<p>As far as I can tell, there's no problem with it at all-- especially if you want to do field work. Very few, even in the upper rungs of the federal government, have PhDs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I still beg to differ. Define "best and brightest."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Best and brightest? I don't know. Lets say the smarter students coming out of the good college. </p>
<p>People who go to, say, top humanities PhD programs or top law schools will run circles around KSG, SIPA, et al. people.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Plenty of high-ranking federal officials go to KSG because of its credentials in the field. Where else would the "best and brightest" be going?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I do not doubt that KSG gives you good career options in the field. But I'm not sure how that proves that KSG students are the best and brightest.</p>
<p>the "best and brightest" of any of the top programs is probably equal.</p>
<p>Columbia2002,</p>
<p>Based on what metric? Considering that a fair number of KSG grads also do joint programs at the very same law programs, I don't know how you're measuring this sort of ability. And really, top humanities PhDs? Based on what?</p>
<p>I'm just curious where you get your information. I honestly believe that KSG looks for different stuff than most law programs. That doesn't necessarily make the grads any less capable, however.</p>
<p>This is a great thread. I have no expertise on the matter, but I can say that Columbia's PSci dept is generally considered among the best, and that in applications to grad schools or political positions you will probably be considered in the same group as (say) an IR major from brown.</p>
<p>Also, people who can't get into Harvard's true top programs but want to say they went to Harvard go to their school of Education (or, recently, to their med school - which is falling in the rankings after its curriculum overhaul).</p>
<p>Med school?</p>
<p>Uhh...</p>
<p>average GPA: 3.76
average MCAT scores were:
Verbal-11.01
Physical Science-12.09
Biological Science-12.03 </p>
<p>I'd say that a 35 on the MCAT still puts you up there with "the best."</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, people who can't get into Harvard's true top programs but want to say they went to Harvard go to their school of Education
[/quote]
</p>
<p>KSG falls in the same category as Harvard's Education school. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Based on what metric? Considering that a fair number of KSG grads also do joint programs at the very same law programs, I don't know how you're measuring this sort of ability. And really, top humanities PhDs? Based on what?</p>
<p>I'm just curious where you get your information. I honestly believe that KSG looks for different stuff than most law programs. That doesn't necessarily make the grads any less capable, however.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The ones who do joint programs at the law schools are probably better than those who do not, so I'm not sure what that proves. KSG doesn't look for "different" stuff -- it doesn't look for as much stuff as other graduate programs. And, anecdotally, the KSG people I've encountered are unimpressive.</p>
<p>Can someone clarify this matter?Are IR students really this weak?</p>
<p>I'm weak..</p>
<p>Columbia2002,</p>
<p>KSG's average stats are largely in line with top history and many top PhD programs in political science. I don't see how they're less impressive than any other average grad students.</p>
<p>What makes them "unimpressive" to you, anyway? </p>
<p>Dionysus,</p>
<p>You have to define "weak." I mean, many of the IR grads I've met have been incredible, interesting people who chose their field out of interest. I don't agree with Columbia2002, simply because I don't think he's done a good job of defining his terms and arguing his point. Anecdotal evidence probably doesn't tell us much.</p>
<p>i kind of feel like the people with Columbia2002's attitude are those who go to med school or law school because they represent a more "prestigious" option only to discover three years and tens of thousands of dollars later that they never really wanted to be a doctor or lawyer in the first place.</p>
<p>look dude, you can talk condescending trash and call "arrogance!" or "naivete!" on him all day long, but the fact is that I know several guys who go to the school of public health as well as KSG, and a handful of HLS and HBS grads... and the differences they describe in the student populations is quite surprising.</p>
<p>None of this is the point. The point is, Columbia has a good PoliSci program that's roughly fungible - in terms of post-grad options - with IR programs at other top schools.</p>
<p>If studying under Arthur Waldron has taught me anything, it's that intractable disputes like this are best solved with violence.</p>
<p>Have at you!! <em>lunge</em></p>
<p>
[quote]
i kind of feel like the people with Columbia2002's attitude are those who go to med school or law school because they represent a more "prestigious" option only to discover three years and tens of thousands of dollars later that they never really wanted to be a doctor or lawyer in the first place.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, the people who you'll find at top schools' schools of public health, international relations, etc. are people who tried to get into the more prestigious schools and failed.</p>
<p>
[quote]
the fact is that I know several guys who go to the school of public health as well as KSG, and a handful of HLS and HBS grads... and the differences they describe in the student populations is quite surprising.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Exactly.</p>
<p>
[quote]
No, the people who you'll find at top schools' schools of public health, international relations, etc. are people who tried to get into the more prestigious schools and failed.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Do you have any evidence for this? Almost all of the people in my program didn't even bother applying to other programs. They all came here because it was the best program for their needs. Not everyone wants to go into medicine, law, or business. A lot of us really really want to be foreign service officers. Or we want to work for non-profits. </p>
<p>But let's say it's true. Let's say that IR grads are "stupider" than b-school and PhD program grads. So what? What difference does that make for you, if you're interested in international relations? You'll just be a big fish in a pond of little fish. That's good for you in a lot of ways. There are plenty of good connections to tap into at SAIS, SIPA, KSG, IR/PS, etc. that you actually can't get at a hoity-toity b-school. How many b-school profs. know high-ranking military personnel who can help me with research projects on Asian security?</p>
<p>Besides, where else would I go for this? I don't want to be a professor, so why would I get the PhD? </p>
<p>I see two problems with the argument, being that 1. there is no proof of this, other than anecdotal evidence, and 2. it doesn't necessarily mean much for someone who wants to work in international relations.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Have at you!! <em>lunge</em>
[/quote]
I used to be really down on JohnnyK, but he's winning me over with Monty Python references.</p>
<p>UCLAri you concentrate in Asian security?</p>
<p>Yes, I do. Mostly balance of power issues.</p>
<p>Does anyone really believe that Havard MBA students are "intellectuals" as opposed to being overconfident and personable savvy business types
in comparison to KSG students?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Does anyone really believe that Havard MBA students are "intellectuals" as opposed to being overconfident and personable savvy business types
in comparison to KSG students?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>B-School students / business types aren't "intellectuals" (I think of "intellectuals" as being pinheads who sit around and discuss boring crap like philosophy all day and can't have a conversation about baseball or which girls at school / work are hot.) However, they undoubtedly have greater intellects than the unimpressive KSG students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do you have any evidence for this? Almost all of the people in my program didn't even bother applying to other programs. They all came here because it was the best program for their needs. Not everyone wants to go into medicine, law, or business.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>People who end up going for second-tier grad programs like IR / public health may not bother applying to other programs because they do or would have done poorly on the MCAT/LSAT/GRE/GMAT. If you can't get into a better program, yes, it would then be for your needs.</p>
<p>The anecdotal evidence is very compelling that KSG types are the lightweights at Harvard. Talk to anyone who went to Harvard or knows KSG types.</p>