Harvard vs. Hopkins

[erikw]

I am deciding btw the Intl Health Programs at the two schools. Anyone have any ideas how the two programs stack up?

"I am deciding between the Intl Health Programs at both these schools. Ideally I'd like to do something in Health Econ/Policy and then get into Public Health consultancy with a focus on intl projects. Any ideas how the two programs stack up? April 15th not very far away."

[jaw17]

Harvard - absolutely no question. Hopkins is very, very weak on the policy/economics side, particularly within the international health department. Not that it matters all that much, but which specific program are you in at Harvard - the PhD in Health Policy or the DrPH in Population & International Health? Also, I'd love to know more about your specific interests within the general policy/economics space!

BTW, there is a small public health thread within the Social Sciences forum - might be worth reposting there.

UPDATE: I just realized that you're deciding on a master's program, not a doctorate. I still think that Harvard is probably the way to go, assuming you're considering the SM in Population and International Health (vs. the MHS in International Health at Hopkins), but the stakes certainly aren't as high. However, Harvard will still better position you for the SD if you do decide to continue on - in policy and economics circles, you may well hit a ceiling with just a masters.

[erikw]

Harvard - absolutely no question. Hopkins is very, very weak on the policy/economics side, particularly within the international health department. Not that it matters all that much, but which specific program are you in at Harvard - the PhD in Health Policy or the DrPH in Population & International Health? Also, I'd love to know more about your specific interests within the general policy/economics space!

BTW, there is a small public health thread within the Social Sciences forum - might be worth reposting there.

UPDATE: I just realized that you're deciding on a master's program, not a doctorate. I still think that Harvard is probably the way to go, assuming you're considering the SM in Population and International Health (vs. the MHS in International Health at Hopkins), but the stakes certainly aren't as high. However, Harvard will still better position you for the SD if you do decide to continue on - in policy and economics circles, you may well hit a ceiling with just a masters.

Thanks for your input jaw 17. After having talked to quite a few people I am still confused. It seems to me that Hopkins is stronger for Intl Health stuff while PIH is in a period of transition. And as of now I am not sure I want to pursue a life in academia hence the practical trappings of Hopkins's program in Intl Health Systems appeals to me more. Moreover it combines Intl Health and Health Policy and Management into one while at Harvard I couldn't even apply to their Health Policy and Management program. However the prospect of taking classes at KSG,HBS and FAS is definitely a big draw. I have also heard that Harvard's program is quite academic and right now I want to get my Masters and work in the field wrt to Health care delivery and access issues and then maybe a PhD later or a MBA.Bloomberg is a much larger school with more faculty and operations in the field while on the pther hand Harvard has its strong connections as well. But Hopkins is funding me more than Harvard and expenses are an issue. I do realize that for a PhD Harvard prolly is stronger but do you think I might be disadvantaged in anway in the job market after my MHS from Hopkins instead of my MS from HSPH?

Thanks!

[jaw17]

Purely from a short-term career perspective, I suspect that the opportunities afforded by the two programs would be roughly similar, and so if this is mostly just a career move then either will get you where you want to go. They both have stellar reputations, but from an educational perspective - and not just a "PhD positioning" one - Harvard is the better fit with your interests. There are a number of policy-oriented folks at PIH (Canning, Bloom, Bossert, Hsaio, Mahal, Reich, etc.), as well as Michael Kremer over at FAS, so I wouldn't worry about not having access to the faculty that officially sit in HSPH's policy department. At Hopkins, on the other hand, Hugh Waters is really the only policy/economics guy stranded among a bunch of (world-class) international epidemiologists, while almost all of the classes in JHSPH's policy and management track are focused on Medicare, Medicaid and other domestic issues. So based on your expressed interests, I think you'd enjoy your studies more at Harvard; if you could endear yourself to Kremer, you might even be able to parlay that into a job with the Poverty Action Lab afterwards, which is much more economics-oriented than most of the other junior-level field positions available.

Of course, if you do move forward with Hopkins you could conceivably undertake the joint MHS/MA with SAIS's Global Health & Foreign Policy Initiative under Scott Barrett, who does a lot of work around the economics of global public goods such as climate change and disease eradication. That might give you more credibility on the economics side than the MHS alone. If you don't mind my asking, where do you work now? That would help me (and other posters) better understand which skills and qualifications you need to beef up most.

For what it's worth, I work at an international development think tank and was so strongly advised against Hopkins by my boss (an alma mater of JHSPH herself, back when their econ emphasis was stronger) that I never even applied - given my particular focus on the development and delivery of pharmaceutical products, there was literally no one there that could advise me. Again, that was looking at the doctoral level, where the stakes are far higher, but the principle still stands.

That's just my two cents, though, and that doesn't address the question of how much student debt would be worth it to gain the marginal benefits from Harvard. That's a tough call, and thankfully one that I don't have to make.

(While it's probably not constructive to mention at this stage, it sounds like LSE's MSc in International Health Policy or any of the programs at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine would have been right up your alley - did you consider those?)

[jaw17]

Oh, plus Boston is way, way more fun than Baltimore...

Then again, the city dump is probably more fun than Baltimore, so that's not saying much

[erikw]

Hi jaw17,

I am just a measely college senior and don't have half as much experience as some of you guys on this board.So I am even more confused. I have been toying with this decision since the end of February and I am still vacillating. Even though PIH is in a state of transition I realize that the dept is very strong in the sort of quantitative stuff I wish to pursue. Jim Yong Kim, Bloom, Mahal and some of the other folks at HSPH and PIH are a definite draw (thank you for providing me with some more names). Last summer I interned at HSPH and became acquainted with their star faculty. I feel more comfortable with even just the idea of HSPH, I really enjoyed my time last summer there.Hence I had a strong Harvard bias to begin with.

I have tried really hard to get to know JHSPH better. The program from a purely practical pov combines both my interests at least for the masters level. Plus I get to work for an entire year which is a bonus and very helpful for making contacts and getting useful field experience for young uns like me! What have you heard about the following folks:Hugh Waters, Damian Walker, Tim Baker, David Bishai, Adnan Hyder, Kevin Frick?

I have talked to students at both schools and I seem to be getting the image of a happier JHSPH student in the Intl Health Program.However the kids at HSPH who grumbled were unhappy with the focus on quantitative demogrpahic stuff at PIH.But I like quantitative stuff.

Finances are quite a bit of an issue. HSPH has offered me nothing. JHSPH is offering me 25 k at the very least and I have been nominated for a full scholarship as well.

As far as cities go, I am not a big fan of Baltimore. I have friends who attend JHSPH and while they have been trying to sell me on the idea of Baltimore they have, so far, only succeeded in making me more apprehensive about the city!

I definitely want to focus on equity issues, issues of access to medication and to health care in general.I know I sound like a sell out but after I graduate I want to work for the private sector, pay off my student debt and then maybe work for NGOs, think tanks and such.So two years down the line I will be searching for a job and I need contacts.

I briefly looked at LSE and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine but I didn't want to make the move across the Atlantic (lame excuse).

Thank you for your help.

Cheers!

[jaw17]

Could you clarify what you mean by the private sector? Frankly, I can't imagine that either degree will position you particularly well for that, unless you're referring primarily to the for-profit USAID contractors (JSI, MSH, etc.). The pharmaceutical industry is incredibly difficult to break into at a junior level, with few to no positions dedicated to global public health, and while the "big 5" consulting firms like McKinsey are increasingly doing work for the Gates Foundation and its grantees, they tend to look for entry-level analysts that have a broader background since they don't assign people to a specific practice.

As for JHSPH's work practicum piece: Maybe I'm dense, but I've never really understood the value of that. I mean, you're going to be working after your coursework ends, anyway, right, so isn't the only difference whether you have pay the school money during that time? While I've heard nothing but praise for any of the Hopkins folks you mentioned, to my knowledge only Waters and Bishai are working on equity and access to medicines issues; the career contacts at the school as a whole are likely to be more clinical/epidemiological/programmatic than those at Harvard. And Harvard has much better connections to the private sector through HBS and HKS.

Happiness, which you mentioned, should be a huge factor, and unfortunately it's just not one I'm qualified to address. But if that proves counter to my other points about the academic issues - combined with the financial ones - then that may indeed point you towards Hopkins. But another big factor is where you'll have more/better opportunities to intern during the summer and (part-time) during the academic year. You really, really need to gain some work experience or you'll have trouble finding a job after you finish your coursework (and that includes the practicum). Getting a master's right out of college can be a bit of a catch 22 - no one wants to hire you for an entry-level administrative position because you're overqualified substance-wise, but they aren't comfortable hiring you for a more advanced position because you haven't demonstrated your ability to navigate the professional environment. Frankly, if I were in your shoes (and imagining those shoes to be completely unencumbered by outside obligations), I would consider deferring for a year to get more real world experience first. Granted, it can be hard to find a job in this field no matter what stage you are in your career, and so you wouldn't want to do that without something lined up. But aside from making it easier to get a job post-graduation, that would also help you save some money and alleviate the potential debt (which is a major factor, given the low salaries) and - more importantly - get a better sense of the specific health issues you're interested in, which might help you decide between these schools, or even point towards different degrees. This depends a bit on your current level of qualifications, though - what are you majoring in at college, and have you had other internships besides Harvard (or will you this summer)?

Of course, deferring is easier said than done, and given your fantastic choices you probably can't go wrong no matter how you play this. But having spent four years working on the policy and economic issues around access to medicines, I can tell you that my own interests and preferences have changed and evolved significantly, and if I had gone with my initial instincts re: graduate school I would have either wound up paying immense sums for an unnecessary masters only to end up going the PhD route anyway, or else given in to the sunk costs fallacy and just resigned myself to the glass ceiling that faces those with just masters (in my specific sub-field, anyway).

Finally, I'll conclude this ramble by reiterating by suggesting the following: 1) If you are at all inclined towards the PhD, then the Harvard program is the way to go; 2) if you are pretty set against a PhD, then I would talk to Harley Feldbaum and see if you can still get into the joint degree with SAIS's international policy department, which includes a generous scholarship from the Gates Foundation and would arm you with the strongest possible combination (and least debt) for a terminal masters in global health policy this side of the Atlantic; and 3) if you're not sure, then I'd defer for a year to figure it out.

P.S. I realize that this is more advice than you asked or bargained for, but I'm so excited to finally see someone on these boards that shares my interests that I've let myself get a bit carried away...

[erikw]

Hi jaw14,

Thanks for all your advice. It is most helpful and a bit confusing as well. You know what? I am seriously rethinking saying yes to Hopkins. Harvard might be more expensive but it might just be better in terms of what my interests are.

I spoke with Harley Feldbaum and he did concede that Hopkins wasn't the strongest for Policy stuff, but for Epi very much so. I can't apply to the join program -- it's too late. Funding is an issue, they can only fund 2-4 ppl each year. He however encouraged me to look into/apply to the program if I ended up at Bloomberg. It's been done in the past by students.

The allure of the practicum requirement is that I get to write my master's thesis on a one year project and might even be hired by the same folks being that I have been around for a year. Also, Hopkins gives students a scholarship to cover their tuition while they do the practicum.For ppl like me doing a year long practicum while still in school definitely bolsters our chances at getting jobs after graduating and gives us a better idea of what we want to do in the field later on. At Harvard, the internship component is just spans the summer so am not sure if that'll help me as much with getting a better idea of my interests. I get the feeling the Harvard program is better for ppl who already have some public health experience while the Hopkins program is for newbies like me and gives us adequate exposure to fieldwork that we lack.

I am really not sure if I want a PhD. I am not very academic. Maybe I'll get a MBA after. Who knows? I want to work in the field, be on the front lines, and lead a peripatetic lifestyle at that. I am thinking of going into consultancy at least for the first little while to pay off my debt. The big 5 are definitely in my sights. McKinsey and ilk have been increasingly doing global health stuff which is a heartening development. I also want to get an experience work for the WHO or PAHO.

I am curious about the glass ceiling in your specialty that you talk about . Could you please elaborate? What aspect of policy are you explicitly going to focus on during your PhD? Could you also please elaborate a bit about your experiences after college and how they influenced your current choice? (I might as well jusk ask for your personal statement! jk!)

If you are on AIM it would be nice if I could chat with you a bit.

Thanks.

[jaw17]

I sent you my contact information via PM if you would like to touch base...as well as my personal statement (well, you asked!). Hopefully this will be more helpful, less confusing.

Frankly, I'd find it very helpful myself to get a better sense of your own background to tailor my advice accordingly. You've given me a lot to think about in terms of where you want to end up, but not as much about where you're coming from. That gets at the heart of what you could gain from either of these programs. If, for example, you are an English or psychology major looking for an opportunity to get a broad base in global health before honing your interests, then the Hopkins MHS is a good fit to help you transition into the field. On the other hand, if you studied health policy as part of your undergrad education (like I did) and so already have that general knowledge base, then the purpose of a graduate education would be to build a more specific area of expertise and/or develop a disciplinary framework with which to approach it. For the latter scenario, the Harvard SM is a much better fit.

As for the many organizations you listed as potential "landing places" - I can go on at length about all of them privately if that would be helpful, and could even put you in touch with a contact at McKinsey if you're looking for summer internships. But I would take a close look at the profile of people who currently work there and at each of the other places you named. My bet would be that very, very few of them have a master's in health - most will have a PhD (in the international organizations) or an MBA (in the private sector). If you think you'll eventually need one of those degrees anyway, I would seriously examine what you hope to gain from first getting a master's in health, as per my last paragraph - purely from a hiring perspective, multiple graduate degree do not have significant value-added. More generally, I think that a few years of professional experience where you can observe and interact with the full range of global health actors first-hand will help you better understand which types of organizations are best suited to your interests.

Of course, I've been very, very fortunate to have worked at a think-tank, and so in many ways I've had the best of both the academic and professional worlds. It is very possible that I am overrating the value of "work experience" as a whole by generalizing from my fairly unique experience.

[erikw]

Thanks a lot for your advice; it's much appreciated. I sent you an email.