MPP vs IR

[Minerva473]

The whole time I've been applying to graduate programs I've been quite indecisive about what I wanted and I think it's because I'm not entirely clear on the benefits of doing an MPP versus an IR degree. Lots of MPPs (Harvard, UChicago Harris, GPPI) have international concentration options, so for me it's not necessarily a domestic/international issue. I'm interested in international development, by the way. In particular I'm looking at one MPP program (GPPI) that requires 3 full courses in statistical analysis and a thesis that incorporates quantitative methods, versus IR degrees that have quantitative components but don't seem as focused on them. To what extent is this level of quantitative background useful for an international development career?

Any other comments on the great MPP - IR divide are welcome. Many people have said the degrees are very different and attract different types of people, but I think it would be interesting to hear people's takes on the specifics of these differences.

Edited March 11, 2010 by Minerva473

[HOUBMA]

I am applying to the M.A. in Global Development Policy at Boston University. It combines International Relations and Public Policy. In my case, this program is perfect!

[tammy-san]

Okay. I'll attempt to answer this question....

I majored in international relations for undergrad, and now I am looking to go to grad school for a MPP/MPA.

The main difference, as far as I can tell, is that IR is theory-centric (it's a concentration within political science). Hence, less of the quantitative stuff. Not to say that political scientists do not engage in the quantitative stuff (they do!), but it's not the back-bone of the discipline. One of my favorite IR professors sum it up this way: IR people are concerned with these two main questions: 1) How does one model the international system 2) Based on the model, how will a state act?

So, for example, suppose an IR student wanted to study the question of humanitarian intervention in a genocidal conflict. He/she would argue whether or not a state will intervene based on both statistical evidence and theoritical/philosophical reasoning (i.e I believe state's act in their own self interests, therefore a state will not intervene if it is not in it's self-interest; to uphold my argument, here is the statistical evidence to prove my point: a higher percentage of states will not intervene. IR is about modeling, predicting how a state will act.

A policy student, however, has a particular agenda. If you are interested in international development, I would lean more towards public policy/affairs. Policy is less about describing the world, and more about looking for solutions to particular problems, and, in that sense, is more "practical". (i.e. here is some data/evidence I have collected. Based on analyzing this data, I believe that in order to fix the problem of genocidal conflict, one must reduce the number of guns sold to country x. Therefore, my policy prescription is to decrease the level of military aid to country X) IR is concerned with how do countries act; Policy is focused on how should a country act

Not to say that the two are mutually exclusive, and obviously the two inform each other. Like the previous poster mentioned, it's good to have both!

And yes, IR students tend to be more on the academic track, while policy students tend to be on the "job" track.

Hope this helps.

Edited March 11, 2010 by tammy-san

[tammy-san]

I should add, that my description of IR and policy studies is VERY simplified. But I just wanted to give you a generalized idea!!!

[Minerva473]

Okay. I'll attempt to answer this question....

I majored in international relations for undergrad, and now I am looking to go to grad school for a MPP/MPA.

The main difference, as far as I can tell, is that IR is theory-centric (it's a concentration within political science). Hence, less of the quantitative stuff. Not to say that political scientists do not engage in the quantitative stuff (they do!), but it's not the back-bone of the discipline. One of my favorite IR professors sum it up this way: IR people are concerned with these two main questions: 1) How does one model the international system 2) Based on the model, how will a state act?

So, for example, suppose an IR student wanted to study the question of humanitarian intervention in a genocidal conflict. He/she would argue whether or not a state will intervene based on both statistical evidence and theoritical/philosophical reasoning (i.e I believe state's act in their own self interests, therefore a state will not intervene if it is not in it's self-interest; to uphold my argument, here is the statistical evidence to prove my point: a higher percentage of states will not intervene. IR is about modeling, predicting how a state will act.

A policy student, however, has a particular agenda. If you are interested in international development, I would lean more towards public policy/affairs. Policy is less about describing the world, and more about looking for solutions to particular problems, and, in that sense, is more "practical". (i.e. here is some data/evidence I have collected. Based on analyzing this data, I believe that in order to fix the problem of genocidal conflict, one must reduce the number of guns sold to country x. Therefore, my policy prescription is to decrease the level of military aid to country X) IR is concerned with how do countries act; Policy is focused on how should a country act

Not to say that the two are mutually exclusive, and obviously the two inform each other. Like the previous poster mentioned, it's good to have both!

And yes, IR students tend to be more on the academic track, while policy students tend to be on the "job" track.

Hope this helps.

This is very helpful indeed. Both sound interesting but you've pretty much summed up why my instinct was to look into MPP programs when I started to think about applying. I want something really practical, though I do appreciate the value of the theory. Looking at many of the graduate IR degrees like Fletcher's and SAIS, the concentration/elective classes they offer do seem quite practical but the required courses are about the theory you're talking about (I notice however that there are fewer required classes for IR degrees than for MPPs).

[tammy-san]

This is very helpful indeed. Both sound interesting but you've pretty much summed up why my instinct was to look into MPP programs when I started to think about applying. I want something really practical, though I do appreciate the value of the theory. Looking at many of the graduate IR degrees like Fletcher's and SAIS, the concentration/elective classes they offer do seem quite practical but the required courses are about the theory you're talking about (I notice however that there are fewer required classes for IR degrees than for MPPs).

The reason why there are less IR required classes is because once you have a solid foundation in the theory, you then apply them to various different topics of your choosing, and most IR students eventually specialize in a specific topic. For an MPP degree, you are trying to acquire a specific skill set, so most programs require you to learn x, y, and z first, before you take electives.

That's why there are some people who, when shopping around for a MPP program, want a heavily quantitative course load. They feel the more stats/econ you have, the better. I don't necessarily feel that way. I too am interested in international development. However, my two years as a Peace Corps volunteer in West Africa made me question what those economists at the World Bank were smoking when they made up some of the most unfruitful development/aid policies ever!!!!!! Therefore, statistical analysis can only get you so far...

But, that's a whole other issue....

Edited March 11, 2010 by tammy-san

[DCA-John]

Honestly, neither, unless it's specifically development focused.

I've been working in development for 6 years now (financial services and agriculture). I've got an MBA from a second-tier school and am waiting to hear back from Princeton on their mid-career MPP and Harvard for the MPA-ID

I'd recommend reading this: http://chrisblattman.com/2008/03/01/which-is-for-you-mpa-mpaid-or-phd/

There are three major career tracks in development:

- DC-based policy positions at places like the World Bank where you sit and tell people 3,000 miles away what to do

- DC-based or field-based positions where you serve as a technical expert

- Field-based positions where you manage projects

For the first sort of position, an Econ Phd is almost a prerequisite. the MPA-ID is a close substitute, but at the higher levels, everyone is an economist.

For the second type of position, you're better off getting a masters in a functional area and getting as much experience as possible working in developing countries and getting fluent in a language or two (at least 3 on the FSI scale). So, for example, I have an MBA in international finance. Other relevant degrees: MS in civil engineering, MS in agricultural economics or ag science, MA in public health, MD, JD (with a focus on international law or trade law). Alternately, a strong background in IT or GIS would take you a long way

For the third type of position, join the peace corps or get a grunt position at someplace like DAI or Chemonics.

[Putoots]

In response to Minerva, I am in a very similar position. (Very conflicted.)

Coming from a Peace and Conflict Studies background at Cal (a subset of the International & Area Studies Department), I figured I would do International Relations or something like that. My number one choice was obviously SIPA's MIA, with UCSD and other programs a distant second.

However, having worked for a large local public organization for three years, I have really become interested in solution-finding and analysis-type stuff. My area of interest is still American foreign policy (focused on humanitarian aid and development), but I am definitely shifting away from approaching this subject from a purely academic standpoint.

Having said that, since my short-term goal is to find a research/think tank position, I want to make sure I have a solid theoretical and multi-disciplinary background. The Heinz School at CMU seems a little thin in international policy, despite the fact that it is really strong in quantitative analysis, whereas UCLA, KSG, and the Ford School seem to have a pretty good research foundation in that area.

I was also admitted to the University of Chicago's M.A. in International Relations -- a one-year program that should give me that multi-disciplinary background I want before I fully commit to public policy. Of course, getting an M.A. and an M.P.P. seems like overkill and (possibly) a waste of money. Maybe the best bet is to try to find a public policy school with a strong research foundation in your area of concentration? That is the direction I'm heading...

Edited March 11, 2010 by Putoots

[Minerva473]

Honestly, neither, unless it's specifically development focused.

I've been working in development for 6 years now (financial services and agriculture). I've got an MBA from a second-tier school and am waiting to hear back from Princeton on their mid-career MPP and Harvard for the MPA-ID

I'd recommend reading this: http://chrisblattman...a-mpaid-or-phd/

There are three major career tracks in development:

- DC-based policy positions at places like the World Bank where you sit and tell people 3,000 miles away what to do

- DC-based or field-based positions where you serve as a technical expert

- Field-based positions where you manage projects

For the first sort of position, an Econ Phd is almost a prerequisite. the MPA-ID is a close substitute, but at the higher levels, everyone is an economist.

For the second type of position, you're better off getting a masters in a functional area and getting as much experience as possible working in developing countries and getting fluent in a language or two (at least 3 on the FSI scale). So, for example, I have an MBA in international finance. Other relevant degrees: MS in civil engineering, MS in agricultural economics or ag science, MA in public health, MD, JD (with a focus on international law or trade law). Alternately, a strong background in IT or GIS would take you a long way

For the third type of position, join the peace corps or get a grunt position at someplace like DAI or Chemonics.

Interesting -- I had been thinking that this might be the case and have done a lot of questioning as to the benefits of MPPs / MA-IRs. I know how competitive the Young Professionals Program at the World Bank is, with floods of Ph.D.s banging at the doors for a position, and I'm not even sure that I want to "tell people 3,000 miles away what to do". Good food for thought -- thanks!

[Leica]

I'm not sure I agree with the distinction tammy-san makes. I'm finishing up an MAIR at American right now and I think I've written a grand total of three research papers (with only one on state behavior) - the rest have been policy memos/briefs/white papers/briefing books, etc, with papers in quantitative methods, advanced analytical methods and so forth. I can't speak for all programs, obviously, but most MAIRs are very policy-oriented with a solid practical component, especially those in DC, though academic-minded students have the option of choosing courses that would prepare them for a PhD as opposed to, say, a policy analyst job. MAIRs (or, more specifically, MAIDs) can have a heavy quantitative component, too, especially if you're interested in development economics and things of that sort. And while theory is unavoidable, my program only requires one theory class, and I've heard many DC schools are the same way.

And yes, IR students tend to be more on the academic track, while policy students tend to be on the "job" track.

I'd disagree with this as well. Very few of my classmates are on the academic track - I can't think of a single one, actually (and we're a big school), though I'm sure they exist.

[tammy-san]

I'm not sure I agree with the distinction tammy-san makes. I'm finishing up an MAIR at American right now and I think I've written a grand total of three research papers (with only one on state behavior) - the rest have been policy memos/briefs/white papers/briefing books, etc, with papers in quantitative methods, advanced analytical methods and so forth. I can't speak for all programs, obviously, but most MAIRs are very policy-oriented with a solid practical component, especially those in DC, though academic-minded students have the option of choosing courses that would prepare them for a PhD as opposed to, say, a policy analyst job. MAIRs (or, more specifically, MAIDs) can have a heavy quantitative component, too, especially if you're interested in development economics and things of that sort. And while theory is unavoidable, my program only requires one theory class, and I've heard many DC schools are the same way.

I'd disagree with this as well. Very few of my classmates are on the academic track - I can't think of a single one, actually (and we're a big school), though I'm sure they exist.

Hmmmmmm. Well, what I was trying to do was to draw a distinction between the two disciplines for some clarification. As for actually programs...yes, most terminal MA IR programs and MA IDs are more of a hybrid of not only policy and political science, but econ and a whole host of other disciplines as well. These days, many schools have MA IRs that are designed very much like a professional program, rather than actual Master's of Arts--in the traditional sense.

Edited March 12, 2010 by tammy-san

[Leica]

Hmmmmmm. Well, what I was trying to do was to draw a distinction between the two disciplines for some clarification. As for actually programs...yes, most terminal MA IR programs and MA IDs are more of a hybrid of not only policy and political science, but econ and a whole host of other disciplines as well. These days, many schools have MA IRs that are designed very much like a professional program, rather than actual Master's of Arts--in the traditional sense.

True, but the "discipline" of IR is also kind of tough to define because there are just so many different things going on. Your distinction is probably entirely applicable when one considers PhD programs, but MAs are definitely a different beast. That said, I do think the distinction between MAIRs and MPPs with an IR concentration is kind of arbitrary and perhaps sometimes defined by university politics above all else.

[tammy-san]

True, but the "discipline" of IR is also kind of tough to define because there are just so many different things going on. Your distinction is probably entirely applicable when one considers PhD programs, but MAs are definitely a different beast. That said, I do think the distinction between MAIRs and MPPs with an IR concentration is kind of arbitrary and perhaps sometimes defined by university politics above all else.

Now we're just splitting hairs.

[Minerva473]

True, but the "discipline" of IR is also kind of tough to define because there are just so many different things going on. Your distinction is probably entirely applicable when one considers PhD programs, but MAs are definitely a different beast. That said, I do think the distinction between MAIRs and MPPs with an IR concentration is kind of arbitrary and perhaps sometimes defined by university politics above all else.

Having read about it more this does seem to be the case. The degrees do seem different, but it sounds like neither degree (regardless of how quantitative it is) is really going to train you to take on a super technical position in international development (except for the MPA-ID). IR degrees tend to be more flexible, with more electives, but if you want to take the MPP stats / management courses anyway (and if the MPP has an international concentration) then maybe the difference isn't that important.

Edited March 12, 2010 by Minerva473

[RunnINcircles]

Oh goodness I'm in your boat with all of this Minerva- I am debating MPP and IR programs- and I'm really confused now! I've only been out of undergrad since last June so that's definitely not helping with the confusion for me (lack of work experience). I'm basically debating between Berkeley (MPP) vs. Johns Hopkins SAIS (MA in IR) right now...Berkeley's GSPP is really quant-focused which was expected- I almost feel unprepared for it since I only took intro micro & intro macro during my undergrad- I would love to have that statistical and quantitative training though because it seems like a great skill to have when going into the workplace... getting an MA in IR appeals to me because I want to use my language skills and I loved the int'l studies courses I took for my major- my problem is basically that my interests are too wide and maybe that was because of my background in IR- it encourages multidisciplinary approaches and in the process I liked too many things I would love to work at a think tank or research institute either for something internationally focused or even housing/poverty-focused topics... buuuut I want to settle down in the Midwest in the end- I'm just wondering if an MPP is more suited to doing that vs. an MA in IR? You would think that there would be more IR jobs outside of DC but it really doesn't seem to be the case in the midwest...

[Minerva473]

Oh goodness I'm in your boat with all of this Minerva- I am debating MPP and IR programs- and I'm really confused now! I've only been out of undergrad since last June so that's definitely not helping with the confusion for me (lack of work experience). I'm basically debating between Berkeley (MPP) vs. Johns Hopkins SAIS (MA in IR) right now...Berkeley's GSPP is really quant-focused which was expected- I almost feel unprepared for it since I only took intro micro & intro macro during my undergrad- I would love to have that statistical and quantitative training though because it seems like a great skill to have when going into the workplace... getting an MA in IR appeals to me because I want to use my language skills and I loved the int'l studies courses I took for my major- my problem is basically that my interests are too wide and maybe that was because of my background in IR- it encourages multidisciplinary approaches and in the process I liked too many things I would love to work at a think tank or research institute either for something internationally focused or even housing/poverty-focused topics... buuuut I want to settle down in the Midwest in the end- I'm just wondering if an MPP is more suited to doing that vs. an MA in IR? You would think that there would be more IR jobs outside of DC but it really doesn't seem to be the case in the midwest...

I do know how you feel! Choosing is quite stressful but it helps to remember that both Berkeley and SAIS are really excellent and you'll probably have a great experience at either one. I suspect if you do the MA in IR and you want to really use those IR skills you'll likely need to spend some time abroad, and some time in New York and/or DC. Perhaps if you want to later go the academic route, you could get a Ph.D. and get a job in a university in the Midwest. There may be some opportunities in Chicago as well. Also, I think state governments often have offices to support international trade. But in general, from what I can see, the Midwest is probably not the place to start or develop an exciting career in IR.

[RunnINcircles]

I do know how you feel! Choosing is quite stressful but it helps to remember that both Berkeley and SAIS are really excellent and you'll probably have a great experience at either one. I suspect if you do the MA in IR and you want to really use those IR skills you'll likely need to spend some time abroad, and some time in New York and/or DC. Perhaps if you want to later go the academic route, you could get a Ph.D. and get a job in a university in the Midwest. There may be some opportunities in Chicago as well. Also, I think state governments often have offices to support international trade. But in general, from what I can see, the Midwest is probably not the place to start or develop an exciting career in IR.

Thanks Ya I'm really honored to have gotten into these programs- glad that spending way too much time on apps and stuff worked out! But that's a good point- and if I was in DC I would have the opportunity to network and get a few of those years behind me... I guess I just really need to figure out where I would go with the MPP if that's the route I choose to take... you said you're trying to do something in international development? Where are you aiming to work?

[Minerva473]

Thanks Ya I'm really honored to have gotten into these programs- glad that spending way too much time on apps and stuff worked out! But that's a good point- and if I was in DC I would have the opportunity to network and get a few of those years behind me... I guess I just really need to figure out where I would go with the MPP if that's the route I choose to take... you said you're trying to do something in international development? Where are you aiming to work?

Possibly international development. I have many qualms about this, but the fact that I'm originally from a developing country and academically am very, very interested in development issues makes me want to take this route. I grew up outside of DC so having a job based there would be nice, though I'd be interested in living abroad as well. I'm thinking right now seriously about choosing the joint MPA MAIR degree at the Maxwell School (Syracuse), but am also considering Fletcher. I really like the practical focus of the Maxwell programs and I think they'll prepare me to be a great project manager (though I'm not sure what kinds of projects I'd like to manage).

When I was choosing where to apply I was a little confused about project management vs policy analysis, but thought I'd probably be more interested in policy analysis as I'm quite an analytical person. Due mostly to ignorance on my part I did not apply to Berkeley or UChicago, which seem to be the most focused on this. But now I realize that hard policy analysis is not for me -in my work I've been the most happy when I've been coordinating a project, which still requires strategic and analytical thinking as well as organization, rather than 100% sitting in front of a computer screen and analyzing things. I think Maxwell will make me a lot better at this, and in this sense it has been important for me to know what I want. But I don't KNOW exactly what kind of job I want to get. I think there's also an element of doing a degree to figure things out. You can't always test things out in a professional setting because your options are limited to what you can get. When you're studying you get exposed to new things and hopefully can see how you can get to where you want career-wise.

Anyway I hope this makes some sort of sense. I'm still trying to work it all out in my head!

[RunnINcircles]

Possibly international development. I have many qualms about this, but the fact that I'm originally from a developing country and academically am very, very interested in development issues makes me want to take this route. I grew up outside of DC so having a job based there would be nice, though I'd be interested in living abroad as well. I'm thinking right now seriously about choosing the joint MPA MAIR degree at the Maxwell School (Syracuse), but am also considering Fletcher. I really like the practical focus of the Maxwell programs and I think they'll prepare me to be a great project manager (though I'm not sure what kinds of projects I'd like to manage).

When I was choosing where to apply I was a little confused about project management vs policy analysis, but thought I'd probably be more interested in policy analysis as I'm quite an analytical person. Due mostly to ignorance on my part I did not apply to Berkeley or UChicago, which seem to be the most focused on this. But now I realize that hard policy analysis is not for me -in my work I've been the most happy when I've been coordinating a project, which still requires strategic and analytical thinking as well as organization, rather than 100% sitting in front of a computer screen and analyzing things. I think Maxwell will make me a lot better at this, and in this sense it has been important for me to know what I want. But I don't KNOW exactly what kind of job I want to get. I think there's also an element of doing a degree to figure things out. You can't always test things out in a professional setting because your options are limited to what you can get. When you're studying you get exposed to new things and hopefully can see how you can get to where you want career-wise.

Anyway I hope this makes some sort of sense. I'm still trying to work it all out in my head!

haha I completely understand- it really helps to write it out and talk it through though right? I'm sure whichever you go to will help you with your career goals but it definitely is a big decision to make. It'd be nice for someone to be able to make that decision for us haha

That's why I'm stuck between the MPP vs. MAIR debate because I could use the MPP to manage at nonprof or something to that effect but I'm still unsure if that's what I want to do- I think in the end I do want to work at a research institute or nonprofit but I just need to figure out in what respect I'd like to do that... boooo hard decisions that have to be made against a ticking clock haha

[stilesg57]

I wouldn't pour too much brain power into trying to decipher the minutiae. The Masters level is definitely a different animal than the undergrad level for both of them.

The alumni base and how the schools position their programs is very important of course, but from my experience working with people in Beijing with IR degrees (primarily SAIS people) and comparing it to the MPP program here at Duke I'd say that an IR degree with a policy focus and an MPP with an international focus are often po-tay-to / po-tah-to. I'd certainly consider both kinds of programs if you want to do international policy work.

[socaljournalist]

I agree. For the most part, the point is simply to obtain a master's degree from a prestigious school, so employers understand that we're qualified for certain jobs. The employer list for SIPA at Columbia (MIA) vs. Berkeley's Goldman School (MPP) is virtually the same, so I don't think it matters that much. If you work hard and cultivate a specialty, you can have whatever career you want.

I wouldn't pour too much brain power into trying to decipher the minutiae. The Masters level is definitely a different animal than the undergrad level for both of them.

The alumni base and how the schools position their programs is very important of course, but from my experience working with people in Beijing with IR degrees (primarily SAIS people) and comparing it to the MPP program here at Duke I'd say that an IR degree with a policy focus and an MPP with an international focus are often po-tay-to / po-tah-to. I'd certainly consider both kinds of programs if you want to do international policy work.

[socaljournalist]

But one argument for MPP/MPA over IR is the median salaries - that I've seen - tend to be higher for the former. Harvard boasts a median salary of $100k for private sector MPP graduates. On the other hand, Columbia's MIA grads attain a median salary of $55k.

I agree. For the most part, the point is simply to obtain a master's degree from a prestigious school, so employers understand that we're qualified for certain jobs. The employer list for SIPA at Columbia (MIA) vs. Berkeley's Goldman School (MPP) is virtually the same, so I don't think it matters that much. If you work hard and cultivate a specialty, you can have whatever career you want.