Figaro

I don't know any MSW program other than UPenn's, but if others emphasize writing as much as my university does, you're going to write your pants off, especially during that first semester, which was a real ball-buster. Writing isn't difficult for me, but had it been, I don't know how I would have retained any vestige of my sanity during that first semester because the work load was that bad, especially considering that we students had to work full days, three days a week, for our field placement. Penn wants students who can do research and write well. They want people who will leave the SP2 program prepared to affect social policy issues. If you need to work on your writing and research skills, then spend time this summer brushing up on your skills and study techniques. Think about skills you will need to manage a big workload. The good news is that when you make it out of this program, you'll be transformed from a grub into a beautiful research and writing butterfly. You'll be able to wow potential employers with your knowledge, experience and competence. If you can't write to save your life, don't go to Penn. I'm just finishing my second semester and am happy to report that despite my occasional panic incidents (because of the workload), I have near perfect grades. I love this university, the campus and Philadelphia. My professors are excellent. My classes are fascinating. I highly recommend this place. Just prepare for it as best you can.

I'm presently close to completing my first year of Penn's MSW program and I am sorry that I didn't see your post until now. In order to help any other people, I'll reply anyway. I can tell you that Penn is very social policy oriented. Because the criminal justice system is so very lacking when it comes to social justice, that subject is well dealt with at Penn. My instructors have been nothing short of fabulous. My field placement is great and I love Philadelphia and the UPenn campus. Because you're from the west coast, I'll forgive you for not understanding that UPenn is an extremely prestigious university and has no less name recognition than Columbia. It is also a great university but I don't know anything about their MSW program because I did not apply there. Therefore, if you're choosing between the two, I would leave that issue out of the equation. Philly isn't cheap to live in and west Philly landlords jack up the rents because of all the colleges in University City (area of Drexel, Penn and a couple other colleges), but it's still a lot cheaper than living in NYC. If you have to "carve out your own niche" at Columbia to concentrate on criminal justice, then you should have accepted Penn. Given the excellence of both universities, I'm sure you'll do well after graduating from either one.

The OP wrote that only ONE person in the history of the place had ever assaulted a case manager. ONE! Maybe he or she threw a book or something; we don't even know the seriousness of that assault. It could have been a thrown slushie. Statistically, that one assault might be well below what it would be with the same number of people in the general population. We don't know how many people came threw the doors during its existence, but it's probably a lot if it has been there many years. I'm trying to think of a line of social work that has absolutely no risk, ever, to it at all, and I can't think of one. Being sensible about one's safety and taking precautions, so as to avoid unnecessary risks is always a good idea. I don't think anyone would recommend "ignoring warning signs." It's just that I don't think one lonely case of something violent over the course of the operation of the entire place is a "warning sign." That sounds like a pretty safe gig to me.

I apologize for being too harsh in my delivery and for the sarcastic tone, but still think you should re-consider your career choice. Whether you do or not is of no concern to me personally, but for the sake of your future clients, it seems a little more reflection might be a good idea. I reacted as I did because whenever anyone automatically assumes that as a group, people with any one of a broad number of mental issues are more likely to be more dangerous than anyone else feels like a direct attack on some very much loved family members of mine and it hurts me because those attitudes hurt them and people in their same boat. I have loved ones who have suffered doubly from mental illnesses. Firstly, from the illness itself and secondly, from the stigma associated with it, which causes people like you to draw very harmful and unfair conclusions about them.Stigma limits their opportunities and harms them in many other ways. I grew up with these issues. Nobody at my house was ever scared of people with MIs. When someone wasn't well, the family helped them as best they could, just as we would have if one of us had cancer or diabetes. You said that you have a mental illness. You named depression. Let me ask you this: should your co-workers and fellow students be afraid of you when you begin working and studying with them? Of course not, you're likely to say. That's silly.That's som ething for you to think about. How would you feel if someone was afraid to drive you somewhere just because you have a history of depression? That stings, doesn't it? Again - you won't be working with people with untreated MIs. Your clients will be in treatment. That's a really big difference. Your original post on this subject said that you were told that in the entire experience of the person you spoke with, there had only been once instance of a case manager being somehow assaulted by a client, yet you see that as a significant danger warning. I don't how that would work out statistically in light of the total number of people that place has worked with, but the rate of violence among any population of people, when working with the public, might be expected to be higher than that. You didn't say you were going to be working as case manager. You said that your job was to transport people to appointments and such. That's another important distinction. Case managers deal with dicier problems and issues than driving people. There's no guarantee of safety anywhere you go, no matter what you do in this world. If you spend some time reading about this subject, you will discover that the stats don't support your level of fear of people with MIs. People with MIs are far more statistically likely to be victims than perpetrators of violent crimes. Overall, their rate for violent crime isn't any higher than the general population. Substance abuse is more of an indicator of violence potential. There are so many factors when it comes to mental health and danger. I never said I was better than you, i just questioned the fitness of this career path for you, given the things you have written. I'll be working in Philadelphia and doing home visits. My family is more worried about me getting mugged going back and forth to those home visits than they are about my clients. They bought me pepper spray, and I'll take precautions, but this career can never be 100% safe. You can't be 100% safe even if you never leave your home. If you go forward with this, then I hope you take a class on mental illness. If not, then please spend some time reading about this subject so you aren't scared to work with what is a good chunk of the population of the country. It would not be good for people if you communicate fear when you work with them. That's just insulting and offensive if they sense that from you. Maybe you will be more comfortable if you brush up on the subject. Here's an article from psychcentral.com for you if you care to peruse it... http://psychcentral.com/archives/violence.htm

I read your posts on this subject, Littledarling and honestly, I'll agree with your self-assessment that you're being stupid. Based on these and your other posts here and there on this board, are you sure Social Work is your thing? Perhaps you would feel safer working for a bank, or something, instead. It isn't unreasonable to ask and wonder about how your program ensures your safety during your field placements. That's fair. But, your comfort with casting people with mental illnesses as these terrifying creatures who are ready to attack you at any moment is really awful. What you wrote makes me so intensely dislike you that it's hard to be civil, but I'll try. I know what I'm talking about here. One of the reasons I chose this profession and my college major, which was Psychology, is because I have a sibling with a bad case of depression and LDs, an uncle with schizophrenia and some cousins on my mom's side with various schizo-affective diagnoses. It's a hereditary thing sometimes. I grew up knowing a lot more than most of my peers about this subject and my mother had to handle issues with her sibling since she was a pre-teen. She was more mature about it at 14 than you are right now, by the way. Here's a fact for you..... people with severe mental illnesses are seldom violent and when they hurt someone, it is usually themselves. Check into the statistics on this and you'll see. Another point: even if someone with a severe mental illness commits an act of violence, such as hitting a family member or throwing things, that is nearly always because they are not stable with their medications at that time and/or are in a psychotic state. Just because a person has had a violent outburst at some time does not mean that they will just spontaneously attack somebody out of nowhere. Each person with an MI isn't a knife-wielding Chuckie just ready to cut you to pieces at any moment. Problems with violent outbursts are usually related to LACK OF MENTAL HEALTH CARE and you will be working with people who are receiving such care. People with Alzheimer's, which is a widely non-stigmatized brain disorder, can hurt caregivers sometimes. A great-aunt of mine (little old Italian lady who wouldn't have hurt a soul before she got Alzheimer's) threw something nasty at her very devoted and dying husband. Should you be cognizant of the conditions of the people you are working with? Absolutely. But when dealing with a population of people who are already so heavily stigmatized that many with mental illnesses refuse to seek care, for exactly the kind of attitude you have about how "dangerous" they are, the last thing they need is a social worker who is quaking in her boots and judging them as criminals just because they're sick. A few years ago my Mom took my sibling to a county commissioners meeting where the idea of a halfway house for stable, high-functioning persons with MIs could work on recovery. Several local yahoos stood up and kept repeating the completely bogus claim that area children would be in danger if that halfway house was there because the residents were likely to rape the children. They kept repeating the lie that people with MIs are by definition, likely pedophiles. My sibling, the one with depression, sat there and listened to person after person imply this and discuss how terrifying people with MIs are, and these were people with no history of any violence. It's ignorance and it hurts people.My mom stood up and read a list of famous, notable people with MI histories, including Abraham Lincoln. All over this nation, young people kill themselves partly because of the stigma associated with asking for mental health care. Your kind of attitude adds to this stigma. It hurts the very people you may have to serve. If you want to be 100% safe all the time from all the kind of people you might fear, do everyone a favor and go into another profession. People suffering from mental illnesses need social workers who understand them, treat them like human beings worthy of human dignity and respect and don't send out vibes that they're terrified of them. It's just appalling. At minimum, do something where you can, perhaps, work only with people you'll never be uncomfortable around. Good luck with that. (may I suggest that bank job again?)

One of the posters stated that you would have to pay taxes on the forgiven amount. That is not true. Public Service Forgiveness loans do NOT have the tax bomb. Nor do all of those 120 payments have to be consecutive. You just have to make 120 payments while employed by a 501-C3. You can even go work in private industry for a while and come and come back to the non-profit to pick up with where you left off. There is so much mis-information about these re-payment programs that it is very confusing, but this information is available right on the fed govt's sites regarding loans where the information can be double-checked. Frankly, it sounds as if you would be happier at school No. 2. I'm sure you'll do fine. I just accepted admission at your school #1. Because of the re-payment program options, I'm a little nervous but comfortable with the loans and how I plan to handle them. If I end up someday with a chance to use my degree in a way that means leaving non=profits, that will mean that I'll encounter employers who aren't as familiar with the details of social work degrees and in that situation, that elite university degree is gold, baby. The reputation of that place is worldwide. You can even take classes at Wharton, the medical school or the law school (or any of their other grad schools) while you're there and that doesn't look too shabby on a resume if it shows that you took a class about running non-profits at frickin' Wharton (one of the top finance schools in the world). Ultimately, you have to be happy and only you know what is important for you. If you are really worried about the loans and you would be happier for those two years at the other place, then be at peace with that. Here's some info. I came across today about your school No 1. This is for the original poster and not intended to offend anyone. "In their latest editions Penn was ranked 13th in the world by the QS World University Rankings,[82]14th by the Shanghai Jiao Tong University's Academic Ranking of World Universities,[83] and 15th by the Times Higher Education World University Rankings.[84] According to the Shanghai Jiao Tong University ranking Penn is also the 8th and 9th best university in the world for economics/business and social sciences studies, respectively.[85] University of Pennsylvania ranked 12th among 300 Best World Universities in 2012 compiled by Human Resources & Labor Review (HRLR) on Measurements of World's Top 300 Universities Graduates' Performance ."

The Crow: The book sounds very interesting and worthwhile, but I wonder why the authors are faulting social workers as "unfaithful," when it is our society's taxpayers who have decided that they don't want to pay taxes to support social services like social work for the poor. It seems that there is this expectation that social workers should be very willing to work for next to nothing - to see their careers as charity work. Has there ever been that same expectation of other vital public service providers, such as police officers, firemen, nurses or teachers? (although teachers often get low wages, too) Can you imagine state troopers being asked to work for $25,000 a year and with few benefits? Social Work is a career heavily populated by women. If it was a job with mostly men, do you think as many people would be promoting this idea that they should be willing to make lousy money? Why should people who have achieved high levels of education and preparation for their careers be willing to accept pay so low that they can't decently support themselves and their families? I think that's an unreasonable demand of social workers. If and when our society decides to place any value on the lives and care of the poor, I believe plenty of social workers will be more than happy to serve them. However, it is unfair for the taxpayers to expect that any professionals will work for free just so they can pay lower taxes. When our society places as much value on the lives and care of the poor as they do on fetuses, maybe we'll see reasonable salaries for social workers. Until then, it's not fair to blame social workers for going where the money is. They have bills and kids too.

Another thing to worry about is the Tax Reform Act of 2014, which also, really sticks it to student loan borrowers by increasing the taxes on student loans and by making the PSLF amount forgiven taxable at the end of 10 years of payments. Right now, it's not taxable. This little gem is a creation of Republican Congressman Dave Camp. Because Republicans just can't think of enough ways to hurt college students and those trying to make their loan payments in a down economy. On the bright side, Camp's Act has very little chance of passing and the President's Proposed Budget is just a proposal (but troubling anyway because it shows a willingness on his part to go along with a gutting of the PSLF program) is also likely to go nowhere and even it does, it is highly unlikely to apply to present borrowers and grads who already based their plans on the federal govt's promise of these things. Look up the Tax Reform Act of 2014. It's flipping unbelievable what this a-hole wants to do to students.

I'm going to be watching this, but so far, even if they make changes to either IBR or PSLF, it seems unlikely that they'll be willing to screw over the people who have already borrowed money and chosen their careers based on those programs. You don't have to go to grad school to take advantage of either, BTW. If any changes are made, I bet they will be at a future date to apply for only new borrowers (as in, first year college students) and forward. Otherwise, thousands of lawyers, doctors and others will get really screwed over and given the political clout some of these people have in our society, I just don't see that happening. It would be very unfair to people who relied on them being there and they outcry would be enormous. We already have a shortage of doctors, so imagine if we pull that rug out from under thousands of them. So - I feel pretty confident that it will be there in its present form for us and maybe another year or two of new borrowers. After that, who knows? I do understand the argument that grad students benefit the most from these programs, but given that the national rate of graduation is not that impressive, at least with grad students the help is going to proven and tested good students who aren't as likely to default. If they shovel the money instead toward funding Animal House types, it's just going to get wasted. At least grad students are good students.

The study Inatcup refers to was published in 2009, but is based on data as old as 1992, so although there may not be much out there to go on, that study is based on really old data from when a lot of things were different. Just keep that in mind if the data means something to you.

LAKings makes good points. Honestly, no one can possibly know what you most value and want out of your education. Neither of your choices are bad ones and each one has its virtues. I do, however, think that it's a mistake to assume that all the Ivy has to offer over a quality, but less pricey school is "prestige." Penn has a fantastic social work program with small class sizes, great professors and a lot of opportunities. It's not just about prestige if you come out of that program. You'll have an excellent education from there. People who want to work in social work are by nature, nice people who believe in equality of opportunity and we are often so eager to prove ourselves as non-elitists, that I think there's an actual reverse stigma to attending or even considering an Ivy or another really top program that's expensive. In social work as a field, it does seem true that loosely, an MSW from any of the top 25 to 50 schools or so will be awesome as a credential in the field, if you are sure that you will always use it only for jobs in the field. If you're not sure about that, then think that through. I'm seriously considering Penn myself. I'm not flipping out about the cost because my monthly payments will be the same for ten years no matter where I go. The lawyers have all figured that out already and because of that, they aren't worrying about the cost of where they go to law school, yet I keep seeing social workers, who will make far less income and are of far more use to society than most lawyers, worrying about the debt load while Larry and Sally the Lawyer from Georgetown Univ. Law School plan to get huge sums forgiven in ten years and aren't losing sleep over it. The ones who are also getting MSWs will be our competitors for the social service jobs that we need to get for PSLF, so you want a good school on your resume to compete with the army of out-of-work lawyers who chase after every public service job that can pay over $50,000 (to get the loan forgiveness in ten years). So, go where the program best matches what you want to get out of it. It seems that Tulane is a good school. I'm just not familiar with it, only because I'm not from the south. It takes a lot of work to decide these issues. Go where it makes you happy. Really. But, check into your re-payment options before you decide just based on the cost.

Which one do you really want to go to? Which one will give you the educational experience you want to have?

I don't know anything about BU (except that it also seems to be an excellent school), but I'll vote for Pitt anyway because I know a little about Pittsburgh. What's your area of concentration? Also - how did you get such generous aid? I live in PA and they didn't offer me a penny. All I can get is loans.

Rejected by Simmons last week. They made the right decision. I had already decided that it wasn't the best place for me anyway, although the location of that place in Boston is just beyond compare. A rejection keeps one nice and humble. I'm just glad it wasn't three of them.

Lifesaver: I read somewhere that there are some schools with MSW programs that don't charge more for out-of-state students, but I don't know which ones they are. I do sympathize with you on that. Like you, there's no way I could keep my debt load at $50,000 - 55 to get an MSW. That would have only been possible if I didn't have any debt from my undergraduate degree. I can't finish my education without being at least $75,000 in debt. So, it's a risk to do it and it's a risk NOT to do it, because I won't get a decent job without it or be able to compete with MSWs for any jobs. I don't take the debt level lightly either. It's terrifying. However, if you are too uncomfortable about it, then don't do it. Don't do it if you aren't sure this is right for you. Each person has their own factors to consider, like other debt, level of family financial support, projected income at graduation and the cost of living where you want to live. I read about other people getting these tasty financial packages but they seem to mostly be living in MA and attending Boston area schools. I can't get crap in the way of aid other than loans. Just try to plan now for how you'll pay back the loans. That's why I'm studying the loan forgiveness programs and income based repayment plans. Personally, $600 a month for ten years would be too much for me, too. I think that If you're going to be over $150,000 in debt with all the other educational debt you have, that's too much for anyone unless you're a doctor. Unless the monthly payments would be manageable with the income based re-payment and the loan forgiveness programs. Check those out before you decide. After we're all through this, we really have to get active in working to increase the way people look at social workers and the value of them as professionals worthy of incomes commensurate with the level of education the jobs require.