I have not had a chance to watch the video yet, but here are some points to consider:
If you . . . actually took the time to watch even a bit of the video, then you’d be able to discuss it.
Why don’t I try to summarize what was said as I actually did watch the video:
Per the video, the school’s implementation task force spent a lot of time with the core competencies/courses, and they looked at what other schools are doing to make sure that they are “on track” with them.
The new dean likes the “integrated” core courses. From the video (which if youe watched into even the first 7 minutes as you’d get this info), you’ll see that currently BUSPH students get a MPH on the diploma, and their *transcript* says a major in Epi, for instances, but they are also seeking out certificates in stuff like pharmacology. BU MPH students want additional credentials, such as in biostats. Concentrations at BUSPH are around 16 credits, and they will be *re-labeled* as certificates.
One professor said that the new “certificates” which will replace the concentrations run contrary to the notion of specialization and said that it does away with having the first concentration course in the first year. He said they’re going from 28 credits in a concentration/specialization towards a more integrated approach, and this is what students are upset about.
Some students dislike the proposed changes as the concentration/specialization helped students organize their work for the degree, and in their eyes made them marketable.
Currently the school has concentrations, certificates, sub-concentrations, tracks, areas of emphasis . . . the new paradigm is that they will all be called certificates.
Given that students are “all on the same level” in the first year, in order for large numbers of them to enter into common “practical/professionalism” courses where they get a sampling of “boots on the ground” experience (whatever that might be), there might be problems with getting an appropriate advisor as the concentrations/majors are done away with, and students will, presumably in most cases, seek a couple of ‘certificates’ instead.
In 2016 there will be a major marketing campaign to push this new “whatever it is”. They will try to market the certificates to a variety of people, including BU MPH alums who need to improve/different skills.
There are issues for Fall of 2015 students as things will change (of course to be determined), but they want to know as these students will have to adapt to the changes a year later.
Bottom Line:
1. Concentrations/specializations eliminated, now most students will probably do two certificates, and start work for specific certificates in the second year.
2. Certificates seen as more “marketable” as it is a term that people recognize, and these certificates will probably be “sold” to non-MPH folks like engineering students and Harvard divinity students. There will be a large ad campaign on the new curriculum.
3. Structural changes in curriculum, year one/semester one (?) is integrated common core curriculum, no certificate-specific classes.
4. 2015 entering students may face special challenges as in 2016 the new curriculum begins.
5. Might be hard for advisors to connect with students as specialization is delayed in the timeline, and many students might do two certificates, so, . . . who advises them? There are ideas about letting people in private industry be advisors, perhaps in part a tactic to decrease the burden on current advisors.
6. Changes driven by a five-year study of a clutter of names for different concentrations/sub-concentrations/specialties/ etc. . . but also by a new dean who comes from Columbia where they’re all about certificates.
7. How would this improve deficiencies at the school? Rebranding a product doesn’t necessarily make it better, and it will probably take years for bugs in the structural curriculum changes to be ironed out. In all fairness, the school, which already charges a very high tuition, should give discounted tuition to all incoming students as they’re basically guinea pigs from the 2015 entering class onwards for the next four years at least.
8. Why were these changes implemented? Need to draw in more students/tuition dollars? Unlike at Columbia, it doesn't not appear to be a way to tailor the certificates to meet employers needs, but rather a simplification of existing nomenclature and as a marketing tool, (at least upfront this doesn't appear to be a concern at all, though later adjustments/renaming/curriculum changes may well need to be made to new certificate programs). The curriculum changes appear to move to make the school more like Columbia in some respects.
9. BUSPH is a relatively young school of public health without a strong identity, i.e. lacking an established identity like Emory, or a particular strength in a sub-discipline like Tulane with global health, so the strategy appears to be this move away from specialization, (in fact to a split-specialization(dual certificate)/interdisciplinary-integrated paradigm) and selling the "boots on the ground" aspects, utilizing local industry/institutions in Boston to provide both a glimpse of post-graduation life, as well as de facto advisers for an anticipated flood of certificate seekers, new MPH students and the already very large class size of MPHers, in the hopes that this will make BU different and more marketable.
10. BUSPH students want additional specializations/certificates, and BU admissions says they get calls asking about 'certificates' all the time, so they basically took away the older concentrations/specializations, so that students have time to either do one certificate (and a ton of electives in that certificate area), or most likely most students will do two certificates, but this remaining specialization will be delayed in the curriculum in favor of a more integrated approach.
11. A BU person said that employers don't look at transcripts, certificates don't mean that much, and they are looking at having certain skills sets. Certificates will probably help students who previously couldn't do double concentrations (now you can do two certificates), but a student runs the risk of having the specialization delayed and diluted where they might complete two certificates, say one in pharmacy and one in epi, but then not have accumulated enough of the eli skills needed for a particular job, and not having oriented themselves to epi longitudinally across the two years, but just in the final year.
That's the nature of things, but you go out of your way to talk down BUSPH. I am not saying it does not have its downsides, but you do not have any personal experience at the school. Just "knowing people who went to the school" is not enough for you to speak for a larger body of individuals.
First of all, I obviously never claimed to “speak for a larger body of individuals.” Secondly, no, you don’t have to attend a school in order to be critical of it, if you have enough information, know people who have gone there and follow it and other schools.
I guess you could criticize reporters for covering what the Congress does without ever actually being in Congress. Sort of like saying, “how dare reporter x cover Congress and presume to speak for them, he/she’s never been in Congress themselves!”
.
Just received Acceptance notice from Tulane for Epi MPH!!!!
You obviously dislike BUSPH for whatever reason, that's fine. But there are plenty of folks that are happy with their decision to study there.
