biggest queston is whether or not the problem itself has the courses you feel you need and that you would have access to professors that do the types of things you want and have the type of connections you'll need. Another consideration I'd keep in mind is what organizations exist in NYC\Boston that you'll be able to network with while in college. Neither NYC nor Boston will be as good as a place like DC but you'll still find plenty of organizations that do micro finance in both. If one has a focus that you'd want to be a part of, think about that.

I wouldn't say KSU is a "best kept secret", at least not for those who work in security studies. Both of these are by Fort Leavenworth, Kansas which is home to, among other things, the Command and General Staff College and the Combined Arms Center, the "intellectual" arm of the United States Army. There are plenty of professors who work at both the local universitys and the Army schools there. In fact, there is a partnership between CGSC and KSU.