Program dilemma: Theoretical based IR vs practical based MPA

[talons1025]

I am extremely torn between these two programs (in case anyone actually wants to see them, here are the links):

 

MPA  http://las.depaul.edu/sps/Programs/Degrees/InternationalPublicServices.asp

IR      http://las.depaul.edu/int/Programs/Graduate/index.asp

 

IR is very, very theoretical based.  I am not sure I like that very much.  What I DO like, however, is that it is an affiliate member of the APSIA.  I contacted the program director and she had told me that graduates often go on into foreign service (which is what I want to do).  When questioning the heavy theoretical approach, her response was: "our perspective is that the theory component helps students become better critical thinkers and  ultimately informs the work they do in the field.  Students taje the theory they learn in the core courses and apply it to a particular question or issue.

 

It seems to me that these skills, while great, are not really suitable for finding employment in case the FSOT doesnt really work out.  Also, they seem better suited to someone who is after a phd.

 

The MPA is pretty straight-foward.  I do like it, but its not part of the APSIA at all, which is a downer.  I do worry how good of a program it is vs a traditional IR program like the other one. 

 

Any thoughts?

 

[TimB]

It depends on what you want to do. If you want to do IR focused work, I'd say IR is a better bet, if you want to work in management but in an international context, the MPA might be better suited for you. 

 

Finding employment with graduate level skills has a lot to do with networking, so I would investigate their alumni network and where they place students. How good the school is for networking probably has more to do with placement than how "practical," the program is. 

 

Personally, I'm not well suited for HR work or budgeting. It interest me only as a means to an end; I've always been focused on the theory and the big picture. If you're the same way, I say go for the IR degree even if it seems less practical. One of the best nuggets of advice I've ever gotten was "don't get good at a shitty job," or pretty much, don't try to specialize in what you don't want to do.

 

However, if you like the more practical stuff because that's what you like to do (and I know some people do love the management and HR aspect of operations), than go with that. Any organization needs both big picture/theory people and practical operations focused folks.

Edited November 6, 2013 by TimB

[CurrentFSO]

There's no one perfect way in to the Foreign Service.  People come in with all kinds of different backgrounds.  In my A-100 training class we had MAIRs, MPPs, lawyers, journalists, teachers, PR folks, former military, an EMT, a biologist, and others.  So, there's no magic ticket in to the FS and no wrong way either.  What's important is doing well on the FSOT, the QEP, and FSOA.  The State Department posts the 13 dimensions it uses to evaluate applicants on its careers.state.gov website if you poke around a bit and the best preparation is to take the test.  So, if you haven't taken the written exam yet, you should give it a try.  It's free and just takes a few hours of your time.  If you pass, great, but if not then you get a sense on what you need to work on for the next time. 

 

Also, I always encourage people who are interested in the Foreign Service to make choices that will serve them well even if the Foreign Service doesn't work out.  Each year, somewhere around 20,000 people take the written exam, but anywhere from 250-700 are hired.  So, even in peak hiring years, only about 3.5% of the people who take the written are actually hired.  So, don't make any decision solely based on what will or won't get you in to the Foreign Service.  There's no guarantee of getting in, and there are a lot of other great opportunities out there, too.

[NPRjunkie]

Foreign Service won't care which type of degree you do. If you don't like theory, don't do a theory-based degree. The Foreign Service won't care whether you went to an APSIA school. If you want to do government service at all, getting a master's is necessary at some point for career advancement but it doesn't matter where it's from, but the thing you need to consider is that your career trajectory/priorities might change. By that logic, a professional degree will serve you better. And by that logic (again), just choose the best umbrella brand name you can (i.e. the best university that has a public policy program you can get into). No one will know or care what you studied 5 years down the line; at most, they'll think "Oh, this person went to University of X--I went there as an undergrad!" not "Oh, he did a theory-based IR program instead of a blah bla blah." That doesn't happen.

[TimB]

Foreign Service won't care which type of degree you do. If you don't like theory, don't do a theory-based degree. The Foreign Service won't care whether you went to an APSIA school. If you want to do government service at all, getting a master's is necessary at some point for career advancement but it doesn't matter where it's from, but the thing you need to consider is that your career trajectory/priorities might change. By that logic, a professional degree will serve you better. And by that logic (again), just choose the best umbrella brand name you can (i.e. the best university that has a public policy program you can get into). No one will know or care what you studied 5 years down the line; at most, they'll think "Oh, this person went to University of X--I went there as an undergrad!" not "Oh, he did a theory-based IR program instead of a blah bla blah." That doesn't happen.

 

I don't know how much I agree with that. At the very highest level, yes, it might initially get your resume a second glance if you come from a program with tremendous name recognition like Harvard of Princeton, but after that top echelon I think the value of a name decreases dramatically. Is anyone really going to have their eyes bug out seeing that you went to Duke as opposed to Syracuse, or NYU as opposed to the New School? I just don't think it will make a difference to most employers. Connections however, make a huge difference. It's not only how you land a job, it's how you find out about them in the first place. To that end, higher ranked programs that might not have the name recognition of an Ivy (Chicago, Duke, NYU, American) will still have great alumni networks, good internships, and prominent professors. Obviously significantly lower ranked programs might not offer as good opportunities. 

 

Harvard might have great name recognition, but if you're a shy person whose not great at networking with your professors, then being in a class of a few hundred might not be as good for you as a smaller program where you're one of thirty or forty students. 

Edited November 11, 2013 by TimB

[NPRjunkie]

I don't know how much I agree with that. At the very highest level, yes, it might initially get your resume a second glance if you come from a program with tremendous name recognition like Harvard of Princeton, but after that top echelon I think the value of a name decreases dramatically. Is anyone really going to have their eyes bug out seeing that you went to Duke as opposed to Syracuse, or NYU as opposed to the New School? I just don't think it will make a difference to most employers. Connections however, make a huge difference. It's not only how you land a job, it's how you find out about them in the first place. To that end, higher ranked programs that might not have the name recognition of an Ivy (Chicago, Duke, NYU, American) will still have great alumni networks, good internships, and prominent professors. Obviously significantly lower ranked programs might not offer as good opportunities. 

 

Harvard might have great name recognition, but if you're a shy person whose not great at networking with your professors, then being in a class of a few hundred might not be as good for you as a smaller program where you're one of thirty or forty students. 

 

Nothing you said is remotely at odds with what I said. I said no one will care about a theory vs. professional degree in the FS (true); I said no one will care if you went to an APSIA school (true); I said for the FS it doesn't matter where you got your degree (true); I said a professional degree is more versatile than a theory-based degree if you don't choose the FS (true); I said the best possible brand name you can get in terms of schools can only serve you better (true); I said no one will care what you studied 5 years down the line (true); I said, at most, they will care if you went to the same university they did without any reference to Ivy League schools (true and absolutely the exact same thing you said). Did you really just make me repeat my entire post? I didn't go to an Ivy school and I (quite obviously) include my own school in the top branded ones that I mentioned.

But, having turned down an Ivy school for SAIS and now 5+ years down the line and wanting another career change, I most certainly would prefer an Ivy branded degree especially compared to my friends who chose a different program. It's my particular problem (not with the school), but I never indicated any of that in my post above so I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. I think a lot of people like to pretend these are objective rankings when it completely depends on your own trajectory, and that can change dramatically in and shortly after grad. school. It always seemed half my classmates were greenhorns fresh from undergrad so I'm not sure what all the fuss is about with my program, but whatever. I'm sure each school has its strengths and flaws.

Edited November 12, 2013 by NPRjunkie