Quantitative and Econ heavy IR programs?

[bsack]

i'm probably going to be doing an mphil in IR at cambridge in the fall (or oxford, havent heard back from them yet though), because i'm not down for the whole "work for 3 years at an NGO before applying" jam that most US programs have going on. the uk programs let you apply/are designed for immediately after undergrad. however, aside for some possible research related statistics, the uk programs aren't particularly quant heavy. so i'd like to compliment it with another, more quant/econ heavy masters. i was wondering if you guys knew of some good programs for this particular purpose. thus far, i've found two programs that seem to match nicely

first is the master of international economics and finance (or "MEIF") at SAIS johns hopkins. this is very ideal because it covers the exact stuff i want to learn, it's targeted towards young, very early career individuals, it's only a year long program, i'd be able to take some IR electives just for fun, and it's at a stellar school.

second is the IPS program at Stanford. also quant heavy, covers the stuff i want to learn, get to take some cool IR stuff on top of the quant stuff. it is a year longer than the SAIS program, but i think the Stanford name and network in general could make it relatively more valuable than SAIS. plus, ive heard that it is possible to get generous funding in the second year, more so than most schools aside from princeton's woodrow wilson. 

other economics masters i've found are academic and often lead to a PhD track, which is not what i'm looking for. so you guys got any suggestions/know some other programs that would fit? i dont want to put all my eggs into two baskets. i also wouldn't be opposed to doing a regular IR program with an econ concentration at SIPA or something a few years down the line (just cuz i like learning this stuff and i feel it would be useful), but i wonder if it would look weird to have two IR degrees on a resume. would employers be able to differentiate that one is an academic, research degree and the other is a quantitatively oriented professional degree?

[bsack]

mief* not meif

[Poli92]

What is your end goal and why do you need a quant-heavy degree to fulfill it?

[bsack]

i'm thinking i want to do something in political risk analysis, which would require a solid grasp of both international politics and econ/finance

[Poli92]

Since you'll already have considerable substantive preparation in IR, I think the marginal benefit of another IR degree would be minimal. Given that you're interested in political risk analysis, you may be better served to look at MBA programs. 

MBA programs will teach at lot more of the quant, finance, and accounting methods that go into PRA. Also, because PRA is predominately for-profit and you will likely want/have to work for a financial or consulting firm at some point, an MBA will go a lot further towards giving you the socialization and connections to help you succeed in that area. 

[publicaffairsstudent]

I think any policy related degree would be redundant. If you want to learn quant skills then don't mess around. Get a masters in statistics. If you're wedded to the econ and still in England, look into London school of economics. They have an MSc in econometrics and mathematical economics. Degrees by that name at other institutions may be worthwhile to investigate.

Edited February 24, 2016 by publicaffairsstudent

[Ben414]

I don't have anything additional to add to what Poli92 said, but I wanted to second that advice.

[bsack]

PRA is certainly what i'm drawn to the most, but i also want to be able to keep my options open. would an MBA afford me that kind of flexibility? it might be harder to say no to certain things staring down the barrel of six figure debt. this is why the one year MIEF or the generously funded stanford and princeton programs seemed attractive. ive even heard that several of stanford's first year IPS courses are taken at their business school. it just seems like an economic way to get comparable skills with a great degree of flexibility. now, i'm in no way saying that i'm guaranteed funding. but given that i've crushed it in IR in undergrad, i think probability wise, i have an exponentially greater chance of getting funding at a policy program than an MBA (unless i find an employer willing to pay), particularly those programs designed for early career professionals

Edited February 24, 2016 by bsack

[Poli92]

7 minutes ago, bsack said:

PRA is certainly what i'm drawn to the most, but i also want to be able to keep my options open. would an MBA afford me that kind of flexibility? it might be harder to say no to certain things staring down the barrel of six figure debt. this is why the one year MIEF or the generously funded stanford and princeton programs seemed attractive. ive even heard that several of stanford's first year IPS courses are taken at their business school. it just seems like an economic way to get comparable skills with a great degree of flexibility. now, i'm in no way saying that i'm guaranteed funding. but given that i've crushed it in IR in undergrad, i think probability wise, i have an exponentially greater chance of getting funding at a policy program than an MBA (unless i find an employer willing to pay), particularly those programs designed for early career professionals

Regarding flexibility, you will hem yourself in a lot more by doubling down on IR than you would if you went for the MBA. As far as the cost goes, yes, MBA programs are very expensive and generally more stingy. However, you'll just have to bear in mind that down the road you will likely not be as competitive in a field where hiring managers are used to seeing MBAs.  

[bsack]

@publicaffairsstudent i already did part of my undergrad at LSE. their econ MSc requires applicants to hold an economics undergraduate degree (otherwise you have to do an extra year of coursework), and my undergrad is IR/poli sci. plus, it's more of an academic econ degree leading to an econ PhD. it's not really they type of econ degree i'm looking for.

also, the straight-up IR masters in the UK aren't policy degrees like HKS or SIPA or something, generally speaking. they're largely academic and often come with a research component, so they're more akin to a political science advanced degree than a professional IR one. my question is, if i were to hypothetically do two masters, would people be able to differentiate between the two on my resume? they technically would both read as "M.A. IR," (unless i went to tufts fletcher or something, they have a funky name for their degree, M.A. Law and Diplomacy) but they are fundamentally different degrees in terms of content, coursework, or focus.   

Edited February 24, 2016 by bsack

[bsack]

i know im just starting out, but based on the PRA job descriptions i've seen thus far, MBA doesnt seem like a common requirement at all. is it really that ubiquitous? most of the ones i've looked at just require a masters. seems like they recruit more from the quant-oriented IR or policy programs i've mentioned above 

Edited February 24, 2016 by bsack

[monocle]

32 minutes ago, bsack said:

@publicaffairsstudent i already did part of my undergrad at LSE. their econ MSc requires applicants to hold an economics undergraduate degree (otherwise you have to do an extra year of coursework), and my undergrad is IR/poli sci. plus, it's more of an academic econ degree leading to an econ PhD. it's not really they type of econ degree i'm looking for.

also, the straight-up IR masters in the UK aren't policy degrees like HKS or SIPA or something, generally speaking. they're largely academic and often come with a research component, so they're more akin to a political science advanced degree than a professional IR one. my question is, if i were to hypothetically do two masters, would people be able to differentiate between the two on my resume? they technically would both read as "M.A. IR," (unless i went to tufts fletcher or something, they have a funky name for their degree, M.A. Law and Diplomacy) but they are fundamentally different degrees in terms of content, coursework, or focus.   

As someone who has done hiring in international development/human rights related field (albeit not the same as political risk analysis), I would not at first be able to differentiate between the two degrees.. It would definitely raise questions for me. Why do you need the two degrees? Getting the job will come down to how you frame those two different experiences during the interview and on your cover letter and resume. 

To your original question of which programs to look at: given that you're probably too stubborn to change your mind and do a two-year master's in the US.. the SAIS one-year MIEF does seem to be what you're looking for. You could also check out UChicago Harris's one-year MA in Public Policy, which is only for those who already have another graduate degree "designed for students who want to learn the fundamental skills of quantitative policy analysis."

Stanford's IPS is somewhat of an enigma.. because it's so small, I haven't really found much information about it outside its website. It doesn't seem to be any more quantitatively focused than any other program. And it's been around for 35 years with only 700 graduates, which doesn't sound like the large network you are talking about. Though if you want the prestigious name, it wouldn't hurt. If you really are willing to do 2-years though, why not do the two-year at SAIS? Or apply to the MPA/ID at Harvard which is well known to be one of the most rigorous in quantitative analysis?

[bsack]

because i want to do my masters after undergrad, and the average age of incoming of incoming students for the MPA/ID at Harvard is 28 years old. slightly lower average age for the regular SAIS 2 year, but still roughly comparable. i know it sounds kinda snooty, but 28 sounds like an eternity away haha. 

i looked up the program you mentioned at u chicago, and it seems pretty solid and roughly fits what i'm looking for. however, their website says that you either need a masters from u chicago in order to be eligible, or a PhD/MD/JD from another university. perhaps i can talk to the admissions dean though, a politically-oriented degree from one of the oxbridge schools seems like it would fit the mold of the type of students they're looking for.

based on what i've read from IPS students on gradcafe, you get the best of two worlds with their program. since the program itself is so small, you generally become tight with your cohort and get a very reliable network to draw upon. even if you have a large program at HKS or something, it is highly improbable you become tight with most of the kids in your class. on top of that, since some of your classes are taken at the business and law schools, you get another very potent and powerful network to draw upon. (plus you get access to the university's overall strong professional resources and networks). everything is fairly consolidated together. contrast this with a program like sais, which isn't even located remotely close to the main johns hopkins university campus in baltimore (sais is just 2 office buildings in dupont circle). the famous stanford name doesn't hurt either. these things, in addition to the quantitative focus of the coursework, are what drew me to their program. however, unlike the MIEF, it is two years long, which is somewhat bothersome.

Edited February 24, 2016 by bsack

[bsack]

as someone who has done hiring from IR circles, would you be less thrown off if you saw something like M.S. Foreign Service (Georgetown's creative name for their IR degree) or M.A. Law and Diplomacy (Tufts Fletcher) paired with an MPhil in IR on a resume, or would you still fundamentally recognize these as two of the same degree? ya the difference is purely semantics, but in practical terms, could it still help with differentiation with someone who is reading through resumes?

i do want to emphasize that the difference between most UK IR degrees and an American IR degree is somewhat comparable to the difference between an economics masters and a MBA, just to give a very rough/crude example. if i were to hypothetically go the double masters route, is there any way to differentiate on my resume without having to provide an explanation in every single cover letter and interview? if it's always going to come off as redundant without a proper explanation, i would likely be more inclined to steer clear of the regular IR programs and seek out more pure econ programs like the MIEF

Edited February 24, 2016 by bsack

[loveglove]

4 hours ago, bsack said:

as someone who has done hiring from IR circles, would you be less thrown off if you saw something like M.S. Foreign Service (Georgetown's creative name for their IR degree) or M.A. Law and Diplomacy (Tufts Fletcher) paired with an MPhil in IR on a resume, or would you still fundamentally recognize these as two of the same degree? ya the difference is purely semantics, but in practical terms, could it still help with differentiation with someone who is reading through resumes?

i do want to emphasize that the difference between most UK IR degrees and an American IR degree is somewhat comparable to the difference between an economics masters and a MBA, just to give a very rough/crude example. if i were to hypothetically go the double masters route, is there any way to differentiate on my resume without having to provide an explanation in every single cover letter and interview? if it's always going to come off as redundant without a proper explanation, i would likely be more inclined to steer clear of the regular IR programs and seek out more pure econ programs like the MIEF

Unfortunately, I would have to agree with everyone else that it would be seem redundant and raise a few eyebrows. Would you not have the option to make your IR degree in Cambridge more quant-heavy? Or apply directly to a masters degree that is already quant heavy? SAIS accepts a good number of people straight out of undergrad with strong stats, which you seem to have (about 20-30%).

[monocle]

5 hours ago, bsack said:

as someone who has done hiring from IR circles, would you be less thrown off if you saw something like M.S. Foreign Service (Georgetown's creative name for their IR degree) or M.A. Law and Diplomacy (Tufts Fletcher) paired with an MPhil in IR on a resume, or would you still fundamentally recognize these as two of the same degree?

To be honest--and I've said this in a couple other threads--I don't really see the UK master's adding much to employability if there was no prior work experience (in any field even if unrelated). So, seeing two master's degrees without work experience is what raises the biggest question. I might see the two degrees as possibly being a dual degree program. I would definitely ask you about each experience in the interview. It doesn't really matter what the degree says.

If your response was that you wanted more professionally-oriented, quantitative experience and thusly applied to the second, US master's. I might wonder why you didn't do that in the first place. 

But, when it comes down to it... having two master's degrees isn't a *bad* thing.. it's just that it raises questions and it's your answers that really matter.

44 minutes ago, loveglove said:

Would you not have the option to make your IR degree in Cambridge more quant-heavy?

I think this is probably the best option. Then, you might as well try to get a job in PRA right after you finish your MA from Cambridge, because why not? During application season your profile won't really look any different than it does right now since you will not yet have the Master's nor any grades to show for it, nor new work experience. You should try the job market.

Edited February 24, 2016 by monocle

[bsack]

i have work experience on capital hill and in diplomacy as an undegrad. however, i want to pivot towards more private sector stuff and PRA, hence the desire for some more quant training and practice. i want to get an academic IR experience, as i want a more in-depth understanding of the international political system. (such academic, research-based IR programs are rare, only quality ones i can think of are U Chicago, Oxbridge, and the london school of economics.) also, i genuinely enjoy learning this stuff, i'd do it even if inherited a billion dollars. plus, i think i'd have a hard time getting into most programs at my age. i think i'd likely get  one of those "rejected, but apply again in two years" letters ive seen other people on here talk about. if i doubled up, i think i'd get the very best of both worlds: more in-depth understanding and research on the one hand, and a quantitative, econ heavy professional experience on the other. if i did hypothetically double up, that would be my response to why not do the US quant degree first.

i dont think i can juice up on quant in a way that would be reflected on the degree itself. i could perhaps audit courses, as i did at lse. but i dont think that would show up on a degree. nonetheless, would auditing be viewed as beneficial from the perspective of employers?

the only person i know that got into sais straight from undergrad was a wealthy international, so they (1) obviously had a ton of international experience growing up in a foreign country and (2) had the money to pay up front. how much funding do the freshies usually get at sais? i dont know if the younger students would get a lot of money. i was also advised by the career advisor at my school not to apply right away, because, in her words, i would look lame next to the kids that have been working at an NGO in Central African Republic or something for the last 3 years. however, i dont think she was taking consideration the academic strength of my application. but how much does that matter for sais? sais is the 2nd best ranked IR program, but the 75th percentile gpa is only 3.76, which i exceed by a mile. contrast that with the 2nd ranked law school for example. as a professional IR degree, i think they would value postgrad work experience more for admissions and for financial aid/fellowships. SAIS's one year MIEF on the other hand is for early career individuals, with a big proportion of people straight from undergrad. i think i would be very competitive there, and especially have a leg up on the direct from undergrad kids with my masters. however, i really really don't want to put all my eggs in one basket, which is the raison d'etre of my post

Edited February 25, 2016 by bsack

[Solio]

13 minutes ago, bsack said:

i have work experience on capital hill and in diplomacy as an undegrad. however, i want to pivot towards more private sector stuff and PRA, hence the desire for some more quant training and practice. i want to get an academic IR experience, as i want a more in-depth understanding of the international political system. (such academic, research-based IR programs are rare, only quality ones i can think of are U Chicago, Oxbridge, and the london school of economics.) also, i genuinely enjoy learning this stuff, i'd do it even if inherited a billion dollars. plus, i think i'd have a hard time getting into most programs at my age. i think i'd likely get  one of those "rejected, but apply again in two years" letters ive seen other people on here talk about. if i doubled up, i think i'd get the very best of both worlds: more in-depth understanding and research on the one hand, and a quantitative, econ heavy professional experience on the other. if i did hypothetically double up, that would be my response to why not do the US quant degree first.

i dont think i can juice up on quant in a way that would be reflected on the degree itself. i could perhaps audit courses, as i did at lse. but i dont think that would show up on a degree. nonetheless, would auditing be viewed as beneficial from the perspective of employers?

 i was also advised by the career advisor at my school not to apply right away, because, in her words, i would look lame next to the kids that have been working at an NGO in Central African Republic or something for the last 3 years. however, i dont think she was taking consideration the academic strength of my application. but how much does that matter for sais? sais is the 2nd best ranked IR program, but the 75th percentile gpa is only 3.76, which i exceed by a mile. and is for early career individuals, with a big proportion of people straight from undergrad. i think i would be very competitive there, and especially have a leg up on the direct from undergrad kids with my masters. however, i really really don't want to put all my eggs in one basket, which is the raison d'etre of my post

bsack,

you have gotten a lot of quality advice from people on this forum, as well as your career adviser, about the value of work experience.  I'm sure you are intelligent and I don't doubt the "academic strength of [your] application", but work experience gives you something you can't get in undergrad, no matter how many tests you ace ,papers you write or how high your GPA is.  Is it possible to get into grad school without work experience?  Of course.  Do people do it every year?  Of course!  If that's what you want, go for it.  But a lot of what makes grad school such a fantastic learning experience is your fellow students, their unique life experiences, and how they help create a richer environment in which to study.   Speaking as a soon to be grad student, I would much rather have classmates that "have been working at an NGO in Central African Republic for 3 years," than someone who has a high undergraduate GPA.  

As others have suggested, check out a stats or econometrics masters or an MBA if you are seriously interested in quant.  The MIEF also sounds like an acceptable option.  And if you are serious about not putting all of your eggs in one basket try researching job opportunities.  Two years may seem like a long time to you, but I guarantee you it will fly by.  It could give you some perspective and some experience outside of the ivory tower, which will only make your application stronger.  

I wish you the best of luck in whatever you end up doing!  

[bsack]

oh i wasn't trying to denigrate the people that worked at an NGO in africa, i was trying to say the same thing you're saying: i.e. how competitive would i be against someone that has already done real world stuff abroad, even with my strong undergrad academic credentials. my personal preference would be to do grad school stuff when everything is still fresh from undergrad and i'm more enthusiastic about school, rather than wait some years and then force myself to get back into the swing of things as a full-time student to learn material that i know as a fact i could easily handle today. i'm not saying spending some time outside of the ivory tower would not be valuable, and my interning experiences thus far have provided some useful perspective. but it's just a matter of personal preference.

good luck with your elliott application! that's my school, and i think we really do have a top-notch faculty. 

[monocle]

3 minutes ago, bsack said:

my personal preference would be to do grad school stuff when everything is still fresh from undergrad and i'm more enthusiastic about school, rather than wait some years and then force myself to get back into the swing of things as a full-time student to learn material that i know as a fact i could easily handle today.

This is what I thought my senior year of undergrad, too.. but man I feel extremely grateful that someone convinced me to take a couple years off. One thing is that my professors all told me to do grad school right away, while i was still young and things were fresh. But I think that was bad advice coming from a small group of people who have done nothing but be in a university setting. If anything, I feel smarter and sharper than I did when I finished.

Ah, but I'm sure you'll be fine whatever path you choose. I feel bad for you that everyone is raining on your parade a little bit. I think the general consensus is that your reasons for wanting to do the two degrees are not very strong and that the Master's degree at Oxbridge doesn't really help your application as much as you think it will. Also you're really limiting yourself in program options not to consider non-IR programs and two-year programs with heavy econ.

As a last word for me, as an employer I literally will not know how much quant you did in your degree based on what it was called, so definitely stop worrying about that. The way I will know is by asking you. And it wouldn't matter to me whether you audited those classes, took them for supplementary credit, or they were core curriculum classes. So, if you can do it all at Cambridge, I think that would still be the best option.

[bsack]

oh i'm not wedded to a duplicate IR masters or anything. it was just one of a few options i brought up in my first post for getting a more rigorous education in economics, along with the mief and IPS. it came up some more in the subsequent responses, so that's why i went into my rationale for that particular pathway. i wanted to get a feel for whether that seems like a viable option, or whether it seems to redundant. it seems like it's more the latter, so i'm leaning more towards more econ programs, or an mba down the line if i can get employer sponsorship. but an mba would be a few years down the line, so i would have plenty of time to prepare if that's what i decide to do. however, if i want to do an econ or econ-heavy masters in 2017-2018, that's something i would have to prepare for before the application season starts again this fall. that's what i want to get out of this post: do you guys know of some more econ-focused terminal masters that aren't PhD stepping stones? i'm not a statistics or econ major, so i'm looking for a way to bolster my quant credentials to be more competitive in things like PRA, and i'm looking for programs that are geared towards students that don't necessarily already have an econ or business bachelors (like LSE's one year MSc requires). i mentioned the MIEF masters at sais and the IPS, and i think duke might have a program as well, but i think it would be unwise to bank everything on just two programs, so i wanna see if there are other things out there i can apply to as well. (if there's an IR spin to the program like MIEF, that's a plus since i'm obviously already familiar with IR, but it doesn't necessarily have to be an IR-linked program. it could be at a graduate school of arts and sciences, a business school, etc etc.)

i mentioned auditing at oxbridge as a potential way of getting some more quant under my belt, but im uncertain if that's something they let students do, and even if they do it doesnt compare to a solid full-year of econ. so i just want to see if there are any other options available, just in case the auditing option doesnt work out

[bsack]

an MBA does seem attractive because, from the class profiles i've seen thus far, a plurality of entering students do not hold a business undergraduate degree (nonetheless, they've obviously all taken some quant and math classes at some point). so the graduate b-schools do a good job of training people from a variety of non-business academic backgrounds. but like i said, if that's the path i want to go down, it's not something i really need to think too heavily about at this particular juncture, and therefore isn't something that i'm trying to focus too heavily on in this post (other than to acknowledge that an mba is a solid option considering my goals).

Edited February 25, 2016 by bsack

[bsack]

 

1 hour ago, monocle said:

This is what I thought my senior year of undergrad, too.. but man I feel extremely grateful that someone convinced me to take a couple years off. One thing is that my professors all told me to do grad school right away, while i was still young and things were fresh. But I think that was bad advice coming from a small group of people who have done nothing but be in a university setting. If anything, I feel smarter and sharper than I did when I finished.

this is the only bit of advice i would contest. as someone that took a few years off from a foreign language and also from calculus before starting back up again, it is an excruciating nuisance to get back "up to speed." obviously, it is true that most people do get back up to speed eventually, but what is equally true is that stop-and-go is not the most ideal or efficient way to learn. but obviously there are several things you have learned and experienced through your professional life that fresh undergrads have not, so there are pros and cons associated with both waiting and jumping straight in. 

Edited February 25, 2016 by bsack

[Solio]

1 hour ago, monocle said:

I feel bad for you that everyone is raining on your parade a little bit.

Rereading my post, it definitely comes across more "self-righteousy" than I intended.  Apologies for any rain on your parade!  

 

7 minutes ago, bsack said:

 

this is the only bit of advice i would contest. as someone that took a few years off from a foreign language and also from calculus before starting back up again, it is an excruciating nuisance to get back "up to speed." 

You could go teach calculus in a country where they speak your foreign language.  

In all seriousness, when you write your resume, you can emphasize the difference between the two degrees you choose, so even if the names appear similar, your description of your thesis, concentration, classes taken etc, will show the different skills you have learned.  

30 minutes ago, bsack said:

if i want to do an econ or econ-heavy masters in 2017-2018, that's something i would have to prepare for before the application season starts again this fall. that's what i want to get out of this post:  i'm not a statistics or econ major, so i'm looking for a way to bolster my quant credentials to be more competitive in things like PRA, and i'm looking for programs that are geared towards students that don't necessarily already have an econ or business bachelors (like LSE's one year MSc requires). 

It sounds like you still have a year and a half of undergrad left, correct?  To bolster your application for a heavy hitting econ program, would it be possible to get a minor in econ or stats in that time?  Or to get an internship/ volunteer position in D.C. that requires these skills?  Either of these options would also help you find professors/ professionals who could possibly write you a strong letter of recommendation.  

Here are two links I found that might give you a bit more info.

This is an article about the University of Michigan Master of Applied Economics Program:

http://blog.supplysideliberal.com/post/81460572155/on-masters-programs-in-economics

This one is for Poets and Quants, which is primarily focused on MBAs, but I believe they have recommendations on quant heavy masters as well.

http://poetsandquants.com

Either way, good luck!

[bsack]

no need for apologies, i'd rather know now what the perception of a dual masters is like rather than when im several thousands of dollars in the hole. 

actually, i just have this year left. i already have an offer from cambridge (waiting on oxford), and i'd be starting this fall. however, that doesnt preclude doing something over the summer, and that's something i'm working on right now actually. would that go a long way in bolstering my quant credentials?

the umich program looks solid and the type of thing im looking for. i do nonetheless prefer the stronger names and networks of hopkins sais and stanford, but umich does seem like a decent safety option

 

Edited February 25, 2016 by bsack