War/Security Studies PHD

[Stapler88]

Hi everyone, 

 

I'm new to the board.  I am looking into starting a graduate program with the goal of going into academia (so eventually a PhD).  I am an attorney and have been practicing law for almost 4 years now so I already have a JD (I heard that most places will treat this as an MA for PhD application purposes).  I am looking to study War/Security Studies with a particular focus on insurgency/counterinsurgency/terrorism.  What are the top programs for this?  

 

Thanks!  

[dpgu800]

The usual choices would be Georgetown Security Studies Program and Johns Hopkins SAIS Security Studies MA.

 

But I haven't really dug around in this area to know a lot....

I know a person in the Georgetown SSP, and s/he loves the program and Georgetown in general is very well respected in DC.

[Stapler88]

What do those schools look at when making decisions on admitting students?  I have a good undergraduate GPA (over a 3.9) in polisci and even took grad courses while in undergrad.  However, my gpa in law school was about a 3.3 (which was enough for cum laude status).  I also published in an international law journal while in law school and have about 4 years of work experience (in law and teaching at the college level, which included government and theory courses).  Assuming I get a competitive GRE score, where does this put me in terms of being competitive for Georgetown/John Hopkins/Princeton? 

Edited March 10, 2014 by Stapler88

[Doyle]

A couple of other programs to consider: 

 

Harvard Kennedy School (esp faculty associated with the Belfer Center), MIT, Princeton WWS, Fletcher school, Ohio State Mershon Center, Texas A&M.  If you're open to a British-style PhD, the Kings College London War Studies or Defence Studies programs are excellent, and both offer blended distance learning--or if your personal situation allows, you could live in the UK for a few years.  If you want to teach in the US. the UK programs may be less helpful, as many U.S. departments will look for some significant methodological (read: quantitative) background, which the British-style program won't provide.  (You could offset that with a quant-intensive or mixed-methods dissertation that demonstrates mastery of the techniques--you just won't have classes to point to, since the British program is dissertation only).

 

The undergraduate GPA is certainly competitive. I don't know how the various schools would interpret the law school GPA but cum laude and published certainly help.  

 

Since you have some time, I'd recommend doing some background reading on the faculty at the various schools (CV/major work) to get a sense of who you might be interested in working with.  Then reach out to them and see how they assess your chances.  While they may or may not be on the admissions committee, many will give you a sense of how your profile and interests fit with the school. 

[dpgu800]

What do those schools look at when making decisions on admitting students?  I have a good undergraduate GPA (over a 3.9) in polisci and even took grad courses while in undergrad.  However, my gpa in law school was about a 3.3 (which was enough for cum laude status).  I also published in an international law journal while in law school and have about 4 years of work experience (in law and teaching at the college level, which included government and theory courses).  Assuming I get a competitive GRE score, where does this put me in terms of being competitive for Georgetown/John Hopkins/Princeton? 

Your law background certainly won't hurt, if not help you.

And your poli sci background will also serve you well, esp with your GPA.

 

As for your chances, the SSP's published admissions stat is:

GPA - 3.59

GRE Verbal - 162 (87%) *

GRE Quantitative - 156 (65%) *

GRE Writing - 4.8 (76%)

TOEFL (Internet based) - 108

IELTS - 8.0 

Average Age - 26

Average Years Work Experience - 2.7

 

(http://css.georgetown.edu/ssp/admissions/review/)

And "Admission to the SSP is competitive: 25 to 30 percent of applicants are admitted each admissions cycle."

 

All in all, your chances are very good, esp with a GRE score above the average.

Compelling SOP is def good, and good, personalized LORs would boost your prospect greatly

(mixing academic and prof. references is something you need to consider as well)

Since you prob took the LSAT, I assume you shouldn't have too much trouble with the verbal section, tho idk how you're with the math...

 

And in general, IR-related programs like to see

1) relevant professional/academic exp. in the field you intend to study/work in after graduation,

2) your fit to the program (does your particular academic interest match the faculty expertise, etc), and

3) a compelling reason/narrative why you want to study this field

    (relevant in your case b/c you're switching fields, tho your case isn't too uncommon in the IR field. Many IR folks I've seen had law background) 

(hopefully this isn't too general of information you already know...)

 

And like others mentioned, MIT is well-known for security studies issues, as well as Fletcher School  

King's College London is also def well known in the field, esp. bc not a lot of UK universities can match KCL's expertise in War Studies. 

[IRToni]

Guys, you're all talking about MAs/policy PhDs, while the OP seems to be talking about general poli sci PhDs. Admission rates for these tend to be closer to 10% than to 30%. I'll reply more thoroughly in the Poli Sci forum

[Stapler88]

Guys, you're all talking about MAs/policy PhDs, while the OP seems to be talking about general poli sci PhDs. Admission rates for these tend to be closer to 10% than to 30%. I'll reply more thoroughly in the Poli Sci forum

What's the difference between policy PhD's and general poll sic PhD's in terms of course of study and choices after graduation?  

[dpgu800]

What's the difference between policy PhD's and general poll sic PhD's in terms of course of study and choices after graduation?  

IRToni means that the info I provided is for the security studies. My bad..

Most of what I said still applies, except that academic background/record will be more important for a PhD. And admissions rate is much, much lower for PhDs, tho funding options are usually much, much better with a PhD 

But if you want a PhD and you don't have any postgraduate qualification in that field, you might be asked to do a MA first anyway. 

 

The securtiy studies programs I and others have mentioned are policy programs that are more multidisciplinary (except for the KCL War Studies program, which is basically in a league of its own, being an academic degree for the study of war/conflict), in contrast to more traditional, disciplinary, academic poli sci degrees, which are more grounded in poli sci research methodology.

MIT poli sci dept that I mentioned is an example of the latter, which is a academic poli sci dept with particular expertise in war studies/security studies.

 

You can still get a security studies PhD from Johns Hopkins SAIS, but it'll be offered by a policy school, and thus will not hold much sway with traditional poli sci depts. It will be good for a career in the policy community, but not so for becoming an academic in traditional setting

[Stapler88]

I see.  My goals are to go into academia with the option of doing public policy work at some point as well.  As such, which program would give me the most flexibility?  

[dpgu800]

I see.  My goals are to go into academia with the option of doing public policy work at some point as well.  As such, which program would give me the most flexibility?  

It's my understanding that even policy school academics usually have traditional, disciplinary PhDs. I've seen couple that have a policy school PhD, but I don't believe that's the norm.

A "old fashioned" poli sci PhD with a optional emphasis/faculty expertise in security studies issue would be ideal for you, I would argue.

And the MIT poli sci program seems to fit this mold pretty well. They're well-respected as a poli sci dept, and they do churn out pretty high-profile security studies-related research...

 

KCL's War Studies PhD might be good, too. But I'm not too sure about employment prospect in the US for British PhDs, at least for lesser known schools like KCL. I've seen LSE and Oxbridge PhDs with positions in tier 1 research unis in the US, but haven't seen any KCL grads...

 

But again, this is really not my area. Most poli sci depts do offer specialization in conflict/security studies, and you could prob find a good fit for yourself. MIT's really the only one I know that's solid in reputation and academic rigor. And you may be able to find better advice/info from the poli sci forum

 

One thing to note tho is that such traditional poli sci depts will usually be less flexible/tolerant of "deviant" backgrounds (like law, in your case), and will force you to start from the MA level. This may not be a problem for you, but it could a potential downer, b/c it's at least one or two additional yrs to your studies.

[IRToni]

What's the difference between policy PhD's and general poll sic PhD's in terms of course of study and choices after graduation?  

 

There's actually a number of differences. You need a M.A. for a Policy PhD, while you don't need one for a Poli Sci PhD. This also means that a Poli Sci PhD is usually longer than a Policy PhD (min. 5 instead of min. 3/4 years). If you want an academic career, a Poli Sci PhD is the way to go. Many Poli Sci PhDs can be inter-disciplinary, in that they allow you to take courses outside of Poli Sci, and have committee members from Econ, law etc., but at the end of the day, you will be a political scientist.

 

 

One thing to note tho is that such traditional poli sci depts will usually be less flexible/tolerant of "deviant" backgrounds (like law, in your case), and will force you to start from the MA level. This may not be a problem for you, but it could a potential downer, b/c it's at least one or two additional yrs to your studies.

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that. However, they will want to know that you know what academic poli sci is about, and have some idea of the state of the field.

 

OP, I agree that MIT sounds great for your interest, because it tends to be relatively policy-relevant in its research.

[dpgu800]

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that. However, they will want to know that you know what academic poli sci is about, and have some idea of the state of the field.

 

OP, I agree that MIT sounds great for your interest, because it tends to be relatively policy-relevant in its research.

What I meant was that they'll want you to start from the beginning of the program, instead of giving advanced standing and transfer credits.

Most academic programs don't really offer terminal MAs anyways. 

That's really true with any social science postgraduate program....

[Doyle]

While there is something to the notion that a "traditional" political science/IR PhD is easier to sell in the academic job market, much will depend on the specific school, the degree to which the policy program is integrated with the political science/IR program, and the specific advisors you wind up working with.  I would disagree with the notion that a degree from SAIS would somehow be discounted in the academic job market because it is a policy school, for example.  In my opinion, a security studies program at a top-tier policy school where you work with faculty who are well-known and well-regarded in the political science community (e.g. WWS, SAIS, HKS) will be just as competitive in the job market as an IR degree from a similar top tier school.  

 

If you look around, there are only a handful of programs that specialize in security studies at the PhD level, either policy or traditional IR.  The choice between an IR and a policy program should be based on the particulars of that program.  I think you'll get the best sense of that by contacting faculty at the schools you're interested in, describing your research interests, and getting a sense of how well that fits with each school.  

[IRToni]

While there is something to the notion that a "traditional" political science/IR PhD is easier to sell in the academic job market, much will depend on the specific school, the degree to which the policy program is integrated with the political science/IR program, and the specific advisors you wind up working with.  I would disagree with the notion that a degree from SAIS would somehow be discounted in the academic job market because it is a policy school, for example.  In my opinion, a security studies program at a top-tier policy school where you work with faculty who are well-known and well-regarded in the political science community (e.g. WWS, SAIS, HKS) will be just as competitive in the job market as an IR degree from a similar top tier school.  

 

 

I thought this as well, but all of my professors vehemently disagreed with me. According to them, someone coming in with a SAIS PhD (which, coincidentally, was the school I was considering), will be at a disadvantage, because he won't have done the comprehensive examinations, has less relevant teaching experience ( teaching politics), was not required to go through the same rigorous PoliSci PhD process, and is thus, according to them, lacking in general knowledge of the field. Of course, you can argue with that, but that was what they were saying.

 

This does not, however, apply to the joint PhDs offered at HKS, e.g. (PEG) or Michigan, though!

[Doyle]

I thought this as well, but all of my professors vehemently disagreed with me. According to them, someone coming in with a SAIS PhD (which, coincidentally, was the school I was considering), will be at a disadvantage, because he won't have done the comprehensive examinations, has less relevant teaching experience ( teaching politics), was not required to go through the same rigorous PoliSci PhD process, and is thus, according to them, lacking in general knowledge of the field. Of course, you can argue with that, but that was what they were saying.

 

This does not, however, apply to the joint PhDs offered at HKS, e.g. (PEG) or Michigan, though!

I don't think your professors were up on the latest SAIS program.  According to their website, SAIS requires 3 comprehensive exams.  WWS requires 2 one of which is the Politics Department IR general exam.  I can't speak to the teaching requirements at SAIS, but at WWS the teaching requirement is most likely to be satisfied in a politics class.  There may still be a perception to be battled in some quarters, but I think by the time it gets to a hiring committee, the specifics of the degree will carry weight.

[hailmary]

You need a M.A. for a Policy PhD, while you don't need one for a Poli Sci PhD. This also means that a Poli Sci PhD is usually longer than a Policy PhD (min. 5 instead of min. 3/4 years). If you want an academic career, a Poli Sci PhD is the way to go. Many Poli Sci PhDs can be inter-disciplinary, in that they allow you to take courses outside of Poli Sci, and have committee members from Econ, law etc., but at the end of the day, you will be a political scientist.

 

This is not true.  I split my PhD applications between public policy and business schools and none of the programs require an M.A.  All of them take about 5 years.  And the goal for both is academic careers, though there are people in both that go into industry.  Also, all of the programs I applied to are highly interdisciplinary and allow you to take courses in other schools and departments.