MPP Programs with little/no experience required?

[stormageddon]

I'm a rising senior and just decided I want to do an MPP program. I've heard that a lot of programs require/strongly prefer a few years of full-time policy-related work experience, but I was wondering if you guys could point me to programs that don't care so much about it? If anyone has gotten accepted to any programs without relevant work experience, I'd love to hear about it.

I'm in the beginning stages of my search, so all I know for sure is that I really want to focus on social policy (more specifically, I'm very interested in poverty alleviation and family policy). I'd also prefer to go somewhere with as cold of weather as possible (especially in the summer - anything over 75 feels pretty miserable to me), but I definitely wouldn't let that keep me from going to an awesome school if it also happens to be somewhere with super hot weather.

Anyway, I have a 4.0 GPA from a public state university in Child Development and Family Relations. I have pretty much all my major courses and gen eds done now, though, so I'm going to be tacking on an economics minor by the time I graduate. I'm also expecting to do well on my GRE (knock on wood) - I'm planning to study for it pretty extensively and I'm a decent test taker. I should be able to get at least a couple strong letters of recommendation as well.

Anyway, as for experience: I did an Alternative Breaks trip one year that focused on the homeless population, and I'm planning on doing it again this year if I can. I also studied abroad a semester in China. For work experience, I've worked in my school's library, tutored Calculus through my schools Tutoring program, tutored/helped in the homework room in an afterschool program with younger kids, am currently a peer mentor for my school's TRIO center, did a couple months as an administrative assistant in the same department, and am going to do more admin-type stuff this year back in the tutoring department. I'm also planning on taking a gap year before starting a master's program and will be doing a yearlong internship where I'll basically be a live-in houseparent/foster parent (along with a couple other interns) for 4-5 abused/neglected kids at a time between the ages of 0 and 6. So I will have some semi-pertinent work experience when I apply to different places, but I won't have any official policy-related internships or jobs or anything.

If anyone has any recommendations for which schools I might want to take a look at, I'd really appreciate it!

[yoh_rrg]

I think the best way to find the answer to this question would be to look back through the results threads on this forum. People usually post their years out of undergrad and where they were accepted. Some that come to mind as taking applicants without real work experience would be Harris, Sanford, SIPA, Wagner, Heinz, and Georgetown. I'm sure there are others-- in fact I know of someone who was accepted to WWS straight from undergrad but I would say that is against the norm. The issue of course is whether funding is important to you at all. Based on threads here, it seems the students without experience receive smaller funding packages, and a lot of the programs are awfully expensive to be taking out loans for. I at least am really glad I took several years to work (and save up money!) so I can take on no debt and feel confident that I am getting what I want out of my degree. I know that's probably not what you want to hear, so I'll cut myself off and let other people who can really answer your question reply. In the meantime, I highly recommend digging through the results threads as a starting point.

[ExponentialDecay]

Aside from Princeton, all policy schools routinely take people straight from undergrad (and stiff them with the full bill, maybe with a tenner knocked off). That said, what you propose is a supremely bad idea in every way. There is no good reason to go to professional school out of undergrad. You won't have the work experience, direction, and probably maturity to make anything more of the experience than just an extension of college. A 6 figure degree shouldn't be a box to tick - especially since you only do it once. At least you're doing a year-long internship, but you should also consider doing another 2 or 3 years in a full-time job, even cursorily relevant to policy. It's never too late to go to grad school, but it is frequently too early.

[stormageddon]

Thanks you guys for being honest. I'm really interested in doing research (esp. dealing with federal/state policies that affect families in or on the brink of poverty) and have debated between doing an MPP with a focus on family/poverty or getting a a phd in human development or family studies with a focus on policy. Any thoughts on doing the latter? Maybe that would be a better fit.

Edited July 18, 2018 by stormageddon

[stormageddon]

.

Edited July 18, 2018 by stormageddon

[ExponentialDecay]

If you want to do research, an MPP is not a good fit at all. A PhD is viable, though I don't know your area well enough to tell you what it should be in.

That said, even though you can do a PhD out of UG, if you envision interacting substantially with the policy world in order to execute your projects, do yourself a favor and take a year or two to see how it actually works first. It'll make you a more effective researcher and, from a lifestyle perspective, it'll let you know if you can actually stand to exist in the policy world long enough to build a career. You don't want to be the idiot who quits to do marketing after investing 5 years into a degree.

[MaxwellAlum]

I agree with ExponentialDecay.  I have an MPA and work in a research/policy analysis job in government, but the type of research I do is really different from that which a PhD in an academic position might do.  I don't conduct or analyze the results of robust, random sample surveys and am not qualified to do so.  I don't run regressions because, while my MPA gave me enough stats to know how to run a regression, it certainly wasn't at the level you see in academic papers.  Mostly my work involves interviewing government officials, describing government programs and budgets, and analyzing data but at a very descriptive level, which is not always uncomplicated but is certainly quite different from what an academic would do.  I feel lucky to be able to do this type of work without having spent years and years in grad school or writing a dissertation ::shudder:: but I don't consider the work I do to be equivalent to the type of work academics do.  Some of my colleagues do have PhDs, which while not a requirement definitely confer a good amount of credibility in this field.

I'm not saying this to knock MPAs/ MPPs, but to say that they don't really prepare you to do hard research, and I don't think they help much if the ultimate goal is a PhD.

I know a couple of people who went to grad school straight out of undergrad and are doing great.  But an equal number ended up making career changes that involved getting another grad degree.  It's so much better to go into grad school knowing what you want.  For me, the best way to figure that out was to get full time and paid work experience.

 

 

 

Edited July 20, 2018 by MaxwellAlum
Initial post incomplete

[chocolatte_]

I'll second what other posters have said: you need to get more experience first, not only as an application booster, but to give you more of an idea of what policy work can involve. You want to go into an MPP or similar with a set idea or goal in mind. Doesn't matter if you change your mind later. But make it specific.

Have you ever attended a neighborhood association meeting? Volunteered to be a board member for your local library or for a local homeless shelter? These positions are open to any interested community members, and they give you experience with being in a room and watching people try to agree on something - anything - and then actually follow through on it and get it done. If you want to go into "poverty alleviation and family policy," it'll help you tremendously to know where the problems are. You're already going to get some sense of problems through the fostering experience so that's a good start.

Does your city have funding for a homeless healthcare program but nowhere to build facilities because of all the NIMBYs? Why is your town struggling to enroll kids in its low cost preschool program to the extent they want to cancel it: is it lack of awareness? Belief that certain kids don't qualify?  What are the issues and what's holding up progress?

The more you see this stuff in action, the more your ideas will solidify. Plenty of programs (MPP, MSW, etc.) are happy to take the money from recent college grads with no particular sense of what they want to do, but is that going to give you the best experience for your considerable financial layout?

[chocolatte_]

8 hours ago, MaxwellAlum said:

I'm not saying this to knock MPAs/ MPPs, but to say that they don't really prepare you to do hard research, and I don't think they help much if the ultimate goal is a PhD.

What's your take on MPA programs with a stats or quant focus? I've heard people say things to the effect that MPAs with these focuses are in demand because of the skill set they give, but it sounds as though you're saying their skill set either wouldn't be sufficient, or that they won't land jobs where this kind of work would be necessary as it's going to fall to an academic instead.

(I'm not particularly interested in a stats focus myself, I'm just curious about whether this might be a new trend to try to make the MPA more appealing or relevant).

[MaxwellAlum]

On 7/20/2018 at 3:05 PM, chocolatte_ said:

What's your take on MPA programs with a stats or quant focus? I've heard people say things to the effect that MPAs with these focuses are in demand because of the skill set they give, but it sounds as though you're saying their skill set either wouldn't be sufficient, or that they won't land jobs where this kind of work would be necessary as it's going to fall to an academic instead.

(I'm not particularly interested in a stats focus myself, I'm just curious about whether this might be a new trend to try to make the MPA more appealing or relevant).

I'm not against more quant in MPA programs nor do I think it is useless.  The more quant you have the better consumer of research you can be.  That's important for any policy job. To what extent you can use the skills you learn in those programs to conduct rigorous impact evaluations or design surveys I don't know.  All I can say is that in my experience MPAs and MPPs are not research focused degrees and if hard research is your goal, a PhD will get you much farther skills-wise and in terms of credibility on the job market IMO.

[chocolatte_]

14 hours ago, MaxwellAlum said:

I'm not against more quant in MPA programs nor do I think it is useless.  The more quant you have the better consumer of research you can be.  That's important for any policy job. To what extent you can use the skills you learn in those programs to conduct rigorous impact evaluations or design surveys I don't know.  All I can say is that in my experience MPAs and MPPs are not research focused degrees and if hard research is your goal, a PhD will get you much farther skills-wise and in terms of credibility on the job market IMO. 

That all makes sense. I'm not interested in a stats focus but I did wonder if it would be useful to have - sounds like I can keep to my original plan of a budgeting/finance focus (there's stuff at work that I could benefit from knowing how to do, for sure).

[MaxwellAlum]

5 hours ago, chocolatte_ said:

That all makes sense. I'm not interested in a stats focus but I did wonder if it would be useful to have - sounds like I can keep to my original plan of a budgeting/finance focus (there's stuff at work that I could benefit from knowing how to do, for sure).

Definitely - MPAs and MPPs are perfect for going into budgeting and finance related jobs.  Might be worth arranging informational interviews with people in a local/state/federal budget office.  I know several people who enjoying that career path and doing interesting work, but it's not for everybody.

[ExponentialDecay]

On 7/20/2018 at 9:05 PM, chocolatte_ said:

What's your take on MPA programs with a stats or quant focus? I've heard people say things to the effect that MPAs with these focuses are in demand because of the skill set they give, but it sounds as though you're saying their skill set either wouldn't be sufficient, or that they won't land jobs where this kind of work would be necessary as it's going to fall to an academic instead.

(I'm not particularly interested in a stats focus myself, I'm just curious about whether this might be a new trend to try to make the MPA more appealing or relevant).

The reason MPAs aren't good preparation isn't that they're not quantitative enough. There exist MPAs that are as quantitative as an econ PhD (the MPA-ID and, lowkey between us here, the MACRM at Chicago) and MPAs that give you access to as quantitative a curriculum as you want to make it (Chicago, Columbia, CMU). The issue is that they're not professionalizing you as a researcher. They're not structuring your time in a way that privileges research, they're not introducing you to researchers as a future researcher, they're not teaching you the minutiae of a research life. They're doing all of these things, but for policy, which is a totally different thing. And, like, I know people who have gone on to non-policy PhDs after an MPA - but the MPA for them was a waste of time. 

Any worthwhile policy program, by the way, will tell applicants two things: not to apply unless they have at least 2 years of relevant work experience, and not to go if they are considering a PhD afterwards. But they'll still take your money if you choose to not heed these warnings, so don't take acceptance to policy programs as silent confirmation that they think your goals fit in their program.

[chocolatte_]

1 hour ago, MaxwellAlum said:

Definitely - MPAs and MPPs are perfect for going into budgeting and finance related jobs.  Might be worth arranging informational interviews with people in a local/state/federal budget office.  I know several people who enjoying that career path and doing interesting work, but it's not for everybody.

I've worked in the field for 10 years - you're right, it's not for everyone, which is why I stay on the program management side whenever I can. It has a large budgetary component, however, so whether I like it or not, these are good skills for me to have.

[AGReyes]

Stormaggedon,

I went straight into grad school after graduating from college and, while having a Master's degree made it so much easier to find a job than if I would have started job hunting with just a B.A., I do feel I missed out on an important part of the experience. There are definite pros/cons.

I grew up in Oklahoma and got my Bachelor's in PoliSci from the closest big state school, and knew that if I started job hunting for a policy/government job in my state (because I couldn't just move to D.C. live everyone else and have the money to pay rent while unemployed and job hunting there - I was definitely not upper middle class), I was going to get into State Government making $25k a year with no job security and would hit a dead end quickly, shuffling paper in some god-forsaken government brutalist building in Oklahoma City.

I took a calculated risk and decided to go straight to grad school at SAIS in D.C. (1 year in Bologna/1 year in DC with a little $) and use that year in DC to scope out what jobs I wanted. 
I wanted to be a Diplomat (hence SAIS), but the Foreign Service process is long and difficult, and the more I learned about it, the less convinced I was it was the right path for me. So I used my year in DC and cast a really wide net. Did three internships while in grad school (State Department, The White House (Office of Legislative Affairs), and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs).

When it came time to job search, I again cast a wide net (because I need A job, any job - rent in DC is horrific!) and used my time at the White House to help land a position at OMB. Now I do policy analysis and development, budgeting and management. So for me, the whole gamble paid off in the end. But there were multiple points where it could have ended horribly had I not planned out everything well in advance (i.e. starting to job search 9 months before you graduate, not just 2-3 like many students do). 

All of that said, I do feel I missed out on grad school though. I wasn't sure what skill sets I needed to have so I just took classes that interested me, whereas others with experience knew exactly what skills gaps they had and took courses to remedy those deficiencies. I would say without work experience, you're also looking at grad school as largely a pipeline to a job. Which means you're less invested in the education itself, and more invested in the careers it opens up. That's not a negative thing by any mean (I mean, the whole point of shelling out $100k+ is to ultimately land a good gig. You can get an education for a $1.50 in late fees at the public library, as Will Hunting would say), but people who have previous work experience know they are more competitive in the job market and thus aren't so 'worked up' about finding work post-graduation. I also felt they enjoyed the experience more. And, to the extent grad school is as much about who you meet than what you learn, being constantly in stress about the future means you miss out on the 'networking' part of grad school (which to me is the #1 ROI on your grad school investment).  

The other big risk is that coming in straight from undergrad likely means no funding. So unless you know you want to work in Government and have confidence in PSLF being there once your loans are disbursed, you are taking a big financial gamble. A lot of people come into grad school with lofty dreams of joining the Hill or an NGO and being change agents, and then the crushing burden of student loan debt stovepipes them into consulting and contractor work (far removed from the social change they wanted to effect in the first place). 

Moral of the story: There are pros/cons. You can make it work, but going straight to grad school does have risks. 

[LadyJuju]

The Heller School at Brandeis is one of the top rated social policy schools. They have a concentration in children, youth, and families. See here:

http://heller.brandeis.edu/mpp/concentrations/child-youth-family-policy.html

Heller tends to be generous with funding. I don't know how they would handle your lack of experience but do well on the GRE, write an excellent personal statement highlighting your passion and commitment to social justice, CYF, etc. Can't hurt to try.