soaps

I've heard from current/former SIPA students who've recommended avoiding the career services center. SIPA has fine employments stats for a public policy/int'l affairs program (not to mention alumni going on to do amazing things); it's just that the school won't hold your hand finding a job. It's part of living in a big city where no one is special, and I imagine this comes naturally to some and not others. I never used career services in undergrad and I was fine.

It's really a question of whether it's in your interest to go straight to these programs without full-time work experience, not whether it's possible or not. How much is a public policy degree going to help you without any prior work experience? The average age of entrance is also 26 to 27, so I wonder how easily a 22-year old would fit in.

How'd you get SAIS from that site? A couple weeks ago Peterson's had SAIS at 43% and now the acceptance rate isn't even given. Anyway, these numbers are all higher than the historical averages due to the extreme volatility of people applying to public policy programs in the last few years. SIPA admissions told the recent admits the average acceptance in 2012 was 30% for all masters programs. Edit: didn't realize this was an old/revived topic.

Huh? The troll posts were deleted by the mod, not sure if you saw them. It was nasty.

Each school's endowment is separate, so Harvard's $30 billion plus endowment doesn't mean HKS has access to that money. Their own website points out how tiny their endowment is under "limited endowment." http://www.hks.harvard.edu/degrees/sfs/prospective-students/hks-financial-aid-philosophy#heading_02 Also, even if HKS had a gigantic endowment, it doesn't mean that money gets exhausted. Universities want to earn money on the principal, which is why large endowments grow and don't shrink. Columbia's endowment is also over $8 billion now.

I think it was all the trolling that did this thread in.

I answered this in the other subforum you posted this question to, but Michigan and Chicago are nowhere near the quality of Columbia or Harvard for these programs. SIPA is mostly known as an international affairs school, which makes Harvard the obvious choice. I'd recommend looking at the Government Affairs subforum. People there are more familiar with these schools.

Chicago and Michigan are in a completely different category aren't nearly the same quality as Harvard and Columbia, but they are much cheaper. All things being equal, Harvard is the obvious choice unless Columbia ended up offering you funding. Don't trust the Public Affairs/Policy rankings on US News. Everyone in the field knows they are completely wrong/irrelevant. You should direct this question to the Government Affairs subforum where people are actually familiar with these schools.

I'm dealing with similar issues but for a different program. There's no amount of information you can consume that will allow you to make the best decision. At a certain point, you just have to trust your instincts. I understand the rollercoaster, though. My mind tries to evaluate all the different opportunity costs between re-applying next year, or applying to law schools, or not going to graduate school at all. I think this is natural for anyone who has a mix of priorities in life. I'd take advantage of the time you have to make a decision, take it easy, and maybe you'll be struck with some insight down the road.

Which concentration did you select in your application? I wonder if people who don't select political and economic development have a leg up.

Thanks, Eigen! Apologies for feeding into it, but I'm glad the mods are on top of things. The Government Affairs forum has really been toxic this year.

... the one you posted from another account? There are no other posts from you. I don't think your other post (as captdelorean, presumably?) is accurate either for reasons stated in my post(s) below that one. But I'm not going to beat a dead horse, so I'll just leave it at that.

Those areas are definitely ok for groceries, school proximity, and socializing. Wallingford has some great bars/restaurants, and Ravenna is cheaper with quick access to the main U thoroughfares while also being closer to Greenlake. I think most UW students tend to migrate to those areas and you'll find more grad. students there as well. Long-term you may want to consider areas like Ballard, Fremont, and Capitol Hill once you get your bearings in Seattle. The UW community is gigantic and well-integrated with the rest of the city, so you're always likely to encounter students. That said, if you come from a big city with a good subway system, prepare to be disappointed by Seattle's transportation system and traffic.

I won't be there in the fall but I went there as an undergrad. UW is an amazing school with a beautiful campus, and the University District is full of great restaurants, bars, and culture. It's starting to gentrify but still has a gritty heart, which I love. For what you're studying you'll love the reading room in Suzzallo Library. Happy to answer any Seattle related questions if no one else pops up.

Yeah it's not exactly a cakewalk even for people graduating from T14 law schools. I doubt many of the lower T14 are even finding jobs. It's cutthroat competition and you need to stay at the top of your class even at Harvard/Yale/Stanford... not everyone starts with a six figure salary. Not to mention, his GPA makes it a virtual certainty he would not make it into a top law school even if he aced the LSAT. Worst advice I've ever read.

If SIPA funded him, they must really want him. How much did they offer? He shouldn't forget that so long as he maintains a 3.4 GPA, 70% of second-year students get partially funded with an average fellowship award between 15-20k. If his first-year award exceeds the tuition difference between SAIS and SIPA, he could end up in less debt going to SIPA. His background also makes him more likely to receive external fellowships, university-wide fellowships, etc. SIPA has a very holistic admissions process and seems to love international students. Full tuition at SIS isn't trivial either. It just depends what he wants to do... SAIS/SIPA offer more career possibilities, I think.

Yes because the obvious answer for someone who doesn't want a load of debt is to forget that, wait a year, apply for top law programs that are vastly more competitive with absolutely no guarantee of getting in, all just to have higher tuition for three years instead of 1 or 2, and despite having shown no prior interest in law. What excellent advice. Honestly, the stuff I read on these forums sometimes... Why would someone interested in public policy programs be suddenly OK with taking on more debt and (by extension) taking on a lucrative and punishing law career (in the most ideal scenario) just to pay off that debt when his actual interest is public policy? Christ almighty.

I'm MIA.

Has anyone else not received the Google group invite for new admits?

The MIA is 39% according to Peterson's... and besides, Harvard's MPA2 on Peterson's is 61% and SIPA's MPA probably attracts similar applicants. But in any case, OP asked about international affairs programs, not public policy. SIPA is known (really) as an int'l affairs school and there's probably not much to distinguish its MPA. Peterson's acceptance rate data on SAIS has (mysteriously) been pulled since yesterday when I was researching it, but it was at 43%. Historically both the MIA and MIPP have fluctuated around the 30s to low 40s. Peterson's data for all these schools seems a little out of date. It's weird, because there's also data indicating the 2004 MIA acceptance rate was 31%... it'd be interesting to know just how much these programs fluctuate. Data everywhere is pretty unreliable.

$70-80k is the base salary for an entry-level analyst in NYC, which actually makes sense looking at the titles/positions SIPA lists under banking/finance. And since it's median salary, isn't it unlikely to be distorted by dual-degree students? There's no way a dual-degree Columbia MBA student is going to have an 80k base salary in the city unless he made some wrong choices. Executive assistants at banks can make that much. Anyway, I could be wrong, but I don't think those stats are distorted too much. Then again, I can't explain the 122k median salary for a private sector MPP grad. at HKS--maybe more dual-degree students?--but my suspicion is that an MPP on its own from HKS is a little more valuable than people think. Otherwise, you'd expect the MPA2 to be equally distorted by dual-degree students when, counterintuitively, it carries a lower median salary for private sector. I agree it's more of a gamble and probably prevents SIPA from stealing more top students.

The SAIS website says 41%, which is comparable to SIPA. That's the number of people choosing to go into each sector, not necessarily a measure of the program's value to that sector. HKS may also have a selection bias for people more devoted to public service. The median salary for SAIS in the private sector is much, much lower, but it's impossible to tell how much of that is due to HKS dual degrees. Overall there's no reliable data for someone to think SAIS is more marketable for a private sector job.

I never received an invite to the Google group, and I sent an e-mail where the New Admits website tells you to but haven't heard back.

SIPA gets an undeserved reputation on these forums mainly because it funds only around 14% of first year students, and most people posting here are obviously going to be entering into their first year. That said, around 70% of students get partially funded at SIPA their second year with the average awards lying somewhere in the realm of $15-21k. The average debt a SIPA student can expect is around $63,000. From my own research, all that makes SIPA pretty average for financial aid for the top programs, and it makes it far-and-away better than somewhere like HKS. The "cash cow" reputation is therefore undeserved in comparison to other public policy programs. SIPA is also one of the most selective programs, so why it's considered uniquely "cash cow" puzzles me. The selectivity (by admission rate) goes this way: WWS->HKS->MSFS->SIPA->Fletcher->SAIS. In terms of quality? People are crazy if they think SIPA isn't as strong (or stronger) than any of those schools. The number of top faculty and research centers is superb, the forums and access to world leaders seems unmatched, and certain aspects of the core curriculum (like the second-year workshop) make it entirely distinct from other programs. It's also New York City--enough said. SIPA has great job placement--and particularly good private sector placement--by public policy school standards. Its median salaries for grads are comparable to or exceed the other top programs with the exceptions of HKS and (I'm sure) WWS. That said, the reputation is that SIPA's career services are awful. Columbia in general seems to suffer from the reputation that it won't hold your hand, won't help you find a job, etc. Even so, the placement of SIPA students in top agencies/firms/NGOs, and the number getting top fellowships, matches or exceeds the performance of other top programs. Anyway, this has all been discussed a million times before, but don't trust the impression you get from this forum. TheGradCafe is an often biased microcosm that can distort reality. It's largely (like I mentioned) a result of low first-year student funding. I'm sure current SIPA students can answer better than I can, but I think SIPA gets an unfair shake here. No one should doubt it's quality as an international affairs program. Just look at its alumni if you doubt it. If anything, I think SAIS gets an exaggerated boost on these forums. I've spent a fair amount of time working in DC and never felt SAIS exceeded the reputation of any school and even suffered in comparison to the reputation of MSFS/Gtown. So, again, these forums are unique and don't necessarily reflect reality. There are also people who are planning to choose SIPA over SAIS/Fletcher/GTown on the forums currently. Check out the SIPA thread.

I agree! But we were talking about private sector jobs and SAIS, and I think reports of SAIS's recognition and marketability for the private sector have been greatly exaggerated. Where do people get this impression? I'm genuinely curious because it'd be nice to know.