Posts Tagged ‘LSE’

Since my last post on the LSE MPA, there have been some significant changes made to the curriculum. How did I find out about the new changes? An email from my blog reader. This in and of itself should raise concern over the level (or lack thereof) of communication between administration and the student body.

So, what are the changes?

Instead of 5 units of courses a year and a mandatory dissertation in year 2, the new curriculum only consists of 4 units of classes a year. Dissertation in year 2 is now optional in place of an one-unit course. For the International Development folks, this means you no longer have an option course in year one. The trade-off is a 20% lighter workload than what I had to endure.

I found out about these changes whilst studying for 2^nd of my five exams and it made me want to scream. Just the thought that had I enter this program one year later, my life would have been 20% better, i.e, I would’ve been able to devote to my classes 20% more, have a better social life, or the like. I am a proponent of making the dissertation an option. This is a professional degree, and dissertation does not necessarily provide the kind of tool kit that one needs in a professional arena.

Responses from the student body

Since most of us did not know about this news until a few days ago, the newly elected board of MPA Policy Forum (supposed to be a student governing group – its name is undergoing possible change) vigorously lobbied for a meeting with the MPA Steering Committee.

An email was sent out few days ago from one of the Committee members who would not be able to attend the meeting. One of the paragraphs really drew my attention:

We are acutely aware that students do not feel they were given adequate opportunity to comment on the new arrangements, and although this was raised at Staff Student Liaison Committee meeting, and is in direct response to other petitions from students over several years, we are profusely sorry that more was not done in this respect.

So he apologized, but I did not see any concrete plans on how procedures will change to better communicate and engage the student body. Again, if you are changing curriculum without consulting students who are experiencing the coursework and will be the ones who apply the learning, then how is it possible to have a good curriculum? It’s analogous to designing aid policies without asking the local population what their needs are. Come on! LSE is better than that!

Dilemma

Whether or not the incoming 2^nd year students will adopt the new curriculum, or maintain the current status quo of 5 units of classes including mandatory dissertation, requires unanimous voting from the student body.

I have a hard time believing that there are people who do NOT want the change. To be a complete nerd, let me just apply a little of what we learned this year. Adopting the new change is a Pareto optimal move for everyone – no one can be worse off. If you want to write a dissertation – take the option. If you want to take more classes, feel free to audit and attend all the classes you want at the LSE. No one is stopping you. But voting against the new change will hurt those who struggle with current load of coursework. The email from my reader who informed me of this new changed said, “So I am guessing someone has read your blog and took note of your comment that 5 units are just too much!” I wouldn’t go as far as that, but while the administration did not adequately engage the student body, I am quite certain that the complaint of excessive coursework is well represented.

Why do I care?

You may wonder why I am wasting my time addressing issues that have no relevance to me, considering I am off to Columbia next year. Well, I spent a year here at the LSE, and will thus be forever associated with the program. I want the LSE MPA to evolve and to grow into something that all of the students can be proud of, and can enthusiastically recommend to others. From my last post, you can probably conjure that I currently lean toward the negative side when it comes to recommending it.

I want to be equally as proud of my time at the LSE as I will be at Columbia SIPA. I want people to recognize these two programs as equal substitutes. I don’t want anyone in the future to ever ask me what I was thinking when I chose LSE MPA over Columbia SIPA.

My two cents

So what would I change if people gave a crap about what I think?

Significantly lower admission granted to undergraduates. Every good professional program has exception of a few absolutely brilliant undergraduates who deserve a place. They have saved lives or took part in some other amazing miracle during their summers or gap year. Those people absolutely deserve a place. However, letting academically brilliant students who lack professional experiences into a professional program creates problems for the rest of the student body. Unfortunately, the LSE MPA currently has a much higher percentage of such students than other programs that I know. As far as I remember, I don’t remember this statistic being published whilst I made my decision, so I was in the dark.

What problems could academically brilliant undergrads possibly create? For one, their skill as a study machine has not diminished one bit. They haven’t forgotten how to study strategically, how to cram for exams, how to memorize extensive amount of information. Those who have gained professional experiences have a great deal of other skills, but at a great disadvantage in this area.

Furthermore, I notice a lot of people who came from undergrad also studied similar subjects before, which further put them at an academic advantage. So not only that they remember how to study, they also just learned this stuff sometimes less than a year ago. You tell me if that doesn’t create imbalances with people who’ve been in the workforce for 5 years and did Art History or Literature in undergrad.

Once again: this is a PROFESSIONAL program

Curriculum for a professional program can’t mimic MSc degrees. The admission process and the type of students admitted can’t be the same as purely academic programs. I am confident that the current administration is well aware of these factors, but I feel they still lack significantly in addressing the professional aspects of the program. The academic side is more than well taken care of – obviously even a bit too much given the reduction in curriculum. Focusing more on the professional aspect will set this program apart. The competition for MPA programs are nowhere near as fierce as MBA programs and LSE is already one of the best, but it needs to innovate continuously and quickly to compete with programs that are sprouting around the world.

Your thoughts?

I don’t mean to air the program’s dirty laundry in public, but I believe these type of changes and issues need to be made aware for prospective students, who perhaps don’t want to get reeled into a not-yet stable program.

I also think it’s a good chance for other policy professionals to contribute their ideas on what makes a great professional program that will serve the wide and varied public sphere. They are the people out there doing the kind of work that people in this program aspire to. So if they were to educate new-comers, what would they want us to learn?

1 person likes this post.

Unlike

A few months ago, I wrote a post on my thoughts on the LSE MPA after my first term. Now that I have completed the year and am in the final stretch preparing for exams, I thought it’s time to do a bit of update on how I really feel. It’s admissions decision time, and I’ve received a lot of emails from people, so this is a good time to share.

I am pursuing a degree in MPA International Development, so this will be a more program specific post than the previous one. I came into this Program directly, less than two months, after my service in the Peace Corps. This is an important factor. I’ve received emails also from currently serving volunteers, and this is something I stress: being abroad for the 3rd year in a row may not be as easy as you think. I will expand on this later.

I must admit that a big reason why I did this program was the finances. LSE gave me money and in comparison to the other programs that I was considering (Columbia SIPA, Johns Hopkins SAIS), this was substantially cheaper. If I could do it again, would I still make the same choice? maybe, maybe not. But either way, I would have liked to know what I know now.

The Academic
Your first year in MPA International Development consists of 5 units of courses. 1/2 unit is a term. However, all exams take place in June. You are required to take four core classes, 3 of which every MPA has to take, and a development management core. I was concerned with the lack of choices, and it turned out to be a big source of unhappiness. I was stuck with these 5 classes for the entire year. Most other programs, you switch up the classes at the semester, giving you a fresh start after Christmas break. While the courses aren’t terrible, they are definitely not ones I would voluntarily take. I think above all factors, this should be your number one consideration. Something I definitely wish I had considered more. You will spend all day everyday working for these classes, and you want to make sure you’ll love it, or at least like it a lot.

The approach of these MPA classes in the first year is highly theoretical. For someone who did undergrad in a business school, this a difficult adjustment. I really did not value the practicality of my education from undergrad until I am here forcing to read all these theoretical academic articles that I am not sure how they apply to the real world. This is certainly a personal preference. The LSE MPA differs from others in that it has a dissertation component and is a gateway to PhD should you wish to pursue. If you like to really delve into a subject and know it really well, this is for you. If you want to survey a wide range of courses and know enough about each one but not to become a super expert, then this is probably not for you.

One little story to illustrate the theoretical-ness of this program: One day in my development management seminar, I was so frustrated with all the theory, I point-blank asked the professor, “With your experience working in the World Bank and the field, did you ever use any of these theories?” he said, “well, to be honest, you never use these”. He then tries to encourage us that this may be the last chance we can indulge in academics. The unfortunate thing is, MPA is suppose to be a professional program, and I didn’t come here to indulge in academic exercises. Side note: this development management and policy course is taught more like an intro to IR theory class. I feel we are trying to apply IR theory to developing countries, which I don’t find all that useful in solving today’s development issues.

Furthermore, it can feel incredibly frustrating when most other MSc students only take 3 full units of classes plus a dissertation in the summer, you are stuck with 5 units of classes. Something doesn’t seem to add up.

Finally, the UK system is bizarre and is a big source of stress. There is very little feedback and you need to be incredibly self-disciplined to on top of things (which I am really not). Essentially, there are few things that you have to do, but there is a constant looming dark cloud of exams hanging over your head. This is a big complain that I’ve heard from many, not only within the MPA, but other MSc students as well.

Dual Degree
The LSE MPA is in the Global Public Policy Network where students can apply to pursue their second year at Columbia SIPA, Sciences Po, Lee Kwan Yeu School of Public Policy in Singapore, or Hertie School of Governance in Berlin. The website makes it seem that it’s pretty easy to do this. In reality, it depends on where you want to go. If you are aiming for Columbia, competition is fierce and there is no rhyme or reason as to who gets in or who doesn’t. Since there aren’t any grades by the time you submit these dual degree applications, they base on your original application to the LSE and a few essays. SIPA is the only one that has multiple essays, four to be exact. The rest only requires one motivation statement. And for the other programs, it’s pretty much if you apply, you can go (Sciences Po may have a bit of competition, but not much).

Toward the end of my decision process last year, I was actually very attracted to SIPA. I didn’t receive the acceptance until very late in the process and by then, my mind was already set on LSE. When I didn’t receive much financial aid from SIPA, I didn’t bother to sway my decision. The truth is, SIPA curriculum fits me better. Luckily, I was one of 7 this year that received a spot at SIPA for dual degree (19 applied this year, usually about 1/3 chance). I am very fortunate that things work out this way. But I would strongly advice people to go to the school they’d most want to go to irrespective of the dual degree option.

The Professional
MPA is suppose to be a “professional degree” right? Well, the LSE MPA definitely has some work to do in this regard. I felt there was very little guidance in finding internships and becoming prepared for various professional settings. The LSE itself has a decent career service, but has a main focus in banking and consulting recruitment. Also it’s really far too small to serve the entire university. You have to book ahead for everything and it’s always a race to get a spot. I attended a few career fairs and they were more like a career zoo.

The MPA itself has a lady from LSE Career Service who is dedicated to the MPA program. However, she comes to the MPA office one day a week and you can book a 20 min appointment with her. Again, it’s always a mad race trying to get those appointments. The MPA itself has organized a few “professional” events, but they were all pretty terrible and pitiful. One alumni panel that I attended had 3 people – one just graduated, the other was a PhD student and I honestly can’t remember what the 3rd person did.

If you want a career in EU, then this is a good starting point. However, if you think doing this degree will help you stay in the UK after, think again. The new coalition government is taking away post-study visa starting next year. If you want to work in the US government, definitely consider SAIS or SIPA instead. They really don”t recruit here much. With that said, if you are trying to get into finance or consulting in Europe, LSE is one of the best places to be.

The Social Scene
The LSE doesn’t have much of a campus, and their residence buildings are scattered across London. This isn’t like a US school where if you live in university housing, you are usually near the campus. Trying to be cheap, I picked the residence that is farthest from campus. This also added to the frustration. Computing is not so fun when you gotta lug around a laptop and books. If you are someone who are most productive studying at the library, then live near the school. Otherwise, you will spend half your days commuting and feeling very frustrated.

Because this lack of campus, I find my friends living in different areas of London, making socializing that much more difficult. These are things that I never thought would really matter, but they do. When you’ve been stuck in your shoebox room for 10 hours writing a paper, and all you want is to hang out with your friends with a beer, it sucks that they live far away.

I didn’t really get involve with extracurricular activities, which probably adds to the frustration. In the first week of school, there is a fair for all the student societies and whatnot. Again, it was entirely too many people and incredibly overwhelming. I think the positive aspect with the other policy schools like SAIS, SIPA or Kennedy is that they are self-contained so the extra-curricular are targeted toward people within these schools. LSE MPA itself isn’t big enough to have such activities, but when you get lumped in with the rest of the LSE, it’s really overwhelming.

So, is there anything good?
Yes! The LSE student body is probably the most diverse that you would encounter. Befriending this dynamic group of people is really something. Let’s not forget the LSE name. It carries certain level of prestige that makes people go wow. If you discount the grading and the strange, archaic system, this is actually a good place to learn. If you want economics training, there is no better place. If you are someone who really likes to dig deep into an issue and learn a lot about a few subjects, this is the place for you.

London is actually a fantastic city if you can find time to enjoy it. While studying in Europe isn’t like studying abroad in Europe, there is still sufficient amount of time for you to take trips to wonderful European cities. This is a big plus about going to school here.

Post-Peace Corps
If you are a serving volunteer thinking about this program right after your service, I’d suggest that you think seriously about whether you can spend another year or likely two abroad. Coming from Cameroon, I thought, oh, London is a developed country, there’s running water, electricity, Internet all day long and I can get anything I want. I’ll be just fine. But what I failed to realize is how much I would miss being closer to my friends and family after those two years. Furthermore, there aren’t many RPCVs here at the LSE and the RPCV network in London is just beginning and isn’t strong yet. I wish there were more RPCVs around who I could talk to. I’ve lived abroad a lot even before the Peace Corps, but this reverse-culture shock was like none other. Take this into consideration when you make the decision. It affected me more than I had imagined.

All in all, you need to be disciplined, open-minded and find charm in gloomy London weather. My thoughts are mine, and it’s not a true representation of how everyone feels. There are those who really love it, but then there are those who hates it so much that they think it’s worth it to just drop out of the program. Like anything, there is a range of opinions. Take it for what it is, and good luck in your decisions!

7 people like this post.

Unlike

a different way of life

We are entering week 16 at the LSE, and that means the final quarter of the year. Where did time go? I am finally putting on my game face and am finally feeling the pressure of life in this “real” world. There seems to always be something going on – places I need to be, things I need to do, people I need to see. I find myself running around meeting various obligations and questioning what all the busying around is for. I no longer have time to think, to feel and to be, those were the luxury of life in Cameroon.

When I sit in development classes and hearing discussions of democracy, institutions and economic development, all I can really think about is the simplicity of my life in village. After two years of living au village, I’m extremely conflicted between modern world efficiency and the things you have to give up to reach such level of efficiency – a real community, nature, appreciating simply being alive, etc.

I don’t want to live in the past, so I am attempting to move forward. Despite all of my nostalgia, I’m putting myself out there to get my hand on the corporate ladder, to get with the program and remembering what it takes to “succeed” in this world. But when I walk around the LSE campus seeing people stressing out and discussing the horrible consequence of not getting a job with a top 15 investment bank or consulting firm, I feel sad for them. Don’t they see that there is so much more to life?

I miss living a life that always has a purpose. Peace Corps advertises itself as “the toughest job you’ll ever love”, and it’s true. It’s tough in a very different way. Living in such different environment, I was in touch with my deepest strengths and weaknesses. Yet even during my lowest moments, I could find purpose by having one simple conversation with a villager. There is something profound about the ability to change lives not through any noble act, but simply being present and converse.

Day in and day out now, I follow the motion of grad school grind, and during the low days here, I don’t know where to find inspiration and to feel purposeful again. So I look back to my pictures and draw inspiration from the past. It’s easy to become suffocated by the conventional societal pressure. But it’s important to remember, especially under high stress situations, that expectations are relative. I can only do my best to find a purpose in life for me.

Today, I miss Cameroon. They come in waves. But tomorrow is another day. Moving on, moving forward.

In between the library and my shoebox room, I did manage to do some fun things and I’ll share them in due time.

7 people like this post.

Unlike

With one term under my belt, people have been asking me what I think of the LSE and the MPA program so far. So here are some personal insights on this prestigious institution and one of its many graduate programs.

The London School of Economics and Political Science is fancy, and there is a reason for that. This year, yet another Nobel Prize was awarded to a member of the LSE community, marking it the 16th Nobel Prize here. It is strange to think that the dude sitting next to me in the library could possibly be the next Noble Laureate. You never know. Given all these fame, it is no surprise that the academic is rigorous.

The MPA stands for Master of Public Administration. The easiest way that I describe the degree is that it is a MBA in the public context. Within the program, I have chosen to specialize in international development. The MPA program here requires first year students to take 5 unit worth of courses and lasts two years. Which, I did not realize until after I began my course, that almost all the other master’s programs only last one year and require students to take 3 or 4 units and to complete a dissertation in the summer. The extra work is often unrecognized in the job market so I am taking the liberty to hereby distinguish the LSE MPA from the other LSE MSc degrees. Just in case there are potential employers reading this! Again, you never know.

The Garrick - my favorite café on campus

The facts aside, what are my thoughts? Well, it is no doubt challenging. However, coming from a U.S. system where there are continuous assessment, I was used to some form of pressurized learning. It is thus very strange that an entire term has gone by, and I’ve only had two assessed assignments that counted for a small percentage of my grades. It takes a lot of self motivation to get the readings done and be on top of the material. The lack of feedback is very frustrating, and this seems to be a common concern among those who have done undergrad in the US or other similar systems. This system, however, exemplifies learning for learning’s sake, and not learning to pass exams. Much better way of educating in my opinion, but more feedback would be nice.

The Famous Houghton Street

You may think, well, then how are your grades determined? There are no doubt exams. For my classes, the one final exam counts for anywhere from 75% to 100% of the final marking. It’s pretty scary. 50/50 I can deal, 75% – 100%? That’s downright frightening. Another difference, while Americans are used to hyper grade inflation where getting an A is the norm, the LSE is not so. 70 or above is A, and those are few and far between. Most people fall between 60-70 (B) or 50-60 (C). Throughout all of my life as a student, it was rare to see anything below a 80. There is thus some serious psychological discomfort now when someone gives me a 60 and telling me that’s not bad. Whaaaat?

All the technicalities aside, I am enjoying being a student again and challenging my mind. Being at an institution like the LSE means I’m constantly surrounded by some very intelligent people (albeit some can be very very competitive, and easily stressed). The LSE has incredible resources in terms of research and very supportive Career Services. The faculty for the most part are interested in teaching and sharing their expertise. It’s taking me a while to get a handle on things (the system, the right way to tackle the studies, etc.) and feel complete ease in this environment. But, I think I’m doing well considering I came from a village with no running water! small small catch monkey! (Pidgin English for one step at a time)

The one difference I do want to point out, is that the Europeans are not used to paying a lot for school, while Americans are used to shelling out a ridiculous amount for university education. Recently, there were severe student protests because the UK government wants to increase student fees to £9,000 a year (approx. $13,000) for undergrads. The Americans have a hard time wrap our heads around on what the big deal is. In the U.S. $15k is the norm for most public universities and private universities can run from $20 to $40k a year!

At the LSE, while the quality of education is top-notch, it’s easy to see that you do get what you pay for in terms of facilities. The library is always packed and there is never enough space to study on campus. Everything from the technology facility in the classrooms to the student union, the gym, the food on campus, etc. all pale in comparison with most universities in the US. But, on the other hand, some may argue that you go to school to learn, so all the other extra stuff doesn’t matter. You win some, you lose some.

LSE Library by Day

LSE Library by Night

Like

Unlike

I haven’t written much about the academic aspect of my experience thus far here at the LSE. To be honest, I really am still trying to figure out what is going on and what is the best strategy in tackling the course work and getting organized so I don’t seriously freak out come April. One thing for sure, I have been using my brain and drawing a great deal from two years of field experiences in the Peace Corps.

Last week, while attending the Wokai London Chapter launch event, I was cornered by Jono, a 2nd year Australian MPAer, into teaming up with him for the upcoming MPA Hot Topic – a debate series organized by the MPA Policy Forum. This round of debate topic was Is China the Security Threat of the 21st Century? I think the fact I am Chinese/Taiwanese and also America was largely the reason why I was targeted by Jono. I can rarely say no when people ask me favors as such, so I agreed.

Luckily, Jono had a good argument in place and all I had to do was strengthen some parts of it, add a few slides, talk for 7 minutes and answer some questions. Before the actual debate took place, I was tired and just wanted to end my day. But in the end, it turned out to be really fun. Our central argument was that there lacks an international institution such as the EU or NATO in the Asian region (note the recent incident between N. & S. Korea) will encourage China to gain hegemony power. Furthermore, tension with Taiwan is a major ticking bomb that in the unlikely chance of a major disagreement leading to conflict, US may intervene and the problem becomes a major international concern. There are also other factors such as lack of democracy in China (freedom of speech, press, etc), military spending, etc.

Prior to the debate, a poll was taken and 70% of argument took the stance of the opponent that Chinese is NOT the biggest security threat vs. 20% who were on our side and 10% who were indifferent. At the end of our compelling argument, we won the debate by earning majority support!

The Winning Team at The George

The whole thing turned out to be quite fun and we had a good laugh in some of the humors within the arguments. I also realized that my public speaking abilities have improved quite a lot due to two years in the Peace Corps. I suppose speaking English in front of people just isn’t that big of a deal after teaching and speaking to large groups of Cameroonians in French on a regular basis.

Like

Unlike