Advice for Masters and PhD students

Advice from a friend and colleague:

While at Think Tank X, and again here at Thank Tank Y and talking to folks from various think-tanks and Beltway bandits around town, there is a widespread sense that many current Master's programs often do not produce as well-developed analytical abilities in their students. Whether it is how they look at problems, or how well they write, there's widespread frustration with what incoming research assistants can do. Methodology is even more troubling: what constitutes evidence, what is an authoritative source. 

Insofar as PhD programs inculcate that into the students, that's an improvement. BUT, as our mutual friend notes, there arises other problems; one he didn't note but which I've seen (and heard others complain about) is that PhDs often take far too academic an approach, which often doesn't mesh well with policy requirements. A decision-maker often does not have the time (even if they have the interest) in poli-sci theory or historical background. The author needs to be able to differentiate between what they needed to know to write the report, and what should go into the 5 page executive summary, the one-page outline, and the 10 minute brief (and that's a hard 10 minutes, not a professorial 10 minutes).