holykrp

I have weird undergrad transcripts too because I took pre- and post- bacc classes. SOPHAS averages all of my undergrad credits together. They also show I believe your last 60 and 90 credit averages (though that's off the top of my head). Each school will interpret these differently, and few schools calculate it differently, though, so it does depend on where you're applying to.

I've already heard from Pitt, WashU, and Florida. They all make decisions as they receive apps. I think Michigan, BU, and Tulane are similar as well. There are threads on grad cafe dedicated specifically to these types of scenarios, but basically I'd say that public health programs are looking at the whole application, and if the rest of your application is strong, the GRE won't matter as much. Of course it depends on the school, program, and how low the scores are. Epi programs are going to weight quant scores more heavily than other programs in general, and of course in general the higher ranked the school, the better of scores they'll want to see. Depending on where you are applying and the deadlines, you might still have time to re-take the GRE if you are insecure about it.

In addition to what has already been said, here's a repost from another forum: I bought a book that is really good: http://www.amazon.com/Graduate-Admi...d=1416579424&sr=8-3&keywords=admissions essay I highly recommend it. It has a lot of tips on communicating with grad programs and the application cycle and gives a ton of essay examples, so you can get a feel for the style you like. Gives some solid writing tips as well for the essay, but if you're not a writer in general, you may want to pick up some other books on writing. I think he gives recommendations. General overview from what I can remember: 1. Be sure to visit the school's website and answer the exact question they ask/requirements they have. Do not go over the word count. 2. Customize each essay by school. Include why you want to go there (obviously), professors you'd like to work with, why you want to live in that area if you are moving, etc. 3. Clearly state your goals and how the program would help you achieve them. 4. DO NOT say "I've always wanted to..." 5. DO NOT reference examples from when you were a child, unless you do it really quickly to attach it to something you did as an adult. 6. Do not just walk through a resume; you can reference your other work in the application (e.g. "I worked at XYZ company on a research project; my resume details my responsibilities.") 7. DO NOT use humor 8. "Show" don't "tell" (i.e. It's better to extrapolate on one example of when you exhibited a certain quality versus giving a list of your qualities.) 9. Sometimes it is good to give a laundry list of your skill bank, but do that only one time. 10. The author of this book is big on reductionism as a means of being more concise to fit word limits. I also would be happy to take a look at your essay. I have a knack for writing things like this. In general, to spice it up you could: 1. Use better adjectives 2. Action verbs 3. Varied sentence structure 4. What I call "weaving"; For example, start talking about your story, and weave in the program, then back to your story, then back to the program, etc.

Sure, you have to tailor your strategy to the particular school, but you definitely want to introduce yourself somehow to demonstrate interest. For example, I saw a lot of professors' profiles that had my general research interest, but didn't have a whole lot more info on what particular diseases they were researching, so I asked admissions if they knew of anyone researching that particular disease. Several times there were no professors researching that disease, but they were able to provide me with information on other opportunities I may have in that area, such as adjunct faculty or people with joint appointments, or maybe possible practicum opportunities. One school introduced me both to a professor (who further detailed opportunities with other professors) as well as a student who did a practicum in my interest area. Another school introduced me to a professor in that department as well as an affiliated physician at a local hospital (I also visited that school). Other schools were more direct and referred me to specific web pages. Don't harass anyone, but asking thoughtful and pointed questions showing that you have a clear and genuine interest in that particular school and program can definitely be helpful.

Yes, it's a good idea. You can use that opportunity to both introduce yourself and use the information in your statement of purpose. What I typically did was reached out to the program contact and asked them some questions as well as if they had any professors who conduct research in my area of interest. Then, depending on how the conversation went, I reached out to some professors. I suggest scheduling a call with someone at the school, be it a program representative or professor, to discuss the program and visiting if at all possible. You want to demonstrate your interest in their program. This will give you more material to customize your SOP.

What are you replying to? No one on this thread has said anything that indicates women are not capable of critical thinking. My response clearly outlines that any general sexist reason would be due to societal pressures and not the inherent intellect level of women. I don't think the OP is being sexist at all, just curious as to why it is a more female-dominated profession. Joe's does not indicate why women gravitate toward nurturing professions (or what they are calling "helping and low pay" professions), so maybe that is what you're replying to. The reason is because that is what we are told we are conditioned to be "nurturing." (Not just through what we are told growing up, but we are also directed in our play to take care of others; baby dolls, toy kitchens, etc. Additionally, girls in general are not encouraged as much toward the math and science professions. Luckily for me, my mom made me start learning math at a young age.) The reason men gravitate toward higher paying positions is because they are similarly conditioned to be providers. Another consideration is many individuals who get MPHs either come into the program with other degrees, like MDs, or end up acquiring other advanced degrees. It then stands to reason that either these women are either naturally more altruistic, more concerned about public health, or because they have been conditioned to be more nurturing. Which is obviously up for debate.

I agree; the MS program is in the med school and sounds like it is mostly intended for people who are already in programs at Stanford (though it doesn't explicitly say this and I'm sure they'd consider others). If you like the idea of Stanford mainly for the prestige and location, Berkeley is in pretty much the same location and has a top school of public health, so I'd suggest considering their program, as it will have more robust resources as it is specifically in a public health school instead of a med school. The previous poster has already said all of this though, haha. I'd just contact Stanford and ask them about it, if I were you.

It's hard to say based on the info you've given. It really depends on the specific program. For example, epidemiology is going to pretty much require your GRE quantitative is above 50% at least, and maybe higher depending on the program. However, I know that some other "majors" don't care about the quantitative score hardly at all. If you're doing something like global health, international experience might have a lot more weight than GRE scores anyway. It also depends on what type of work experience you have, your recommendation letters, how well your SOP is written, and exactly how low the GPA is. Really, the best thing you can do to get a gauge of how competitive your stats are is to look at what the school's website says about what they are looking for in applicants, talk to admissions counselors, and look at the grad cafe admissions board. The best way to increase your chances of getting in is to visit the school or at least have a conversation with a professor or two in addition to an admissions counselor. I think you picked a good variety of schools, though, that seem reasonable.

Just that Harvard, Emory, Columbia, Michigan, and Johns Hopkins all were happy to answer any questions; contacted UCLA at multiple touch points and got crickets. I'm sure it's a networking thing, but for me particularly, I wasn't concerned with chasing it down because they don't have much going on in my area of research interest. I contacted them merely to cover all bases in case I was missing something from the website. I'm sure they're at the "top" in other research areas.

Thank you for the reassurance; any I can get right now is helpful while I'm awaiting decisions!

This is my first grad school application cycle so I'm certainly no expert. From what I've read, though, there is a clear advantage to applying as early as possible. It also depends on the cycle of the school; it will be more advantageous to apply early if you're applying mostly to programs that are on a rolling admissions and make decisions as applications come in. If you think you can raise your GPA above 3.0, though, I think that would be more important than submitting a couple of months earlier.

Hi - Thanks for the response. I've addressed this all in detail in my SOP, it's kind of a long story to post. Basically, I started out in a direct entry pharmacy program and I did most of a pre-med curriculum (mostly As, some Bs) in addition to my business degree. I've worked as a grant writer in a cancer lab and volunteered at a hospital. I was going to finish up my pre-reqs and go to medical school, but my intention is to research the etiology of psychotic disorders, so since I have a quantitative/math background, epidemiology seemed like a much better fit. I've done a lot of reading on psychiatric research and subscribe to journals, etc., so I am able to speak to my interest pretty intelligently in my statements, I just don't have experience directly in public health. I plan on going for a PhD or going to medical school afterwards with the intention of eventually directing clinical research. I'm taking organic chemistry over the next two quarters to finish my pre-reqs before I start my master's degree.

Think of your stereotypes, and there's your answer. I'm a woman and a feminist so I'm cringing typing this, but here we go: 1. Like the above poster says, women tend to go into "nuturing" professions more often than men, who tend to prefer careers where they can earn the most. 2. Most public health disciplines require "soft" skills. It is a cultural trend that are discouraged from learning math and science when they are younger, or at least less encouraged than men are. That means that their male counterparts may go into more science or math heavy professions. 3. Because of cultural pressures, men are much more concerned with being perceived as a good provider. Depending on the discipline, public health can pay well, but won't pay as much as a physician/surgeon/lawyer/etc. 4. Women are still largely responsible for household and childcare responsibilities. Because of this, they tend to take on education and career paths that require less schooling and less demanding schedules. So a woman in a marriage with traditional gender roles may decide to go to graduate school, but an MPH will take much less time than an MD or JD. Then, upon graduation, the workload will require less hours in the office, so she has time to take care of household responsibilities. The man, however, would not be so concerned with those issues, and would go on to pursue the level of education that would pay him the most.

Glad I'm not the only one... I e-mailed the school and department trying to get in touch with someone who I could ask questions about their program. Not even a reply! Not worth tracking down, either. Good school but not the top, and the top schools were much friendlier.

Hi all - I have a background in business analytics and am trying to get a sense for how competitive my application is. I actually have NO IDEA since I don't have a science/social sciences degree (finance) and it is making me nervous. I'm trying to decide how "safe" I need to go with applications. Has anyone with a "non-traditional" background applied and been accepted to MPH/MSPH programs? Which did you get into or rejected from? Or are there any other career changers out there that can weigh in? Just a note that other than this my application appears competitive - 95% GRE on verbal, 71% on quantitative, 3.749 undergrad GPA, 3 years analysis experience. Thank you! K

Hello! I am applying to MS/SM programs in Epidemiology and I have my heart set on Harvard due to some very specific research they are working on. According to their website, my stats fall between their 50th and 75th percentiles and they have a 32% admit rate. This makes me very hopeful, but I am getting skeptical. There is a blurb above their stats that they have a mostly self-directed applicant pool, so the stats could be inflated. Does anyone know how difficult it really is to get into HSPH, specifically for the SM 80 credits program(s)? Thank you! K