Univ of Chicago CIR Strengths/Weaknesses

[Sroek]

I was accepted into the University of Chicago's Committee on International Relations and I was wondering if anyone knows the pros and cons to going to the school? Has anyone been there or know somebody that is attending. I was told by the director of admissions at GTowns CPASS to make sure I went to an APSIA member school, but Chicago is an affiliate member and doesn't have full membership because it lacks one or more of their requirements. What are your thoughts? So far I've been accepted to Korbel in Denver and Chicago and my area of focus is security studies. Is it worth going? Opinions?

[Sroek]

Please, please, somebody post something!

[globalsun]

I was accepted into the University of Chicago's Committee on International Relations and I was wondering if anyone knows the pros and cons to going to the school? Has anyone been there or know somebody that is attending. I was told by the director of admissions at GTowns CPASS to make sure I went to an APSIA member school, but Chicago is an affiliate member and doesn't have full membership because it lacks one or more of their requirements. What are your thoughts? So far I've been accepted to Korbel in Denver and Chicago and my area of focus is security studies. Is it worth going? Opinions?

I was accepted to with a good amount of aid. I think I will be going to the open house.

The general impressions of the program are:

1. Very theory based. Academically its probably a extremely rigorous given the massive thesis due at the end. You can extend to a second year if your research requires it.

2. The one year, bookish nature of the program is also way too short for you to find internships, etc.

3. Chicago is not an ideal location for future international policy jobs.

4. Chicago's reputation is very strong in the academic community especially at the Phd level, but its reputation to employers might be more limited than other big name programs.

5. It is a good school to go if you are preparing for a future Phd.

6. Not that competitive to get in (50% admit rates I heard from staff).

7. Small program and the faculty I have talked to seemed nice.

[s58]

Hi,

Even I'm accepted to CIR this Fall with a considerable amount of aid. Is there a substantial chance of continuing into the second year of this degree? (there website suggests every year some of the students do this)

Also, does anyone have any idea of how strong their papers on the Middle East are?

I'm an international student, so I won't be attending the open house.

Have no idea about the strength of their security studies concentrations. But yes, program definitely seems quite academic and not quite professional.

[light]

I too have been accepted for the fall with a good amount of funding, and will be attending. I visited CIR in May and found it to be the most academically oriented of the major programs (also visited Fletcher, GW Elliott, NYU Politics/IR). I liked that the program seemed very much like a community whereas Fletcher (albeit an impressive program) felt too career oriented (suit for interview). So, it really depends on what you are looking to get out of it. Personally, I think living in Chicago is going to be great, and the surrounding city is large factor for me as well. With respect to how good they are in certain areas... the best way to find out is to look at who the faculty are, get on JSTOR, and read some of their publications. I will be pursuing international law, and Eric Posner is one of the best out there. I hope this helps. See some of you on April 6, and happy choosing.

[Rhymenoceros]

I too got accepted to Chicago's CIR and received a nice financial aid package (1/3 tuition fellowship). I'm still waiting to hear from Georgetown & SAIS, but this is the most generous aid package I have received thus far. The fact that I can finish my MA in a year at Chicago already cuts my cost in half, when compared to the other private IR programs.

Now I got to wait & see what happens with these other schools

[Sroek]

So what does it mean for us, will we be able to get a job when we finish aside from that in the academic sector? How competitive was it to get in? My acceptance letter said they received over 300 apps and the website says they accept about 40-50 people. Do you guys know otherwise? And one last thing, how far do you think the brand name and reputation will take us?

[light]

I think that CIR grads have no problem getting jobs after graduation. Check this out http://cir.uchicago.edu/prospectivestud ... ment.shtml

It's also a very good point about halving the costs of living in a one-year program as opposed to a two-year.

[globalsun]

Chicago gave me a generous fellowship too. But I feel an one year degree is a just way too short to achieve to get a full, well rounded education in IR. Stanford heard that from its alumni and extended its one year MA IR program to two. Looking at the CIR curriculum, its essentially taking the first year of a Chicago Political Science Phd program. I also would not blindly trust what the website says in terms of job placement as many people who found great positions in consulting or banking probably likely were doing a dual degree with Booth MBA Program. Its really hard to imagine one can get a job with Booz Allen Hamilton with only a one year, academic IR degree.

Also take note that the program is not fully accredited by the APSIA. Still I think I will be headed to Chicago on the 6th, just to see for my self. If my only goal was to improve my odds for a later Political Science Phd, then Chicago would be a great choice.

[Sroek]

So far I have to pick between Korbel at DU or Chicago CIR. Korbel seems more practical, an APSIA member, and on paper an excellent Inlt Security curriculum. On the other hand, Chicago has the academics without dispute, name brand and rep, and unforeseen opportunities, but does lack full APSIA membership because it is only an Affiliate Member and the one year program does seem too short, limited, and no internship. Everyone tells me go to Chicago out of the two because it is Chicago, but what do I do?

[globalsun]

So far I have to pick between Korbel at DU or Chicago CIR. Korbel seems more practical, an APSIA member, and on paper an excellent Inlt Security curriculum. On the other hand, Chicago has the academics without dispute, name brand and rep, and unforeseen opportunities, but does lack full APSIA membership because it is only an Affiliate Member and the one year program does seem too short, limited, and no internship. Everyone tells me go to Chicago out of the two because it is Chicago, but what do I do?

I think the APSIA membership is only a rough indicator of quality and they have not been transparent about all the requirements a school needs to become a full member. There are of programs that seem far inferior to what Chicago can offer, but get membership status for probably their independence from main university. Its also inconsistent given that a famous school like LSE is a full member even though its a purely academic one year program. I think you can craft the curriculum in Chicago around your interests given the variety of courses offered there. You always have an option of extending it to two years if you feel there is a need and get a summer internship. In the end I really do think a U Chicago degree trumps DU given its academic rigor, even though it falls short of the heavy weight IR schools like SAIS, SIPA, WWS, and KGS.

[Sroek]

I'm going nuts people! Anybody have any other thoughts on this?

[console]

I'm going nuts people! Anybody have any other thoughts on this?

Hi Sroek and Others,

First of all, congratulations on your acceptances. It's no easy feat, particularly in this admissions cycle.

I honestly think the Chicago MA in IR adds very little value. I guess if you want a theory-based academically-oriented program you could make a case for it, but it seems a bit like a degree unsure of its purpose. One argument is that it's a good primer for a PhD, but the program touts students' ability to take courses at Harris, the law school and other departments. The other argument, though not stated as forcefully, is that the degree will help you get a job in IR policy or the private sector. I hardly think a one-year academic degree helps achieve this goal. Never mind the lack of networking and the inability to develop a concentration within IR, I just don't think you can take enough classes in a year to do some real policy analysis in addition to the theory/history based courses. Lastly, the Chicago brand is pretty impressive, but people working in IR know the solid MA programs and won't be impressed just because you have Chicago CIR on your resume. I guess if you're planning on working outside of IR, Chicago prestige might come into play. In the end, the program seems only good for IR PhD aspirants who don't yet have a package that will get them into an actual PhD program.

Prestige is an issue every admissions cycle, and it was a factor for me too, but after having been in grad school for a year, I've realized people take it a bit too far, to the point of creating these mythical programs. When you look at the IR rankings, applicants aren't the only one falling for this apparently. UCSD, Syracuse and Denver should be ranked higher in my view, while Chicago, Stanford, MIT and Yale to a degree should be lower. But with all the emphasis on going to a "top" school, what I hear most from career services at my school and from alumni is the importance of networking. I know this isn't news, but contacts in and out of your school network is absolutely the most important thing, unless you're getting into something quite technical. And yeah going to a "top" school does give you access to some impressive people, but there are plenty of folks working in IR at high-level positions who didn't go to those schools. In my view, while the prestige factor can be justifiably be part of the calculus, the fit is so much more important; that is, the character of the school (if I can call it that: community feel v. all business), the strength and courses offered in your area of interest, flexibility and so on.

So if I had to choose between Chicago and Denver as someone looking for a professional IR degree (and that's what APSIA's all about right? Not theory study), I'd take Denver without hesitation. I don't know either program personally so who am I to say, but I do know someone from CIR who got little from it in terms of professional development and I've heard from lots of people that Denver's got a great program and it's on the rise. I would try not to give in to the prestige-whoring that's rampant not only in the IR field, but in our society generally. Don't get me wrong, since we live in this world, going to a "top" school makes your life easier and there is some merit to why these programs are sought after, but other schools equip you with skills and opportunities to do amazing things with your life. The important thing is commitment to your field and making good decisions (finding mentors, picking classes, etc.) during grad school.

I hope this wasn't too preachy, but for me it was hard to get a sense of the balance between going to the best school I got into and going to the right school for me. My decision came down to choosing a school that was strong programmatically in areas that I was weaker in and seemed important for future professional development. I know this is a tough decision, but I would just urge you to continue to seek out opinions from lots of people and try not to listen to anybody too much. Is that bad advice? I don't know, I don't REALLY know what I'm talking about.

Good luck to you all of you!

[HisRoyalHighness]

Console wrote:

Prestige is an issue every admissions cycle, and it was a factor for me too, but after having been in grad school for a year, I've realized people take it a bit too far, to the point of creating these mythical programs. When you look at the IR rankings, applicants aren't the only one falling for this apparently. UCSD, Syracuse and Denver should be ranked higher in my view, while Chicago, Stanford, MIT and Yale to a degree should be lower. But with all the emphasis on going to a "top" school, what I hear most from career services at my school and from alumni is the importance of networking. I know this isn't news, but contacts in and out of your school network is absolutely the most important thing, unless you're getting into something quite technical. And yeah going to a "top" school does give you access to some impressive people, but there are plenty of folks working in IR at high-level positions who didn't go to those schools. In my view, while the prestige factor can be justifiably be part of the calculus, the fit is so much more important; that is, the character of the school (if I can call it that: community feel v. all business), the strength and courses offered in your area of interest, flexibility and so on.

This is one of the best things I've read so far on this site. The obsession with "rankings" while ignoring clear deficiencies in the higher-ranked programs (like the fact that KSG and Yale are both inferior IR programs which are more highly ranked because they have the Harvard and Yale names behind them) is really quite shocking. I wasn't aware when I applied that I was going to be paying $50,000+ per year for an extended two-year employment program. I thought I was applying to programs in which I was interested, which impressed me and who would teach me the most about my chosen field.

[light]

I've been thinking about this, and I don't think CIR is overrated. To be honest, I didn't think it was one of the highly ranked IR programs. I have always wanted to go to Chicago because I was a History major in undergrad, and UofC is (arguably) the History Mecca. Then I came to find out that this program offers students resources (including faculty) from History, Classics, Law, Political Science, Anthro, and area studies. I think that's pretty exciting.