Policy School International Student Shift: China --> India and Latin America

[GradSchoolGrad]

It is my understanding that many policy schools have shifted their international student strategy from a reliance on Chinese international students to India and Latin America. I am just wondering if people are seeing/hearing the same out there and if that has had any impacts of curriculum, peer experience, and etc.? 
 

*I realize this is more relevant to Tier 2 schools and below. Tier 1 and 1.5 schools have generally ensured a diverse international student population. 

[GradSchool96]

3 hours ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

It is my understanding that many policy schools have shifted their international student strategy from a reliance on Chinese international students to India and Latin America. I am just wondering if people are seeing/hearing the same out there and if that has had any impacts of curriculum, peer experience, and etc.? 
 

*I realize this is more relevant to Tier 2 schools and below. Tier 1 and 1.5 schools have generally ensured a diverse international student population. 

What would you consider as the different tiers of schools?

[GradSchoolGrad]

Just now, GradSchool96 said:

What would you consider as the different tiers of schools?

I count HKS and Princeton as Tier 1, Harris and Heinz as 1.5, McCourt, Tractenberg, Sol as Tier 2, Batten as Tier 2.5, More regional focused programs like University of Kentucky MPP as Tier 3. I think that works for now. 

[GradSchool96]

20 hours ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

I count HKS and Princeton as Tier 1, Harris and Heinz as 1.5, McCourt, Tractenberg, Sol as Tier 2, Batten as Tier 2.5, More regional focused programs like University of Kentucky MPP as Tier 3. I think that works for now. 

What about when including IR programs, like Elliott or SIPA?

[GradSchoolGrad]

Just now, GradSchool96 said:

What about when including IR programs, like Elliott or SIPA?

I purposely excluded IR programs because the choices in concentration can drastically change things. For example, if you want to focus on Nuclear non-proliferation, Monterrey can arguably be seen as on par if not even better than Fletcher. Another example is National Security, whereby SIPA would then fall below Fletcher. 

[GradSchool96]

43 minutes ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

I purposely excluded IR programs because the choices in concentration can drastically change things. For example, if you want to focus on Nuclear non-proliferation, Monterrey can arguably be seen as on par if not even better than Fletcher. Another example is National Security, whereby SIPA would then fall below Fletcher. 

Good point. Do you have thoughts on broad rankings for US foreign policy, while also considering that it's a broad field?

[GradSchoolGrad]

3 minutes ago, GradSchool96 said:

Good point. Do you have thoughts on broad rankings for US foreign policy, while also considering that it's a broad field?

That is what I'm getting at. For Policy Grad programs, there are some numerous exceptions to the way I tier, so some level of broad tiering is viable. I would be very uncomfortable to do that for IR grad programs because exceptions are the rule. If I were to make a PodCast about categorizing IR schools, I wouldn't tier them but talk about the Big 7 (HKS, SIPA, Fletcher, MSFS, Elliot, SAIS, SIS) and what pathways they are best suited for and what pathways they aren't as advantageous for. 

[GradSchool96]

2 minutes ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

That is what I'm getting at. For Policy Grad programs, there are some numerous exceptions to the way I tier, so some level of broad tiering is viable. I would be very uncomfortable to do that for IR grad programs because exceptions are the rule. If I were to make a PodCast about categorizing IR schools, I wouldn't tier them but talk about the Big 7 (HKS, SIPA, Fletcher, MSFS, Elliot, SAIS, SIS) and what pathways they are best suited for and what pathways they aren't as advantageous for. 

That would honestly be great (talking about the pathways)! A lot of them seem pretty similar, so it's hard to make a decision between them.

[GradSchoolGrad]

3 minutes ago, GradSchool96 said:

That would honestly be great (talking about the pathways)! A lot of them seem pretty similar, so it's hard to make a decision between them.

Okay, I'll make that Episode 3 then (no promises on when that will come out - maybe end of this week - depending on work). 

[mnbvcxzlkjhgfds]

22 hours ago, GradSchoolGrad said:

I count HKS and Princeton as Tier 1, Harris and Heinz as 1.5, McCourt, Tractenberg, Sol as Tier 2, Batten as Tier 2.5, More regional focused programs like University of Kentucky MPP as Tier 3. I think that works for now. 

Could you explain how Heinz and Harris are at the same tier? I'm still making my grad school decision and would appreciate it. Thanks!

[GradSchoolGrad]

12 minutes ago, Yengsterhoo said:

Could you explain how Heinz and Harris are at the same tier? I'm still making my grad school decision and would appreciate it. Thanks!

So from a pure competitive jobs outcome perspective I think of Heinz and Harris as opposite extremes of the same tier. Harris is at the top of 1.5 (and you can argue validly it can belong in the Tier 1 group). I view Heinz as in the bottom of the 1.5.

The reason is that both its alums and student hit highly competitive jobs, but has strengths different areas. Harris hits MBB (and its probably 2nd to HKS in terms policy schools that can hit MBB) and the top competitive jobs I mentioned. Heinz uniquely hits policy innovation initiatives and competitive Tech in a policy related space (excluding Tik Tok which has an out of control hiring process IMO). I have seen Heinz people hit major think tanks, but not Brookings, CATO, or CSIS - at least not consistently. 

Bottom line, Harris has a wider range of strengths and is stronger in what is considered traditional policy jobs (as in within the past decade). Heinz is trying differentiate itself as more of policy innovation school, so its students have done well landing in "new age policy grad jobs". 

[d2ear]

I am seeing the same international student shift.
The size of admitted Indian students in my class was double the size of admitted East Asian students (China, Japan, Korea...etc.) The size of admitted East Asian students is about the same size as European students, which is really not that many.  
I don't have the data of the application counts by regions/countries. But I assumed it's either policy schools accept more Indian students than students from other regions/countries or they are just getting fewer applications from East Asian countries.