I just got registered for a non-degree grad school course to mitigate a low undergrad gpa -- am I doing the right thing?

[wavywaves]

I'd like to steer my career towards policy, specifically as related to economic inequality, and to facilitate that transition I intend to pick up an MPP sometime in the next few years.  A lot of things about my application look strong -- I got a BA in Economics from a Top 30 program, I did really well on the GRE a couple of months ago (167/167/5.0) and my work experience is solid (I was a financial analyst at a successful startup, I did an Americorps VISTA year and I'm currently waiting to begin a position as a GS-11 Program Analyst with HUD).  The only thing I feel is holding me back is that my undergrad GPA was outright awful -- 2.41 cumulative, not much higher than that in-major.  

In light of that, I'm trying to do everything I can pad out my application over the next year or so.  Elsewhere in the forums I came across the idea of doing a non-degree grad school course and that made a lot of sense to me, so I got registered at American U for PUAD601, Quantitative Methods for Policy Analysis.  My reasoning with picking this course is that: 1) it seems substantially rigorous to display academic competency should I do well in it; 2) it seems like it would be universally relevant to whichever graduate program I might end up attending in the future; and 3) picking up extra Stata experience can't be a bad thing in the job market (I've been waiting for about six months for this HUD position to start, so I'm getting a bit antsy and considering backup options).

My questions are: A) did I pick the right course?; and B) even if I pull an A in this course, will I have any chance of being admitted into a decent program with such a low undergrad GPA?  The process for applying to and being admitted to this course happened really quickly, so I'm just looking for some input on whether I'm making the right decision here -- it's a significant expense to take a class this way, after all.

Regarding A: the other course that seemed reasonable to me was Econometrics, but I wouldn't be able to take it until next semester for scheduling reasons.  Any input as to whether one might be a better option than the other for me, or as to whether it might be reasonable to take both?

Thanks!

[Ben414]

Other than your GPA, everyone else in your profile is the epitome of what these programs are looking for. Work as a program analyst for 2-3 years, and you should be in good shape regardless of your GPA. I don't think the course you signed up for will make much of a difference one way or the other. Schools want to see that you have some economics and some math or stats experience. If you've taken micro and macro economics in undergrad, that's enough.

[Concordia]

Still, some evidence that you've got your shit together academically never hurts, especially if it shows interest/aptitude for your chosen subject.

[wavywaves]

These two comments pretty well sum up the internal debate haha.  On one hand it definitely can't hurt, but on the other hand it's a ~$4,500 expense.  I guess it comes down to how much I personally value it and how much I'm willing to spend.  I'm leaning heavily towards seeing it through -- no one's called me an idiot for this yet, and that's mostly what I'm checking for

[amstu]

I don't know anything about your program or field, so this question may not be helpful: Is a writing sample submitted as part of your application and how much does your field value writing? Is it the expectation of the program that a piece of publishable policy will be produced? 

I ask because, in my mind, spending any extra time on bolstering a writing sample seems much more sensible--provided its a field where that is valued. If this were my field, I would skip the expensive course and pour all my time, energy and research (if applicable) on writing, revising and, polishing. 

[Concordia]

As usual, you have to Know Thyself.  I had out of academia for a bit, and while I'd done some recent night classes, my best papers weren't quite what I wanted to hand into a very critical committee.  

A January course at Harvard Extension (nowhere near $4.5K, BTW) with a writing component came up at a very convenient time.  The prof and TA gave me enough of a kick that I ended up writing a really good final paper.  That became a successful sample without too much over-thinking, and it probably didn't hurt to have another A in the file.

It was also kind of an entertaining class, although I wouldn't have taken it if I weren't feeling a little fear.

Edited August 19, 2017 by Concordia

[kb6]

Taking a course sounds like a great idea if you're trying to get into grad school. I did something similar for what I thought was a middling GPA. And the fact that you're a few years removed, did very well on the GRE and have pretty great work experience puts you in a good position. 

You're still going to have to explain that 2.41 GPA at some point, though. Was there some kind of family or mental health crisis? Did your grades improve throughout your years there? Were you just really immature and partying all the time? There should be a section in each application for "additional information," so you should think about how you're going to frame it so that they don't think that this is something that's going to happen again.

But my bigger question is this - why are you trying to get into grad school right now if you're just starting a GS-11 position? That's about the max level you can get straight out of a master's degree, and I know a few people who started at GS-9 after SAIS. You might find you need the master's eventually to advance, but if this is the kind of field you're hoping to go into, I don't think it would be worth it to quit your HUD position less than a year in to go to a full-time master's. Something part-time at night would be more reasonable, although again you will want to be super-certain that the degree is vital for you to move up because these programs are very expensive.

[wavywaves]

Thanks to everyone for the responses!

It might not be correct, but for right now I'm looking at this course as a separate component from my writing sample.  I need to be able to explain my undergraduate gpa -- and I do have a well-considered statement ready for that -- but beyond the explanation I think it'd be nice to add demonstrable proof that I can succeed in a graduate level course, so that's my primary motivation here.  If I could also walk away from the experience with a killer writing sample, that'd be a great upside.  Any recommendations as to what programs or courses I might look into that could let me kill two birds with one stone here?

KB6, I appreciate you considering the big picture!  Ideally, because it's a passion of mine, I'd like to eventually end up working on policy research related to economic inequality; my dream job long-term would be a fellowship at the Institute for New Economic Thinking.  I just don't expect that I'll be able to make that type of transition without a stint at grad school somewhere along the line.  You're right that it'd be crazy to quit on a job as solid as the one at HUD within two years for grad school, and I definitely don't plan to do that.  If the HUD position comes through I'll be riding it out for a while, looking into part-time grad programs down the line and weighing the new career options that a few years of federal experience will open up.  But it's not that simple because right now I'm also having to weigh the possibility that the HUD position won't come through -- like I mentioned, I've been waiting on the position to start for the better part of a year now as a result of the hiring freeze -- so I want to be prepared to apply for a full-time program in the nearish future if need be.

Edited August 23, 2017 by wavywaves

[ExponentialDecay]

On 8/23/2017 at 6:08 PM, wavywaves said:

KB6, I appreciate you considering the big picture!  Ideally, because it's a passion of mine, I'd like to eventually end up working on policy research related to economic inequality; my dream job long-term would be a fellowship at the Institute for New Economic Thinking.  I just don't expect that I'll be able to make that type of transition without a stint at grad school somewhere along the line.  You're right that it'd be crazy to quit on a job as solid as the one at HUD within two years for grad school, and I definitely don't plan to do that.  If the HUD position comes through I'll be riding it out for a while, looking into part-time grad programs down the line and weighing the new career options that a few years of federal experience will open up.  But it's not that simple because right now I'm also having to weigh the possibility that the HUD position won't come through -- like I mentioned, I've been waiting on the position to start for the better part of a year now as a result of the hiring freeze -- so I want to be prepared to apply for a full-time program in the nearish future if need be.

Am I way off-base, or is it really infuriating that an institution that purports to nurture new perspectives in economics is governed entirely by old white men? Seriously - among all its board members (like 50 people), I counted 2 women and a few Asian dudes. The institutes for, I presume, old economic thinking that I am familiar with at least pretend to honor the idea of supporting new perspectives by hiring people from diverse backgrounds to serve in leadership positions.

Anyway, if you want a fellowship (i.e. be given money to do your own research), you need a PhD.