I have been lurking this thread for a long time. While I am not an MPH, or an MS, or a post-bac program ?graduate?, I still think I can clear a few things up because everyone here is a little right and a little wrong.
I am an MD/PhD student studying health policy, and I have been the student representative to my school?s medical admissions committee for the past two years (and I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night
).
First off daelroy, you are wrong. Most of my PhD work has been in the history of medical eduaction and the policies that regulate it. The development of post-bac programs had nothing at all to do with MPH students and everything to do with money. When they were first created they were used to offer some legitimacy to institutions where admissions could be ?bought?. One school outside of a large, midwestern city used to be notorious for this ? to the point where some residency programs in that city, for a time, would not accept any graduates from that institution. And that remains some physicians? view of them (very few, but they are out there). Before you get all defensive, realize that today?s programs bear no resemblance to that AT ALL, and almost all adcoms know that. A post-bac is a valid method, and by no means an easy one, to improve your application.
I do not understand why everyone is so caught up in what program type equals re-applicant. As FoughtFyr truthfully pointed out, re-applicants are noted on the AMCAS application.
Daelroy is right in a different regard. The AMCAS application places post-baccalaureate work into the ?undergraduate? GPA category. MPH (or MS) work is placed into a separate ?graduate? GPA. So, only the post-bac program really raises the ?undergraduate? GPA. I would point out that any post-baccalaureate work would do this, which has been the subject of heated debate on our adcom. We do not recalculate the GPAs provided by AMCAS in any way, so if someone returns to a community college after graduation and takes some 100 level courses, they can raise their undergraduate GPA, even in BCPM; but I digress.
Our adcom functions similar to the one FoughtFyr described. Any graduate level work is awarded the GPA given by AMCAS. We do not differentiate between the types of Masters programs (yes, an MS in Physical Education would work!). We also award a ?bonus? for the completion of any graduate program of at least two years length, with a larger increase for doctoral work, and that is only awarded when the degree is complete. Like his/her adcom, we do not award the "bonus" for completing a post-bac program.
So what is ?the best? way to go. On my adcom (and from the sound of it FoughtFyr?s as well), do an MS (or an MPH) and go back and take some undergrad classes in the sciences at the same time. That way, you will get the undergrad GPA increase, the "bonus" for finishing a Masters program, and a solid graduate GPA. If the MPH were really an ?easy? Masters, although I suspect this is not true, then it would seem to me to be a good degree to use in this capacity.
As far as what is ?most respected? by adcoms. The answer is ?nothing?. By that I mean most of the committee?s initial consideration (for interviews) is based almost solely on the numbers. A candidate who completes a post-bac program of 40 undergraduate credit hours in one year with a 4.0 would look the same as one who did 10 hours of post-bac undergrad work on their own for four years with a 4.0. We use the numbers. By that standard, an MPH may look worse if there was a need for raising the undergraduate GPA above our minimum. However, if the undergrad GPA were above our cutoff minimum, but still rather low, the extra consideration for completion of the Master?s would more than offset this - in that case the MPH (or MS) would be better. How?s that for a straight answer? And no, I can?t tell you what the cutoff GPA is, because it varies, not only year to year but also within the application cycle.
In ?secondary? (post interview) consideration which is respected more? That really depends on a number of other factors including which member of the adcom is evaluating the applicant. I tend to lean toward those completing a Masters of some description, as do most of the members of my adcom. I think FoughtFyr said it well when he/she said that it showed a sense of ?maturity? and realization that medical school entrance was not guaranteed. If a post-bac student shows this in other ways, I can see them being as well regarded. I do agree that a post-bac program demonstrates more aptly that an applicant can handle medical school, but by the time we are looking that closely at an application that really isn?t our main concern. We only interview applicants we believe can handle the work.
Two last points to consider. On our adcom sit two MD/MPHs; I asked and one received his MPH degree before medical school, and one (an emergency room physician) went back after residency. There is also one MS in chemistry, also from before medical school. There are no members of the committee who admit to having been in a post-bac program.
Second, (since FoughtFyr seems to have left this thread), MPHs are used in emergency medicine. The last EMRA guide has a section devoted to public health in the ED. In my (limited) experience, almost all areas of medicine at least consider public health. Even radiology! There is a public health partnership as part of Dartmouth?s radiology residency! So, I hate to say it but I think you are wrong there too daelroy.
