How much weight are put on grades in Mid-career programs?

[escondido41]

It has been 10 years since my LLM. 20 years since my JD and 24 years since my College degree.  I had horrendous grades (classic C student) except for LLM which was almost perfect.  Since then I have had a long professional career which, in my estimation would put me in a good position in applying for a mid-career MPP/MPA from the top schools.  But just how much will my grades pull me back?  Are they given much weight in mid-career programs?  Most say that there is no minimum cut-off for grades, but in reality is there such a things as really bad grades that would just stand out in an application regardless?  

Edited June 23, 2020 by escondido41

[GradSchoolGrad]

6 hours ago, escondido41 said:

It has been 10 years since my LLM. 20 years since my JD and 24 years since my College degree.  I had horrendous grades (classic C student) except for LLM which was almost perfect.  Since then I have had a long professional career which, in my estimation would put me in a good position in applying for a mid-career MPP/MPA from the top schools.  But just how much will my grades pull me back?  Are they given much weight in mid-career programs?  Most say that there is no minimum cut-off for grades, but in reality is there such a things as really bad grades that would just stand out in an application regardless?  

First of all, I would like to get some clarity on how you define mid-career programs. I know of some mid-career MPAs, but I don't know of many mid-career MPPs. I will say that you will be the older 5%, even in "mid-career programs". Also it depends on the prestige and selectivity of the program. The tip top does really care (so Harvard's MPA program for example) about grades. Beyond that, they are just looking in life progression in terms of career and in your case graduate school activities. So, if you had Cs in college but As in law school or your LLM, you could be in a good spot.

The unknown is the COVID factor. I could see some even distinguished programs drastically lowering their standards just to stay afloat. 

[escondido41]

Thanks for the reply.  I am referring to the HKS MC/MPA actually.   Unfortunately, even law school was C country.  Of course I would still try but I just have to manage my expectations.

[GradSchoolGrad]

1 hour ago, escondido41 said:

Thanks for the reply.  I am referring to the HKS MC/MPA actually.   Unfortunately, even law school was C country.  Of course I would still try but I just have to manage my expectations.

I mean, if you have an outstanding career (and I mean really outstanding), you might have a chance. However, if you don't have upward trajectory (I don't know if your LLM gave out grades), then your chances for admissions is likely problematic. You legitimately bring doubt upon your ability to academically graduate what can be an academically challenging program. 

That said, given the realities of COVID, who knows what will happen. 

[Boolakanaka]

You are fine. I’ve been on admissions committees and by and large, given the other degrees you have, they are placed in appropriate context. The committee knows evaluating you juxtaposed against someone just graduating or even 2-3 years out of undergrad is not a similar or analogous comparison. You career and the previous degrees you hold will be primary factors.

 

And there are specific mid career programs in which the criteria I just mentioned are pretty much the standard versus the exception. By way of specific example, at the Yale School of Forestry (I consider this public policy with a specific area interest) they have such a program, and one of friends in his mid 40s has an almost identical background to you and he had no problem gaining admission.

[GradSchoolGrad]

1 hour ago, Boolakanaka said:

You are fine. I’ve been on admissions committees and by and large, given the other degrees you have, they are placed in appropriate context. The committee knows evaluating you juxtaposed against someone just graduating or even 2-3 years out of undergrad is not a similar or analogous comparison. You career and the previous degrees you hold will be primary factors.

 

And there are specific mid career programs in which the criteria I just mentioned are pretty much the standard versus the exception. By way of specific example, at the Yale School of Forestry (I consider this public policy with a specific area interest) they have such a program, and one of friends in his mid 40s has an almost identical background to you and he had no problem gaining admission.

I mean maybe you can give me more clarity on this. I think its one thing to have bad undergrad GPA and show upward trajectory with career success or grad school academic performance. However, if someone has gone to three higher education experiences at three separate periods of life with a C level GPA, wouldn't that be a concern for an admission committee (I realize the missing data point is GRE scores)? I'm sure a super super stellar career can compensate for that... but how stellar would that career need to be? 

[Boolakanaka]

4 hours ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

I mean maybe you can give me more clarity on this. I think its one thing to have bad undergrad GPA and show upward trajectory with career success or grad school academic performance. However, if someone has gone to three higher education experiences at three separate periods of life with a C level GPA, wouldn't that be a concern for an admission committee (I realize the missing data point is GRE scores)? I'm sure a super super stellar career can compensate for that... but how stellar would that career need to be? 

Grades are important out of undergrad because you have really have other insert to evaluate the candidate. The process of admission is to identify candidates that have both an interest and an aptitude to succeed during graduate school. In his specific situation,  as he mentions, his LLM, which is basically a legal post doctorate, which less than 1 percent of all law graduates will ever obtain, he did it with straight As. In short, it shows he is capable of very high level academic work. One of the current deliberations of ad-coms is to parse down and see in-between the lines where the applicants ability and capacity reside, and that is not merely contained in a stellar GPA.
 

[escondido41]

8 hours ago, Boolakanaka said:

You are fine. I’ve been on admissions committees and by and large, given the other degrees you have, they are placed in appropriate context. The committee knows evaluating you juxtaposed against someone just graduating or even 2-3 years out of undergrad is not a similar or analogous comparison. You career and the previous degrees you hold will be primary factors.

 

And there are specific mid career programs in which the criteria I just mentioned are pretty much the standard versus the exception. By way of specific example, at the Yale School of Forestry (I consider this public policy with a specific area interest) they have such a program, and one of friends in his mid 40s has an almost identical background to you and he had no problem gaining admission.

Thank you.  This gives me a bit of a chance I guess.  Its been so long since I looked at my transcripts and had almost forgotten that I was a C student.  Somehow I never felt inadequate or wanting in the professional world.  GRE?  I'd probably do better straight out of college than now.  The program doesn't require it(though you can volunteer to submit it), but I am also thinking that a stellar GRE would be the best way to allay worries about intellectual capacity.  Then again, it's just been so long since I did any sort of math!

[GradSchoolGrad]

3 hours ago, Boolakanaka said:

Grades are important out of undergrad because you have really have other insert to evaluate the candidate. The process of admission is to identify candidates that have both an interest and an aptitude to succeed during graduate school. In his specific situation,  as he mentions, his LLM, which is basically a legal post doctorate, which less than 1 percent of all law graduates will ever obtain, he did it with straight As. In short, it shows he is capable of very high level academic work. One of the current deliberations of ad-coms is to parse down and see in-between the lines where the applicants ability and capacity reside, and that is not merely contained in a stellar GPA.
 

Okay, I misread the part about LLM and him getting As (I thought it was another C). That being said, my understanding is that LLMs are 1 year degrees and that it is often desired for legal areas that have additional layers of complication (tax and patent for example). However, coming from the higher ed policy space, I also understand LLMs to be money makers for Universities and not exactly the most competitive to get into (below the top 7 law schools) nor academically rigorous (correct me if I'm wrong here). Unlike law school which is about stacking people (class rank). LLMs are more about covering materials. 

I'm not trying belittle LLMs, I'm just trying to better appreciate if an LLM really makes up for a combined undergrad and grad school academic strike earlier in youth. Despite not many people acquiring it, I view it very differently than PhDs, whereby most of them have comprehensive examinations to weed people out and is 4 to 7 years long.

[Mppirgradschool]

I am familiar with the MC/MPA and know that they really look at the Q portion of the GRE. More than one would think for a mid-career program. How they'll view GPA in this case is hard to determine -- do well in the GRE.

[escondido41]

25 minutes ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

Okay, I misread the part about LLM and him getting As (I thought it was another C). That being said, my understanding is that LLMs are 1 year degrees and that it is often desired for legal areas that have additional layers of complication (tax and patent for example). However, coming from the higher ed policy space, I also understand LLMs to be money makers for Universities and not exactly the most competitive to get into (below the top 7 law schools) nor academically rigorous (correct me if I'm wrong here). Unlike law school which is about stacking people (class rank). LLMs are more about covering materials. 

I'm not trying belittle LLMs, I'm just trying to better appreciate if an LLM really makes up for a combined undergrad and grad school academic strike earlier in youth. Despite not many people acquiring it, I view it very differently than PhDs, whereby most of them have comprehensive examinations to weed people out and is 4 to 7 years long.

I think to further add to your skepticism, my LLM is not from the US or UK.  I do agree with your points, although on the other side of the coin the LLM is more specific, professional in nature and recent, so perhaps it could better reflect a candidate's current abilities. 

[escondido41]

24 minutes ago, Mppirgradschool said:

I am familiar with the MC/MPA and know that they really look at the Q portion of the GRE. More than one would think for a mid-career program. How they'll view GPA in this case is hard to determine -- do well in the GRE.

Thank you.  I will apply for the Mason Fellowship which does not require GREs, although I think I will need to take it anyway and ace it just to have a chance.

[GradSchoolGrad]

1 hour ago, escondido41 said:

Thank you.  I will apply for the Mason Fellowship which does not require GREs, although I think I will need to take it anyway and ace it just to have a chance.

I am not trying to mean or anything. I just don't want you to waste your time. I personally spent 2 weeks to make sure my HKS MPP application was perfect. I wish someone told me that I wasn't qualified due to my lack of quant classes in college and hence my rejection should have been expected.

Right now your story simply isn't matching up.

1. You are applying for a decently quant program while you don't have a record of academic success, let alone quant exposure in general (professional or otherwise). Please keep in mind, that they also take into account the quality of the institution, which you thus far haven't really given clarity. However, I can assume that by virtue of having C's in college, you probably didn't go to a top 50 US law school unless you had a family connection. 

2. Right now you are not identifying that your professional exploits compensate for your academic challenges.

3. Most people I encounter at least talk about what their practice GRE score is, and it concerns me you haven't mentioned that. You have to build up to an awesome GRE score. 

I say this because, thus far, I don't think you should focus on the HKS MPA program. The fact that you haven't identified a back up solution is also very concerning. 

[escondido41]

1 hour ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

I am not trying to mean or anything. I just don't want you to waste your time. I personally spent 2 weeks to make sure my HKS MPP application was perfect. I wish someone told me that I wasn't qualified due to my lack of quant classes in college and hence my rejection should have been expected.

Right now your story simply isn't matching up.

1. You are applying for a decently quant program while you don't have a record of academic success, let alone quant exposure in general (professional or otherwise). Please keep in mind, that they also take into account the quality of the institution, which you thus far haven't really given clarity. However, I can assume that by virtue of having C's in college, you probably didn't go to a top 50 US law school unless you had a family connection. 

2. Right now you are not identifying that your professional exploits compensate for your academic challenges.

3. Most people I encounter at least talk about what their practice GRE score is, and it concerns me you haven't mentioned that. You have to build up to an awesome GRE score. 

I say this because, thus far, I don't think you should focus on the HKS MPA program. The fact that you haven't identified a back up solution is also very concerning. 

I don't think it is mean at all.  I am grateful.  I am not being specific because I don't think it is necessary other that the information I have provided.  I am not asking for a review of my professional achievements after all.  I think that is too subjective to make any sense of.  There will definitely be no consensus.  Grade may be another matter.

 

  All my degrees are non-US.  I am also not applying to the MPP but to the MC/MPA which is less quant focused.    I have not taken the GRE nor have I taken practice tests.  I would assume I would be above average on verbal and low on quant.  The program does not require GREs so I am not focused on it, unless I would need them to compensate for my grades.  Hence the question.  I do have back up plans but I don't see how it relates to the question so I didn't mention them.

[GradSchoolGrad]

In regards to MPP, I was speaking to myself. I know the MC-MPA well.

[Mppirgradschool]

12 hours ago, escondido41 said:

I think to further add to your skepticism, my LLM is not from the US or UK.  I do agree with your points, although on the other side of the coin the LLM is more specific, professional in nature and recent, so perhaps it could better reflect a candidate's current abilities. 

Are your other degrees from outside the U.S. as well? A C average in the U.S. is a 75% -- which is dismal -- but in some European countries, a 75% could put you in the top 10% of your class. Do you know what your class rank was? 

[Boolakanaka]

14 hours ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

Okay, I misread the part about LLM and him getting As (I thought it was another C). That being said, my understanding is that LLMs are 1 year degrees and that it is often desired for legal areas that have additional layers of complication (tax and patent for example). However, coming from the higher ed policy space, I also understand LLMs to be money makers for Universities and not exactly the most competitive to get into (below the top 7 law schools) nor academically rigorous (correct me if I'm wrong here). Unlike law school which is about stacking people (class rank). LLMs are more about covering materials. 

I'm not trying belittle LLMs, I'm just trying to better appreciate if an LLM really makes up for a combined undergrad and grad school academic strike earlier in youth. Despite not many people acquiring it, I view it very differently than PhDs, whereby most of them have comprehensive examinations to weed people out and is 4 to 7 years long.

Sir, while. JD is a professional degree it is still a doctorate and should be afforded some of the same deference and distinction you are lending to a PhD.  Whether you accept my actual insight on being on an admission committee is solely your prerogative.

[GradSchoolGrad]

2 hours ago, Boolakanaka said:

Sir, while. JD is a professional degree it is still a doctorate and should be afforded some of the same deference and distinction you are lending to a PhD.  Whether you accept my actual insight on being on an admission committee is solely your prerogative.

I have been on committees with JDs and for University level programming decisions, and while that is often a point of conversation made by those with JDs, it isn't commonly accepted as the same in the academic community in the United States. I highlight this for the benefit of future JDs who may one day stumble upon this post. 
 

[Sigaba]

4 minutes ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

I have been on committees with JDs and for University level programming decisions, and while that is often a point of conversation made by those with JDs, it isn't commonly accepted as the same in the academic community in the United States. I highlight this for the benefit of future JDs who may one day stumble upon this post. 
 

I had a classmate who had a JD. He could not get his head around the fact that the graduate school and the department viewed the degree as a professional degree, not even the equivalent of a master's degree (he wanted to transfer law school courses to get credit for M.A. requirements). 

I think that one of the key intellectual distinctions between a JD and a Ph.D is that the latter requires one to create new knowledge, the former does not.

 

[Boolakanaka]

5 hours ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

I have been on committees with JDs and for University level programming decisions, and while that is often a point of conversation made by those with JDs, it isn't commonly accepted as the same in the academic community in the United States. I highlight this for the benefit of future JDs who may one day stumble upon this post. 
 

And my point to all that, is to encourage their application as it adds much to the education/cohorts, not dissuade their interest as they are not part of the cool GPA club. I got two degrees from Yale, and well, it may profoundly disappoint you, but I don’t have a 4.0 Frankly, this over valuing and emphasizing GPA is at once provincial and both historically and institutionally antiquated. Most of the students admitted will be admitted via usual routes (e.g. high grades and scores) , but as the poster specifically mentions, he is looking at mid-career programs, and accordingly, they will give his/her application its due justice and review.

[GradSchoolGrad]

59 minutes ago, Boolakanaka said:

And my point to all that, is to encourage their application as it adds much to the education/cohorts, not dissuade their interest as they are not part of the cool GPA club. I got two degrees from Yale, and well, it may profoundly disappoint you, but I don’t have a 4.0 Frankly, this over valuing and emphasizing GPA is at once provincial and both historically and institutionally antiquated. Most of the students admitted will be admitted via usual routes (e.g. high grades and scores) , but as the poster specifically mentions, he is looking at mid-career programs, and accordingly, they will give his/her application its due justice and review.

Look, I fully believe in holistic analysis of a perspective candidate + inducing diversity (of all types) into any graduate program. However, at the end of the day graduate programs set soft patterns for admissions for a reason. One is to get a target slice of the total market applicant pool. The other is so people applying have a reasonable expectation to academically graduate. Based upon what the original poster informed me, I am concerned about his ability to graduate.

It isn't about having perfect GPAs or anything like that (I sure as hell did not). It is about showing some level of academic or professional performance to highlight aptitude to graduate from the program (and yes Harvard MC-MPA can be hard, and I know smart people who struggled academically with it). I respect the original poster's privacy to not inform us about his professional activities. However, barring that information, we can only assess based upon his life of academic activities, which right now seem suspect (granted a lot of pieces are missing). I mention this because there are lots of other mid-career in their 30s, 40s, and etc. interested in MC-MPA, including some I encountered in this forum that bring diversity that actually have the academic/professional combo (although not perfect) to be excellent candidates for the program. Yes, I do know students in MC programs that have academically failed from the program.

I respect Harvard MC-MPA for being a MC program that is actually academically challenging and does their due diligence screening applicants to avoid people are concerns for ability to graduate.. This is unlike many MC programs that are pure money pits and takes anyone who has the money and can breathe (slight exaggeration but you get the point). I am also trying to give the original poster a fair shake of what I think the chances are of getting in given the information available. He is already talking about competing for competitive scholarships, let alone succeed in the application cycle. He can ignore everything I say, but it would be irresponsible if I am not honest with him. Again, I can be totally wrong because we are working partial information here given lack of transparency (his right - I fully respect it). Plus - COVID has changed higher education and a lot of schools are lowering their standards. 

Edited June 26, 2020 by GradSchoolGrad

[escondido41]

Of course talk is cheap, but I am quite certain I can handle the academic demands of the program.  I base this on previous alumni of the program that are my peers, classmates, schoolmates whose academic performance I am aware of and can gauge mine against theirs.  So I am not worried if I can handle it or not.  I have no plans of spending a great deal on something I feel I will fail in.

What I am worried about, is if I can even be in a position to do so if my undergrad and law school grades take up a large part of their decision.  My question is really just that, how much weight to they put on it.  For the rest of the criteria, it is very subjective even if I post my CV here, hence I do not see the need to inquire about my competitiveness on that aspect.

 

About COVID, everyone says it will make things less competitive, but I feel a lot of those who got in this year will defer to next year and make it even more competitive next year.

[GradSchoolGrad]

1 hour ago, escondido41 said:

Of course talk is cheap, but I am quite certain I can handle the academic demands of the program.  I base this on previous alumni of the program that are my peers, classmates, schoolmates whose academic performance I am aware of and can gauge mine against theirs.  So I am not worried if I can handle it or not.  I have no plans of spending a great deal on something I feel I will fail in.

What I am worried about, is if I can even be in a position to do so if my undergrad and law school grades take up a large part of their decision.  My question is really just that, how much weight to they put on it.  For the rest of the criteria, it is very subjective even if I post my CV here, hence I do not see the need to inquire about my competitiveness on that aspect.

 

About COVID, everyone says it will make things less competitive, but I feel a lot of those who got in this year will defer to next year and make it even more competitive next year.

Look, I am not saying if you legitimately will handle it academically or not. I am speaking to if the admissions committee thinks you will be able to handle it or not based upon things that have happened in the higher education world. I obviously don't know you, so I can speak one way or another. I can however assess how an admissions committee might view you based upon what you have put out. 

As for COVID, no one really knows what will happen. If COVID-19 stretches into Fall 2020 and they make classes online, I promise you there will be a drop in interest and competition will decrease. A lot of those who deferred will seek not to pursue their deferment.

If COVID-19 ends by the winter, it may get a little bit more competitive than usual, but I think it will be negligible. One reason is because you are going to have a smaller pool of people globally that can pay for it. Also, uncertainty and COVID-19 and visa policy (granted that depends on who gets re-elected) will likely limit the international student population. We see this in the MBA market with INSEAD vs. US MBAs. Top US MBAs have had 10% or so increase in applications, while INSEAD has has a 40%.

[escondido41]

5 minutes ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

Look, I am not saying if you legitimately will handle it academically or not. I am speaking to if the admissions committee thinks you will be able to handle it or not based upon things that have happened in the higher education world. I obviously don't know you, so I can speak one way or another. I can however assess how an admissions committee might view you based upon what you have put out. 

 

Yes, I understand and appreciate it.  I guess the point you are making is if I have C student grades in under grad and law school that I will have to make up for it in an extreme way through my professional experience.  I think I have good professional experience, but I am not a former president of a country, so I have my work cut out for me.

 

As for COVID, if courses come online, I think more of the "I'd love to go to Grad school but can't leave my work/family/commitments" would apply and cancel out those looking for an on-campus experience, of not overwhelm it.  Of course no one will really know until we find out. 

Edited June 29, 2020 by escondido41

[goinfor3]

On 6/23/2020 at 9:46 AM, escondido41 said:

It has been 10 years since my LLM. 20 years since my JD and 24 years since my College degree.  I had horrendous grades (classic C student) except for LLM which was almost perfect.  Since then I have had a long professional career which, in my estimation would put me in a good position in applying for a mid-career MPP/MPA from the top schools.  But just how much will my grades pull me back?  Are they given much weight in mid-career programs?  Most say that there is no minimum cut-off for grades, but in reality is there such a things as really bad grades that would just stand out in an application regardless?  

Someone in this thread made a valid point about grading standards being different in other parts of the world. It may be worth the expense of having a US based degree equivalency service convert your international grades to a US GPA. I don't want to advertise any one particular service, but if you look on the HKS website you will find the name of a service they accept. I had my UK MBA degree converted and found my US equivalent GPA far better than I would have expected. 

Like you, I had a terrible undergraduate career. I've since gone on to two graduate, professional programs where I did far, far better. I am currently studying for the GRE to bolster my HKS MC/MPA application later this year.