Fletcher School of Law & Diplomacy - Pros and Cons for the Future

[GradSchoolGrad]

As someone who came from higher education grad school industry research + went to grad school in an adjacent space + with roots in the IR community, I appreciate Fletcher as a school with traditionally great student experience but lots of challenges going forward that make it arguably less competitive than alternative options. Happy to discuss this openly and honestly with anyone else from the space or curious. 

[InternationalStudent]

Aren't they incredibly career focused and well funded? I think the quality of their teaching matters very little as long as those two factors are top notch. 

[GradSchoolGrad]

17 hours ago, InternationalStudent said:

Aren't they incredibly career focused and well funded? I think the quality of their teaching matters very little as long as those two factors are top notch. 

I do agree, that they are incredibly career focused and one of the best funded schools at Tufts (I don't have the stats in front of me, but that sounds about right). However, I view them as being in a weaker position to take advantage of that career focus. They are less able to make gains from their dollars due to structure issues. Here are the issues that I see:

1. Diminishing Core Career Strengths

Fletcher has historically been known for being strong pipeline for Non-Profits/NGOs/IGOs with maybe a second (though less significantly so) towards Government Service. Those two spaces are simply diminishing in attractiveness and opportunities due to changes in the last 10 years (everything from social, to geopolitical, and etc.). The career services has been making a strong effort to diversify their pipeline into private sector via their DC and New York trips, but the bottom line is that there is strength in being known for something. 

2. A Brand Problem

Fletcher has a great brand within the IR space, but the problem is that outside of the IR space, I would argue that struggle with brand recall, let alone brand sentiment. This is purely anecdotal, but I will say that even within the DC policy space, I have seen people look at a Fletcher resume and ask what school is that. Historically, Fletcher can focus on their ares of strength and be okay with having lower brand recognition. However, with many job routes leading outside of the traditional IR space + interdisciplinary be the way of the future, this limited brand scope is going to be a problem for Fletcher students.

3. A Capability Problem

Yes... Fletcher is connected to Harvard and there is a long established relationship there. However, at the end of the day, Fletcher is not Harvard. Just because your neighbor lets you borrow their pool here and there, doesn't mean that the pool is your's to fully enjoy. I say this because, Fletcher sans Harvard is in a rather weak position to be interdisciplinary. Although Tufts has tried to improve the situation, there is still a rather sharp divide between Fletcher and the Tufts undergraduate community and limited organized synergy. Tufts doesn't exactly have other major professional schools in proximity (that being the keyword) to the Somerville campus for Fletcher students to co-create/collaborate with. Logistically, getting to Harvard from Somerville (Remember you have to go there and back) is burdensome. Columbia, Georgetown, and event GW can point to their interdisciplinary offerings range as a source strength that can drive career opportunities - something that Fletcher lacks. Yes, you can be a certified negotiator at Fletcher... but you can do that at lots of places.

4. A Location Problem

As an IR school, it helps to be adjacent to the IR network and IR institutions. Fletcher is in a suburb of Boston (not even Boston proper). This matters because this limits the amount of networking that you can do, but live projects that are accessible. You can't exactly hop on over to do a project during the semester to boost your resume as you could if you lived in DC or NYC... or even a bigger city like LA (don't get me wrong, I love Boston). You are stuck waiting for a summer internship. Harvard and MIT don't struggle with this location problem as much because people are more willing to come to them + they have invested in massive and well-funded centers that make them a destination to begin with people in the IR / IR adjacent space. + have their own organization connected project to partake in.

5. A Competition Problem

Fletcher faces tougher competition from all angles.

US only:

a. Within the US - MPP/MPA schools are getting more into IR relations type matters

b. Other IR schools are expanding their programming

c. New market entrants are coming onboard - like Yale, to the IR related grad school game.

International:

British schools like Oxford and LSE are strengthening their program offerings in IR/area studies/policy in an effort to try to attract the international student population.

Bottom Line

Fletcher will likely persist to have amazing teaching quality and a strong student experience. But with its core strengths mattering less and its dynamics confronting tough situations, its IR space focused brand value can only carry so much water.

[2711383]

I would add to this that given recent.. complications.. for international students to stay in the US post-graduation, STEM designated programs are looked at a lot more favorably. I know I'll personally only be applying to STEM programs. A lot of policy schools have already smarted up and achieved STEM designation for at least one of their programs: HKS has the MPA/ID, SAIS has the MIEF, Heinz has the MSPPM:DA, McCourt has the DSPP, Harris has the MSCAPP and the MAPSS QMSA, etc.

I like Fletcher and the MALD program, but it's not worth it for me to study IR or public policy without the chance to stay in the US and maybe network in DC or New York. Same goes for SIPA. I consider myself a great fit for a couple of their programs and I know I would easily get in, but it's not worth it without the two year OPT extension. 

Going back to your point about UK schools, the UK is now allowing students to stay in the country working for two years after graduation, and after that it's much, much easier to score a work visa in the UK than an H1B in the US. Sciences Po is also in the competition, and if you manage to find a job in France after the completion of a two year master's, you're allowed to stay there indefinitely. 

To be honest, if it wasn't because of how much some (not all) US schools blow European schools out of the water in terms of program quality and network, I wouldn't even bother with applying to the US. I probably won't if Trump gets elected to a second term because not even STEM grads will be safe then. 

[sloop7]

6 hours ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

Fletcher has historically been known for being strong pipeline for Non-Profits/NGOs/IGOs with maybe a second (though less significantly so) towards Government Service. Those two spaces are simply diminishing in attractiveness and opportunities due to changes in the last 10 years (everything from social, to geopolitical, and etc.). The career services has been making a strong effort to diversify their pipeline into private sector via their DC and New York trips, but the bottom line is that there is strength in being known for something. 

I'm curious to hear a bit more about this — which schools you do see as "being known for something"? How are those reputations better positioning their grads moving forward?

[GradSchoolGrad]

5 hours ago, sloop7 said:

I'm curious to hear a bit more about this — which schools you do see as "being known for something"? How are those reputations better positioning their grads moving forward?

Sure.

1. So Georgetown MSFS is most known for (and in my opinion, has an over-exaggerated perception for being so) as a school for government service. Traditionally, this has meant strong career pipelines into the foreign service and other federal agencies (it is in DC after all). In a market environment where government hiring has weakened in some areas (i.e. Foreign Service), Georgetown MSFS has found itself able to pivot in other government agencies (such as the International Developmental Finance Corporation), Federal Consulting, government related invested projects, and etc. Basically, adjacent career pipelines that benefit from the strong Georgetown brand + being in DC.

2. SAIS being a very quant oriented program means that it is known for strong quantitative analysis. That means its graduates can weave between traditional IR jobs and more data analysis jobs. I knew someone who graduated from SAIS during the last recession who was able to transition into wheat trade forecaster for the Department of Agriculture. Again, SAIS can do make this play due to its long brand connections + DC location.

3. GW Elliot has got some really interesting niche plays (aside from being a strong IR program in General). The three that I am most familiar with (and I'm sure there are others I'm missing) is that they have a really good reputation in are:

a. China
b. Global Health 
c. Space policy
 

Basically, with niche plays, you have a more straightforward path to earning credibility by connecting yourself to the right people.

The problem with Fletcher it is in a difficult position to leverage its primary job market brand value (NGO, IGO, Non-Profit) to give its a students a broad spectrum bump in the job market now that that area is under hiring duress. Traditionally this brand strength has overcome its challenge of being in Somerville and can actually be considered rather helpful to get top notch professors (or so I understand). Now Fletcher, also has a pretty good brand strength in government service (although all have commented that they find themselves easily outnumbered by MSFS and SAIS folks). However, since it is not in DC, it is harder to pivot that brand strength to other government service adjacent career opportunities.

I will honestly say that, I have heard good things about Fletcher being a place to do PhD and a lot of those market factors are not as relevant for that education pathway. I'll let someone more in the know comment about that. 

 

 

[went_away]

On 8/22/2020 at 10:40 PM, GradSchoolGrad said:

Sure.

1. So Georgetown MSFS is most known for (and in my opinion, has an over-exaggerated perception for being so) as a school for government service. Traditionally, this has meant strong career pipelines into the foreign service and other federal agencies (it is in DC after all). In a market environment where government hiring has weakened in some areas (i.e. Foreign Service), Georgetown MSFS has found itself able to pivot in other government agencies (such as the International Developmental Finance Corporation), Federal Consulting, government related invested projects, and etc. Basically, adjacent career pipelines that benefit from the strong Georgetown brand + being in DC.

2. SAIS being a very quant oriented program means that it is known for strong quantitative analysis. That means its graduates can weave between traditional IR jobs and more data analysis jobs. I knew someone who graduated from SAIS during the last recession who was able to transition into wheat trade forecaster for the Department of Agriculture. Again, SAIS can do make this play due to its long brand connections + DC location.

3. GW Elliot has got some really interesting niche plays (aside from being a strong IR program in General). The three that I am most familiar with (and I'm sure there are others I'm missing) is that they have a really good reputation in are:

a. China
b. Global Health 
c. Space policy
 

Basically, with niche plays, you have a more straightforward path to earning credibility by connecting yourself to the right people.

The problem with Fletcher it is in a difficult position to leverage its primary job market brand value (NGO, IGO, Non-Profit) to give its a students a broad spectrum bump in the job market now that that area is under hiring duress. Traditionally this brand strength has overcome its challenge of being in Somerville and can actually be considered rather helpful to get top notch professors (or so I understand). Now Fletcher, also has a pretty good brand strength in government service (although all have commented that they find themselves easily outnumbered by MSFS and SAIS folks). However, since it is not in DC, it is harder to pivot that brand strength to other government service adjacent career opportunities.

I will honestly say that, I have heard good things about Fletcher being a place to do PhD and a lot of those market factors are not as relevant for that education pathway. I'll let someone more in the know comment about that. 

 

 

This is a really odd post. You've listed a lot of general points that don't display much knowledge of Fletcher specifically and that could apply to about any international affairs school, so I'm a little confused why you chose to create a post specifically about a school with which you don't seem to have much personal knowledge or experience and list a lot of generic negatives about IR in general, framed as a critique of Fletcher in particular. For example, the cross-registration with Harvard is a tiny part of the school's offerings and has very little to do with the overall educational experience or its interdisciplinary core competency (Fletcher's curriculum and faculty are entirely built around an interdisciplinary education; it's generally *not* about drawing in profs from other schools or doing partnerships).

I am as much of a critic of these schools and degrees as anyone - see my post history about the mismatch between degree price and perceived prestige vs actual career outcomes and earning potential - but not seeing how this conversation has anything to do with Fletcher in particular. For example, the renewed entry of Yale to this market is a challenge for all higher-end schools, not just for Fletcher.

If you've heard anecdotes or are in touch with a large number of recent grads and are picking up this buzz from them, I'd be curious to hear about that, but didn't see anything about that in your posts above.

Also, you say that MSFS has managed to pivot to getting its grads into other government programs apart from the Foreign Service. I haven't seen any evidence of that and don't even know how that would work given that the path into government service is pretty set for everybody (except Princeton grads who benefit from a legally shady arrangement to get in), but am open to hearing evidence of it. Finally, you seem to be under the impression that Fletcher is primarily a training school for the nonprofit sector. This would be a far more relevant critique for a place like SIT in Vermont. If anything, the primary career destinations are government service, multateral institutions, international security, defense consulting, and finally international development.

Edited September 7, 2020 by went_away

[GradSchoolGrad]

2 hours ago, went_away said:

This is a really odd post. You've listed a lot of general points that don't display much knowledge of Fletcher specifically and that could apply to about any international affairs school, so I'm a little confused why you chose to create a post specifically about a school with which you don't seem to have much personal knowledge or experience and list a lot of generic negatives about IR in general, framed as a critique of Fletcher in particular. For example, the cross-registration with Harvard is a tiny part of the school's offerings and has very little to do with the overall educational experience or its interdisciplinary core competency (Fletcher's curriculum and faculty are entirely built around an interdisciplinary education; it's generally *not* about drawing in profs from other schools or doing partnerships).

I am as much of a critic of these schools and degrees as anyone - see my post history about the mismatch between degree price and perceived prestige vs actual career outcomes and earning potential - but not seeing how this conversation has anything to do with Fletcher in particular. For example, the renewed entry of Yale to this market is a challenge for all higher-end schools, not just for Fletcher.

If you've heard anecdotes or are in touch with a large number of recent grads and are picking up this buzz from them, I'd be curious to hear about that, but didn't see anything about that in your posts above.

Also, you say that MSFS has managed to pivot to getting its grads into other government programs apart from the Foreign Service. I haven't seen any evidence of that and don't even know how that would work given that the path into government service is pretty set for everybody (except Princeton grads who benefit from a legally shady arrangement to get in), but am open to hearing evidence of it. Finally, you seem to be under the impression that Fletcher is primarily a training school for the nonprofit sector. This would be a far more relevant critique for a place like SIT in Vermont. If anything, the primary career destinations are government service, multateral institutions, international security, defense consulting, and finally international development.

I like a lot of your posts, and I have even reacted positively to them in the past. I think you might be troubled by comments because there is a misunderstanding of how and why I'm looking at Fletcher (and other schools in general). 

First off, I want to highlight that yes, I am not nor was I ever a Fletcher student and nor do I pretend to have had that experience. My exposure to Fletcher comes in 5 areas:

1. Following Fletcher as a Higher Ed watcher - after having done Higher Ed industry comparative analysis in my prior life both for a research organization and a higher education institution

2. Robust professional connections with the Fletcher alumni/student community running back a decade (and they have talked about Fletcher at length). Personally, some of my best colleagues and some of my worst came from Fletcher (strangely none in the middle), so I'm not exactly biased by that.

3. My social network of Fletcher alumni (many that graduated in the past 4 years or so) 

4. Fletcher's sales pitch (both to me back when I was prospective student and continuing to this day as I find out via the non-profit graduate school coaching I do). 

5. Recruiting conversations at the organizations I have been in and I have had with other professionals in the various fields I have been in (IR, National Security, and IR). 

That being said, I am speaking about Fletcher from the perspective of overall higher education strategy per its value proposition as realized by its students. As we know very well, actual experience does not necessarily relate to value projection. The other thing I want to highlight is that I am speaking about Fletcher in relative terms. As I stated before, there are many things I like Fletcher and I think they are trying hard to do the smart thing directionally (i.e. DC and NYC career trips have adjusted to the IR student demand decently well). However, I speak of Fletcher relative value propositions given ts overall positioning + challenges against that over the OVERALL graduate school market (not just other IR). The reason why I started this post, because I just find Fletcher to be fascinating higher ed case study of an IR school  that his historically done well establishing a solid reputation for itself in a very different way than its peers. I was hoping to solicits others thought on if the Fletcher way will suffice in the future given challenges, some IR wide, but other unique to Fletcher. 

So just to give you some perspective in how I think about things.

1. The Harvard connection:

I totally realize that Harvard cross registration is only a part of its school offerings. HOWEVER... since I started looking at grad schools a decade ago to today, it has been a major element as part of its sales pitch, one of the top things mentioned by any Fletcher associated person trying to sell Fletcher to me. As a non-profit grad school coach (AKA: I don't get paid), to this day the #1 question I get asked about Fletcher relates to the relevance of its Harvard connection/cross-registration. Every single alum I have talked to has mentioned the opportunity to take classes at a Harvard school as bragging point (or access to the Harvard Negotiation certificate). I bring it up just to the get the issue out of the way.

2. Interdisciplinary Education

Yes, Fletcher does bring many professors/instructors from many disciplines to teach its students. From that respect, Fletcher is without doubt an interdisciplinary program. However, what I'm highlighting that Fletcher is missing out on is having robust (key word) and collaborative institutional partnerships with the many other schools within Tufts to fully leverage a multi-disciplinary programming. Yes, creating hodgepodge of talent can be helpful, but having sustained institutional collaboration truly delivers robust resources, experiential learning opportunities, connections, and networks to students beyond the roledex of a professor. Fletcher definitely does have formal agreements and connections with lots of orgs and education entities, but RELATIVELY speaking compared to its competitors, they are not as robust.

To paint this better, at GW someone teaching a legal aspect of international relations at the Elliot school usually has the resources of the law school since it is most likely a dual hat faculty role. Tufts has no law school so such is not possible with Fletcher. Tufts also doesn't have business school. In fact Tufts is missing lots of professional schools present in most major universities. Don't get me wrong, Tufts is an awesome place to go to for undergrad, but its lacking major graduate school assets to support Fletcher. From value projection angle, its simply more helpful to associate a school with a Pantheon of collective brands and capabilities rather than a stand alone organization.

3. Industry Bucketing

I'm bucketing multilateral institutions and non-profits (which includes research arms/humanitarian non-profits) together because that is how it was careers were bucketed for me when I first locked at Fletcher and went to Fletcher in person (three times). Maybe this is outdated, but clearly based off your identification of Fletcher strengths highlights I'm not off the mark. 

4. Georgetown MSFS Pivoting

Please note that by MSFS pivoting, I am noting an overall more expansive career outreach throughout the DC environs (which Fletcher is trying to do itself, but without the strength of being in DC) into other Federal government agencies + Federal consulting + other. So some things to highlight:

a: MSFS has had a historically robust Federal consulting pipeline (granted I personally am not a fan of the space) among multiple firms (so more than just Deloitte - granted that is the big hitter).  My understanding is that people do go from Fletcher to Federal consulting, but it is not really a school for Federal consulting. I want to highlight that Federal consulting and Defense consulting are two separate things. 

b. Yes, post Trump election where foreign service was drying up, I saw a lot of people pivoting to Trade and economic development (with a trade angle) government organizations, supported MSFS. By this I mean outside of PMF (which did itself have increased advertising as well). 

c. I also saw interesting private sector Pivots.

i. Netflix recruiting at MSFS for management of its international Portfolio

ii. Google recruiting for international tech policy roles

iii. Mapping companies 

iv. A play towards Government data analysis (I still think MSFS is behind SAIS in this angle).

Basically, I'm highlighting how MSFS made hay with its DC location + connected relationships with all the big brand grad schools in Georgetown. Something as simple as MSFS students could network with Georgetown Alum from any single of its grad schools + undergrad programs that tends to index towards DC + NYC (sheer power in numbers alone) made the value proposition super helpful. 

I'm sure we'll still disagree on somethings. However, I hope you recognize that I am legitimately coming from somewhere.

Edited September 7, 2020 by GradSchoolGrad

[tacos95]

2 hours ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

Federal consulting pipeline (granted I personally am not a fan of the space)

I've heard a couple people say these kinds of gigs aren't great. I'm thinking primarily of Deloitte type roles. Just curious what specifically is bad about them. Is it just the golden handcuffs or are there other major issues that make them bad jobs?

[GradSchoolGrad]

2 hours ago, tacos95 said:

I've heard a couple people say these kinds of gigs aren't great. I'm thinking primarily of Deloitte type roles. Just curious what specifically is bad about them. Is it just the golden handcuffs or are there other major issues that make them bad jobs?

I think that is a separate topic, but I will do you a solid and start a new threat for you to discuss it.

[ajak568]

On 9/7/2020 at 12:32 PM, went_away said:

Also, you say that MSFS has managed to pivot to getting its grads into other government programs apart from the Foreign Service. I haven't seen any evidence of that and don't even know how that would work given that the path into government service is pretty set for everybody (except Princeton grads who benefit from a legally shady arrangement to get in), but am open to hearing evidence of it.

Could anyone comment one what this post is referring to re: arrangement for Princeton grads to "get in"? To get in where? Into a government position? If someone could explain, I appreciate it. Thanks!

[GradSchoolGrad]

1 hour ago, ajak568 said:

Could anyone comment one what this post is referring to re: arrangement for Princeton grads to "get in"? To get in where? Into a government position? If someone could explain, I appreciate it. Thanks!

I didn't write it but I'll go with a stab in the dark. A lore I have always heard (never proven by facts or anything beyond pure speculation that I have heard repeated to me) has that Princeton was always a favored University at large for Foreign Service / CIA and etc. since the 1950's. Don't think that is true anymore as the academic environment has significantly changed since then. 

Edited March 14, 2021 by GradSchoolGrad

[went_away]

On 3/14/2021 at 2:04 PM, ajak568 said:

Could anyone comment one what this post is referring to re: arrangement for Princeton grads to "get in"? To get in where? Into a government position? If someone could explain, I appreciate it. Thanks!

It's a DoD Fellowship that is reserved exclusively for Princeton students and hires them into high-profile policy positions. It's based on a personal, elite connection one of their faculty had with the Department.