Policy Schools Going After Students with Less Work Experience

[GradSchoolGrad]

Question: How do you feel about policy grad schools expanding the #  & proportion of straight from undergrad and lower work experienced students into their student body?

Context:

As a higher ed watcher focusing on grad schools, I have been noticing that there has been a lot more action and talk among Policy Grad schools (including the top ones) to expand their student enrollment potential by going after strategies that essentially elicit a younger/less work experienced student. Examples of such are:

a: Installing 4+1 (so getting your MPP/MPA with 1 year of grad school after taking the necessary classes as an undergrad)

b. 2+1/2 programs (apply in undergrad to schedule going to grad school after 1 or 2 years of work experience)

c. Targeting those straight from undergrad as a viable student community - as seen with marketing investment and pitches. 

There is a business reason behind this (grad students make Universities money while undergrads don't). In the UK going to policy grad school straight from undergrad or with only 1 year of work experience is actually rather normal (but they have numerous other cultural and programatic differences(. 

Just wondering if everyone else feels this is a good or bad direction in general or to their own situation. 

Edited May 5, 2022 by GradSchoolGrad
typos