Applying to a MPP/MIA program without a well-focused goal?

[malmo]

I graduated from college a couple of years ago and after doing an English-teaching Fulbright, I began working as a paralegal at a fancy law firm. For a long time, I had planned to go to law school, but recently began to change my mind after seeing how miserable my co-workers are and how much they have to work. Since I focused so much on the application process for law school, I don't really know much about MPP admissions, but I majored in IR and would love to work in the field in some capacity. Problem is that I don't have a concrete idea of what I want to do (I'm leaning towards doing some kind of consulting work on trade or labor issues, but won't feel comfortable writing a statement of purpose about something I have no experience in). What level of certainty/focus does an application to programs like SAIS, WWS, HKS, or Fletcher need to convey? And is it stupid to go into a program without a concrete idea of what I want to do, in the first place? Some part of me thinks I'll find something interesting to do after graduation anyway, as long as I can get into one of these super-prestigious places. Is that really naive?

[fso2k11]

You have about 9 months, I think you can gain some convincing certainty/focus by then. The top schools will all expect it, I think.

I graduated from college a couple of years ago and after doing an English-teaching Fulbright, I began working as a paralegal at a fancy law firm. For a long time, I had planned to go to law school, but recently began to change my mind after seeing how miserable my co-workers are and how much they have to work. Since I focused so much on the application process for law school, I don't really know much about MPP admissions, but I majored in IR and would love to work in the field in some capacity. Problem is that I don't have a concrete idea of what I want to do (I'm leaning towards doing some kind of consulting work on trade or labor issues, but won't feel comfortable writing a statement of purpose about something I have no experience in). What level of certainty/focus does an application to programs like SAIS, WWS, HKS, or Fletcher need to convey? And is it stupid to go into a program without a concrete idea of what I want to do, in the first place? Some part of me thinks I'll find something interesting to do after graduation anyway, as long as I can get into one of these super-prestigious places. Is that really naive?

[CowboyDan]

It's a complicated, tough call. Here's my situation, which will hopefully be somewhat informative and useful. I've been working as a journalist (mostly opinion writing rather than reporting) since I graduated in '06, and have realized that the issues I care the most about all connect to poverty, inequality, and the wealth gap. I decided to take a crack at grad school with an eye toward becoming a much more informed, connected-to-policy-debates journalist. So I applied to HKS, WWS, and Goldman, and got into the latter two. (It looks like I'll be going to WWS.)

I definitely had less policy background than almost anyone in my incoming class, and certainly couldn't say specifically what I wanted to study, but I made a conscious effort to tell a coherent, well-put-together story in my personal statements: I no longer want to just be another pundit who chimes in constantly and superficially; I want to actually contribute to the discussion about inequality in a careful, well-informed way. I made it clear that my interests were broad and I wanted to narrow them down, and listed some possible areas of focus (education, health care, criminal justice). I also talked about how lucky and privileged I have been growing up, and how I've come to realize just how much was given to me -- all of which is true, but also included to help make it clear to the adcom folks just how visceral an issue the wealth gap has become to me.

As for the WWS policy memo, I made sure that my topic tied closely to inequality, and that every step of the way I evaluated the nuance and complexity of the issues I was discussing (don't quote me on this, but while the point of the policy memo is to suggest concrete solutions, I really do get the sense that they'd rather see a memo filled with caveats and "buts" and "on the other hands" than one that is too sure of itself -- it's not as though they expect you to actually solve the problem in question, so I think it's more of a matter of them getting a gauge for your talents as an analytical thinker who can evaluate various bits of potentially conflicting information).

Oh, and I also told the people writing my letters what I wanted to focus on, which you should definitely do if you apply -- it helps bring the whole application package together.

I feel very thrilled and lucky to have gotten into WWS (anyone who tells you there isn't luck involved is lying -- just look at the numbers), and I was able to do so without a hugely specific area of interest. A few caveats: I write for a living, so I was probably able to make up for my (numerous) other shortcomings as an applicant with a well-written policy memo and personal statement. I also had a very high GRE score, and happen to work for a publication most people have heard of. Plus I have heard that MPP/MPA folks like journalists. I also included a note about my weaknesses (some low early-college grades and a lack of econ/stats course experience), figuring it would be better to point them out and explain them rather than have the adcom people discuss them without me getting a word in -- no idea if this helped, but in the case of WWS it can't have hurt too badly (Goldman didn't have space for such a document, if memory serves, so I only submitted it to WWS and HKS).

But while all the writing/GRE/career stuff might have helped, I do think what worked the most in my favor was the fact that I was able to give the schools a rather strong sense of who I am and what is driving me to study public policy.

So in short, if you can put together an otherwise compelling application that can at least indicate some broad area of interest, I think you'll be in good shape. But I'd ask around and even email some admissions personnel (if you're paranoid such emails would hinder your chances -- though I don't think they would -- just send these emails to competitive programs to which you won't be applying).

Hope this has been helpful, and let me know if you have further questions. I'm by no means an expert, but I did learn a lot from the application process.

[malmo]

Wow thanks a lot, CowboyDan. That was incredibly helpful! I really appreciate the advice and I will definitely be thinking about how to craft the kind of cohesive application you're talking about. BTW, congrats on WWS!

It's a complicated, tough call. Here's my situation, which will hopefully be somewhat informative and useful. I've been working as a journalist (mostly opinion writing rather than reporting) since I graduated in '06, and have realized that the issues I care the most about all connect to poverty, inequality, and the wealth gap. I decided to take a crack at grad school with an eye toward becoming a much more informed, connected-to-policy-debates journalist. So I applied to HKS, WWS, and Goldman, and got into the latter two. (It looks like I'll be going to WWS.)

I definitely had less policy background than almost anyone in my incoming class, and certainly couldn't say specifically what I wanted to study, but I made a conscious effort to tell a coherent, well-put-together story in my personal statements: I no longer want to just be another pundit who chimes in constantly and superficially; I want to actually contribute to the discussion about inequality in a careful, well-informed way. I made it clear that my interests were broad and I wanted to narrow them down, and listed some possible areas of focus (education, health care, criminal justice). I also talked about how lucky and privileged I have been growing up, and how I've come to realize just how much was given to me -- all of which is true, but also included to help make it clear to the adcom folks just how visceral an issue the wealth gap has become to me.

As for the WWS policy memo, I made sure that my topic tied closely to inequality, and that every step of the way I evaluated the nuance and complexity of the issues I was discussing (don't quote me on this, but while the point of the policy memo is to suggest concrete solutions, I really do get the sense that they'd rather see a memo filled with caveats and "buts" and "on the other hands" than one that is too sure of itself -- it's not as though they expect you to actually solve the problem in question, so I think it's more of a matter of them getting a gauge for your talents as an analytical thinker who can evaluate various bits of potentially conflicting information).

Oh, and I also told the people writing my letters what I wanted to focus on, which you should definitely do if you apply -- it helps bring the whole application package together.

I feel very thrilled and lucky to have gotten into WWS (anyone who tells you there isn't luck involved is lying -- just look at the numbers), and I was able to do so without a hugely specific area of interest. A few caveats: I write for a living, so I was probably able to make up for my (numerous) other shortcomings as an applicant with a well-written policy memo and personal statement. I also had a very high GRE score, and happen to work for a publication most people have heard of. Plus I have heard that MPP/MPA folks like journalists. I also included a note about my weaknesses (some low early-college grades and a lack of econ/stats course experience), figuring it would be better to point them out and explain them rather than have the adcom people discuss them without me getting a word in -- no idea if this helped, but in the case of WWS it can't have hurt too badly (Goldman didn't have space for such a document, if memory serves, so I only submitted it to WWS and HKS).

But while all the writing/GRE/career stuff might have helped, I do think what worked the most in my favor was the fact that I was able to give the schools a rather strong sense of who I am and what is driving me to study public policy.

So in short, if you can put together an otherwise compelling application that can at least indicate some broad area of interest, I think you'll be in good shape. But I'd ask around and even email some admissions personnel (if you're paranoid such emails would hinder your chances -- though I don't think they would -- just send these emails to competitive programs to which you won't be applying).

Hope this has been helpful, and let me know if you have further questions. I'm by no means an expert, but I did learn a lot from the application process.

[mppgal55]

Grad school is challenging. No matter what your background, there will always be a moment where you struggle/the coursework is difficult. What gets me through the more challenging coursework is a clear knowledge of how the material relates to what I want to do. Having an end goal makes the process worth it. I know it'd be much more difficult to push through the hard moments if I didn't have an understanding of why I was doing it in the first place, how it will get me where I want to be, etc.

Additionally, good schools have great networks and career connections. Different schools have different "fits" - different areas where they are stronger than other programs and have greater alumni bases, etc. If you are uncertain, you may pick a school in which the contacts you will make aren't where you will eventually want to be - and you'll have no way of determining this before hand.

An MPP/MAIR from a prestigious school is a valuable degree. Even so, why would you spend $100,000+ on something you are uncertain about? The degree is valuable, but only on top of your own motivations and experience. Is any job good enough that any good school would do? That won't sell itself to an adcomm well, and it won't really sell itself to an employer eventually either. Being able to connect your degree and background to potential jobs, including why you want the job, will be necessary at the end of the road.

If you are uncertain about education versus healthcare versus environment, that's one thing, but if you're uncertain about the field, I think you'll have a rough road ahead. This is just my 2 cents!

[abogs78]

I have to echo what CowboyDan said as well. I did not have any public policy background or experience per se. I majored in Economics and Public Policy however I worked for an investment bank when I finished college. I worked at this investment bank for 3 years before I decided to return to my home country (in West Africa) to do some development work when I got tired of Wall Street. You mentioned that you majored in IR. Where there any topics that you really liked during your undergraduate days that you want to investigate/research even further? That is something you can highlight in your SOP or decide to focus on in graduate school. Do you have any cases that you have worked on at the law firm that you find interesting (inequality, wage gap, government programs...etc)? Or, are some of the recent happenings in the world - Haiti, Japan, Chile (disaster management), Iraq, Iran, Middle East (Security/International Relations), Sudan, Congo, Ivory Coast (international development)...etc interest you and you want to know even more about them. Maybe you want to know a lot more about a specific geographical region (Africa, Middle East, Europe, Asia, Latin America) and it is relationships (in terms of trade, economy, policy decisions...) with other regions in the world. Perhaps an international travel that caused you to have a different perspective on things you have taken for granted in the past....something along these lines might be helpful. You might even want a JD/MPP/MPA combined program and look to do something related to international law advocating for women's rights, education, environmental law....etc.

You need to do some research and decide on which programs or academic programs really interest you. I don't know which fancy law firm you work for but I will tell you this: making a transition from your law career to something public policy related might be a key item that sets you apart from others and get you into that top program! Personally, it was for me even though I did not have a stellar GPA and my GRE scores were decent. Like Cowboy Dan, I got into WWS as well and the director of the program highligted on my admission letter that they appreciate my transition from investment banking to the international development arena! My guess is this was one of the few things in my profile that got me in (although I had doubts about getting in when I applied)

Have you had an opportunity to volunteer? Volunteering is viewed positively on your resume. However, don't pad your resume unnecessarily if you have not done any volunteer work. Having had an opportunity to volunteer for 8 years since high school through my last work in the development world which I finished this February was one of the few things that made it easy for me to define what I really wanted to do during my MPP/MPA program and the skills I would like to acquire during my graduate studies. When I was applying to grad school I had no clue what I wanted to do either. So, starting my SOP was quite difficult but I had the chance to speak with one of my professors in college and he asked me one simple question - "Which topic or challenges in our world makes your blood boil and if you have a chance to address it, what would you do?" - which sparked the areas I would like to investigate and the solutions I seek to address some of the challenges we have in our society - I ended up writing a 5 page single spaced essay witihin two months on my array of interests! Of course, I had to trim off the irrelevances and get my cousin to trim it down to two/three pages before I submitted them to each school. I applied to 10 schools (all top 10 in the MPA/MPP arena) and I got into 8 programs (6 that were willing to give me funding).

So Malmo, it can be done. However, you should start your plans right now. I started a year before I submitted my applications by asking my professor (who wrote a recommendation for me as well) for guidance. I will echo CowboyDan again: get people who understand what you are looking to do or the areas that interest you to write your recommendation letters for you. Ask if they can write a "positive recommendation" for you (I actually said that in my e-mail to my professors and professional contacts). Send them a copy of your SOP (a rough draft is okay) before they start writing your letter of recommendation and give them enough time to think about what to write. Sending them your SOP might even make it easier for them to write your recommendation (my professors said this over and over again) and give them a chance to know what you are planning on doing instead of guessing/writing something generic. Again and again, time is essential not only for you to put a great application package together. It is also vital to prepare for the GREs, visit schools to decide the best programs and faculty you would lik to work with during your graduate studies plus getting your recommendations in on time. Good luck!

Edited March 21, 2011 by abogs78

[greendiplomat]

I'd just like to add my 2 cents to the very thorough and insightful responses given above.

I applied directly out of undergrad, fully aware that I wanted to go into the environmental space after getting my master's (so you could say that I definitely had more direction than your average straight-out-of-undergrad). Having deferred by a year (this decision was originally due to personal/financial reasons) and having worked in the field for almost a year now, I'm very happy about my decision to take a year off. Looking back at the classes that I was planning on taking during my two years, I'd say about 1/3 of those I wouldn't even consider taking, now that I have more specific career goals.

As such, I think that, yes you have a shot at getting in, and no, you probably won't have trouble finding employment after graduation. That said, graduate school is a substantial investment, and I think that, for it to be worth the amount of debt (unless you're well-funded either personally or externally), I think that you'll get more bang for your buck with a stronger sense of what you want to achieve with your degree.