Quantitative and Econ heavy IR programs?

[Poli92]

For clarification, exactly which quant courses have you taken at this point?

[bsack]

microeconomics (A, highest grade in class), macroeconomics (A, highest grade in class), international economics (a combination of international trade and finance, A highest grade in class), single-variable calculus (-A), statistics in the social sciences (-A). 

i have yet to take an econometrics course or a multivariable calc class, which i would like to do.

[Ben414]

1 hour ago, bsack said:

microeconomics (A, highest grade in class), macroeconomics (A, highest grade in class), international economics (a combination of international trade and finance, A highest grade in class), single-variable calculus (-A), statistics in the social sciences (-A). 

i have yet to take an econometrics course or a multivariable calc class, which i would like to do.

I'm not sure if your quant background is deep enough right now to get you into Stanford. HKS MPA/ID requires multivariate calculus at the minimum for admission, and they prefer an applicant also have linear algebra. (If someone knows the quant requirements more definitively, though, please correct me.)

SAIS isn't that difficult to get into relatively, and I think you would have a solid chance despite a lack of work experience if you achieve strong GRE scores. I'm not familiar enough with Stanford's program to chance you, but if it's comparable to HKS/WWS/Goldman, your lack of work experience will very likely keep you out (and possibly your quant background). I would think you'd have a decent chance at Michigan.

The best thing you can do is get 2-3 years of work experience and take multivariate calculus and linear algebra. Not only will it greatly improve your profile and make your more likely to be eligible for the type of quant-heavy programs you want, but it will get you much better funding too. If you truly want to be economic about the decision, you'll take time off to get work experience.

19 hours ago, bsack said:

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

FYI: from the applicant threads over the past few years, I would guess Michigan's MPP program is harder to get into than SAIS. Michigan is not an appropriate safety school for someone with your profile.

Edited February 26, 2016 by Ben414

[bsack]

solio was referring to michigan's applied economics terminal masters, not their MPP. frankly, i didnt know they had a MPP, and i do fulfill the requirements for their econ masters. this is the degree i was referring to in my post. and, as a separate aside, even if their MPP did have a lower acceptance rate, i imagine their applicants would have weaker stats than applicants to sais, sipa, georgetown, kennedy, and the other top programs, which tend to be pretty self selective in the first place. frankly, it would not make sense to me that top applicants would compete for a seat in ann arbor, when they would be better off at established programs at ivy or ivy-caliber schools in new york, dc, etc (unless their tuition is really cheap like princeton or something)

i fulfill all of the IPS requirements, as per their website: 

"The IPS program requires the completion of five prerequisite courses prior to matriculation:

• Microeconomics

• Macroeconomics

• Statistics

• International finance*

• International trade*

*International trade and international finance are often covered in a single international economics course. "

Source: https://ips.stanford.edu/academics/ma-degree-program

 

many students actually complete their requirements after matriculation, so i think i've actually come out ahead

Edited February 26, 2016 by bsack

[bsack]

i would certainly not be opposed to taking linear algebra or something over the summer, seems sensible and it would probably make me more competitive. i'm not really looking at HKS ID tho, given it's development emphasis and somewhat older average age.

Edited February 26, 2016 by bsack

[Ben414]

8 minutes ago, bsack said:

solio was referring to michigan's applied economics terminal masters, not their MPP. frankly, i didnt know they had a MPP, and i do fulfill the requirements for their econ masters. this is the degree i was referring to in my post. and, as a separate aside, even if their MPP did have a lower acceptance rate, i imagine their applicants would have weaker stats than applicants to sais, sipa, georgetown, kennedy, and the other top programs, which tend to be pretty self selective in the first place. frankly, it would not make sense to me that top applicants would compete for a seat in ann arbor, when they would be better off at established programs at ivy or ivy-caliber schools in new york, dc, etc (unless their tuition is really cheap like princeton or something)

You have a strange focus on perceived prestige which isn't based in reality. Firstly, Ivy League prestige is exclusively for the undergraduate level. Secondly, SIPA and SAIS are not all that selective. You can check the acceptance threads yourself. They're strong schools, but for these professional programs it's foolhardy to equate acceptance rate with quality. Thirdly, Michigan is better than most Ivy League schools at the graduate level. At the PhD level, Michigan is probably better than all Ivy League schools except for Harvard and Princeton--maybe Yale would be tied with them. Fourthly, if your decision-making process is this guided by your perceived notion of prestige, I would definitely recommend getting some work experience before going to grad school. When you get a chance to work with people from top schools and you see they are just normal people like everyone else, I think you'll be more likely able to cut out the Ivy League nonsense and focus on the factors that actually matter.

[bsack]

frankly, all of this would be news to me and i think to most educated people. a quick google search indicates that michigan's MPP only costs $21,000 for out of state which is literally half what other top ranked IR and policy programs cost for everybody (out-of-state or otherwise). now, if ivy-level prestige is "only for undergrad" and michigan and columbia/harvard/georgetown/yale/hopkins masters are all basically the same thing, why aren't people (1) lining up to apply mich and (2) why are so many more people (including other people on this very thread, let alone the entire government affairs section of gradcafe) applying to the latter schools? they could be getting the same education for 50% off! either these people are totally irrational and don't know what they're doing, or they're making a strategic decision based on their personal career interests and there is something fundamentally flawed with your claims.

now, i dont know if your claims were limited to IR graduate programs or professional graduate programs at these schools in general, but, and im not trying to be rude, i think the kids sitting at harvard law, stanford business, or some of the "lesser" ivies like wharton, columbia, or--maybe yale with it's ultra-competitive global affairs program, would get a pretty good laugh out of this. now, i'm in no way, shape, or form saying that michigan is bad. ford is good at what it does, they got a very good b-school in ross, a good law program. but dont give some b******* that it's basically the same thing as places like columbia, harvard, stanford, upenn, or "maybe tied with yale," that's bad advice to be giving to me and other kids on the site trying to get information. (and i don't know why you mentioned princeton as being better than michigan. princeton has few, if any, professional grad programs beyond WWS to compare against with michigan.) such claims aren't grounded in the real world in terms of placements, salaries, etc. but i guess i might as well throw at a dartboard to decide which graduate schools to apply to.

as for using acceptance rates to assess programs, if you re-read what i wrote, you'll notice that we are both arguing the same exact thing: that acceptance rate doesn't indicate the quality of the program itself. there's no point of contention there, we're already in agreement and i dont know why you brought it up. i don't know if you misread or misinterpreted, but do have a look at my post above again.

lastly, on prestige, i never said a word about prestige. in fact, if you do command+F search of this thread, the only users to use the word "prestige" on this thread are ben414 and monocle, i personally never brought it up. what i did say was i would consider a good network and connections to work off of (plus a recognizable name that employers might like) to be things that could be beneficial. call me crazy, but i don't think it's totally absurd to say sipa and sais and other big time established schools in washington, new york, etc might have a better network and connections than a program run out of ann arbor, just my opinion. plus, there are plenty of non-ivy programs that offer similarly good networks and known programs, like georgetown in dc and tufts university in boston/medford. again, michigan is a perfectly good, well-known school, but it just doesn't have the same level of other benefits that the big boys in IR have. ceteris paribus, that's how you differentiate between your various choices. and if i'm gonna drop some real dough, i'd like to get my money's worth with my ROI. so it's got nothing to do with prestige for its own sake; it's about objective differences in terms of tangible, material benefits from the program (networking, career services, innocuous useless things like that). based on your post on the thread about multilaterals, i think we're in agreement on this point: "So you think an alumni network that is 10-20 times as large in the multilateral org sector is an insignificant factor?...Alumni network matters a lot, and yours will be at a severe disadvantage for multilateral orgs if you go an aforementioned program....HKS [ivy league] and WWS [ivy league] seem to place well everywhere." not that im applying to multilaterals, but same general principle applies

Edited February 26, 2016 by bsack

[bsack]

this is all a useless digression, and i'd really prefer to delete it once it's read. and i'd much rather get back to the topic posed in the first post. i didn't even bring up the ford school in the first place. and, if you read again, you will see that solio and i were discussing the econ masters at umichigan, not the ford school:

On 2/25/2016 at 0:47 AM, Solio said:

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

 

also...i googled ford's website, and this is what their admissions FAQ says:

Do you need math, statistics, and economics classes in order to qualify for admission?

While you do not need these classes to qualify for admission, it would be helpful to you and to our Admissions Committee to have some idea of your skills in these areas. We recommend that you take an introductory Calculus, Statistics, and Micro Economics course. Exposure to these subjects will ease your transition to the Ford School's quantitative curriculum.

Is there a minimum GPA?

The median GPA for last year's incoming class was a 3.4. 

frankly, i don't understand why you would go out of your way to say: "Michigan is not an appropriate safety school for someone with your profile." the only reason i can think of would be to denigrate, and frankly i think that's in a little bad taste. as clearly indicated by ford's own website, i am no less competitive than any other person in my age cohort (i.e. people coming fresh out of undergrad that might consider applying to ford a few years down the line after some work experience), because literally nothing i have said on this thread thus far would indicate that i am not more than up to snuff with ford's requirements/class profile, quantitative or otherwise. i don't know if you're a ford alumni and i've offended you, in which case i apologize and i didn't mean to offend you, but i was just giving my honest opinion. if it means anything to you, i do like the wolverines, my boy tom brady played there. and one of my favorite professors at elliott is a umich guy, david shambaugh, so no hard feelings

Edited February 26, 2016 by bsack

[monocle]

let's all bring it back down a bit.. you're both right about some things. bsack is right that the name does matter. But the Michigan name is really strong, and is one of the top two best public universities in the country along with UC Berkeley (speaking of which, bsack you could check out Berkeley's programs). There actually is a sizeable amount of people who are applying to Ford--I know bsack wasn't talking about Ford--and they send 45% of their graduates to NY/DC/Intl, which is huge for not being in NY or DC. 

Anyways, I think something like 40-50% of people get into SIPA and SAIS (if you exclude PhD admissions rates), so it really does drop off after HKS and WWS in terms of selectivity. And Michigan's rate might be higher.. because after all it is a public university serving the residents of Michigan.

I think part of the reason Ben414 wrote what he did was because bsack explained not wanting Michigan because it isn't an ivy/ivy-caliber, when probably the real reason is that it isn't based in the metropolitan areas that have the organizations for which you want to work. I think the other problem came with the semantics of calling it a safety school, by which you probably meant not a top choice, but you might consider applying.

We know you haven't decided on anything yet, but it just feels wrong not to keep advising that the best course of action is to get work experience, so that you don't preclude yourself from the best quant-heavy IR programs. That being said, you're on the right track, and you probably don't even need a list of more than four or five schools.

[monocle]

The beauty of the American university system is that you can choose your one-semester/quarter long courses. So, really at any of the IR programs, you could register in heavy economics/econometrics/quant courses outside the program and design your program that way

The downside for you is that most of the best professional programs (as opposed to research-based) are two-years long.

[bsack]

oh totally agree 100%, michigan is a very good school. i'd put it a solid 5th for state schools after cal berkley, ucla, virginia, and ut austin. i was just saying that if you preclude the relatively obscure ivies (namely dartmouth and brown), 80-90% of the time the ivies are going to come out slightly ahead in terms of networking opportunities, alumni connections, career services, global name recognition, reputation and rankings among academics and employers internationally and domestically, and other tangible career benefits like that. but i really do mean slightly, they got themselves a top 15 business school over there at michigan, a quality law school, and one of the better poli sci phd's. 

 

[Solio]

On March 8th Foreign Affairs magazine is holding an online grad school fair, here is the sign up link: https://app.brazenconnect.com/events/foreign-affairs-1?&jobAlias=website&variant=fafrontpage

you can talk to representatives from many different schools (Georgetown, Fletcher, SAIS, etc..  Hopefully they will be able to answer your questions.  At the very least it gets your name out there and you can make a few contacts, plus you can get a free 6 month subscription to Foreign Affairs magazine.

 

[bsack]

do you think it would be feasible to be competitive in PRA with just an MPhil if i take some quant courses at summer school? or would i definitely need to scoop up an MBA or econ masters somewhere down the line?

[bsack]

solid, i already have a foreign affairs subscription, but i'll definitely check that out. appreciate it

[Poli92]

6 hours ago, bsack said:

this is all a useless digression, and i'd really prefer to delete it once it's read. and i'd much rather get back to the topic posed in the first post. 

 Why? You have been given plenty of good advice and argued with nearly everyone. This entire thread has seemed like your attempt to fish for someone to tell you to just do whatever you already planned to do and it will all work out. 

Your glib remarks regarding work experience, excessive emphasis on caliber, general combative attitude, and of course your most recent tirade all suggest a lack of sufficient maturity and perspective to truly benefit from a graduate program. 

[bsack]

i'm sorry you feel that way, but aside from pushing back on something ben14 said which i happened to disagree with, i'm not arguing with anyone, and i'm sorry you interpreted it as such. i'd challenge you to scroll through the thread and find an instance where you think i was insincere in my line of questioning vis-a-vis work experience, MBAs, network calibers, etc. i'm just trying get some advice and input from people that have already been there. honestly, i think the thinly veiled insults in your last post are a bit hypocritical and betray a disappointing lack of maturity in themselves 

[Poli92]

My statements weren't "thinly veiled insults" they were blunt criticisms. I am totally willing to own that. 

As far as advice: finish school, get work experience (even if it "isn't your jam"), let life humble you a bit, and shoot for an MBA or quantitative IR degree (or do a dual degree) in 2-3 years if PRA is still what you want to do. 

[Ben414]

I'm not going to spend my time arguing with you on this matter any further. You're making a false equivalence between an undergraduate label (i.e. Ivy League) and the quality and breadth of an alumni network for a specific program within a university. HKS and WWS place well because of the strength of their specific program and strength of alumni from their specific program.

Getting back to you: 1) Michigan is too selective to be a safety school for someone with your profile. 2) Work experience will do you good in my and others' opinions. 3) SAIS might be a good fit for you. 4) Stanford is a long-shot if their admissions value work experience like others do. 4) Rather than doing whatever evaluation process you're doing, look at the grads' first jobs and see which are placing into jobs you want. That is the vast majority of what should be used to evaluate a school.

[bsack]

i don't know if you read anything before posting again, but

(1) we were talking about the masters in ECONOMICS at michigan which is its own distinct program, NOT the ford school of public policy at michigan.

(2) a quick google search indicates that ford's acceptance rate is 52% (again not, an indicator of quality per se). this is about 10 points less selective than sipa and sais, about 20-25 points less selective than harvard kennedy depending on the year, and a billion times less selective than yale and princeton which literally only admit a few dozen students annually. it's median GPA and test scores are lower than other top programs. objectively speaking, relative to other top IR programs michigan is a safety school. i emphasize relatively, but it's still good for what it does. i do not know how you can dispute numbers. based on info from ford's own official website faq (see above), there is nothing to indicate i would not be highly competitive. admissions are of course holistic, but i wouldnt say stats are irrelevant either. obviously, if they require work experience, i would not be applying tomorrow. but based on the real objective numbers provided on their website, i can't see myself as uncompetitive when i did hypothetically apply in the future. however, i do not ever see myself applying, as their quantitative requirements are substantially more lax than other IR programs, and that completely contradicts my goals. i do not want to waste time and money retaking baby micro, baby stats, and baby calc, which are part of their core requirements. they seem to have an ngo and local government focus, not being in dc/nyc doesn't help, and their alumni network connections and placements are something to seriously consider, which i quoted you to substantiate. you can debate against yourself if you want.

(3) i have never in my life heard of someone not being considered an ivy grad if they attained a degree from an ivy league institution, be it undergrad, grad, juris doctor, M.D., mba, mphil, m.a., a.b., PhD etc etc. if you want to get cute, the ivy league is technically an athletics conference, and therefore has nothing to do whatsoever with academics at any level. informally, all constituent schools of all ivy league universities at all levels of post-secondary study are considered part of the ivy league, i thought that was obvious. i'm not making any false equivalencies whatsoever. i'm not assuming, for example, that dartmouth has an excellent IR program solely because dartmouth is an ivy league school. dartmouth does not have any postgrad IR or public policy programs. schools like columbia university, harvard, and princeton have top 10 high quality IR schools and also happen to be in the ivy league. i dont even have a horse in this race, my top choice isn't an ivy school, it's hopkins. i'm just stating facts

 

 

Edited February 27, 2016 by bsack

[bsack]

oh right, saying i'm incapable of "truly benefiting from a graduate program" definitely comes off as constructive criticism. thanks for clarifying, definitely not a thinly veiled insult.

i appreciate you taking the time to give some advice. but next time, consider doing so in a less discourteous and peremptory manner. i will consider taking some time off before additional grad school. i'll see how working in the summer goes and perhaps go off that. if i can't scrum together the cash for an MBA (you mentioned that they were "stingy"), do you think i would be competitive in PRA with an mphil if i got some quant practice some other way (e.g. summer courses, an internship, etc.)? 

Edited February 27, 2016 by bsack

[Ben414]

3 hours ago, bsack said:

i don't know if you read anything before posting again, but

(1) we were talking about the masters in ECONOMICS at michigan which is its own distinct program, NOT the ford school of public policy at michigan.

(2) a quick google search indicates that ford's acceptance rate is 52% (again not, an indicator of quality per se). this is about 10 points less selective than sipa and sais, about 20-25 points less selective than harvard kennedy depending on the year, and a billion times less selective than yale and princeton which literally only admit a few dozen students annually. it's median GPA and test scores are lower than other top programs. objectively speaking, relative to other top IR programs michigan is a safety school. i emphasize relatively, but it's still good for what it does. i do not know how you can dispute numbers. based on info from ford's own official website faq (see above), there is nothing to indicate i would not be highly competitive. admissions are of course holistic, but i wouldnt say stats are irrelevant either. obviously, if they require work experience, i would not be applying tomorrow. but based on the real objective numbers provided on their website, i can't see myself as uncompetitive when i did hypothetically apply in the future. however, i do not ever see myself applying, as their quantitative requirements are substantially more lax than other IR programs, and that completely contradicts my goals. i do not want to waste time and money retaking baby micro, baby stats, and baby calc, which are part of their core requirements. they seem to have an ngo and local government focus, not being in dc/nyc doesn't help, and their alumni network connections and placements are something to seriously consider, which i quoted you to substantiate. you can debate against yourself if you want.

(3) i have never in my life heard of someone not being considered an ivy grad if they attained a degree from an ivy league institution, be it undergrad, grad, juris doctor, M.D., mba, mphil, m.a., a.b., PhD etc etc. if you want to get cute, the ivy league is technically an athletics conference, and therefore has nothing to do whatsoever with academics at any level. informally, all constituent schools of all ivy league universities at all levels of post-secondary study are considered part of the ivy league, i thought that was obvious. i'm not making any false equivalencies whatsoever. i'm not assuming, for example, that dartmouth has an excellent IR program solely because dartmouth is an ivy league school. dartmouth does not have any postgrad IR or public policy programs. schools like columbia university, harvard, and princeton have top 10 high quality IR schools and also happen to be in the ivy league. i dont even have a horse in this race, my top choice isn't an ivy school, it's hopkins. i'm just stating facts

 

 

For the Michigan part, fine, my mistake. I don't know anything about their masters in economics.

However, JHU states "All incoming MA students are required to complete introductory microeconomics and introductory macroeconomics courses, receiving a grade of B- or higher, before they can start course work at Johns Hopkins SAIS." if you're looking to avoid, in your own incredibly immature and disrespectful words, "baby micro, baby stats, and baby calc" you might want to pretend SAIS doesn't have basically the same core quantitative cirriculum as Michigan. I did find one difference, though: Michigan requires calculus for graduation while SAIS does not. Care to comment on that?

Secondly, you're objectively wrong on the quant requirements for IR schools, furthering showing your ignorance. If you're willing to show some maturity--which seems doubtful at this point--you can ask the people around here who have actually gone to or are going to schools like these about the quant requirements. The vast majority of IR schools are not focused on advanced quant. JHU is known for being relatively quantitative, yet even it doesn't require calculus for graduation while advanced quant focus like HKS MPA/ID requires multivariate calculus for mere chance of acceptance.

Thirdly, Peterson's is specifically known for not having up to date numbers on MPP/MPA/MA IR programs. I doubt you care about that, though, as it detracts from this false narrative you've built up. Regardless of Michigan's acceptance rate, though, your lack of experience would have held you back there. Your profile is not good enough for it to have been a safety no matter how many misdirected insults you throw at it to make you feel better about yourself.

Fourthly, it's interesting that you're changing your argument now from "Why would someone go to Michigan when they could go to an Ivy League school" to "I've been saying all along it's not the Ivy League that matters!"

Fifthly, I would guess you haven't heard about people not caring about the Ivy League after undergrad because you're still in undergrad and have already shown your ignorance about grad school so clearly you're not talking to the right people. Luckily, we're on a forum here where you can go ask someone whether all grad degrees from Ivy League inherently defer an employment advantage over schools like Michigan. I'd recommend you go do that, but, seeing as it would detract from your false narrative and runs the risk of making you seem overly immature in this thread, I doubt you will.

From your very first post all the way to your comment on "baby micro, baby stats, and baby calc," it's obvious at this point you're too immature to heed our advice. I've done what I can, and at this point I'm not willing to spend any more of my time trying to help you become more educated about grad school.

Edited February 27, 2016 by Ben414

[bsack]

firstly, i do care to comment as a matter of fact. i said- repeatedly actually- that i was interested in the masters in international economics and finance (it is called "MIEF" for short) program offered out of SAIS. it is designed for early career professionals, with many of their students coming straight from college and a younger average age than the standard M.A. program, which is what i assume you are confusing it with. 

secondly, the objective quant requirements are objectively listed on every programs' website. any person literate in english with an internet connection can view the official requirements online. i didn't magically conjure any fake requirements from my imagination, you can fact check any requirements i posted. i dont think i even typed most of them, most of them i copy/pasted straight from the website, that's why they have that weird font size

thirdly, you can deflect all you want from numbers that you don't like. regardless, like i said, you can view publicly available stats online on official sites for last year's 15-16 cycle. ford's median gpa is about the same the same as sais's floor end 25th percentile and roughly a letter grade down from sipa's median. if you consider substantiating claims with facts and numbers to be "narrative building," so be it. obviously since IR admissions are holistic, i'm not saying numbers are everything, but i dont think they request transcripts just to waste paper. it doesnt appear that i would be uncompetitive against other prospective applicants applying from graduating class cohort. if you're assessing me against people that are currently applying, that's cool, maybe you can chance some high school sophomores for law school admissions as well while you're at it. 

fourthly, if you maybe read again carefully, you'll see that i wrote "programs at ivy or ivy-caliber schools." i would definitely consider schools like gtown, hopkins, stanford to be part of that elite ivy caliber (along with other non-IR schools, MIT, caltech, etc). they don't need to be playing football or basketball against each other to all be considered good schools. the schools that are part of the formal athletics conference don't have a monopoly on quality. so no break in consistency as you seem to imply. and i said at every turn, i think michigan is good, they got good business, good law. but based on what i've seen with placements and things like that, stalking linked in profiles from programs, reading employers from the official school websites, reading student profiles and articles, location, etc etc i think ford is slightly worse than kennedy, sipa, woody woo, etc. you fallaciously conclude that slightly worse = very very bad.

fifthly, i already refuted this line of reasoning with my "dartmouth school of international and public affairs" example. you can keep calling me names, it's whatever.

sixthly, i dont know how long you've been out of school, but "baby" in the context of a college class is usually synonymous with "introductory," "intro to," or "principles of." e.g. intro to psychology, intro to biology, introductory microeconomics, etc etc. i'm sorry if these colloquialisms have offended you. i'll use "introductory" now to avoid ambiguity or offense

Edited February 27, 2016 by bsack

[bsack]

2 hours ago, Ben414 said:

For the Michigan part, fine, my mistake. I don't know anything about their masters in economics.

appreciate it, glad we've moved on. progress feels good

[Ben414]

50 minutes ago, bsack said:

firstly, i do care to comment as a matter of fact. i said- repeatedly actually- that i was interested in the masters in international economics and finance (it is called "MIEF" for short) program offered out of SAIS. it is designed for early career professionals, with many of their students coming straight from college and a younger average age than the standard M.A. program, which is what i assume you are confusing it with. 

secondly, the objective quant requirements are objectively listed on every programs' website. any person literate in english with an internet connection can view the official requirements online. i didn't magically conjure any fake requirements from my imagination, you can fact check any requirements i posted. i dont think i even typed most of them, most of them i copy/pasted straight from the website, that's why they have that weird font size

thirdly, you can deflect all you want from numbers that you don't like. regardless, like i said, you can view publicly available stats online on official sites for last year's 15-16 cycle. ford's median gpa is about the same the same as sais's floor end 25th percentile and roughly a letter grade down from sipa's median. if you consider substantiating claims with facts and numbers to be "narrative building," so be it. obviously since IR admissions are holistic, i'm not saying numbers are everything, but i dont think they request transcripts just to waste paper. it doesnt appear that i would be uncompetitive against other prospective applicants applying from graduating class cohort. if you're assessing me against people that are currently applying, that's cool, maybe you can chance some high school sophomores for law school admissions as well while you're at it. 

fourthly, if you maybe read again carefully, you'll see that i wrote "programs at ivy or ivy-caliber schools." i would definitely consider schools like gtown, hopkins, stanford to be part of that elite ivy caliber (along with other non-IR schools, MIT, caltech, etc). they don't need to be playing football or basketball against each other to all be considered good schools. the schools that are part of the formal athletics conference don't have a monopoly on quality. so no break in consistency as you seem to imply. and i said at every turn, i think michigan is good, they got good business, good law. but based on what i've seen with placements and things like that, stalking linked in profiles from programs, reading employers from the official school websites, reading student profiles and articles, location, etc etc i think ford is slightly worse than kennedy, sipa, woody woo, etc. you fallaciously conclude that slightly worse = very very bad.

fifthly, i already refuted this line of reasoning with my "dartmouth school of international and public affairs" example. you can keep calling me names, it's whatever.

sixthly, i dont know how long you've been out of school, but "baby" in the context of a college class is usually synonymous with "introductory," "intro to," or "principles of." e.g. intro to psychology, intro to biology, introductory microeconomics, etc etc. i'm sorry if these colloquialisms have offended you. i'll use "introductory" now to avoid ambiguity or offense

You're going to get a lot out of this forum with your trolling.

[bsack]

4 minutes ago, Ben414 said:

You're going to get a lot out of this forum with your trolling.

that's an awesome way to deflect from thought-out critiques backed up by facts and sources, it sort of gives the illusion of aloofness without actually engaging in discourse.