Biostat: Minnesota ph.d vs Berkeley ?

[XXQQCC]

Hi everyone!

I was recently accepted by UMN biostatistics into their phd program. They covered my tuition, insurance and offer a 9 month stipend of $14000 before tax. I was also accepted by Berkeley's master program with tuition covered, and stipend around $1500 before tax per month. They didn't mention about the insurance coverage, but from my contact of a current student there, she said it is covered. So I think the financial package is similar except that cost of living in Berkeley is way more expensive.

The overall school reputation of Berkeley is much better than that of Minnesota. Because of this nearly all of my friends who know or don't know about the biostat things suggest me to go Berkeley. Also, the weather is warmer there.

However, Berkeley program that I get in is master since as an undergrad I'm only allowed to apply to their master. It means I have to reapply again probably in 2 years. And may cost me more time to finally get my phd degree.

For cost of living, I will definitely have a better life with the funding that I was offered by Minnesota.

Anyway... I was really debating between the two, I know I still have a lot of time to make decision until 4/15, but I just can't help thinking about it.

What do you guys think?

Thanks!!

[Shostakovich]

At least in the world of Biostatistics, UMN and Berkeley are ranked around the same. I've done research on Minnesota's program, and seems like they have a great program emphasizing the Bayesian side of Statistics. I believe their department is bigger than Berkeley's as well. Then again, there is also the weather and overall school name recognition...

[Biostat_Assistant_Prof]

I would, without a doubt, take Minnesota if I were in your position.

 

From my understanding, Minnesota is actually higher in the realm of Biostat rankings than Berkeley is, and a PhD program offer there is a far better offer than a Masters from UC Berkeley. Also, the cost of living in NoCal around Berkeley is probably higher like you mentioned, and with UMN offering you even more per month, I wouldn't hesitate to take it between these two choices!

[PittPanther13]

I would, without a doubt, take Minnesota if I were in your position.

 

From my understanding, Minnesota is actually higher in the realm of Biostat rankings than Berkeley is, and a PhD program offer there is a far better offer than a Masters from UC Berkeley. Also, the cost of living in NoCal around Berkeley is probably higher like you mentioned, and with UMN offering you even more per month, I wouldn't hesitate to take it between these two choices!

 

I completely agree, the extra time you have to spend at Berkeley to try and get a PhD could be extremely irritating, and although unlikely, it could be possible that they don't accept you when that time comes (I'm sure you are a great student, and that they would accept you!). Living around Berkeley is ridiculously expensive, I have a best friend who lives in San Francisco, and even if I moved in with him and his roommate it would still cost considerably more than most places I've researched. The weather in Berkeley isn't as great as most people expect, although the winter is very mild, it doesn't actually get to hot there (around 75-80) in the summer and rarely hotter. But yes, a definite step up in weather and culture compared to Minnesota. 

 

If they offer an open house for accepted students I'd suggest you go to those and just try to get a feel for the schools, and see how you think you'd feel living there for a couple years. Congrats on the acceptances!

[XXQQCC]

I completely agree, the extra time you have to spend at Berkeley to try and get a PhD could be extremely irritating, and although unlikely, it could be possible that they don't accept you when that time comes (I'm sure you are a great student, and that they would accept you!). Living around Berkeley is ridiculously expensive, I have a best friend who lives in San Francisco, and even if I moved in with him and his roommate it would still cost considerably more than most places I've researched. The weather in Berkeley isn't as great as most people expect, although the winter is very mild, it doesn't actually get to hot there (around 75-80) in the summer and rarely hotter. But yes, a definite step up in weather and culture compared to Minnesota. 

 

If they offer an open house for accepted students I'd suggest you go to those and just try to get a feel for the schools, and see how you think you'd feel living there for a couple years. Congrats on the acceptances!

 

 

I would, without a doubt, take Minnesota if I were in your position.

 

From my understanding, Minnesota is actually higher in the realm of Biostat rankings than Berkeley is, and a PhD program offer there is a far better offer than a Masters from UC Berkeley. Also, the cost of living in NoCal around Berkeley is probably higher like you mentioned, and with UMN offering you even more per month, I wouldn't hesitate to take it between these two choices!

 

 

At least in the world of Biostatistics, UMN and Berkeley are ranked around the same. I've done research on Minnesota's program, and seems like they have a great program emphasizing the Bayesian side of Statistics. I believe their department is bigger than Berkeley's as well. Then again, there is also the weather and overall school name recognition...

 

thanks for your input!!

 

They both have visit days for students who've been admitted. However, Berkeley won't cover any travel cost...I probably need to save money starting from now if I want to go there for visit...

[Rob1234]

If it was to choose between Berkeley PhD and Minnesota PhD, I would have chosen the former. Reasons being the stature of Berkeley, the weather and also you shall have opportunities to work in collaboration with Statistics department, which is probably one of the best there is. But to be frank, if it is a choice of doing Masters against doing a PhD, one should always go for PhD. Minnesota has a great Biostats Department, focused primarily to the application of Bayesian methods in Biostatistics and the faculty there is pretty strong.

[health_quant]

I think Berkeley is still worth serious consideration. Being a funded MS student at a relatively small department should afford you a number of good research opportunities with well-respected faculty in biostats (and possibly stats). Assuming that you make a good impression there, you would be extremely competitive for doctoral programs at the top schools (Hopkins, Harvard, UW Seattle), and you would presumably still be at least as competitive for Minnesota then as you are now.

 

I may be biased though, as I'm currently a funded MS student (at a comparable biostats program to Berkeley's). For what it's worth, I was accepted at the University of Washington this cycle, which likely wouldn't have happened without the research experience and recommendations from the MS.

[XXQQCC]

If it was to choose between Berkeley PhD and Minnesota PhD, I would have chosen the former. Reasons being the stature of Berkeley, the weather and also you shall have opportunities to work in collaboration with Statistics department, which is probably one of the best there is. But to be frank, if it is a choice of doing Masters against doing a PhD, one should always go for PhD. Minnesota has a great Biostats Department, focused primarily to the application of Bayesian methods in Biostatistics and the faculty there is pretty strong.

 

So this is my dad's opinion as well. He said because it is PhD program, so you should go. He says I don't need to worry about the reapplication thing again and can just focus on my study then.

[XXQQCC]

On 1/31/2013 at 7:04 PM, health_quant said:

I think Berkeley is still worth serious consideration. Being a funded MS student at a relatively small department should afford you a number of good research opportunities with well-respected faculty in biostats (and possibly stats). Assuming that you make a good impression there, you would be extremely competitive for doctoral programs at the top schools (Hopkins, Harvard, UW Seattle), and you would presumably still be at least as competitive for Minnesota then as you are now.

 

I may be biased though, as I'm currently a funded MS student (at a comparable biostats program to Berkeley's). For what it's worth, I was accepted at the University of Washington this cycle, which likely wouldn't have happened without the research experience and recommendations from the MS.

This is my mom' opinion. Apparently, my mom and dad are holding two different views.... I agree with both, so it is hard to make a decision...

[health_quant]

This is definitely going to be a tough decision, so don't feel pressured into rushing it. Whether you decide to attend Berkeley or Minnesota, you'll be in a very good position down the road. 

 

Some points in favor of Minnesota (as my last post was kinda pro-Berkeley):

As others have already pointed out, Minnesota is a top-notch program, and at least in biostats, comparable to (if not outright stronger than) Berkeley. If you're planning on going into a non-academic (or even non-statistical) career, the Berkeley name may count for more, but within biostats, people will know what Minnesota means. 

 

As others have also pointed out, there's no guarantee that you will be able to stay at Berkeley. Your dad has a good point in that another round of applications during your second year will be taxing, and certainly distracting from any academic work/research in which you might otherwise be engaged. 

 

Should you decide to move into a different program, you will likely have 3 years in your next school (if they have an accelerated program for MS students like Michigan and Minnesota). In this case, your connections with faculty there may become quite strong, but they may not be as strong as connections you might forge over a full 5 years in one program. (Of course, they could be just as strong...who knows, right?)

Also, some programs may not accept transfer credits, in which case you're in for another 5 years at least. The plus-side to this is that you'll really know your stuff once you leave, but the con may be that this could be overkill for any non-academic posts.

 

Just another 2 cents from someone who still hasn't chosen a program himself. 

 

 

 

On 2/1/2013 at 9:58 PM, XXQQCC said:

This is my mom' opinion. Apparently, my mom and dad are holding two different views.... I agree with both, so it is hard to make a decision...