Ranking concentrations at SAIS

December 07, 2009 | Observer Staff | Comments 0

 Print This Post

By Robert McDonald

Southeast Asia, IDEV, STRAT and Korean Studies top student approval charts

For some, the concentration choice is nearly innate.  An undergrad toiling over Swahili, 2 years of Peace Corps in Kenya, a passion for microfinance and a life size blow up doll of Amartya Sen in your bedroom meant you had IDEV tattooed on your inner thigh the day you got your acceptance letter.  Watching the years fall away as you increased your understanding of derivative markets and securities, perfected your pronunciation of ‘May our partnership bear us years of prosperity’ in Mandarin and that funny warm feeling you get deep inside your suit when the boss starts talking about a successful ‘stimulus package,’ – you knew you were a dead ringer for a Finance Specialization and China Studies.

For others it couldn’t be done more haphazardly. ‘See Mom and Dad, I told you I could do something with my life, I got into SAIS!’  ‘Well dear, what are you studying?’ ‘Uhhh…’ A cursory glance of available options, a check on the box next to IR General, and away we go.

And yet for a chosen few selecting a concentration is a mind boggling burden.  ERE or Eurasian Studies?  Your passion for hydro-power and the carbon trading system cannot be contained, but those 3 years in Estonia taking moonlit walks in the icy Baltic air were the best of your life.

Does it all make a difference, anyway? How much does selecting a concentration really alter our brief 2 year visit to the hallowed halls of SAIS?

Last semester 150 students answered a 20 question survey regarding their concentrations’ coursework, faculty, sense of community, and marketability.  Responses were overwhelmingly positive, but did vary from one concentration to the next.  Quantitative data was briefly discussed in a previous article and is presented in detail above.  All program coordinators were contacted however several faculty and staff were unavailable for interview or did not respond to Observer requests.  Those concentrations who had either 10 people or 20 percent of their group respond are included.

Respondents:

Overall Rankings based on Positive Responses (Note Several Concentrations had less than 5 people or 10% of their students respond and were not considered here).  Concentration Codes: SEA: Southeast Asia. CM: Conflict Management. ILAW: International Law.  IP/ERE: International Policy (now Energy Resources and Environment).  STRAT: Strategic Studies.  IDEV:  International Development.  KOR: Korean Studies.  SA: South Asian Studies. ME: Middle Easter Studies. RES: Russian and Eurasian Studies. IRGTH: International Relations, Global Theory and History.

Total Responses:

Responses based on Courses

Responses based on Faculty

Responses based on Community

The results hinted that available and helpful faculty combined with a strong sense of community mattered most in students’ overall impression of their concentration.  Coursework may not have played as large a role in determining how much respondents liked their area of study, but was often listed as a weakness.  Departments who boasted more long term and non-adjunct faculty also rated highly in questions pertaining to sense of community.  According to Shelley Su, Program Coordinator for Southeast Asia Studies, “I really enjoy the job, though I am jealous of the students here; I love the faculty.  Students will come into the office to chat, study or just relax on the couch; the professors’ doors are always open.”  Some concentrations also emphasized events offered which strengthened student-student and student-professor relations.  “We host consistent events every 1 or 2 weeks; public seminars, ambassador forums, and lunches that allow students face time with guest lecturers.  I, myself, am interested in the topics and am having a ball with this job,” stated Rahul Madhavan, Program Coordinator for South Asia Studies.  Director of the International Development program, Professor Francis Fukuyama, stressed that what set IDEV apart was the preparation provided for students to become well-rounded development practitioners with hard analytical skills and a deep understanding of the issues.  The distinguished professor did concede that fun played a role as well, mentioning IDEV barbeques, camping trips and losing paintball matches to Strategic Studies.

Coursework and a somewhat distant faculty were often cited as issues by students concentrating in subjects that did not fare as well.  “One challenging aspect of the program is the high number of adjunct faculty.  The concentration has brought a variety of different experienced adjuncts in to the program, but as their primary attention is not at SAIS, students have to work harder to make a connection,” responded one  ERE concentrator.  “(Conflict Management) seems to focus more on domestic conflicts even though this is an international relations school.  They offer Peace Kidz which is working in local middle/high schools- I’m sure it’s a great experience but it’s not international relations.  A mediation class I took last year was very interesting and taught by a knowledgeable professor, but it used land disputes between local farmers and child custody cases as references.  We should be discussing ongoing, live international disputes,” stated one 2^nd year student in Conflict Management.

Despite the variation, nearly all departments had a majority of favorable responses. It appears those who ranked near the top had friendly faculty and staff that ensured students felt welcomed and wanted.  So if still in pursuit of your academic bliss, shop around and pay attention to both the welcome you’re given and the folks you’ll be studying with.  Apparently, even hardcore workaholic IR grad students like to feel a little love.

Robert McDonald is a second year M.A. candidate in Southeast Asia Studies and is happy to provide the data for this study.  Have a question, a bone to pick or a different viewpoint? Please contact the Observer at observer@jhu.edu.

Filed Under: December 2009 • News