What are some hard science masters programs I can do if I don't have an undergrad in science?

[workingjourno]

I'm a journalist with 5 years of experience covering pharmaceuticals and healthcare in India, and looking for a masters program to enhance my understanding of science. Aim is to get back into journalism to write on science. I'm 26, and most interested in biology and geography. I studied mass media in bachelors, and then did a post-graduate diploma in journalism. I was good at biology in high school.

Suggestions??

[TakeruK]

Hello!

Please don't post more than one thread on the same topic---I've removed your extra postings.

I think it would be hard to make good suggestions without more information about your career goals. For example, is there a certain credential that you are seeking? Or, is the norm in the field to have a Master of Science degree and you're not meeting a certification but just want to have the same level of understanding as other science journalists?

I don't know a lot of science journalists, but the majority of them have Bachelors degrees in science, and some of them also have Masters or PhDs in science. I think it might be hard to jump right into a Master of Science degree without a science undergraduate degree, unless you are in a specialized program for science journalism. But the majority of science journalists I know and have worked with have the same science undergraduate training as other scientists. I don't know if I just happen to know an abnormal group of science writers though, or whether this is normal. 

[Neist]

2 hours ago, TakeruK said:

I don't know a lot of science journalists, but the majority of them have Bachelors degrees in science, and some of them also have Masters or PhDs in science. I think it might be hard to jump right into a Master of Science degree without a science undergraduate degree, unless you are in a specialized program for science journalism. But the majority of science journalists I know and have worked with have the same science undergraduate training as other scientists. I don't know if I just happen to know an abnormal group of science writers though, or whether this is normal. 

 

 

 

Science writing programs would more or less fulfill the needs that I think she/he requires, and science writing can go either way, that being more or less technical. Some science writing programs require previous science experience (I think the Sci Comm program at UCSC requires it). However, some are specifically designed to provide technical training (Columbia's Earth and Environmental Science Journalism program is like this). Even MIT's 1-year fast track program has a lab component to help people. 

As per the sort of training professionals have, it's hard to say, and it probably depends on who your intended audience is. If you want to inform people who are not incredibly literate in science, then it can be difficult to write on a basic enough level to be useful to a lot of people if you're incredibly scientifically literate. A lot of the for-mass-public science writing that I'm familiar with is by journalists or historians, not scientists, but it's possible that I don't circulate in those crowds. For example, Deborah Blum is a wildly successful, and I don't believe that she has formal science training. But then again, Rebecca Skloot is also pretty successful, and has a BS.

In a long, rambling sort of way, I'm trying to say that there's paths to pursue science writing/journalism, regardless of one's background.  

Edited October 21, 2016 by Neist