soaps

Where are you getting these rankings? Rankings in general are silly, but if you're using U.S. News or something then they are particularly silly. Other, more objective rankings make more sense with JD/MBA programs that compare application numbers to acceptance to yield to graduation rate to employment prospects to salary etc. Public policy/IR rankings do none of that, and are completely subjective. I think WWS, HKS, SAIS, SIPA, SFS, and Fletcher are generally regarded as the top IR schools (in no particular order except for WWS/HKS and maybe SAIS).

I'm honestly not sure why SIPA sometimes gets a bad rap, but I would say it is a step above all those programs except WWS and HKS. Speaking as a New Yorker, SIPA has a much better reputation than NYU/Wagner, and I don't think some of the other programs you mentioned are particularly well regarded (or highly ranked) at all. Why do you think SIPA is poorly ranked? It's easily in the top for international affairs, but I'm not sure about public policy more generally. I think, in past years, it has been criticized for funding, but having just applied to schools this year, funding options at SIPA are much better than at least HKS, so I think a lot of the criticism is undeserved.

Congrats! Do you mind providing your stats and background?

Those stats sound pretty solid. This was my first year applying, but your situation is my worst nightmare. Sorry I can't provide more consolation, but hopefully others can. Is your work experience not public sector? That and the personal statement may have been what it came down to.

Wow, I wish I'd been given the same impression of WWS from others on this forum! Thanks for clarifying. I should have applied. And thanks re: SIPA and Oxford, although somehow I doubt it'll go well for me. Best of luck to you as well!

I was scared away from WWS because of my quant score... didn't even bother applying. Is it not as quant heavy for their MPA?

Thanks! Best advice you've given yet.

Rejected. Kind of shocked I wasn't even waitlisted, but I had a terrible GRE quant score and no quant background. Don't let anyone tell you HKS isn't competitive.

I think, until we get another blog post announcing decisions, everyone should ignore the results database if you want to avoid a mini panic attack. Edit: I stand corrected. Now I'm terrified.

Also, looks like the admins deleted the recent (fake) entries in the results database (the MPP and MPA2). I suspect they had duplicate IPs. Troll confirmed.

Last year MPP and MPA-ID were first, and MPA2 was the day after.

My understanding is that those booklets contain all current fellows, not the newly selected ones. If you look at the past year ones, it contains many duplicate profiles. I could be wrong, but I think if there are 24 in each of those PDFs, it means around 12 new ones are selected each year.

The possibility is indeed remote. The first "result" the troll posted said s/he had a full ride. Finalists haven't even been notified for fellowships as you just pointed out, and all other financial aid won't be arranged until April. The second troll post wasn't about being a finalist; it was about seeing the "new admit" tab that MPP-Tom brought up Monday. Who would be so self-assured they were admitted based on a website glitch some people saw in previous years? Let's also not forget the supposed mistake last week where someone repeatedly posted in this thread pretending they thought it was the Goldman one, only to disappear and never post their results in the appropriate thread. We are clearly dealing with a troll.

I used to work at a top foreign policy think tank and right now I'm a wayward wanderer, going back-and-forth between India and the U.S. doing research/planning and misc. projects for a unique NGO that helps refugees (all on a volunteer basis). I have zero interest in development agencies or large international NGOs... even if I could get a position at one, I imagine them being similar to the job I already had, just in a more exotic location. What has been your experience? I'm interested in human rights/refugee issues, but there are no employment prospects working with the particular refugee/displaced communities I'm interested in (i.e. no international NGO or IGO presence), so long-term I'm not exactly sure what I'll be doing. But in any case, I'm happier living in relative poverty with no job security than I was working at a think tank. I'm not sure if what I'm doing now is "real field experience" in comparison to yours, but I feel I'm accomplishing more over there than I was behind a computer screen organizing briefings, symposia, etc.

Yeah, there is no upward mobility for research in IR or public policy. That's why research assistants/associates are the lowest paid at think tanks/NGOs, and most are just glorified admin. assistants anyway. Even on the program side where the are plenty of advancement opportunities, I think people eventually realize that they aren't really involved in the practice of public policy or IR; they're involved in the practice of talking about public policy and IR (and even then, only in a support role). Think tanks are just cushy early retirement homes for former practitioners, or an income supplement for academics. For junior support staff, I'm really not sure it's anything at all except for a brand name that may or may not get them into a top grad. program. For senior support staff, it must be a prison. It's why I left my job to get some real field experience. Anyway, maybe I've become too disgruntled or disillusioned. Don't mind me!

Sorry, I meant a top law or business school, not just any one. The market is definitely oversaturated with JDs and MBAs. You'd be surprised how many people on this forum think an MPA can get them a job at a top strategy consulting firm. It's the cause of all the negativity in the HKS thread.

GWU and American are mid-tier in DC, in my opinion. NYU/Wagner is mid-tier in New York. As others have mentioned, I encountered many GWU/American master's students completing the same think tank internships I was completing as an undergrad. You also see a lot of GWU and American grad. students going on to take entry-level positions. There isn't a "top 20" for public policy--the field is way too tiny in comparison to JD/MBA programs. There's maybe a top 5 for public policy, and the rest aren't particularly competitive/selective. I think the overall impression of GWU/AU students is that they're less experienced (i.e. straight to grad. school from college), and that the schools are factories. Most undergrads busting their arses doing a bunch of DC internships are set on the top MBA, JD, and public policy programs, not (needless to say) GWU or American. While we're just dealing with perceptions here, I agree with others that WWS and HKS are considered the top for public policy. SAIS,SFS, and SIPA (and maybe Fletcher?) are well-respected for IR. Yale has such a tiny program so, even if it's good, I never met anyone who went there. People who go straight from college to grad. school realize all this a bit too late. It takes awhile to understand DC and this rather uncomfortable/oppressive state of perceptions there. There's an enormous east coast school bias, and even if you get into WWS and HKS, you're still out-classed by people who went to the top law and business schools. This is why I left DC. I was tired of the first question upon meeting someone being "Where do you work?", and the second being "Where did you go to school?" Not an exaggeration. My two cents: get work experience, then a few years down the line, you'll only be in a better position to apply to public policy programs. You may even decide a JD/MBA is more worth it, something too many public policy students realize too late when they're not earning the six figure salary they expected.

We've already established there's a troll on these forums. Now there's an MPP on the results database claiming to have seen the "new admits" tab in Sparks, which is exactly what Tom-MPP told us to look for in this thread Monday. Whoever the troll is, s/he is using this thread as a source.

I agree that the 2 weeks thing was too vague and definitely frustrating, but infuriating? Being infuriated implies that you're entitled to something. Imagine what PhD applicants have to go through... they don't get admissions blogs or near constant feedback from admissions offices, and sometimes they're not even told about their status at all. Anyway, I hate the waiting game as much as anyone and it's almost killing me, but I have confidence that the adcomm is exercising due diligence and that this waiting game isn't (as some have claimed) a product of incompetence. Part of me feels I'm one of those numbers on the margins that Matt Clemons is adding and removing, so no matter how long it takes, I appreciate the amount of consideration they're giving each applicant. That's just my own (perhaps worthless) two cents, but it'll allow me to sleep better tonight. Good luck to everyone and I hope we'll get news starting tomorrow.

Fair enough, but we're all applicants here and none of us are poised to start an HKS reformation before we even know if we're admitted. I just think we need more positive vibes on this board from current students, and if you want to interject with your own subjective appraisal of HKS with whatever prestige-driven, MBA-slanted calculus, I think the best time is after results have been sent out and not during the most anxiety ridden period of the application process. A couple people here clearly think an MPP/MPA can accomplish the same thing as an MBA, and I suppose it's good for you to disabuse them of that notion, but deconstructing a rather innocent, informal admissions blog and painting broad strokes about HKS from it is a stretch. Most of the content, aside from Matt Clemons' anecdotes that I personally find interesting and amusing, are similar to the HBS blog. He is just trying to help ease anxieties... it doesn't signal the decay of HKS. Thanks for clarifying re: the MPA2.

There are far fewer applicants to the MPA2 given the specific requirements, so I'm sure it's more self-selective, but that does seem ridiculously high, and the yield (98%) is also confusing. I thought MC-MPA had the highest acceptance rate. I honestly never understood what type of applicant the MPA2 was aimed at, but it asks for substantial graduate-level coursework similar to the MPP curriculum. To me that implies people who already have a graduate degree, have a pretty solid quant. background, etc. Can anyone enlighten me?

Yeah, financial aid hasn't been sorted out yet, and (as far as I know) finalists for fellowships haven't even been interviewed. I'm guessing it's another troll. You'll be notified by e-mail.

Thanks for compiling these, although the numbers do seem a bit off/strange compared to previous years. For example, compared to an increase of 5% in applicants from 2009-2010 for the MPP, 2011 increased by only 13 people (or 0.75%) according to this. That doesn't seem quite right considering public policy programs have been attracting more and more applicants each year pretty consistently, but maybe they've reached an apex.

Talk about overly dramatic... it's just a blog. Matt Clemons is extremely nice and helpful in-person, and I get the same impression from his blog posts. He's just trying to keep applicants upbeat, not give them "contrite life lessons." I'm glad he tries to update the blog at least once a day, and he does it because he knows applicants are dying for even the tiniest shred of information. I think it paints a good picture, especially compared to SIPA's blog, for example, which often doesn't even bother capitalizing sentences. As someone who's supposedly at HBS and on a fellowship to attend HKS, you seem to spend an inordinate amount of time smearing the school on this forum. Don't you have anything better to do than make applicants feel bad? One would think you'd be busy working on two Harvard degrees and not spending your time reading the admissions blog for a school you're being paid to attend (again, supposedly).

I don't think you have anything to worry about based on your profile.