<p>I know they're fairly different degrees, but I think they're close enough to be comparable.
Which would you say is the more prestigious among policy circles?</p>
<p>A fair question; but could actually know that? I doubt anyone in "policy circles" actually frequents this forum.</p>
<p>Anyway, I'll give your question a shot. For working in the US, I would say SAIS. If you are severely lacking in international experience though it would probably be better to go abroad for the masters, in this case to LSE. Even though a year in the UK hardly counts as significant or challenging international experience, it's certainly better than nothing if nothing is all you've got.</p>
<p>If you are planning on working predominantly in a country other than the United States, I would say LSE. While both programs are excellent I'm sure, LSE has a far stronger international reputation than JHU SAIS.</p>
<p>When you are looking for a graduate MPA, you shouldn't be looking for the "most prestigious" one you can get your hands on, but the one thats fits the best with what you want to do after you graduate. The hardcore obsession with school prestige on here is ridiculous.</p>
<p>when you are looking to apply or even plan in advance is one level. when you are accepted and need to decide is a step above that. but when you speculate about prestige for its own sake then you know you are on CC.</p>
<p>Yup. I agree with both of you. Much of what is done on CC is speculation. And that's ok. </p>
<p>There are lots of threads on here; feel free to post in those that you don't think are ridiculous.</p>
<p>hi. i understand completely and agree with everyone, but i am not speculating i have been accepted to both, and now need to decide! i think prestige is an important factor, particularly when working internationally when name matters, which i plan to do.</p>
<p>so do i go with lse?</p>
<p>Just to be clear, I never said that Whatsups thread was ridiculous, just that the prevalent obsession with orestige on CC is ridiculous, which it is.</p>
<p>It is also somewhat faulty to assume that prestige is "very important" when working internationally. It certainly doesn't hurt, but to pretend that some international jobs are open only to those who have graduated from SAIS or KSG is pentently false.</p>
<p>the LSE has a huge american policy based alumni - and a decent american alumni association. </p>
<p>Being part of that alma mater could be useful.... </p>
<p>I think this is where the "prestige" thing comes in - its about who it groups you with. </p>
<p>don't know about JHU...</p>
<p>There is no doubt that the networking you can do at JHU or LSE is beyond anything you could accomplish elsewhere. What I was trying to debunk, however, was that either of those schools are pipelines to awesome jobs unavailable to people with MA's from lesser school. A great degree helps, but it will only serve as a way to get your foot in the door. Your career has alot more to do with how hard you work.</p>
<p>I'm not exactly a policy expert, but I do have some experience in DC, some connections in the State Dept. (I will NOT go more into detail on this, sorry), and some connections at other agencies that I will not name specifically (just think alphabet soup.)</p>
<p>If you want to work for the US government, then US schools are best. One thing that people often overlook is the lengthy and oftentimes difficult clearance process that accompanies policy work (if you go government). Even lowly careers in State will require a secret clearance. You think this is easy? Think again.</p>
<p>I spent 1.5 years abroad in Japan, and my current clearance process is leaving me GRILLED on this and other issues (family.) One or two years abroad for a LSE MPA may leave you at a significant disadvantage over the SAIS grad when clearance time comes. Is it fair? Maybe not. Is it reality? Yes.</p>
<p>I won't go into more detail on my own personal experience with clearances, as that's one thing I will plan on keeping private-- and those of you who know me here know that's a VERY high threshold-- but I will discuss the process in general.</p>
<p>So if you live abroad for a couple of years they make it more difficult for you to get secret clearance? That sounds stupid of them. Especially if they supposedly value international experience.</p>
<p>nauru,</p>
<p>This is the balance that any agency must look for. For one, experience abroad will help you be a better-rounded individual. However, it also means that you are more likely to come into contact with subversive (to US interests) elements and develop bonds of affection with foreign nationals.</p>
<p>Again, it's not fair. It just is what it is.</p>
<p>hey uclari,</p>
<p>i'm a returned peace corps volunteer heading to sais. where would that leave me in terms of the clearance process?</p>
<p>thanks.</p>
<p>The only significant issue with a clearance investigation is the quality of the contact information you put in for family, friends, employers, and relationships. That is, if you don't put in the extra time to track down peoples' working phone numbers and addresses, then your investigators will have to do it for you. And they'll probably talk to you many times to get your help.</p>
<p>Unless you're like 18 with no prior experience doing anything, an investigation will take a while. Being in the Peace Corps wouldn't hold you back; you'll just need to list your employer's contact. Same with living abroad -- you just need to list contacts there.</p>
<p>Volscio,</p>
<p>I disagree. Over and over again, I see people with significant foreign travel and contacts getting dinged. The more time you have abroad, the more suspicious they become. </p>
<p>It also depends on where you were, why you were there, and how "official" the travel there was. For example, time spent in England is less serious than time spent in India. However, there are some seriously nightmare stories out there (true stories) of people getting dinged for the weirdest stuff.</p>
<p>freemumia,</p>
<p>Since you did something that was sponsored by the US government, you'll be fine. It's not like you just packed up your stuff and left for wherever.</p>
<p>Hey Ari,</p>
<p>Thanks for the insight. I never really thought about this before, and I don't have any plans to work for the US government, but I now realize that I would never in a million years pass a security clearance. I've spent far too much time in weird parts of the world, and my loyalties are far too obviously divided for them to trust me at all.</p>
<p>Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha!!</p>
<p>(Now watch as I never get a job....)</p>
<p>Maybe it varies by investigating agency, and maybe they're more lenient on soldiers, but as a security manager I only saw outright denials for people who were consciously negligent in reporting information. Those who documented their forms thoroughly had few issues.</p>
<p>Hi</p>
<p>this is an old thread but I am going through the same debate, hence if anyone can throw some light onto the matter, it would help.</p>
<p>i have been accepted to the MPA at LSE and the MA at SAIS (one year at Bologna). I am an international student (not from the UK or the US) and want to work in international development organisations. so which would be a good place to go? </p>
<p>would be great if you could throw some light!</p>
<p>thanks!</p>
<p>Hi talentino,
I have been accepted in exactly both programs than you and I am an International Student. I don’t know what to do since both of them cost alot!</p>