Lud

I would disagree with most of the posters in this thread, and say that analyzing why you didn't get into WWS or HKS is a fools errand.

The sheer number of extremely qualified applicants gunning for limited spots means that either school could field an entirely different class made up of people who they didn't accept, and have it be just as good. It's arbitrary, a lottery, sub 10% admissions rate of a self-selected pool of elite candidates, whatever you want to call it. You clearly are qualified (prestigious undergrad, good stats, work experience, probably a solid SOP), you just didn't have whatever arbitrary, not-under-your-control profile they were looking for to fill out their class based on ever-changing organizational goals and requirements, the same as 90% of all the other smart and accomplished people who applied there.

I think looking at yourself and trying to figure out whats "wrong" with you is a common defense mechanism, in that it makes it seem like admissions are under YOUR control. If I know my "weaknesses", and go out and get experience X and test score Y to correct them, they have to accept me! Well, no - you have no idea why they didn't accept you, and even if you "fix" what you think might be the problem, their admissions target very likely has moved again. Picking apart the exact tone of your SOP, career trajectory, etc. provides zero usable insight, IMO. All you can do is put in the app, and hope you get in. If you don't, it doesn't mean there's something wrong with you. Clearly other schools think you are a great candidate (I'm sure many posters here would love to have an 80% scholarship at Fletcher), so move on.

EDIT - you totally should apply again and work to improve your application as much as possible, I'm just trying to inject some reality: that 90% of applicants will get dinged (as you have already experienced), you have no idea why, and it's not worth losing sleep over.

I would never go for a reference from someone reluctant to do it, no matter the circumstances. If you have no other sound alternatives you should consider, in my view, putting aside your PhD ambition for now and work a bit before preparing a stronger application with other referees. Of course I don't know your whole situation so that's just my 2 cent. I also find it utterly surprising that he argues on the basis of his fame and possible connections with Professors at Harvard or similar institutions, how could a reference have an impact on his own career? It seems insane to me or at least totally paranoid.

Here, let's ratchet the anxiety up a little bit more. For some fun (and nerve-racking) reading material, check out the WWS student bios, if you have not yet.

http://wws.princeton.edu/grad/admission/studentbios/

They're all along the lines of "Bobby speaks 17 languages, including three dead ones, fluently. He finished a translation of the Dead Sea Scrolls at the age of eight and then created a Broadway musical out of his experience. He spent three years in Mauritania teaching sign language to manta rays, which then became his assistants in early childhood education programs in Bolivia and in demining operations in Cambodia. Bobby funded his own initiatives by selling his left lung, spleen, and liver. Even though he is a man, he has breastfed hundreds of orphans to save them from starvation. He is the only student to ever score a 4.1 gpa in nuclear-astrophysical-geothermal engineering. He devotes his free time to fighting forest fires."

Actually, no, they're not that bad. They might actually reassure you that these students are mere mortals.

aaronayoung, what decision did you end up making?

I'm close to d-day and leaning towards Geneva (largely to avoid the SAIS mountain of debt). If Geneva is my final choice I would apply for an exchange to Fletcher in my second year.

Have managed to speak to a former MIA student at Geneva who said the faculty is very strong in some areas (int law, pol sci, eco) but weaker in others (dev, hist). As the school is relatively small, there's plenty of opportunity to establish close relationships with professors. It appears as well that you can get around some of the curriculum rigidity by waiving out of one of the core classes as well as going on exchange. Apparently the connections in to the int orgs and NGOs in Geneva are first rate. The course also sets you up well for a PhD later down the line (stats, research methods, thesis) should that interest you.

I would never go for a reference from someone reluctant to do it, no matter the circumstances. If you have no other sound alternatives you should consider, in my view, putting aside your PhD ambition for now and work a bit before preparing a stronger application with other referees. Of course I don't know your whole situation so that's just my 2 cent. I also find it utterly surprising that he argues on the basis of his fame and possible connections with Professors at Harvard or similar institutions, how could a reference have an impact on his own career? It seems insane to me or at least totally paranoid.

I would never go for a reference from someone reluctant to do it, no matter the circumstances. If you have no other sound alternatives you should consider, in my view, putting aside your PhD ambition for now and work a bit before preparing a stronger application with other referees. Of course I don't know your whole situation so that's just my 2 cent. I also find it utterly surprising that he argues on the basis of his fame and possible connections with Professors at Harvard or similar institutions, how could a reference have an impact on his own career? It seems insane to me or at least totally paranoid.

I've been reading posts on this site for the last year and a half or so and I'm surprised no one has started a thread yet for this year's applicants. I saw a few similar posts on the "Am I Competitive" thread but my intention is to start a thread focusing on those of us who are actually taking the plunge and working on submitting applications. We can eye each other's stats and start the support group

I'll start....

Program Applied To (MPA, MPP, IR, etc.): depends on the school, but I've been honing in on programs that have an emphasis on technical skills and allow me to link security, development, and economics. My decision is based on my long-term interests in forced migration and humanitarian policy & research.

Schools Applying/Applied To: Princeton WWS (MPA), Duke Sanford (MPP), JHU SAIS, GWU Elliot (M.A. SPS), Georgetown (torn between between the Security Studies Program and SFS-Global Human Dev., still deciding), Tufts Fletcher = 6 [maybe I should reduce it to 5?]

Schools Admitted To: n/a
Schools Rejected From: n/a
Still Waiting: all

Undergraduate institution: small private liberal arts college
Undergraduate GPA: 3.9
Last 60 hours of Undergraduate GPA (if applicable):
Undergraduate Major: International Relations & German; minors in Poli Sci & Music (Summa Cum Laude, President's Prizes in both IR and German, two honor societies)

GRE Quantitative Score: 157 [77% (meh - does anyone think this is bad?)]
GRE Verbal Score: 167 (98 %)
GRE AW Score: 5.5 (96%)

Age: 24
Years Out of Undergrad (if applicable): 3 years
Years of Work Experience: 2 years professional work experience + internships/volunteer experience
Describe Relevant Work Experience and International Experience: I'm currently a program director in a refugee resettlement agency, and before promotion I worked as a case manager (2yrs+)
I took a gap year right after college to travel and get some international experience. It was sort of hacked together -- I had a legal aid services internship in Kenya (3 months), and volunteered FT at a street kids' rehab center in Colombia (4 1/2 months), and was a a Rotary Cultural Scholar in Germany (3 months). My time in Kenya and Colombia has served me well as I now work with refugees from the Kenyan camps and some Colombians.
Grasping at everything I can here - I spent a summer in Ecuador during college (not study abroad0 and did a brief winter term in China. Also was an ESL volunteer and intern with a refugee resettlement agency during/after college.


Languages: intermediate Spanish and rusty German (was once pretty advanced). Studied Russian as well. I've always been better at the grammar and reading/writing portion of my language studies and becoming fluent has been difficult for me. I'm not a talker.

Quant: Intro to Macro and Micro, Intermed Micro, Int'l Trade & Business, Statistics I. As far as math courses go, the last serious one I took was pre-cal in high school (short-sighted of me, I know). Not sure how much that will hurt me, but at least I have some kind of background in econ.

Strength of SOP (be honest, describe the process, etc): I'm still working on this. I am going to focus on how my work with refugees has prompted me to pursue this degree and how each program will give me the tools I need. Seems pretty straight forward. I also want to emphasize the wealth of management experience I've gained in such a short time (have already navigated handling sudden resignations, hiring processes, funding crises, a State Dept monitoring -- it's been a ride).

Strength of LOR (be honest, describe the process, etc): I'll have one academic reference from my IR professor and one professional reference from my direct supervisor. Still considering who I'm going to ask for the 3rd but am scoping out people I regularly interact with via email/phone/conferences at Home Office...

Other: I am SO stressed about grad school debt. I am really hoping that my management experience and clear professional trajectory will put me in a good position to receive some funding.

I had my Evaluative Interview at Fletcher a few weeks ago. People in the Admissions Office were really friendly and the interview went on swiftly. It took around 45 minutes and my interviewer was a first year MALD student.

Truth is, what they say on their website was really straightforward. All of the questions my interviewer asked me were expected: “what do you do? what is your background? What are your goals? Why Fletcher? What do you think you can add to the program and to your peers?” So I would strongly suggest that you are prepared to answer these questions. For me it was a good time to explain certain things about my background that I felt I wouldn’t be clear in my application. I think it went well. Overall I think it was a positive experience.

Medievalmaniac, I really don't think that the SoP is the right place to explain your coursework, unless it has direct relevance to the narrative you're writing about your development. I just attached a sheet with all my applications called "Undergraduate Coursework in Literature" or "Relevant Coursework," and then divide it up into "English" and "French." Under each category, I had the course number, the actual full title, the prof, and my grade in it. That way they can cross-reference with my transcript if they want, but they have the important info that they'll really be mining my transcript for isolated for them already. And I didn't have to take up precious space in my SoP explaining them.

As for what I did in my SoP that I think worked, I have some perspective on that, having been roundly rejected two years ago and pretty decent success this round (though UVa and U Washington, what is UP?! Still waiting on them). I really think the difference between my two SoPs is the big thing that made the difference, as my numbers and other qualifications (and even most of my writing sample, though I edited it) are the same. So here's what I think made the difference, in three alliterative categories:

1. Focus. Like it or not, they want to be able to categorize you. You can have secondary interests, but they have to be clearly secondary and bear some relation to your main focus. Last time I tried to tell too many stories of my development, and there were too many directions I could go in. This was partially a reflection of where I was at the time, and honestly I think they were right to reject me straight out of undergrad - I needed some time to reflect, to think about what I actually wanted to do in the field. Now that I have, my SoP reflects that clearer sense of direction and purpose.

2. Fit. Everyone tells you this, but it's true. I spent a lot more time really researching profs on the websites, then looking up and scanning through a few key articles, and skimming through the courses they taught. It really gives you a better idea of whether their interests and methodologies ACTUALLY fit yours, or whether it just looks like that on paper. I then tailored my fit paragraph to show how multiple faculty members could support my research interests (this may be English-specific, as in other non-humanitites disciplines you are applying to work with one advisor). Also, if the department has a pet methodology, it's helpful to know that - they'll look for students who fit that bill. Interdisciplinary programs that faculty are involved in and subfield/methodologically-specific colloquia, etc. are also things to look for.

3. Future. This could vary, depending on how much of an academic past you have, but for me what helped was focusing discussing even my past towards showing how it formed a trajectory for the future. I've said in other places around here that the best advice I got for my SoP was that you should think about demonstrating that you are capable of conceiving of a larger project; whether or not you end up doing that project is irrelevant, as you probably won't and the adcomm is well aware of that - the point is that you are CAPABLE of conceiving of a future direction for yourself. I focused on telling a story (i.e. "I'm interested in the relationship to place in Modernist literature") and cutting all details of my past that didn't mesh with that. So by the end I was able to say look! What I discussed doing in paragraphs x (gloss of relevant coursework/advisors, focus), y (challenges and triumphs of writing my thesis and learning theory), and z (teaching, living different places) all feed into the project I'm proposing in this last paragraph (though the project was sufficiently broad so as not to pigeonhole me). I said that I wanted to go in certain different directions, but it was clear that it would be a continuation of my development, not starting anew. They want to see that you are capable of functioning independently as an academic (should be demonstrated by your past and by the fact that you can independently come up with good future directions), but that they have something to offer in terms of guiding you.

Hope that helps!

I just had a professor who sits on admissions committees look over my SOP.

My introduction was talking about how I liked to go to museums as a child and was fascinated by the ancient world. He said that starting out like this is a huge mistake. Obviously if you are applying to study archaeology at the graduate level, it's pretty much assumed that you're fascinated by the ancient world and probably enjoy museums. But so do lots of people. What makes you unique. Attempt to illustrate your passion for the field without really telling some kind of silly story about your childhood. This is also an approach that many people take, and if you really want a strong SOP you'll find a better, more mature, and more creative way to say it.

The next point is, whether or not to talk about the negatives on your application. I wrote mine this year mentioning them extremely briefly and moving on. My thought behind this was to simply focus heavily on all the points that make me a competitive applicant. However, some graduate programs explicitly say that your SOP is the place on your application to mention your negatives and why the committee should overlook them. Obviously, this should not be the focus of your SOP. What the committees are looking for here is growth and improvement above all. Do not make excuses for poor grades, weak GRE scores, or a spotty work record. Do, however, point out how you have grown, how the committee can see improvement, and then highlight the things that make you a fabulous candidate.

The last thing I will mention is also very important, particularly for PhDs. Make sure that you know who you are applying to study under, and what your project is. Demonstrate that you would fit into the department like a glove and that you read Dr. Octopus' latest article on the newest theory, etc. etc. etc. Also, have a concise project in mind. Remember, you're not married to this idea, but you need to show the committee that you can ask the right kind of questions concerning your proposed research and that the project is something that the faculty could help you on based off of their interests and previous work. Do not make this project a carbon-copy of something they have previously accomplished, but a project that complements the research they have already performed. It is also highly advisable, since your job as a PhD student is essentially to perform lots of independent research, to demonstrate that you are capable of performing independent research. Although you want to show that you are a good fit for the program, you do not want to appear as though your adviser will have to hold your hand for the next five years.

Hope that helps! I'm no expert, but these are simply my thoughts on the process.

I'm starting this thread as a chance to help others learn from my mistake(s), and I hope others will be generous with their lessons learned as well.

I JUST thought to look at my transcripts, and realized that two of the classes in which I did the most work in my area of study do not reflect that on the transcript!! They just say "ENGL _____, Literature and Culture" and ENGL ____, British Literature. I didn't even think to talk about the work I did in these classes in my SOP, I focused on my thesis, my conference activity, and what I want to do for my dissertation -so, while I'm sure my professor's letter of recommendation discusses it to some degree, essentially I applied for medieval literature with only one course actually labeled as such on my transcript. My SOP focused very heavily on what I wanted to do in a doctoral program, while (now I see very clearly) only nominally, superficially, expressing why I was qualified to do it. WOW. No WONDER some of the programs I applied to didn't even consider me as a serious applicant!!

So - from my experience, check what your transcript says about the classes you took/the titles they are filed under, and make sure you discuss in detail for about a paragraph the pertinent coursework you did - texts read, etc. etc.

And boy, do I feel dumb!! But at least now I can see where to go in my next round of apps!!

Anyone else got some good, specific pointers?

Hey Lud,

about your first question: I don't think there's any way for you to get credits for an internship in the disciplinary masters. I was also surprised by that, but I think their rationale is that these M.A. prepare for PhD work, so getting the coursework done (remember that most European PhDs don't include a lot of course work, if any at all) is more important. However, many people do internships while there, both during the semester and in the summer, you just can't get any credits. In addition, quite a few people do internships in their fourth semester, when they don't have courses any more and are just writing their theses.

2. There's rules for that: 1. as an interdisciplinary student, you can take classes from the other interdisciplinary programs, 2. as a disciplinary student, you can take 2-4 classes from another (or multiple) disciplines. For out-of program classes: Every student can (currently) take two classes out-of-program, one of them in the Graduate Institute, another one at another academic institution in Geneva (e.g. University of geneva, Academy for Human Rights etc.). All of these work on a "space available" basis, however, which means that you'll only be allowed to take them if there's space, i.e. you don't get priority. At the moment, there's not much flexibility (i.e. you can't take both classes at the Institute), but the student association is actually working on changing this at the moment.

Regarding flexibility: I find the institute to be super rigid in administration questions, much more so than my undergrad.

Hey. I'm a current student in the IR/PS program, and would be happy to answer questions.
I just read through your posts and have a couple of things to say:

1. disciplinary vs. interdisciplinary: In general, the disciplinary courses are more work, more rigorous and have smaller classes, esp. at the beginning. They're also a lot more theoretical, though. I personally changed from MIA to IR/PS, because I probably want to do a PhD afterwards, which can be harder for MIA. At the same time, though, grades are easier in the MIA, and ppl from interdisciplinary programs do go on to do a PhD, although they generally need a B.A. in the same discipline then. Otherwise, there've been some major changes to the MIA and MDev curriculum, which the students were not informed of prior, thus ppl like me applied to different programs than what we're actually getting, which was a bad move on the administration's part. The current programs are up-to-date and unlikely to change drastically anytime soon. The interdisciplinary programs are the two biggest programs, each having about 70 students. That makes core courses really big as well.
However, if you're not interested in doing a PhD, the MIA and MDev will allow you to do internships on the side, and in general take less of your time than the disciplinary programs. IMO, both tracks have their own merits and shortcomings, and although there is a general snobbery between interdisciplinary and disciplinary, you should choose your program based on your own goals. What some people have complained about with the MIA is that it starts off really basic, so your courses in the first semester really are introductory, which can be frustrating if you have a background in the social sciences, which some people do not.

2. Non-lawyers in IL: I know of a couple of people in International Law that have an International Relations B.A., although focusing on international law, with a B.A. thesis in law, so it's possible, but you do really need to have a background in law.

3. Changing after being admitted: It's actually quite easy to change after being admitted, provided you have the necessary background for the disciplinary masters. In general, more ppl switch from interdisciplinary to disciplinary, although switches in all direction are possible. The department head generally decides based on your credentials! I've heard of some people that were transferred from MIA to history when applying, so these things happen, even if there's no note in your SOP.

Right, that's it for now. Hope I adressed some of your concerns and don't hesitate to ask!

Toni

Hello!

I have sent my application for the graduate institute last week which should be examined before December according to the schedule they posted. I am looking forward to hearing from them even though I am unsure to be admitted -I applied for the MIA by the way.

I thought of creating this thread for the 2013 round of applications so as to share our remarks here.

Has anyone else already sent his application?

Something I will be sure to tell all future applicants to grad schools overseas is to get used to weeks of restless nights. After all, because of the time difference all the action happens while you're sleeping and at any moment (whether it's midnight or 4 AM) you could get life-altering news in your inbox. I can't tell you how many times in the last few weeks I've involuntarily gotten up around 3 AM only to check my inbox before going back to sleep again

I don't work in admissions or anything, but I do remember when I was applying that they told me that the academic background was more important than the professional background when they make admissions decisions. They advised me to have all of my recommendations come from professors because of this. You sound like you'd be a great applicant - I certainly don't speak four languages (well, English + have studied three other languages, but speak them all at varying levels of mediocrity)

Put in the specific context of Government Affairs I see that my comments are not applicable. I didn't realize what topic the thread was under, I just clicked and started writing. Think before you type.

There seem to be a lot of threads asking the same thing popping up lately and I figured it might make sense to make an overall guide thread and then those who feel their answers still haven’t been adequately answered can post below for an idea of what their chances are. Here is a brief rundown of factors affecting your likelihood of getting into top-tier and well respected programs. If you fall below par in any one of these factors you can bump it up by being stellar in one of the others. I'll add to this if others point out other things I've left out.

School requirements:
Your first stop should be the school admissions website – this will tell you what prerequisites you need, give you an idea of GRE and GPA requirements and what work experience is expected (if any)

GPA:
From what I’ve seen/read over the years any GPA over 3.4 and you should be competitive. That’s not to say if your GPA is lower than 3.4 you’ll have no chance, but if you have a GPA above 3.4 you should be in good shape.

GRE score:
GRE scores seem to be most important for schools with demanding quantitative programs and for securing the top financial aid. Most schools will state the average GRE scores for their incoming classes on their website – use these to see how competitive you are. By and large you should be competitive if you score over 650 on verbal and quantitative and over 4.0 on the AWA. For the top schools over 700 seems to be closer to the mark.

Work experience:
For most programs it will be expected that you have at least 1-2 years of relevant experience in your field. This can be lowered a little if you have other pseudo-relevant work experience (management in the for-profit sector etc.) but you should have shown some level of professional interest in the area you hope to study at grad school. Applicants coming straight out of undergrad may find it very hard to get into the programs aimed more at junior/mid-career professionals such as Johns Hopkins SAIS and Princeton’s WWS.

Language skills:
For a lot of programs being able to speak a second language is a must, while for others it is just a very good selling point. If you can show experience working in a foreign language this will show adaptability and will endear schools looking to enrol a diverse group of applicants.

Quantitative requirements:
A lot of schools will want you to show experience in micro/macroeconomics and some maths/statistics courses. You can fullfil these through undergrad classes or by taking courses at a community college/diploma program.

Overseas experience (work, study and teaching):
Work overseas and study abroad are also viewed extremely favourably by admissions committees and if you have taught English abroad, worked in the Peace Corps or otherwise gained experience living in a developing country this will really strengthen your application. It also shows you to be a go-getter, and that you can bring this outside experience to grad school study.

Statement of Purpose:
This is where it all comes together. This is your chance to impress the admission committee and show how your personal 'arc' has brought you to this point - being the perfect addition to their grad school. This more than any other part of your application will determine how admit committees view you as an applicant and it's also one of the only application variables that's completely under your control. Having a cohesive narrative that brings together life experience, past academic history and professional experience is a must. It also gives you a great chance to showcase your writing style - so make sure no grammar/spelling mistakes make it into your final revision.

Great list of SOP pitfalls

If your profile matches at least 3 or 4 of the criteria listed above then you are competitive to apply to an MPA/MPP/IR program.

What is most important about any grad school application is showing fit – that is how your profile matches the speciality of that school and its program. If you can’t articulate compelling reasons why you are a good match for them and vice versa, question whether you should be applying to that program.


A note on applying to top schools:

It is worth noting that nobody here can tell you what your chances of getting into a top program (Harvard, Princeton, Georgetown etc.) because getting into a top program requires a certain amount of luck as well as a great profile. Some people get offers from Harvard with a 2.9 GPA, but also happen to have singlehandedly retaken an allied command post in the Korengal valley. It’s down to who reads your application and what they happen to be looking for with the current application cycle.

Spend time improving the elements of your application that you can (GRE, work experience, languages) and don’t waste time freaking out about the things you can’t change (GPA).

If you’ve read all of the above and really still can’t tell if your application is competitive, post your profile below.

For those interested, there's a FB group for the incoming class of 2012:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/334176453293607/.

Join!!!