Low GPA...great work experience

[west123]

Hi all I'm new to these types of forums and realize I may be skirting the "AM I COMPETITIVE" thread, but thought I'd get a feel for how things work around here. Sorry if this is the case!

I'm currently beginning my MPP/MPA application process, now just browsing through programs and such. The responses by all of you to many a thread have been hugely helpful in wrapping my brain around which schools I may apply to, and which program suit me best. In short I have a few questions I would love to get some insight on (I hope this helps others out as well)...

I was the classic victim of fun during undergrad, resulting in a lower than ideal GPA (2.95 or so). This has me quite worried when seeking out various programs of interest to me. Because of my GPA I feel I will overlooked more often than not...even though it is not illustrative of my as an individual post college. 

Following Undergrad (at a top 30 liberal arts school) I went to work on the Hill for a congressional office doing legislative work (working first as an SA as many do). Following about 2 years of work on the Hill I went into the Peace Corps, with whom I currently serving as an English Teacher in a State Department Critical Language country. I anticipate I will be work-proficient in my service country's language upon COS - I must note I did not join PC for grad. school, it was a decision I have long wanted and find to be the most rewarding experience of my life thus far. 

I am currently in the midst of taking both a macro and micro online course for credit through UT in order to get credit and prove my quantitative skills. I anticipate an A or A- in each of these. 

I will most likely be receiving letters of recommendations from a Member of Congress, as well as my Country Director for the Peace Corps. 

I have not taken the GRE's yet but have devoted much time to studying and feel confident going into them...hope to be in the ball park of most schools median scores.

In short, I wonder if anyone has any advice or thoughts on the presence of my undergrad GPA in relation to the credible post-grad experience I have acquired in relation to MPP/MPA admittance?

I seek to find out peoples honest opinions regarding my chances with top-tier programs (I do have specific thoughts on programs but would rather a more broad perspective). 

Any thought on schools like HKS, SIPA, McCourt, Harris, Price, Fels, Ford, Sanford, Heinz, WWS (I know that's probably gone, but no worries!), etc....I will  not be applying to all of course, just painting with a wide brush the threads sake? I realize there are no yes or no answers regarding my inquiry, and it is very dependent on circumstance, but I would love to hear peoples thoughts with the little information I have provided!

Thank you so much for anything you can provide, you all have been so much help already.

[ExponentialDecay]

Do you need scholarship money?

[west123]

33 minutes ago, ExponentialDecay said:

Do you need scholarship money?

I will be seeking a Cloverdell Fellowship (through Peace Corps) if/when applying to schools partnered with the the program...however I will not be outwardly seeking scholarship money from the programs I apply to. 

I am curious if the combination of Hill Experience, Peace Corps Service, high/in line with the median GRE scores, and post college macro and micro courses for credit will work in offsetting my low undergrad GPA at all, in order to have a shot at the programs many of us strive for.

Thanks so much for the reply @ExponentialDecay, really appreciate it. Don't mean to be redundant above, just thought I could simplify things a bit. 

[datik]

Knock it out of the park with your GRE scores and you should be fine. Most schools will be more impressed with your essays/work experience and will only want a reason to be confident that you will not flunk classes. A great GRE score is perfect for that.

You have plenty of time, so you can easily shoot for a 320+ score if you are disciplined. I recommend Magoosh as it helped me to do an effective daily routine.

If you want GRE tips feel free to message me.

[west123]

1 hour ago, datik said:

Knock it out of the park with your GRE scores and you should be fine. Most schools will be more impressed with your essays/work experience and will only want a reason to be confident that you will not flunk classes. A great GRE score is perfect for that.

You have plenty of time, so you can easily shoot for a 320+ score if you are disciplined. I recommend Magoosh as it helped me to do an effective daily routine.

If you want GRE tips feel free to message me.

This definitely was a pick me up! Thanks for the advice @datik! You'll most likely be hearing from me soon!

[ExponentialDecay]

I'd be less confident about WWS/HKS just because historically they scrutinize the numbers, and whilst your story is compelling, it is not unique. I'd also be less confident in getting major scholarship money from prestigious schools. That said, the SIPA/SAIS/Fletcher/whatever tier at full price and anything below should be open to you.

Do get 320+ on the GRE.

Edited May 16, 2017 by ExponentialDecay

[datik]

To add to the above, I would say that it ultimately comes down to how you tell your story. Spend a lot of time in your essays. I made the mistake of focusing more on studying for the GRE than on writing. Schedule appropriate times for thinking about your answers, writing, and re-writing (hopefully get some feedback).

Were there unique moments that helped shape your decision to apply to grad school? Is there a common thread that you followed between your different experiences? How do they help shape your perspective for the future?

 

 

[LifeOnMars]

I would second the idea that you need to sell your story well and also have a strong GRE.  A kinda crappy GPA from a good but not top-tier school, plus entry level work on the hill and a stint with the peace corps will not get you into top tier programs (HKS, WWS, Berkeley, Chicago, etc) unless you can use the GRE to show your academic ability (despite the low GPA) and use your story to show why you would be a good fit for the program and what your experience could enable you to contribute. Even then, you'd have to really have good essays and strong letters of rec to have a chance. As has been said, you do have good work experience but it's hardly unique among the applicant pool for a school like HKS. Larger programs and slightly less competitive schools like SIPA, Georgetown, CMU, Evans, etc are a safer bet, though funding might not be super forthcoming (and while they may be considered less elite or prestigious, those schools still have high standards).

That being said, GPA and test scores are not the deciding factor for pollicy schools.  They seem more interested in your dedication to the public interest and your experience in that field.  So do your best to present your experiences in a compelling way and knock out the GRE to allay any concerns about your academic unpreparedness, you could still end up getting a good offer from a good school.  If I were you, I'd also apply to a mix of schools, some top tier, some second tier. Good luck!

[went_away]

The above posters are right: with decent essays, GRE and recommendations you're right in line for a no-scholarship or low-scholarship offer at a Fletcher or SAIS sort of place. You're probably borderline at SIPA. 

A couple of points: I wouldn't characterize your work experience as 'great,' but as 'standard' or 'decent.' Don't expect it to power you into a top program. 

Also, recommendations from members of Congress are not necessarily a good idea, unless they know you personally and are committed to writing a good letter. A detailed, positive letter from a chief of staff would be far, far more powerful than a generic letter from a powerful person. 

Edited May 16, 2017 by went_away

[west123]

2 hours ago, went_away said:

The above posters are right: with decent essays, GRE and recommendations you're right in line for a no-scholarship or low-scholarship offer at a Fletcher or SAIS sort of place. You're probably borderline at SIPA. 

A couple of points: I wouldn't characterize your work experience as 'great,' but as 'standard' or 'decent.' Don't expect it to power you into a top program. 

Also, recommendations from members of Congress are not necessarily a good idea, unless they know you personally and are committed to writing a good letter. A detailed, positive letter from a chief of staff would be far, far more powerful than a generic letter from a powerful person. 

Yeah I realized upon making the title it was a. It much...but alas I don't think I can edit. 

Really appreciate the replies everyone. My mind was pretty much perfectly in line with what you all were saying. Wasn't exactly thinking of HKS, WWS, Harris as true possibilities but thought I'd include them when asking. Any other opinions are greatly appreciated. GRE and essays are absolutely top priories and I will have much time to work focus/shape them. 

Your point on recommendations from someone like a CofS rather than Member is a good one I will keep in mind. I was not seeking out power over substance but can see how it would come across as such. That will absolutely be a thought at the forefront of my mind.

these have been great replies, they have very much solidified much of what I've been thinking if I work hard enough to knock the GRE's and essays out of the park. Scholarship money was a bit of a pipe dream anyway.

[zling]

Sorry for going a little off-topic, but was curious after seeing some of the replies!

@went_away, @LifeOnMars (and anyone else) - how would you tier the policy schools/programs? Based on your posts above, it seems to be something like:

Tier 1: HKS/WWS

Tier 2A: Chicago, Berkeley, SIPA(or is SIPA in 2B?)
2B: SAIS, Fletcher, Georgetown (McCourt or SFS?), CMU, Evans

[went_away]

12 hours ago, zling said:

Sorry for going a little off-topic, but was curious after seeing some of the replies!

@went_away, @LifeOnMars (and anyone else) - how would you tier the policy schools/programs? Based on your posts above, it seems to be something like:

Tier 1: HKS/WWS

Tier 2A: Chicago, Berkeley, SIPA(or is SIPA in 2B?)
2B: SAIS, Fletcher, Georgetown (McCourt or SFS?), CMU, Evans

Sure that's more or less accurate, but you can't really compare all these programs to each other. They have different constituencies and students have different career interests. Usually I would separate international affairs from public policy. 

[coasts]

I was in a pretty similar situation as you in terms of GPA, but I ended up being fine in the admissions process. By the time I applied, I had a lot of years of work experience so that ended up mattering a lot more than my college grades. That said, I did very well on the GRE and took a statistics class while working. I didn't get into WWS, waitlisted at Ford, but got in everywhere else I applied. No money from Harris, but very generous scholarships from several less prestigious programs.

[ThousandsHardships]

Write a killer statement, get awesome recommendations and good GRE scores, and get in touch with the programs you apply to beforehand so they don't throw out your application before they've had a chance to look it over in more detail. I mean, obviously don't use that as the reason for contacting them. Contact them to find out more about the program and stuff, but do hint at the fact that you have a lower GPA but how you've gravitated toward your field and how serious you've become about your schooling and future direction during your time in the work force. The hard fact is that a lot of universities expect a 3.0 minimum and many programs use this as their initial screening protocol. If you can get past this hurdle, your application will be much more likely to be examined in detail, allowing bright spots to shine. Make sure that your application gets attention, and the only way I can think of to do so is to contact faculty before you apply.

Edited May 18, 2017 by ThousandsHardships

[justkelia]

I wouldn't worry about your GPA too much. The grad school admissions process is a lot more holistic than undergrad- it's not as cut and dry. As someone with a GPA on the lower side, I will give you some aspects of my apps that I think outweighed my GPA.

• Last 60 credits of undergrad was better than overall GPA [show increase in academic performance despite your classes being more difficult]
• meaningful work experience [in public service is a plus- i believe]
• Statements of Purpose showed that I was more than my grades and that I would bring a differing set of experiences and perspective
  • I did not mention my GPA in my actual SoP/ essays unless required (only 2 out of 3 MPP apps required this- and I got into all 3 soooo...)
• Great LoR- I know the people who wrote my letters pretty well and was able to discuss with them in detail what I wanted to study and where I was applying.
• GRE scores were above/average- showed that despite my less than average GPA I was still on the same level as the majority of the other applicants.

I'll be honest and say that I was scared to pieces about my grades, but that fear really lit a fire under me and helped me produce fantastic applications that showed I was more than a few science and psych (and Korean lol) classes. 

Avoid the "Am I Competitive" type threads. Personally, these only made me even more anxious and distracted me from completing my applications in a timely manner.

I'm going to Ford in the Fall. If you want to talk more (or need some words of encouragement), feel free to message me.

[OldMan77]

1 hour ago, justkelia said:

I wouldn't worry about your GPA too much. The grad school admissions process is a lot more holistic than undergrad- it's not as cut and dry. As someone with a GPA on the lower side, I will give you some aspects of my apps that I think outweighed my GPA.

• Last 60 credits of undergrad was better than overall GPA [show increase in academic performance despite your classes being more difficult]
• meaningful work experience [in public service is a plus- i believe]
• Statements of Purpose showed that I was more than my grades and that I would bring a differing set of experiences and perspective
  • I did not mention my GPA in my actual SoP/ essays unless required (only 2 out of 3 MPP apps required this- and I got into all 3 soooo...)
• Great LoR- I know the people who wrote my letters pretty well and was able to discuss with them in detail what I wanted to study and where I was applying.
• GRE scores were above/average- showed that despite my less than average GPA I was still on the same level as the majority of the other applicants.

I'll be honest and say that I was scared to pieces about my grades, but that fear really lit a fire under me and helped me produce fantastic applications that showed I was more than a few science and psych (and Korean lol) classes. 

Avoid the "Am I Competitive" type threads. Personally, these only made me even more anxious and distracted me from completing my applications in a timely manner.

I'm going to Ford in the Fall. If you want to talk more (or need some words of encouragement), feel free to message me.

I completely agree with @justkelia, the grad school review is not as focused on grades as it is program fit.  I enjoy reading the "Am I Competitive" thread to see insanely qualified people freak out for no reason, but don't let it intimidate you.  

My undergrad grades were decent from a decent state school and my law school grades were solid from a good law school; but nobody would have confused me for an overachiever.  But my letters were great, I agonized over my SOP, and prepped like hell for the GRE.  I found the programs that fit my career goals, and could explain how the degree would lead to my next step.  

I got into every school to which I applied, and even got money at most.  Figure out the best way to show you are much more than your grades and that you are exactly what their program is looking for.

Good luck!

[justkelia]

@OldMan77 Haha! Those posts are funny.

Congrats on your acceptances! and money!

[LifeOnMars]

On 5/16/2017 at 8:22 PM, zling said:

Sorry for going a little off-topic, but was curious after seeing some of the replies!

@went_away, @LifeOnMars (and anyone else) - how would you tier the policy schools/programs? Based on your posts above, it seems to be something like:

Tier 1: HKS/WWS

Tier 2A: Chicago, Berkeley, SIPA(or is SIPA in 2B?)
2B: SAIS, Fletcher, Georgetown (McCourt or SFS?), CMU, Evans

Yeah, I guess about like that, although what the hell do I know? I haven't even started policy school yet, and am just basing my opinions on flawed rankings and the biases of this forum. 

To me, Harvard's brand name is kind of uniquely prestigious (though I don't think its worth taking out a 100k in loans), and Princeton is nearly in the same lague and gives a ton of money to the people they accept, which makes it very competitive. In another category, schools like Syracuse of Bloomington are given little love on Grad Cafe, and are not especially prestigious schools in general, but they're both very highly ranked in this field... They're probably quite good academically, since I think those rankings are based on peer review, though I really know nothing about those programs myself. 

I don't know that there is an exact order of the other schools you listed, though I do think Berkeley and Chicago are slightly more competitive because they're smaller programs than, say, SIPA (despite the Columbia name), which has literally ten times the number of students as Berkeley.  People should really choose their school based on the program curriculum, faculty, location, and post-graduation networking potential, as well as cost.  The name of the school probably won't matter much after your first job or two after graduation, anyway.

 

[went_away]

On 5/19/2017 at 10:34 PM, LifeOnMars said:

Yeah, I guess about like that, although what the hell do I know? I haven't even started policy school yet, and am just basing my opinions on flawed rankings and the biases of this forum. 

To me, Harvard's brand name is kind of uniquely prestigious (though I don't think its worth taking out a 100k in loans), and Princeton is nearly in the same lague and gives a ton of money to the people they accept, which makes it very competitive. In another category, schools like Syracuse of Bloomington are given little love on Grad Cafe, and are not especially prestigious schools in general, but they're both very highly ranked in this field... They're probably quite good academically, since I think those rankings are based on peer review, though I really know nothing about those programs myself. 

I don't know that there is an exact order of the other schools you listed, though I do think Berkeley and Chicago are slightly more competitive because they're smaller programs than, say, SIPA (despite the Columbia name), which has literally ten times the number of students as Berkeley.  People should really choose their school based on the program curriculum, faculty, location, and post-graduation networking potential, as well as cost.  The name of the school probably won't matter much after your first job or two after graduation, anyway.

 

The Wilson School is ranked MUCH higher than the Kennedy school. They're not even really in the same league. 

[LifeOnMars]

How do you figure?  How would you rank all these schools?  I agree that WWS is the most selective MPP/MPA program because of the combination of prestige and scholarships, but HKS is certainly a direct competitor.  The US News and World Report rankings in the MPP category put HKS above WWS (#2 and 9, respectively) and the MPA category as well (#3 and 4).  It's not a direct comparison since the HKS MPA program is a mid-career program, but I don't know why you would say they're not even in the same league.  Harvard definitely has a more prestigious name internationally, and domestically I think they're comparable in terms of prestige/brand.

[ExponentialDecay]

@went_away you really love inventing pointless arguments out of nothing and getting really worked up about it, I see. 

[went_away]

1 hour ago, ExponentialDecay said:

@went_away you really love inventing pointless arguments out of nothing and getting really worked up about it, I see. 

If you disagree with something I wrote, make a point. Maybe I'll agree with you!

Please don't attack me personally. 

[ExponentialDecay]

27 minutes ago, went_away said:

If you disagree with something I wrote, make a point. Maybe I'll agree with you!

Please don't attack me personally. 

I'm not attacking you personally. I'm pointing out that you tend to make brash statements about inconsequential things and not back up what you say with any evidence, which is about as personal as saying that your methodology sucks and that's why your numbers don't make sense. 

I mean, you're the one who came in here and were like, Princeton is MUCH better than Harvard, with no justification whatsoever. You seem to be implying that people should trust you because you're you. So, for a change, how about you make a point? Not that I'd like you to further beat this spherical horse in a vacuum, because to me this seems like a completely pointless, baseless argument that you must be making because you're bored or something. They're both good schools that place people with good employers. I don't understand why you need to get in here with an investigation of differences that don't matter even if they do exist.

Edited May 24, 2017 by ExponentialDecay

[went_away]

10 minutes ago, ExponentialDecay said:

I'm not attacking you personally. I'm pointing out that you tend to make brash statements about inconsequential things and not back up what you say with any evidence, which is about as personal as saying that your methodology sucks and that's why your numbers don't make sense. 

I mean, you're the one who came in here and were like, Princeton is MUCH better than Harvard, with no justification whatsoever. You seem to be implying that people should trust you because you're you. So, for a change, how about you make a point? Not that I'd like you to further beat this spherical horse in a vacuum, because to me this seems like a completely pointless, baseless argument that you must be making because you're bored or something. They're both good schools that place people with good employers. I don't understand why you need to get in here with an investigation of differences that don't matter even if they do exist.

Now you're just flaming. 

[Nonprofitguy]

I think in policy circles (very loose terms), WWS is viewed slightly more favorably than HKS because they know it's hard to get in. Plus they probably have easier job attracting top students because of the scholarships, which then affects employers' mindsets.

That being said, if HKS was able to match the $$$, I would personally choose HKS for the following reasons:

• International brand/prestige - no matter where you go in the world, people will recognize Harvard and you'll be able to find alumni
• Student lifestyle - I think Princeton offers probably the best undergraduate experience but for graduate students, not so much. Plus living in Cambridge is a lot more exciting because of its proximity to a big city
• Networking opportunities - this is the biggest factor: while some people prefer the small class size, I think it's quite limiting in terms of networking opportunities. At HKS, I am in same class with HBS/GSB/Wharton/Sloan/Tuck students; can take classes at HBS, HLS; access to top notch guest speakers that come to Harvard; bigger alumni network to call upon, etc.

Truth be told, if you are a candidate good enough for consideration at WWS and HKS, you're really splitting hairs and can't really make a bad choice. If WWS made it easier to pursue a dual MBA/MPA - I think there's currently 1 student total at WWS who is pursuing dual MBA/MPA - I probably would have put in an application there. Just my $0.02.