- Joined
- Mar 3, 2020
- Messages
- 423
- Reaction score
- 1,129
Hi all,
So my boyfriend recently got into both Columbia MPH with an concentration in climate and health and Boston University MS for Climate and Health. He is stuck between the two programs and so I turn to you all for more perspectives/help make his decision. His ultimate goal is to pursue a PhD in epidemiology and to do research in infectious disease modeling.
Pros for Columbia:
Neutral:
So my boyfriend recently got into both Columbia MPH with an concentration in climate and health and Boston University MS for Climate and Health. He is stuck between the two programs and so I turn to you all for more perspectives/help make his decision. His ultimate goal is to pursue a PhD in epidemiology and to do research in infectious disease modeling.
Pros for Columbia:
- has a practicum and a thesis
- has faculty that he is aligned with the research goals for his PhD(infectious disease modeling)
- many more epidemiology/modeling based classes as well as more diverse classes (classes that he is interested in)
- cost is more expensive and COL may be more expensive as well
- massive class sizes(100+ classes)
- research is predominantly conducted in the second year as opposed to the first year
- tuition cost is around half the cost of Columbia
- 1 year program as opposed to a 2 year program, leaving an extra year to do independent research/jobs before applying for a PhD
- Boston professors appear to more engaging with the community/students (may make it easier to obtain an LOR)
- smaller class sizes (10 person cohort currently as climate and health specifically is in its first year)
- Boston has researchers that fit with "secondary" research interest (temperature related health mitigation strategies)
- only has a thesis
- fewer modeling based classes(~2 classes or so)
- does not have very much research based in infectious disease modeling
Neutral:
- city each program is located in(no family/friends on the coasts