Deciding between a renown, expensive school vs. a smaller, reputable school

[nopenotoday]

Hello all,

For this cycle, I have had the privilege of being accepted into two PA programs so far. And more interviews to come! My heart is telling me to go to program B, but my brain is telling me to stick with program A. I guess I am wowed by the flashy offerings of program B over program A that finally helps me feel at home at a educational institution(something I didn't have during my undergrad as a first gen student). Maybe this is me doubting myself, but somehow I feel I may not be as academically successful with a PA program that is only two years long because of the material crunch. The only thing holding me back from program B is graduating with crippling debt by the age of 28 , especially because I had a full ride to college. 

Any and all honest opinions welcome. What would you do? 

Program A 

- 25 months

- Tuition 85-90k

- PANCE 93-97%

- Smaller city in midwest, cost of living fairly low

- Less time during clinical rotation phase/means less specialties I can explore?

- Has all the essentials technology/skill labs

 

Program B 

- Top ranked program (probably doesn't matter)

- 30ish months with longer breaks

- Tuition 170-180k

- PANCE 91-96%

- Larger faculty

- Part of teaching hospital

- Big city, cost of living is larger

- Large alumni network/more leadership CAPA opportunities

[MysticMac14]

My opinion is to go with program A. What ultimately matters is that you become a PA-C in the end - and by looking at the PANCE rates - you seem to have identical chances at both.

How much do you think that 5 months of school will impact your ability to practice as a PA once you graduate? My bet is maybe you'd be slightly better in your first 6 months months but after that I would suspect that it would make no significant difference. 

Something tells me that you wish to go to the bigger program because it will feel more prestigious and like more of an achievement. I understand that, trust me, but no one will care where you graduated from so long as the -C accompanies your title. 

I think one year after graduation - you will only really have 1 noticeable difference, which is how much debt you'll be in.

 

These are solely my opinions and I think you agree that the rational side of your brain is agreeing with me; however, we are not computers and sometimes you need to make a slightly illogical decision or sacrifice in order to be happier.

 

Good luck with your decision! I am sure either path will be completely fine in the end. 

Edited October 7, 2021 by MysticMac14

[Aware]

5 hours ago, MysticMac14 said:

What ultimately matters is that you become a PA-C in the end - and by looking at the PANCE rates

I hate this narrative even if there is some validity behind it. What ultimately matters is that you go to a program that fosters your growth into a competent clinician. Obviously it would be alarming if a program has a PANCE rate well below the national average, but now with so many programs having a PANCE rate of 90+, a high PANCE rate doesn't distinguish a program.

IMO the most important thing is to look at quality of clinical rotations. Didactic is merely to form a foundation, clinicals is where you really learn medicine. Generally the older the program, the more established the rotation site and the more experience a preceptor has precepting students. The program has had time to vet out preceptors/clinical sites that have received poor reviews. If the program is connected to a medical school and shares many of the same rotation sites, this point becomes less important. Also, ask current students if you can about their clinical experience!

I have to respectfully disagree with the poster above, 5 extra months (if 5 extra months of clinical time) is a huge difference and would definitely allow you to explore more specialties especially since it's attached to a teaching hospital that likely has more in-house rotations readily available. From the information you gave us, I would go with program B if it were slightly more expensive than program A, the fact that it is literally double the price makes it extremely hard to justify. I will say that I went to a big name school that was more expensive (~10k more than my cheapest option) and having that on my CV didn't make a difference in landing my current job. Having a large alumni network certainly helps if you plan to stay within the area unlike me, who choose to move to the middle of nowhere on the other side of the country... 

Just trying to give you different perspectives. At the end of the day, you just go with whatever feels best for you.

Edited October 7, 2021 by Aware

[means]

I would choose option A. As long as it is a reputable school, I wouldn't even give it a second thought. There is no reason to pay 180k for PA school. 

[MysticMac14]

1 hour ago, Aware said:

I hate this narrative even if there is some validity behind it. What ultimately matters is that you go to a program that fosters your growth into a competent clinician. Obviously it would be alarming if a program has a PANCE rate well below the national average, but now with so many programs having a PANCE rate of 90+, a high PANCE rate doesn't distinguish a program.

IMO the most important thing is to look at quality of clinical rotations. Didactic is merely to form a foundation, clinicals is where you really learn medicine. Generally the older the program, the more established the rotation site and the more experience a preceptor has precepting students. The program has had time to vet out preceptors/clinical sites that have received poor reviews. If the program is connected to a medical school and shares many of the same rotation sites, this point becomes less important. Also, ask current students if you can about their clinical experience!

I have to respectfully disagree with the poster above, 5 extra months (if 5 extra months of clinical time) is a huge difference and would definitely allow you to explore more specialties especially since it's attached to a teaching hospital that likely has more in-house rotations readily available. From the information you gave us, I would go with program B if it were slightly more expensive than program A, the fact that it is literally double the price makes it extremely hard to justify. I will say that I went to a big name school that was more expensive (~10k more than my cheapest option) and having that on my CV didn't make a difference in landing my current job. Having a large alumni network certainly helps if you plan to stay within the area unlike me, who choose to move to the middle of nowhere on the other side of the country... 

Just trying to give you different perspectives. At the end of the day, you just go with whatever feels best for you.

Considering that nearly every PA school has 12 months of clinical rotations and then the rest dedicated to didactics - the difference between 25-30 should be negligible.

That is fine that you disagree with the -C argument - but in all actuality doesn't most of your learning come with on the job training? That is why it is nearly universally understood that the medical school you attend isn't really relevant but in residency is where you actually learn and development most of your practical knowledge and skills. With PA school being shorter, wouldn't this be even more true for PAs (actual question)?

If a program is accredited then they should be able to prepare the person to be a successful PA. Since the OP mentioned that program A is a 'reputable' school makes me believe that they have been around for long enough to have demonstrated the ability to prepare successful PAs. 

So, it seems that unless the circumstances are marginalized, i.e. the less expensive school is a brand new school not attached to a medical school, the extra months are clinical, the more expensive school is only slightly more expensive, should you choose the more expensive school. 

I'm glad to read an opposing opinion, as most people I have talked to or have sought advise from usually tend to identify more with what I have posted; however, I don't even start school until this January so it is very possible that my perspective is incorrect due to lack of life experience and being biased from my friends and mentors.  

[TeddyRucpin]

Program B aka USC isn't worth its enormous price tag. One would say the same of their dental school as well.

Edited October 8, 2021 by TeddyRucpin

[ohiovolffemtp]

Where you go to PA school is only important to:

• ensure you get a good enough education to pass PANCE.  BTW, except for residencies, no one will care what your PANCE score was as long as you pass
• give you an initial set of contacts to help you find a job

Once you have your first job, it's all about what you learn while working and the reputation and contacts you make.  It won't make a lick of difference where you went to school.  Since both schools do the 1st well, is school B really going to be worth $90K more (before you factor in the cost of living)?  Even if going there lead to a job that paid $10K/year more (very doubtful), you'd still be looking at > 10 years of work to break even.

[Aware]

3 hours ago, MysticMac14 said:

Considering that nearly every PA school has 12 months of clinical rotations and then the rest dedicated to didactics - the difference between 25-30 should be negligible.

Generally speaking, most PA schools have 12 months of clinicals, but there is variation, I choose where I went as it had 10 more weeks of rotations compared to my 2nd choice. You can imagine I had a lot of electives. OP mentioned program A would have less clinical time, the exact amount is left to our imagination and I doubt it's 5 months more, but even 4 weeks more is substantial. In addition to more clinical experience, students often get offered by their preceptors, so think of it as another job audition opportunity while you're still in school. Now is that worth 90k, probably not. I would agree it wouldn't matter as much if it was solely more didactic time and breaks included in. 

That is fine that you disagree with the -C argument - but in all actuality doesn't most of your learning come with on the job training? That is why it is nearly universally understood that the medical school you attend isn't really relevant but in residency is where you actually learn and development most of your practical knowledge and skills. With PA school being shorter, wouldn't this be even more true for PAs (actual question)?

Of course there is a lot of on the job training, for some subspecialty positions, it would probably be almost exclusively learning on the job. You won't learn anywhere close to all of medicine in PA school, but it's about the quality of the education you do receive at the end of the day. The learning curve coming out is even steeper if you had lackluster exposure during clinicals. When physicians apply for jobs coming out of residency, the last clinical work they did was in residency, so no one is going to look into what they did in med school. The last clinical work a new grad PA did was in PA school, so recruiters often will ask about your rotations and what they were exposed to. I'd say after your first job, people don't care anywhere near as much though.

So, it seems that unless the circumstances are marginalized, i.e. the less expensive school is a brand new school not attached to a medical school, the extra months are clinical, the more expensive school is only slightly more expensive, should you choose the more expensive school. 

Only my personal opinion, but yes. Everyone values different things .

 

 

[nopenotoday]

On 10/7/2021 at 11:28 AM, MysticMac14 said:

My opinion is to go with program A. What ultimately matters is that you become a PA-C in the end - and by looking at the PANCE rates - you seem to have identical chances at both.

How much do you think that 5 months of school will impact your ability to practice as a PA once you graduate? My bet is maybe you'd be slightly better in your first 6 months months but after that I would suspect that it would make no significant difference. 

Something tells me that you wish to go to the bigger program because it will feel more prestigious and like more of an achievement. I understand that, trust me, but no one will care where you graduated from so long as the -C accompanies your title. 

I think one year after graduation - you will only really have 1 noticeable difference, which is how much debt you'll be in.

 

These are solely my opinions and I think you agree that the rational side of your brain is agreeing with me; however, we are not computers and sometimes you need to make a slightly illogical decision or sacrifice in order to be happier.

 

Good luck with your decision! I am sure either path will be completely fine in the end. 

Thank you for your honest opinion. You are right in every way. I think I suffer from major imposter syndrome at times and need to feel validated where I work or choose to invest my education in. But at the end of the day, I chose to follow the PA route due to less school, less financial  burden, and to enter the workforce early.

[nopenotoday]

On 10/7/2021 at 4:32 PM, Aware said:

I hate this narrative even if there is some validity behind it. What ultimately matters is that you go to a program that fosters your growth into a competent clinician. Obviously it would be alarming if a program has a PANCE rate well below the national average, but now with so many programs having a PANCE rate of 90+, a high PANCE rate doesn't distinguish a program.

IMO the most important thing is to look at quality of clinical rotations. Didactic is merely to form a foundation, clinicals is where you really learn medicine. Generally the older the program, the more established the rotation site and the more experience a preceptor has precepting students. The program has had time to vet out preceptors/clinical sites that have received poor reviews. If the program is connected to a medical school and shares many of the same rotation sites, this point becomes less important. Also, ask current students if you can about their clinical experience!

I have to respectfully disagree with the poster above, 5 extra months (if 5 extra months of clinical time) is a huge difference and would definitely allow you to explore more specialties especially since it's attached to a teaching hospital that likely has more in-house rotations readily available. From the information you gave us, I would go with program B if it were slightly more expensive than program A, the fact that it is literally double the price makes it extremely hard to justify. I will say that I went to a big name school that was more expensive (~10k more than my cheapest option) and having that on my CV didn't make a difference in landing my current job. Having a large alumni network certainly helps if you plan to stay within the area unlike me, who choose to move to the middle of nowhere on the other side of the country... 

Just trying to give you different perspectives. At the end of the day, you just go with whatever feels best for you.

You make some very important points. I would also go to program B if it was only 10-20k above program A, but it's not. Both schools have attached med schools (program A has a DO school). I also would not stay in the area considering cost of living is so high. Thank you for offering multiple points for me to ponder on.