Northwestern University or University of Pennsylvania?

[RadioRaheem84]

I have two options:

MS, Applied Geoscience, concentration in Environmental Geology/GIS Spatial Analysis
University of Pennsylvania

OR

Master of Public Administration, Urban Policy and Planning
Northwestern University

I know they're two totally different fields but which one would be the best to have in this turbulent economy.

Any thoughts?

[#FF0000]

UPenn is Ivy, guy.

Did you already get accepted to these places?

[RadioRaheem84]

UPenn, yes

Northwestern, still waiting.

UPenn will just cost an arm and leg and I will be in some deep debt. I am just hoping for a good job after I graduate in order to compensate the debt.

Northwestern's program offers more aid and I will be in relatively little debt by comparison, but Northwestern is not Ivy nor is the degree I would pursue there going to be high dollar. Not that it matters, but I am really hoping for some sort of decent compensation.

This is my dilemma.

[RadioRaheem84]

Penn is Ivy but I hear that Northwestern has just as good a reputation.

[#FF0000]

I'd go with Northwestern. Keep your grades up and you can probably even transfer if you wanted.

[black magick hustla]

chicago is so sick pennsylvania is weak

[China studen]

In China. There is a saying: to learn mathematics, physics, chemistry, go where the work can be found.

[RadioRaheem84]

In China, which is more well known?

Penn is more technical and they offer a dual degree program with Tsinghua University in Beijing.

[NoOneIsIllegal]

I hate Chicago, it's a shitty city. But I've heard Northwestern is a decent college.

[coda]

I'd personally go with the geoscience.. to avoid becoming an urban planning politico hack :mellow:

Also the other plus of UPenn is that you'll be able to do the "Rocky steps" at the Philly Museum of Art. Pretty cool. :cool:

Good luck with whatever you choose. :)

[RadioRaheem84]

The degree at Penn seems like it would pay off more.

But, I could switch over to the MPA specialization in Health Care Policy and Administration.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Go to U Penn so you can hobnob with the Wharton School students destined to be the bosses of tomorrow.

[RadioRaheem84]

Wharton? Ha Ha. Most Penn students dislike the Wharton students.

[The Grey Blur]

upenn and become a sexy marxist geographer like david harvey.

[RadioRaheem84]

LOL. David Harvey is awesome! Cannot compete with that.

[The Grey Blur]

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150165044011154&set=o.282013631911&theater

[TC]

With courses as different as MS geoscience and MPA urban policy and planning, the issue is far less Northwestern vs Penn but geoscience vs urban policy - and the answer is totally dependent on your interests. I can't even imagine you're so lay-prestige oriented to pick one profession over another based on what schools you got into in each when both are excellent universities.



Go to U Penn so you can hobnob with the Wharton School students destined to be the bosses of tomorrow.

I think Kellogg is roughly evenly ranked with Wharton.

[MarxSchmarx]

Neither is a good option. I would look for a job that pays the bills. If you are interested in these fields, just continue to stay current in the literature instead of going to post-graduate work, especially if these involve going into debt. Even if you get a job as a receptionist at an architectural firm you will learn far far more about the industry than either of these schools can prepare you for. You might also consider an unpaid internship and get a part time job washing dishes or something to get your foot in the door. Trust me, that will be worth more when it comes to hiring, and you can go back to school once you have something of a regular position.

Unless you are deeply involved in programming or sophisticated spatial statistics, GIS/spatial analysis courses and even credentials are available at community colleges (I assume you are in America). "Environmental geology" although I don't know the details of UPenn's program, I do know something about geology and let me tell you unless you have a damned good career placement office that will get you a job with a government agency, there are hardly any entry-level positions unlesss you have a PhD.

Having said that, going into even mild debt for urban planning is stupid. There are no jobs in the public sector anywhere, and the nonprofit sector there are even less jobs if you can believe it and the pay is much worse. The private sector has no interest in urban planners except a few token individuals they hire and usually these people have had decades of jobs experience in non-profits. Also the housing market in America won't improve for several years, and you are unlikely to see major private owner driven expansion like 20 years ago.

Look, basically departments of urban planning exist to justify a continued influx of students to keep professors employed. If you already have a job at a government agency and need this to advance, then it makes sense.

If you are dead serious about a career in academia, it doesn't really matter which of the two you pursue. Environmental geology is likely to open a few more doors tho. However it is all a pyramid scheme in the end.

[TC]

Neither is a good option. I would look for a job that pays the bills. If you are interested in these fields, just continue to stay current in the literature instead of going to post-graduate work, especially if these involve going into debt. Even if you get a job as a receptionist at an architectural firm you will learn far far more about the industry than either of these schools can prepare you for. You might also consider an unpaid internship and get a part time job washing dishes or something to get your foot in the door. Trust me, that will be worth more when it comes to hiring, and you can go back to school once you have something of a regular position.

Unless you are deeply involved in programming or sophisticated spatial statistics, GIS/spatial analysis courses and even credentials are available at community colleges (I assume you are in America). "Environmental geology" although I don't know the details of UPenn's program, I do know something about geology and let me tell you unless you have a damned good career placement office that will get you a job with a government agency, there are hardly any entry-level positions unlesss you have a PhD.

Having said that, going into even mild debt for urban planning is stupid. There are no jobs in the public sector anywhere, and the nonprofit sector there are even less jobs if you can believe it and the pay is much worse. The private sector has no interest in urban planners except a few token individuals they hire and usually these people have had decades of jobs experience in non-profits. Also the housing market in America won't improve for several years, and you are unlikely to see major private owner driven expansion like 20 years ago.

Look, basically departments of urban planning exist to justify a continued influx of students to keep professors employed. If you already have a job at a government agency and need this to advance, then it makes sense.

If you are dead serious about a career in academia, it doesn't really matter which of the two you pursue. Environmental geology is likely to open a few more doors tho. However it is all a pyramid scheme in the end.


Maybe he/she you know, actually cares about the fields and would find studying them for 1-2 years a personally rewarding life experience worth having. You just can't get the sort of academic depth in a part time internship waiting on people in a field that you can as a full time graduate student. (its also pretty absurd to think that you can support yourself part time washing dishes, if you are making minimum wage you need to work full time basically) Its also basically impossible to "stay current on the literature" if you're not doing it full time and you're not in a faculty where other experts in the field can help direct you towards what is worth reading and what you have to read and what is trivial or redundant.

I really despise the attitude that the only possible point of education is to make money and get employed. The point of life is not to make money!! Money is a mere instrument to get things that you want it is not a goal in and of itself except for greedy obnoxious banker/finance types. Who the f' cares if non-profit jobs that MPA urban development grads get have crappy pay as long as they pay enough to keep you housed and to buy ramen instant noodles, if they let you do something you love full time.

Personally, I don't want to study so I can make money, I want to make money so I can study - if I had enough money in the bank to yield 25k USD in interest annually, I'd never think of taking a paying job and I'd just be a PhD student or adjunct lecturer/professor and political activist forever. Seriously, don't live to make money, make the minimum amount of money necessary to live and find how to enjoy yourself.

[RadioRaheem84]

Very good point TC, but the only thing I am worried about is paying back my loans.

The salary doesn't mean much to me.

I love public policy issues and political economy. I am still a bit of a wonk at heart from my old liberal days, I am just much much much less all about "market oriented solutions".

I think maybe a good balance of the two (interest and money) would be if I were to take the MPA specialization in Health Care Policy and Administration. At least there I would be helping run a hospital or something medical related.

I wonder how the job market is for that.

Really the only thing I am worried about is paying back the debt I accrued. Nothing more.

[RadioRaheem84]

Anyone in here working in either field or actually working at all that could help out with advice.

I am 26 years old with NO major public (agency) or private sector experience.

I really don't know much else outside of public policy. Worked two and half years for a public policy tank at a University doing stats for their survey/polling department. That is the extent of my post grad work. Crunching numbers for the TX Lottery Commission or Dow Chemicals (PR for the papers) who wanted public opinion numbers on a recent chemical spill in KY.

Does that seem appealing at all to an employer?

I

[MarxSchmarx]

Maybe he/she you know, actually cares about the fields and would find studying them for 1-2 years a personally rewarding life experience worth having. You just can't get the sort of academic depth in a part time internship waiting on people in a field that you can as a full time graduate student. (its also pretty absurd to think that you can support yourself part time washing dishes, if you are making minimum wage you need to work full time basically) Its also basically impossible to "stay current on the literature" if you're not doing it full time and you're not in a faculty where other experts in the field can help direct you towards what is worth reading and what you have to read and what is trivial or redundant.

I really despise the attitude that the only possible point of education is to make money and get employed. The point of life is not to make money!! Money is a mere instrument to get things that you want it is not a goal in and of itself except for greedy obnoxious banker/finance types. Who the f' cares if non-profit jobs that MPA urban development grads get have crappy pay as long as they pay enough to keep you housed and to buy ramen instant noodles, if they let you do something you love full time.

Personally, I don't want to study so I can make money, I want to make money so I can study - if I had enough money in the bank to yield 25k USD in interest annually, I'd never think of taking a paying job and I'd just be a PhD student or adjunct lecturer/professor and political activist forever. Seriously, don't live to make money, make the minimum amount of money necessary to live and find how to enjoy yourself.

One thing that differentiates Radio Raheem's situation from other graduate students is that he is apparently not on a fellowship. If you are pursuing an academic (as opposed to a vocational) field, then often you get a fellowship or at least TA-ship. Medical, legal, business and public policy students rarely get fellowships - why? Because it is widely believed (rightly or wrongly) that they will find sufficient renumeration to pay back their debts. But a degree in art history or extraterrestrial geology - people are more reluctant to take on debt, and universities and funding agencies realize this, and so offer financial incentives to ensure these programs have enough students and offset the individual risks because if they were self funded and indebted based on "passion" they understand that their business model (and lets face it higher education is a business under capitalism) would collapse under their flagrant economic inviability.

Indeed, therefore one good proxy of whether a course of study is pursued primarily for economic reasons versus "intellectual curiosity" is whether or not they make students pay their tuition and living expenses out of loans or out of pocket. Since radio raheem spoke of debt, I assumed that these programs exist in large part for economic reasons, rather than say an academic geography program with a fellowship. The question of subsequent employability must therefore come up. I'd argue that it should come up for students persuing a degree with a fellowship as well, but this is not what we are talking about here and that is a different matter.

Indeed, caring about learning for its own sake is not so much overrated as it is oversold. It is basically a glorified marketing ploy that just about every institution of higher education in the world uses. Should people be able to spend their lives devoting themselves to fields they find personally rewarding and sharing that knowledge with a community of other equally passionate people? Of course - that is a big reason why I am a leftist.

Under capitalism, this ideal of scholarly passion has become commodified to try to attract paying customers that take out massive loans for dubious economic returns. To the extent that universities teach people to "think critically" and write well, as far as I am concerned these are skills that one should develop before they fork over 40000 USD a year (assuming they learn these skills, which the evidence suggests most university students at least in America do not). If they have already completed an undergraduate degree as RadioRaheem apparently has, and given the caliber of the schools he is discussing, it seems reasonable to assume that he already has these basic skills. Indeed, let's face it - under capitalism this blissful scholarly career is a luxury afforded to people who, I guess, either have a job waiting at their father's investment banking firm, the tiny sliver that "make it" in academia, or have enough "money in the bank" to be perpetual students (incidentally this is essentially how university endowments that pay faculty salaries work). This in fact was how higher education basically worked until the middle of the 20th century and how it still operates in much of the developing world. By perpetuating the myth that it is within everyone's reach if only they try hard enough, we are playing right into the hands of what is, under the current econom ic order, a glorified pyramid scheme.

But this gets at my point. If someone with RadioRaheems talents spends say 10 years of their life selling out and being miserable doing something they hate (maybe not washing dishes but say selling life insurance) but can amass enough of a small fortune to spend the rest of their life eating ramen noodles and being a perpetual student, versus spending 1-2 years of their life immersing themselves in the "life of the mind" only to graduate with a crushing debt and meager job prospects, who is to say that it makes more sense to take the latter approach? One can always go back to school and life long learning and all that.

As far as the benefits of graduate school go, lectures are an immensely inefficient way to communicate information. Problem sets less so, and discussing ideas with other people helps.Reading the original literature and discussing it with other equally passionate people helps, but you don't need to fork over thousands of dollars - much less go into massive debt - to do that - in fact it happens everyday here on revleft, albeit of varying quality, but let me assure anyone that having sat through more graduate seminars than I care to confess to the quality of discussion and insight people purport to bring to these texts often isn't that much more impressive. Indeed, if you want to see useful discussions of apparently arcane academic discussions, many programming forums online offer examples of posts of the most lucid explanations of even subtle concepts that I've never seen an academic or a text book be able to pull off.

[RadioRaheem84]

Perceptions on BU (Boston U)?