sherpa07

Does anyone know how the AW GRE score is used by public policy admissions offices? I've heard mixed things, including that it doesn't matter at all. For perspective, I just got a 6.0 on AW, 166 on Verbal, but only a 159 on Quant.. Is it possible that Writing/Verbal scores can override a lower-than-average Quant score? How is each score used?

Hi Eclectic. Thanks for the info! I'm also curious about this question. For perspective, what were some of your other quant-related credentials? (GRE quant, GPA, work experience)?

So here's my situation: Just took the GRE yesterday, and did fine on verbal (166), but mediocre on math (159). HOWEVER, I stupidly thought that the final section was ALWAYS the experimental one, so I sort of brushed it off. I didn't not do it, I just completed it rather quickly. And it was a math section. So I'm quite positive this explains my lower-than-expected math score. This was obviously stupid. I should have known better, but I didn't, and it's done now. Do you think this is something legitimate to mention in a supplemental essay? I'm quite sure my potential for math is at least a 163 or so. Or does mentioning this make me sound like an unprepared moron? I can't quite decide. I don't think the 159 represents my abilities, but for reasons that are sort of my fault.. Also, it was my second take, and I'm reallllyyyy not interested in sitting through another 4.5 hour GRE, so I'd like these scores to be final, if possible..

Look into Americorps VISTA (Volunteers In Service To America). You can live at home with VISTA and you don't have to travel or move around. You won't make much money (stipend is set at 110% of the federal poverty level..), but it will give you some experience for grad school. Also, VISTA start dates come a few times each year - for my program, they start in February, April and September. Not sure if that's set nationally, but maybe you could find a program that began in October. Good luck!

So this might be hard to explain here, but I'll give it a wham: The Barron's New GRE guide seems to say that estimating angle sizes, side lengths on geometric shapes is OK when not given any information. It calls it "TACTIC 2: trust the diagram," whereas it seems more sensible to me (and, I think, the Princeton Review "Cracking" book) to NOT trust the diagram. Any opinions on this? When given no additional info about angle sizes, etc., should you just estimate some things and make a guess? I think not, but maybe I'm wrong.

Any thoughts on Brown and UPenn? I'm assuming Brown's funding is quite bad, given its status as the least endowed Ivy? But how about UPenn?

Any thoughts on Duke Sanford or UPenn Fels? They seem moderately generous from my readings here; would you agree?

For what it's worth, the results section here suggests that Cornell CIPA is quite generous..

So I'm a bit ahead of myself, but I'm trying to narrow down a list of schools to apply to for MPP/MPA programs. One VERY important factor is, of course, funding. How would you rank the major Public Policy Schools based on funding generosity? Are there any, apart from Princeton, that are particularly generous? Which ones are notoriously stingy? Here's a sampling of some schools I'm considering, but don't hesitate to add any if you've heard particularly good/bad things!: Cornell CIPA, Syracuse Maxwell, Duke Sanford, Georgetown, GWU Trachtenberg, Harvard Kennedy, CMU Heinz, LSE (for Americans..), UPenn Fels, and Brown Taubman. Share what you've got, even if it's only anecdotal!

I know this is probably a many-time-discussed topic, but how about Masters programs at LSE? How hard is it to get in? With so many different programs, I can't imagine it's THAT competitive. If I take a Masters in a political science field from there, and decide I don't want a PhD for whatever reason, will I be employable in the US? How about other programs - Columbia QMSS, Chicago MAPSS, Brandeis MA polysci - if I stop after these degrees, am I doomed, or will I find employment?

I'd consider Canada.. probably just the University of Toronto? Where did you go? And I am American, so would I be eligible for funding? How much is tuition normally?

Thanks for all the great responses! I have a few more questions, but first, some background on my particular situation: I'm not currently in school, having graduated last June. I went to a top three liberal arts college, but only graduated with a GPA of about 3.5. I didn't complete a senior thesis, and my GRE school was good but not stellar. I took some political science classes, but they were early in my college career when my grades weren't so hot. I really do feel I need some sort of intermediate degree before applying straight to PhD's to increase my chances of getting into a good program. Is this a realistic assumption? I know PhD admissions are much more complicated that stats, but I really do think I can improve my profile with a Master's. Back to the MPP issue: First, funding: though I've looked into programs like QMSS and MAPSS, they seem to provide less funding than MPP/MPA programs. I know they're only a year, but if I received better funding for an MPP, that option may be cheaper.. Secondly, almost all public policy programs are made up of faculty members who studied political science and economics, not public policy. In fact, almost no faculty members studied public policy. Is this a significant factor at all? Thanks!

The title pretty much explains my question.. I'm finding there's a dearth of decent political science Masters programs, and some political science departments even explicitly say "we don't have a Masters, but enjoy our MPP!" (see bottom: http://politicalscience.stanford.edu/graduate-program/prospective-students/faq#Master01). Would an MPP or MPA lend itself well to applying to a PhD in political science (NOT public policy)? My undergraduate degree was in history, so I feel the need to increase my PhD chances with a Masters first, but there are so few programs!

I'm having a bit of a dilemma. I've had my mind set on an MPP/MPA for a while, but am beginning to reconsider. I'm not sure I'd enjoy the classes of an MPP program as much as I would a political science program, which would have a more theoretical foundation. On the other hand, I'm concerned I'd be permanently unemployed with an MA in Political Science, rather than the "professional" MPP degree. Does anyone have any experience with this dilemma? What differentiates the two in terms of employment prospects? Anything?

Is it just me, or are PhD's in public policy rarely mentioned on this forum? Anyway, at least I'm thinking about PhD programs! I'm hoping someone here will have some experience with doctoral programs and can help me with some questions. First, what do PhD's in public policy typically do? I'm concerned that, among academics, a PhD in public policy is not as well regarded as more traditional subjects - economics, political science, sociology, etc. Is this true? And are admissions therefore slightly easier to public policy programs than other comparable subjects? Secondly, most programs I find seem to be geared towards individuals already holding a Master's, whether it be an MPP, MPA or something related. Has anyone ever applied successfully straight out of undergrad (well, with some work experience, or not)? I graduated from undergrad in 2011, and will be applying to either MPP/MPA or PhD programs to begin in 2013, so I will have some work experience. Thanks!

Yea, after posting this, I looked through some program websites to see what they said. I didn't find much, but UMichigan Ford School said something to the effect of, "we look at retakes holistically," don't take averages and don't take the highest score. Both of my scores could improve, though. But would it look bad if I didn't improve on anything on a second retake? Could I cancel a second score after its reported? Any other advice on retaking is appreciated!

I don't necessarily need to retake the GRE for the programs I'm looking at, but I may want to to increase my funding chances. So here's my question: if I retake the GRE and only improve on one section - say, Verbal - but remain the same or even slightly reduce my score on Quant/AW, how might admissions committees view this? I remember in undergrad, with the SAT, colleges claimed to take the highest score from each section a candidate had ever scored. I took the SAT three times, and scored erratically - sometimes I'd improve Q, other times I'd improve V. In the end, I was accepted to a top college, so it was fine, but I never scores amazingly on all three sections at one time. Would this be the same with the GRE? Alternatively, do admissions committees look down on retakes altogether? Also, if it matters, I'm applying to MPA/MPP programs..