lbjane

I don't think that rankings matter nearly as much for MPP/MPA/IR programs as they do for MBA and law programs. Yes, brand name recognition can sometimes open doors, but so can attending a well-known state university or a school near where the person reviewing your resume grew up. Rankings and brand name matter a little more in the private sector, so if you're interested in that route it might be worth more to you. In the federal government, it matters very little. In the non-profit sector, it matters a little bit but not usually as much as a lot of people think it does. If you're interested in state or local government, a regionally well known program may help you make the best connections. Most of the schools publish info about recent employers and there's a lot of overlap across the schools regardless of ranking, though some schools might have a certain regional or policy focus that helps them place more grads with certain agencies or in certain areas. When looking at career information, consider the class size, ask how many people were funded by their employer, and ask about employment numbers with specific employers and/or fields that you've got an interest in, since all of those things can affect how likely a degree from that school is to make a difference in your chance of finding employment with that employer or in that field. Larger schools will naturally have a larger number of employers, but that doesn't mean that their students are necessarily more competitive, it might just mean that there are more of them. Students who are funded by their employer can skew average starting salaries, the types of alumni employment listed, and so on to make it look like your chances of getting a job and/or salary are higher than they are if you're not already employed by that employer. I also think that going to school in DC is not necessarily as important as people think it is. While there are tons of MSFS, GPPI, Elliott, SIS, SAIS, UMDPP, etc grads running around DC, there are also tons of LBJ, Bush, Maxwell, Ford, Sanford, Goldman, UGA, Indiana, etc grads running around DC, too. The big MPP/MPA/IR employers will hit the big policy schools when recruiting and will accept applications and resumes from even more. So, while networking in DC can be helpful, it's not nearly as hard to make the transition from a decent policy school to DC as people make it out to be. There's also something to be said for having full-time faculty available vs a ton of adjuncts who are not nearly as accessible, or who just give the occasional seminar. The decision about where to go is a very personal one. For some people, sinking the money on their dream school is absolutely worth it even if it means a lot of debt or applying again next year. Others are very passionate about a certain subfield and find a school that's a really great fit for that subfield. Some have family considerations that keep them in a certain geographic area. Some are determined to avoid debt. There are differences in programs and the rankings aren't totally worthless, but I wouldn't use them as a large factor when determining where to go. You have to balance what's important to you and find the best fit for you and your career plans, which may not be the best fit for the other people on the board.

I know that many LBJers do dual degree programs. I don't know how many of them apply as dual degree students and how many apply to the second program after starting LBJ or apply to LBJ after starting another program. Even if you don't do a formal dual degree program, there are many classes that are cross listed and many ways to take classes outside of LBJ toward your elective requirement or, under certain circumstances, to count for a core course. I took a class in the business school and it was a good experience. It was a pain to actually get registered for it, but once I was registered, it was a good class. I wouldn't necessarily count on it being easier to get in to the business school or law school after starting LBJ, because I honestly don't think that they really give any preference to LBJ students. However, if you go to LBJ, it's worth looking in to it if it's something that you're interested in.

I graduated from LBJ MPAff a couple of years ago, so my data is a few years old. The MGPS degree was just coming in to being while I was there, so I can't speak to that too much. The employment data breakdown is different from when I was there. When I was there, it was more or less 40% in Texas, 40% in DC, and the other 20% in other parts of the US or overseas. I don't remember salary info, but what's on the site now seems reasonably close to what I remember, though I think that maybe the private sector used to be listed a little higher. The fact of the matter with a lot of government jobs though, is that your salary is more or less determined by some equation of work experience and education and that's not going to change much based on your school. The only place where a school name might get you much of a higher salary is in the private sector. There might be a little difference in the non-profit sector based on school name, but not a very big difference. I can't comment on the MGPS program specifically, but my class sent people to work on international issues at DOS, DOD, DOE, DOT, USAID, CIA, FBI, Deloitte, UNDP, Brookings, and CSIS. There are probably more, but those are the ones that come to mind. LBJ is one of the oldest policy schools and does have a very extensive network in Texas and in DC. There are a lot of LBJ alums working in international issues in DC, but probably fewer and more scattered overseas. You might consider reaching out to Lana in the career office. Her info's on the LBJ career website. While I was there, she was very, very helpful and she might be able to provide some MGPS specific data about employment and specific info about recent employers. I didn't really feel like I missed out on too much by being out of DC. I did an internship in DC during the summer between my first and second year and lots of employers came to UT to recruit. Lana was great about letting people know when different employers were in town and snagging them to come to LBJ when they visited the university in general or the business school or law school. FWIW, I really enjoyed my time at LBJ and ended up working overseas for the US government. I got a lot out of the classes and working with my classmates and my professors were mostly great, with 1-2 exceptions. Austin's a fun place to live, and while it would have been nice to be in DC, it was also nice to graduate debt free and not have to worry about debt when considering job options.

I don't think that 100k of debt for an MPP or MA in IR is necessary or a very good idea. After I got my MPAff from LBJ, I was hired by the federal government at a standard/common salary for employees with masters but not a lot of significant work experience. My take home pay after taxes, Social Security, insurance, and whatnot was about 40,000 and I was living in DC. I managed fine with that, especially as a single person, but if I'd had an extra $14,000 taken out of that, that would have left me with $26,000/year to live in a rather expensive city. If I'd had a family or another significant debt, $26k a year in DC would have been tough. Yes, my income has gone up a little since I started work a couple of years ago, but it might still be tough if I had a family, wanted to buy a house, or had other debt. Unless you really want to go in to consulting, like at Booz Allen, Deloitte, or whatever, the name attached to your degree doesn't matter as much as it would for an MBA or JD, especially in government. Your salary in the federal government will not be higher if you go to Harvard instead of State U. It might make enough of a difference in salary with a consulting company and maybe make a small difference with a non-profit, but certainly not $14k/year more for a Harvard degree than a State U degree at a non-profit. If you can get in to Harvard, chances are you can get in to another decent school that would offer at least some financial aid and ease the debt burden. Like others have said, it is about your tolerance for risk. The degree might pay off, but you might change your mind about your career track and decide that you want to work in non-profits instead of the government, or whatever. You might decide to get married, start a family, or have some other large expense come up. How will the $14k a year debt payment affect you then? Will it force you to take a job you don't want? Will it force you to take the first job that comes up because you have loans due? I think that there are enough other options out there that you shouldn't have to take out $100k in debt for an MPP or MA/IR. Also, ask a lot of questions about how any school determines the average starting salary. How many of the students are there with their employer (military, civil service, private sector) paying for it and who will go back to a mid-career salary? How many students are there as other types of mid-career students who will start with a higher salary when graduating based on their experience? Those stats can skew the average salary of graduates higher than what a graduate without any or much experience might make. So, I don't really think that $100k of debt for an MPP or MA/IR is a good idea and/or worth it.

I applied to the Bush School when I applied to policy schools. Since I was in-state, I went to the interview conference. It was basically a way for you to get to know more about the school and meet current students and a way for the school to get to know more about you. As I recall, they did phone or Skype interviews for people who were not able to attend the conference. I don't think that not attending is a real problem. They understand that not everyone can come in for out of state or overseas.

I think that 50K of debt for a public policy or IR job is a lot, especially if you plan to work in federal government and stay in DC where the cost of living is relatively high. There are any number of loan calculators out there that can tell you what your monthly loan payment would be with a variety of amounts and interest rates. Take a look at that and see if you can manage 50k debt with your current budget and projected income after your degree. There are some public service loan repayment programs, but they may not be around indefinitely and you might not always work in public service. A person's interests can change or you may find that, after starting a family, a private sector salary is more appealing. So, while those programs are there, I wouldn't necessarily count on that alone to take care of your loans. I also don't think that you necessarily have to take out 50k of debt. You might consider taking a year, working on improving your resume, and applying again, but also to a wider range of schools. If you got in to American and Monterey, odds are good you might get in to some other schools with some financial aid if you widen your net. You might also look at programs located in places with a lower cost of living. I think that applicants generally put more emphasis on the prestige of an public policy program than most employers do. In my experience, where you get your public policy or IR degree matters a lot less than where you get your MBA or law degree. If you want to work for the federal government, they don't really care where you got your degree. Most non-profits aren't uber-name conscious either. Talk with the career offices at a variety of schools and you'll see lots of the same employers come up over and over. Hope this helps a bit.

Congrats on getting it down to the word limit! For others who are wondering or for future applicants who search the board, keep in mind that the admissions committee will have hundreds of admissions essays to read. It's important to stay pretty close to the limits since the admissions committee only has so much time to spend on each application. Greendiplomat is right that the admissions committee members see so many admissions essays that they will almost certainly spot one that goes too far over the limit, even if there's no official word count included. I never served on an admissions committee, but I have helped review intern applications that had a similar statement of interest requirement and when you look at a lot of standardized application requirements, those that include way too much or way too little information stand out pretty quickly and usually not in a good way. Blatantly ignoring instructions doesn't bode well for most applicants. Also, keep in mind that you want to enter the world of public policy/IR where your ability (or inability) to boil complex issues that scholars have written many books about down to a two page memo may have a direct impact on your career advancement. So, as interesting as everyone's experiences and goals truly are, it's still important to decide what's truly relevant and to get to the point clearly and concisely. If there are truly extenuating circumstances that need to be addressed in your admissions packet that you can't include due to the word limit, then consider an addendum specific to those circumstances. I'm not talking about an awesome work or job experience, but about major health or personal issues that the admissions committee needs to know in order to understand you as an applicant.

Like others here, I think that you definitely have a shot at the programs you mentioned. However, you might want to look at a wider range of schools, especially since you bring up financial aid. You might take a look at some schools that aren't quite as highly ranked, since you may have a better shot of getting in and getting a good financial aid package. I know that, for example, both LBJ at UT and the Bush School at Texas A&M usually provided enough financial aid to out of state students so that they would qualify for in-state tuition, which would be a lot cheaper than most of the schools that you mentioned if you don't get much financial aid from them. So, broadening your list a bit with some schools that are less competitive may give you more options, especially financial aid wise. I will also plug LBJ because it's a really good, well-established school and you can do a dual degree with LBJ and Russian and Eastern European Studies or just take elective classes in the REE department. Good luck!

I would not take out anywhere near that much debt for an MA in IR or Public Policy. It's just not worth it because it will limit your job options for a long time to come. It's a lot of money to pay back, and while you may be able to take advantage of loan forgiveness programs, I would not gamble that they will all be around in 12 years after you finish your degree and have been working for 10 years. A lot of policy can change, and the loan forgiveness may or may not still be there or the amount covered could change. It's almost never necessary to take out that kind of debt for a degree that will lead to public service. The school rankings do not matter nearly as much as they might in law or business schools and the salaries are much lower. Government agencies will recruit at a lot of schools beyond the top SAIS/SIPA/MSFS schools, and will consider applicants from lots of other programs. In the government, where you got your degree matters a lot less than your experience and the skills you demonstrate in the interview process. So, it's just not necessary to take out a ton of debt when you can go to a lower ranked school and get more aid or an in-state school that doesn't cost as much. I went to the LBJ School at UT, which did not cost anywhere near $140k and my classmates and I still got great jobs that we enjoy. I would agree with others and suggest working for another year or so if you can to save and improve your resume and then applying to wider range of schools where the costs are lower and/or you might have a better chance of getting more aid. You can then pick a school that will get you where you want without breaking the bank.

Congrats on the funding! $20k is not a huge, huge amount of debt, but I'm not sure how much you'd be looking at total. Like IRHopefull2010 said, the cost of living in Austin is dramatically cheaper than in DC, so consider that as well when running the numbers. I would say that housing in Austin, for example, is 1/2 to 1/3 of what it would cost you for something similar in DC. I'm not sure what your aid packages are at both places, but when I was applying to DC schools, the tuition difference and cost of living difference between LBJ and DC schools ended up being $80k cheaper over two years, which was a huge amount to me. It made the difference between graduating with $80k of debt or debt free and being able to save lots more and have a more comfortable life after graduation. Although I had a job lined up when I graduated, it was nice to know that I wasn't going to have to jump at the first thing that came just to make my loan payments. As for the Texas-centricness of the classes and/or students, it's true that there is a Texas influence since there are a lot of students from Texas and there are a lot of students interested in state and local policy as well. However, it really depends on the courses you take and the professors you choose. Lots of LBJers intern during the year with professors, with non-profits, with state agencies, and local entities. Also, from what I can tell, LBJ grads in DC end up getting the same or similar jobs that GW students get after graduation so I don't really know that it makes that much of a difference. I had similar apprehensions about not being in DC and missing out on internship and networking opportunities, but in the end, it really didn't matter. All of the big employers recruited at LBJ and UT and I landed one of my dream jobs after graduating without incurring a ton of debt. Not saying it's the solution for everyone, but things worked out well for me.

I don't really know anything about the job placement rates for the class of 2009, but for the years around when I graduated, people seemed to find work that they wanted within a few months of graduation. I think that Zourah makes a good point that both federal and state hiring take awhile, so people may have conditional offers, but be waiting for security clearance or other paperwork to go through. For example, I had a conditional offer and didn't actually start work until about a month after graduating. While I didn't talk with every single person in my class and the years before and after, I wasn't really aware of anyone who really struggled to find something. Good luck with your decision!

I'm only a few years out of grad school, but so far I have not felt at a disadvantage for not having attended the programs you mentioned. I have worked with people who graduated from those schools and feel like I can hold my own. You can make some generalizations about students from different programs, but I've met excellent people who've gone to schools most people have never heard of and absolute idiots who went to some of the programs you mentioned. I think that it's really up to the student to make the most of any program. Those who do will usually be successful and those who don't will have more trouble, at least in my experience.

I graduated from LBJ's MPAff program (GPS was still being worked out when I was there) and now work in international affairs in DC. So, here are my thoughts. The GPS program is indeed new, but LBJ is one of the oldest policy schools in the country and I think that people will look at that as much as the specific program you did there. The new dean is indeed internationally focused, the former dean is now the Deputy Secretary of State, and LBJ has been expanding its international programs and attracting more and more students interested in international affairs for many years now. LBJ alums who want to find work in international affairs have a pretty good record of finding work. As other posters mentioned, UT also has some great regional studies programs that are really well known and it's really easy to take courses in other departments if you want a regional focus. I think that the number of students who stay in Austin after graduation has to do with the fact that there are still a lot of students at the LBJ school who are interested in state and local policy, so they tend to go into state and local government in Austin. So, I think that most people who stay in Austin do so because they choose to for career, family, and/or quality of life, not because they can't find work elsewhere. Another large group of alums usually find work in DC on both domestic and international issues. A few end up overseas, but not that many, I don't think. From my class and the classes before and after mine, I know people who work at State, USAID, the UN, Dept of Navy, Brookings, HHS, Deloitte, OMB, CRS, World Bank several of the intelligence agencies, and lots of non-profits. There are also probably several people/places I'm forgetting. There are certainly LBJers who work overseas, but there's not really large concentrations in any one area that I'm aware of. However, UT is a huge school and has alums all over the world and you could definitely tap into that network if you couldn't find an LBJer working in a particular place. I do think that the cost of a program is important and that's what really compelled me to choose LBJ over a couple of DC schools. I knew that I wanted to work for the government or an NGO and that I wouldn't be making tons of money after graduation. So, I couldn't justify taking out tons of debt for grad school. However, I was a bit apprehensive about breaking into DC after graduating if I went to school in Texas, but I did an internship in DC between my first and second year and had no problem finding work here in DC when I graduated. Since I have very little debt, I'm able to live somewhat comfortably here in DC and even save money every month for retirement and for an eventual down payment on a condo, which is something that some of my colleagues who went to pricier schools aren't necessarily able to do. Hope this is useful info.

Unigenitus, I don't think that your private sector experience would hurt you in admissions so long as you could clearly articulate what you want to do after completing an MPP/MPA and why the MPP/MPA and not an MBA or other degree is the best program to prepare you for your future career plans. The reason MPP/MPA programs value work experience is similar to the reason that MBA programs also value work experience. You will be able to contribute more and apply the concepts better if you have a practical framework in which to apply them. For example, as an investment banker, you've likely had experience dealing with trade and economic policy in several ways and you could probably share a lot of insight in those fields. However, if I were looking at you as an applicant based on your posts here, I would be unlikely to admit you because you sound like a condescending @$$ who would not work well with others. A lot of policy programs require significant amounts of group work and based on your posts, it seems like you have nothing but disdain for people with public sector experience and that may well include a significant number of your classmates. I would also question how successful you would be post-MPP if you see everyone who works in government as incompetent and unpatriotic idiots, because, again, those are going to be the people with whom you're going to have to work to make and implement policy and policy changes. If you're not able to give most of your coworkers the benefit of the doubt that they are good people who want to and are trying to do good work, and find a way to encourage good work rather than just discourage them you're not likely to be very effective at all. There is certainly something to be said for bringing a practical, private-sector approach to a policy program and to public sector work, but you're not likely to get very far if you treat the people around you like something you stepped in on the street.

What I heard about the situation at LBJ was that applications were up, but a lot of the increase came from people who had no business being in a public policy program. The adcom actually admitted fewer students this year than the past couple of years since a lot of the applicants were weak candidates. So, I'm not sure what it's like at other schools, but at least at LBJ, if you were a good candidate before applications increased then you'd probably be a good candidate now. You just need to demonstrate that in your application with strong scores, grades, and good essays that clearly demonstrate that you're truly interested in an IR/MPP/MPA program and not just going to school because you can't find a job and don't have anything better to do.

First of all, you almost certainly don't *have* to take out the better part of 100k in loans to do it. In all likelihood, there's no one with a gun to your head forcing you to go to a certain school and take out 100k in loans there. You could apply to a wider range of schools, including some lower ranked ones where your chance of financial aid would be better, and ultimately go somewhere where you wouldn't have to take out as much in loans. I'm not saying that it's the wrong choice to go to Michigan and take out 100k in loans, but I am saying that it's a choice, not a necessity. One of the primary reasons I chose LBJ was because I knew that I could get out debt free. Between some financial aid, working part-time, and savings, I knew that I could afford the tuition and living expenses for two years without taking out loans. That's made a huge difference for me now that I'm working. Instead of spending several hundred dollars a month on loan repayment, I'm able to put more away for retirement and a house down payment. You say yourself that an undergraduate degree from a great school did not guarantee you work and I think that that holds true at the graduate level as well. I work with people who have degrees from more prestigious schools and less prestigious schools than LBJ and UT and from what I've observed, it hasn't made much of a difference where people went to school in terms of performance or promotions. Classmates and friends of mine who work in other offices and for other agencies report similar situations where they work. So, I don't think that it makes a huge difference where you went to school when looking at federal employment. I will definitely acknowledge that it's different if you're looking in the private sector or legislative work.

I think that this has already happened to a certain extent. Applications at LBJ were up 35% this year, but the incoming class is actually *smaller* than the past couple of years because the adcom didn't feel like as many of the candidates were qualified as have been in previous years and admitted fewer students than they have in quite some time. I suspect that many of the applicants were people who couldn't find a job or had lost their job and decided a public policy degree would be their ticket to employment, even if they had no business applying to a public policy program.

I'm not a GW student or alum, but just wanted to say something about courses filling up. I know that LBJ held a certain number of spaces for incoming students in almost all of the fall classes. The courses would show up as full in the registration system, even though there were spaces reserved for first year students. I don't know if GW does this too, but they might.

I know that it's a personal decision for everyone, but I just can't see much logic in taking out massive amounts of debt for an MPP/MPA/MAIR degree. Unlike law and business schools, that extra debt for an MPP-type degree isn't likely to result in a higher salary. Most MPP applicants and students aspire to work in the public or non-profit sector and managing a huge debt load when you're only making about 50k a year, living in DC or NYC, and maybe eventually wanting to start a family is pretty difficult. So, I would think long and hard before taking out tons of debt. I turned down GW in favor of LBJ because I knew that LBJ would be about 80k less over two years after I took the differences in tuition and living expenses into account. It was hard for me to give up GW's location in DC and the accessibility to internships and networking, but I figured that 80k of debt would probably close more doors for me than GW's program and location would open. I couldn't have known this when I made that decision, but I ended up being very happy at LBJ and ultimately finding a job in DC that I really enjoy. So, it all worked out fine for me, even though I wasn't in DC and attended a lower-ranked program. Plus, I can live a lot more comfortably and save for important things like a down payment on a house and retirement, since I don't have a huge monthly loan payment.

I think you'll face an uphill battle coming straight from undergrad with a 2.8. The GPA isn't a dealbreaker if you've got significant work experience, but when you're coming straight from undergrad, your GPA will weigh more heavily in your admission chances and funding chances. You'll probably find that a lot of applicants to policy schools have done internships, worked on campus, and/or held multiple offices in a student organization while in college, so I'm not sure that your work experience thus far would really set you apart from other applicants. If I were you, I would focus on bringing up your grades next year if at all possible, doing well on the GRE, and writing a great SOP that really communicates how an MPP will help you achieve your career goals. I know the economy's not great, but I would also try to look for a job as well and see if you can get a couple of years of full-time, professional work experience under your belt. Having work experience will mitigate the low GPA a little bit and probably improve your chances of getting funding somewhere. Also, you'll get more out of an MPP if you've got some work experience that relates to policy in some way, because you'll have had more experience about how policies work (or don't work) and you'll be able to bring more to classroom discussions and assignments.

I think that living $1500/month is definitely doable in Austin if you don't have any debt payments weighing you down. I managed on about $15k a year and lived comfortably, although not luxuriously. I would avoid Riverside as a grad student. I went to UT for undergrad and grad school, and Riverside is not that great. The rents are cheaper, but a lot of the big complexes down there are all undergrads, and are super noisy. UT's not a top party school for nothing. Also, as someone else mentioned, it's one of the least safe areas in Austin. It's not on par w/ SE DC or anything, but a lot of my friends who lived down there had their cars broken into and one even had his car stolen. As a grad student, I'd check out north campus/hyde park, Far West, Camino La Costa/Cameron Road, and Manor Road/Cherrywood. Those areas are nice enough, with good access to campus, and not too noisy/overrun w/ undergrads. Happy hunting.

Hmmm, I think that everyone's answer would be a little different. I think that it does really depend on what you want to do. First, are any of those programs especially strong in what you want to do? Second, the big name will likely be more helpful in the private sector or in politics. If you're interested in working for the federal government or a non-profit, the name is less likely to help you and the extra debt will be more of an issue since your salary will likely be lower than in the private sector. Finally, I disagree with Irishpg10 on the name factor. I don't think that the effect will last as long as irishpg10 implies. After your first job or two, hiring managers will be more concerned with what you've done in your previous jobs than where you got your degree. I think that that holds true in both the public and private sectors, although probably moreso in the public sector. I'm also skeptical that you could make up $60-100k in working and resourcefulness. You could certainly make up some of the difference, but $60-100k is a lot to make up, considering that you could also work while attending one of the less-expensive schools too. Ultimately though, you have to weigh what's important to you. For some people the name or specific course offerings at a school are important enough to offset the additional cost. For others, it's not. It's up to you to decide what's most important to you.

I agree with TheRunAround that you have to make the best decision for yourself. I chose to choose an lower-ranked, in-state program (LBJ) over a higher-ranked, DC school (MSFS) because I was just not comfortable taking on a huge debt load. However, someone else may have different priorities and it really comes down to what you're comfortable with doing. I say to do your homework, calculate your loans and what it will look like when you repay them, then weigh the costs with the pros and cons of each program. There's probably not one "right" answer for most people, but you can probably make a good decision if you know what you're getting yourself into with each program. It was really hard to turn down MSFS because I really loved the program, the campus, and being able to study in DC, but at the end of the day, I felt that the debt load would close more doors than going to MSFS would open. I wanted to have the option of waiting a while for a great job or taking a lower-paying job in the non-profit or development sector, and I felt that a high load of debt would prevent that. I can't know how things would have turned out if I'd gone to MSFS and whether the debt would have really been a problem, but I was very happy at LBJ and shortly after graduating from LBJ, I started a job that was one of my top career choices when I entered grad school. Plus, I don't have any debt from grad school and am able to save more for retirement and buying my first home. So, I've been very happy with my decision.

I did mine online through a local community college. It only cost a couple hundred dollars and the course was pretty flexible. I would definitely recommend working w/ a community college, since it's likely to be one of the cheapest options.

Hmmmm, I'm a recent LBJ alum and I have to disagree with TTUJay that the Bush School is much stronger than LBJ in international affairs. I think that the Bush School has a decent focus in national security and intelligence aspects of international affairs, but that it's really lacking in other aspects of international affairs. I think that the LBJ School does a much better job of balancing security, development, and diplomacy, which are all integral aspects of foreign affairs. I applied to the Bush School when I applied to schools and I attended their interview weekend. I was underwhelmed with the students that I met. It seemed like more of them were coming straight from undergrad and had less work experience than students at other programs I considered. Very few had any substantive international experience, which is also important if you're going to study international affairs. I was also concerned that their international affairs program seemed to focus primarily on intelligence and security, even though they did offer some courses in other areas of international affairs. Again, I did not ultimately attend the Bush School, so that's based almost solely on my experience at the interview weekend. I work in DC now, and my impression is that the Bush School is reasonably well known, but that it would depend on what you want to do. If you want to work for the federal government, you'd be fine, but if you're looking to get into the private sector or to work in politics (campaigns, the HIll, etc) it's probably not as well known because it's a newer program and has not been very highly ranked (36th in the last US News and World Report rankings). I can't say that this is true for the Bush School, but I know that the bulk of LBJ alums are in Texas and DC and I would guess that the situation is similar for the Bush School. So, if you're looking to work in state or local government in another state or to work internationally, it's probably not that well known. However, Texas A&M is well known and you would be able to tap in to A&M's general alumni network and potentially overcome that. Good luck with your decision!