Question: PhD in Public Policy v. Political Science

[mako06]

I would appreciate any input on this especially from veteran professors who have seen the disciplines move through their various stages. I am a Marine officer in a terminal MA security studies program. I will graduate in June and retire from the military this summer or fall. I desire to enter a PhD program (probably 2012) with IR/security studies/"grand strategy" (a hate how pretentious "grand strategy" sounds btw) as my research focus. Upon graduation, I desire to work for a think tank (RAND, CSIS, Brookings, etc), the USGOV, or in academia, in no particular order.

Having done a ton of research on PhD programs (polisci and PP) and leading scholars in those programs, my question is which PhD program, polisci or PP, is more appropriate for what I want to do? I know some polisci programs have a security studies/strategy focus: MIT, Georgetown, Chicago somewhat, Yale but more so in History. Then there are a few unusual programs: SAIS with Prof. Eliot Cohen and RAND grad school. The there are all the PP programs many of which have a security track option.

I have looked at the curriculums and courses in most if not all of these, and am leaning towards a PP PhD program. I just wanted to get the input of the gradcafe crowd.

Let's just assume for the moment that I am a competitive candidate for the top programs. Is it better to go to Chicago and study with Mearsheimer and Pape, et al., a polisci program with a security focus like MIT/Georgetown, or a top PP program?

Thanks...

[Zahar Berkut]

Conventional wisdom says a political science PhD is better for the academic job market, while a public policy degree will look better everywhere else. But with security studies the line is grey, especially if you take a political economy approach or specialize in specific issues rather than "grand" theoretical concerns. Joseph Nye put his degree to good use outside academia, for instance (an exception?). It's possible for public policy PhD's to get academic jobs as well, but it's far less common (I can think of two professors total I know of with that degree). And for US government, depending on the position, both ought to be acceptable, especially given your already deep background.

One important consideration: the value added of a PhD for academia is crystal clear, but it's less obvious what a public policy PhD will do for you already having an M.A. Which is to say, from my academic-centric point of view, that it may help, but it will take more justification on your point to decide why the extra education is beneficial.

I hope that helps a little. I'm curious myself now about placement records and such for public policy PhD programs.

[mako06]

Interesting to note the vast majority of the faculty at Harvard KSG PP program all have PhDs in Economics.

[The Lorax]

I went through the same round of decision making. I'm now finishing up a Master's of Public Policy, and am headed into a PhD in Poli Sci. The conventional wisdom as told to me is that a PhD in Public Policy rules out academia unless you want to work in a Policy school, but these jobs are far scarcer than standard degrees, but that a PhD in Poli Sci opens up the job market both in Policy and Poli Sci as far as academia, and still preps you well for a think tank job. So Poli Sci gives you more options.

Speaking to the concern about needing a PhD in policy when you already have an MA if you decide to work outside of academia...well, that's just snobbery talking. If you want to work outside of academia and you want to work for a high level think tank, you better have a PhD in something. Policy is as legit, if not more so, as a field of study as is Poli Sci in the world of practical application.

So the question is, what do you REALLY want to do?? As a fence sitter myself...I picked policy sci, but I did not apply anywhere that didn't have a strong policy option as a subfield/ a strong policy school that I could moonlight in should I so desire.

It is important to keep in mind the important difference in what a poli sci degree vs. a policy degree is all about. Poli sci is strictly academic. It studies the movement of political institutions, sure, but it often fails to ask the next obvious question...so what do we DO about it? Political science doesn't care about what people should/could do. It's not active. The entire orientation of public policy is answering the question, what to do next? It's involved with quantifying and assessing the outcomes/impacts of policy decisions, and calculating the consequences of the next set of potential policy moves.

The cynical part of me asked my self "do you want to relegate yourself to a dusty shelf, answering narrow irrelevant questions, that even if they do change the field, will only reach a half a dozen other dusty, shelved people?? Or do you want to hit the pavement and at least try to make this place more just??"

Edited April 13, 2011 by The Lorax