Employment Opportunities and Experiences among Recent Master’s-Level Global Health Graduates

Abstract

Objectives: To examine the job search, employment experiences, and job availability of recent global health-focused master’s level graduates. Methods: An online survey was conducted from October to December 2016 based out of Washington, DC. The study sample includes students graduating with master’s degrees in global health, public health with a global health concentration or global medicine from eight U.S. universities. Results: Out of 256 potential respondents, 152 (59%) completed the survey, with 102/152 (67%) employed. Of unemployed graduates, 38% were currently in another educational training program. Out of 91 employed respondents, 62 (68%) reported they had limitations or gaps in their academic training. The average salary of those employed was between $40,000 and $59,000 annually. The majority of respondents reported they currently work in North America (83.5%.); however, only 31% reported the desire to work in North America following graduation. Conclusions: Discrepancies exist between graduates’ expectations of employment in global public health and the eventual job market. Communication between universities, students and employers may assist in curriculum development and job satisfaction for the global public health workforce.

Postgraduate Employment Outcomes of Undergraduate and Graduate Public Health Students

“…Two articles focused on graduates of schools or programs of public health in multiple countries, 3 focused on Australia, 2 focused on Canada, and 1 each focused on Vietnam, the United Kingdom, and South Africa. Fourteen articles focused on subareas of public health (3 on health communication/education, 40 -42 3 on maternal and child health, 43 -45 5 on global health, 46 -50 1 on industrial hygiene, 51 1 on nutrition, 52 1 on Aboriginal health), 53 5 articles focused on undergraduates, 54 -58 and 3 articles focused on doctoral graduates. 45,59,60 Two articles focused on postgraduate employment outcomes of a subset of graduates who had previously participated in a volunteer program, 57,61 and 1 focused on international students.…”

“…Seventeen studies were surveys of the alumni of a single school or program of public health using mail, telephone, or online survey methods. 40,44,45,48,50,52 -55,57,58,61 -66 Three studies were surveys sent to graduate programs, 41,43,67 7 were surveys of alumni of multiple schools or programs of public health, 11,42,46,47,49,56,68 2 were based on nationally collected surveys of doctoral recipients in the United States, 59,60 3 were national data collections from numerous schools and programs of public health, 11,20,22 and 1 used data from the published websites of multiple schools and programs of public health. 63…”

“…Seven studies used protocols in which a consistently defined cohort year of graduates was surveyed at a consistent and specific number of months postgraduation (typically 6 months or 1 year after graduation); used 1 or multiple graduating cohorts from the same school or program of public health, each measured at consistent time frames postgraduation; and did not mix multiple graduating cohorts into 1 data set. 11,20,22,23,49,54,63 Seven studies did not indicate clearly which cohorts were included. 41,50,52,53,56,67,68 The data for studies of doctoral graduates using the National Science Foundation’s annual Survey of Earned Doctorates, which are collected annually from all doctoral graduates in the United States, 59,60 were gathered before graduation.…”

“…Most articles made no attempt to assess the differences between responders and nonresponders, 20,40 -45,48 -51,54 -57,63,68 did not describe their survey instrument or its development, 43 -45,48,51 -56,64 and did not describe field testing the survey, institutional review board approval, or statistical methods. Although the standards for designing surveys recommend consulting with experts in the field, 69 and career services professionals often are responsible for gathering employment data, only 4 studies consulted with such professionals.…”

REAPing the benefits: development and use of a structured evaluation framework to codify learning resources for Global Health professionals

“…A commitment to promoting societal health is perhaps one of the few unifying features of the global health and public health workforces [1,2]. Those who work in the field approach their workplace challenges from different perspectives: as generalists and specialists; as academicians and field-based practitioners; as citizens of lowand middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries; as advocates and clinicians [2][3][4][5][6]. Professionals at all stages of their career can benefit from opportunities to further develop and expand their skills and knowledge.…”