MPH NYU MPH vs. BU MPH

[JohnAnonS80]

I'm deciding between NYU's MPH program and BU's MPH program, and I can't arrive at a decision! Does anyone have any advice? I'm just wary that NYU's College of Global Public Health is new, even if its program isn't.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[She-Hulk]

I don't think either of these programs is one of the big names in Global Health, if you want to especially focus on that. BU is kind of trying to re-brand themselves as a public health school that focuses on policy issues in the U.S., and their global health "footprint" is shrinking due to some recent changes in projects available to students.

BU is also super expensive, and coincidentally, for whatever it is worth, has the highest percentage of female students out of all accredited public health schools. They're sticking it to the working woman!

Places like Florida, Tulane, Emory, JHU, Harvard and Brown have Global Health programs that are more substantial.

 

[JohnAnonS80]

I don't think either of these programs is one of the big names in Global Health, if you want to especially focus on that. BU is kind of trying to re-brand themselves as a public health school that focuses on policy issues in the U.S., and their global health "footprint" is shrinking due to some recent changes in projects available to students.

BU is also super expensive, and coincidentally, for whatever it is worth, has the highest percentage of female students out of all accredited public health schools. They're sticking it to the working woman!

Places like Florida, Tulane, Emory, JHU, Harvard and Brown have Global Health programs that are more substantial.

Thanks! Do you know about NYU's MPH program in general? How does it compare to that of BU's? Do you think BU is worth the price?

 

[She-Hulk]

I don't know too much about NYU's MPH in general, sorry.

If you get a very good merit award/tuition discount, or work for BU, then it might make sense. The fact though is that unless you go to a specific school with a stellar rep and good connections, like Emory or Harvard or JHU, it really doesn't matter where you go for the MPH.

And even with all that, we're still talking about an MPH here, not a masters in biostatistics or something more marketable, so you may not been employed in a public field in ten years, and even if you are you won't be making a whole lot, so outrageous loans will become a problem.

BU cranks out a lot of degrees with unclear value that are super expensive, and it's a mix of a private business and education.

 

[751866]

I don't know too much about NYU's MPH in general, sorry.

If you get a very good merit award/tuition discount, or work for BU, then it might make sense. The fact though is that unless you go to a specific school with a stellar rep and good connections, like Emory or Harvard or JHU, it really doesn't matter where you go for the MPH.

And even with all that, we're still talking about an MPH here, not a masters in biostatistics or something more marketable, so you may not been employed in a public field in ten years, and even if you are you won't be making a whole lot, so outrageous loans will become a problem.

BU cranks gives a lot of degrees with unclear value that are super expensive, and it's a mix of a private business and education.

This is an important point you have mentioned. It's very important to understand what you want to do with a degree and what you're best suited for from the degree program. I believe, based on examining several curricula, that MPH programs, regardless of any concentration, are better suited for general administrative and planning type roles for public health initiatives and studies, but aren't well equipped to fill the role of epidemiologist or biostatistician. There is a reason those two programs exist on their own and rarely borrow coursework from MPH programs, while the MPH program often borrows courses from epidemiology or biostatistics programs. The MPH is more narrow and less quantitatively skilled which contributes to the marketability of that background. I would heavily weight the amount and types of loans you will need for an MPH. If you can get tuition waivers as a graduate assistant, that would make the option more appealing, but you will still have a limited scope.

 

[JohnAnonS80]

I don't know too much about NYU's MPH in general, sorry.

If you get a very good merit award/tuition discount, or work for BU, then it might make sense. The fact though is that unless you go to a specific school with a stellar rep and good connections, like Emory or Harvard or JHU, it really doesn't matter where you go for the MPH.

And even with all that, we're still talking about an MPH here, not a masters in biostatistics or something more marketable, so you may not been employed in a public field in ten years, and even if you are you won't be making a whole lot, so outrageous loans will become a problem.

BU cranks gives a lot of degrees with unclear value that are super expensive, and it's a mix of a private business and education.

Thanks! Hm, I thought BU had a stellar rep? Also, what do you mean by "BU cranks gives"?

 

[JohnAnonS80]

This is an important point you have mentioned. It's very important to understand what you want to do with a degree and what you're best suited for from the degree program. I believe, based on examining several curricula, that MPH programs, regardless of any concentration, are better suited for general administrative and planning type roles for public health initiatives and studies, but aren't well equipped to fill the role of epidemiologist or biostatistician. There is a reason those two programs exist on their own and rarely borrow coursework from MPH programs, while the MPH program often borrows courses from epidemiology or biostatistics programs. The MPH is more narrow and less quantitatively skilled which contributes to the marketability of that background. I would heavily weight the amount and types of loans you will need for an MPH. If you can get tuition waivers as a graduate assistant, that would make the option more appealing, but you will still have a limited scope.

Thanks! Are you talking more about the MS in Epidemiology/ MS in Biostatistics?

 

[751866]

Thanks! Are you talking more about the MS in Epidemiology/ MS in Biostatistics?

I may be misunderstanding your question, but my point was to expand on what was already said with regards to an MS in biostats (or even Epi) being more marketable than an MPH. The MPH is across the board less rigorous than an MS Epi with MS biostatistics being the most rigorous due to the largest quant focus. The issue being that it's critical to understand the realistic scope of employment and job security with the degree you decide to pursue, especially if you have to take loans. In other words, I would be more comfortable taking X in loans for an MS in Epi or Biostats than I would be for an MPH simply due to the marketability difference between the degrees. I then meant that tuition waivers will make any program more enticing, specifically for an MPH in your case because I think it's more difficult to payback loans with the kind of jobs an MPH usually lands.

Did this answer your question? Sorry if I missed your point.

 

[She-Hulk]

Thanks! Hm, I thought BU had a stellar rep? Also, what do you mean by "BU cranks gives"?

Public health school can be very easy to get into, sometimes even for the top programs . . . so "stellar rep" doesn't carry much weight, though I'd consider the stellar rep programs to be JHU/UNC, Harvard, Emory, Tulane, Columbia schools like that . . . not BU.

Even at the top schools, is it worth it to pay $$$$ for a degree you can get cheaper elsewhere for a fraction of the cost? BU has a reputation squarely in the middle of the most known schools, but they charge a lot.

BU also churns out semi-worthlesss degrees for premeds, to boost their application to med school and often times these degrees don't help. There's a strange business-like attitude at BU were they talk about the product (degree) and the customer (student), based on people I'be known who have gone there. And they ask students to unabashedly promote the public health school.

It's as close to being the sociopathic businessman's version of public health school as there is out there. A lot of bluster, and not a lot of substance. If you think there should be a greater purpose, and a higher calling, to do public health beyond just a way to support yourself, BU might not be for you.

Sorry about the typo, I meant to say BU cranks out a lot of degrees

 

[JohnAnonS80]

I may be misunderstanding your question, but my point was to expand on what was already said with regards to an MS in biostats (or even Epi) being more marketable than an MPH. The MPH is across the board less rigorous than an MS Epi with MS biostatistics being the most rigorous due to the largest quant focus. The issue being that it's critical to understand the realistic scope of employment and job security with the degree you decide to pursue, especially if you have to take loans. In other words, I would be more comfortable taking X in loans for an MS in Epi or Biostats than I would be for an MPH simply due to the marketability difference between the degrees. I then meant that tuition waivers will make any program more enticing, specifically for an MPH in your case because I think it's more difficult to payback loans with the kind of jobs an MPH usually lands.

Did this answer your question? Sorry if I missed your point.

Ah gotcha! That's exactly it! Thanks!

 

[JohnAnonS80]

Public health school can be very easy to get into, sometimes even for the top programs . . . so "stellar rep" doesn't carry much weight, though I'd consider the stellar rep programs to be JHU/UNC, Harvard, Emory, Tulane, Columbia schools like that . . . not BU.

Even at the top schools, is it worth it to pay $$$$ for a degree you can get cheaper elsewhere for a fraction of the cost? BU has a reputation squarely in the middle of the most known schools, but they charge a lot.

BU also churns out semi-worthlesss degrees for premeds, to boost their application to med school and often times these degrees don't help. There's a strange business-like attitude at BU were they talk about the product (degree) and the customer (student), based on people I'be known who have gone there. And they ask students to unabashedly promote the public health school.

It's as close to being the sociopathic businessman's version of public health school as there is out there. A lot of bluster, and not a lot of substance. If you think there should be a greater purpose, and a higher calling, to do public health beyond just a way to support yourself, BU might not be for you.

Sorry about the typo, I meant to say BU cranks out a lot of degrees

Thanks! You've given me a lot to think about. Just out of curiosity, how come Tulane is more reputable than BU? Is that based off of rankings or the quality of education? Thanks again!

 

[She-Hulk]

Thanks! You've given me a lot to think about. Just out of curiosity, how come Tulane is more reputable than BU? Is that based off of rankings or the quality of education? Thanks again!

I would definitely say Tulane is more reputable than BU. Firstly, Tulane was the first institution of its kind in the country in the early 1900's to institute a school of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, so maybe it can lay claim to being the first school of public health, or at least one of the first.

BU's public health school was created in the 1980's, so many decades after Tulane.

Secondly, Tulane's mission is global health and a global perspective.

BU "markets" a lot of small foci, but in reality patterns itself on other schools, mostly Columbia. And BU lives in the shadow of many other public health schools in Boston, such as Harvard, Tufts and UMass which probably has an advantage over BU when it comes to placing students at the Mass health department.

Tulane is a quiet giant that doesn't need to advertise itself, BU is a publicity hog that asks its students to self-promote the school and talk about how wonderful it is.

 

[She-Hulk]

I've worked around MPH degree holders, and they kinda admit the degree doesn't give a person hard skills, but it is more of general concepts, and these people can be doing work unrelated to an MPH.

I'm more impressed with people who have a Masters in social work, or in Biostats, and these people seem much more confident of who they are in terms of education. If you are fresh out of college, you might have more vague career aspirations and choose an MPH which is a generalist sort of degree, but you should think twice as it is an expensive degree with limited career options.

This is an important point you have mentioned. It's very important to understand what you want to do with a degree and what you're best suited for from the degree program. I believe, based on examining several curricula, that MPH programs, regardless of any concentration, are better suited for general administrative and planning type roles for public health initiatives and studies, but aren't well equipped to fill the role of epidemiologist or biostatistician. There is a reason those two programs exist on their own and rarely borrow coursework from MPH programs, while the MPH program often borrows courses from epidemiology or biostatistics programs. The MPH is more narrow and less quantitatively skilled which contributes to the marketability of that background. I would heavily weight the amount and types of loans you will need for an MPH. If you can get tuition waivers as a graduate assistant, that would make the option more appealing, but you will still have a limited scope.

 

[751866]

I've worked around MPH degree holders, and they kinda admit the degree doesn't give a person hard skills, but it is more of general concepts, and these people can be doing work unrelated to an MPH.

I'm more impressed with people who have a Masters in social work, or in Biostats, and these people seem much more confident of who they are in terms of education. If you are fresh out of college, you might have more vague career aspirations and choose an MPH which is a generalist sort of degree, but you should think twice as it is an expensive degree with limited career options.

It's interesting to hear that they admit the lack of hard skills from the degree. A few of the people I know with an MPH or who want to get one have expressed different sentiment, even to the point of disparaging the actual biostatisticians.

I guess we've had pretty different experiences with these crowds.

I agree overall that it's an expensive generalist degree. I see it as a degree that would help someone interface with the epidemiologist, biostatistician, and physician, without being able to absorb any one of those roles.