PHDA testimonials

I was looking at programs that were more data-oriented because my data skills were not quite high enough to get a good data-centric job. So, while I was finishing my MA, I figure PHDA would serve me well. Plus, the tuition was much lower because I was a student!

I found the Working with Administrative Data (PHDA 01) was a good course. It was less intensive and slower paced than the other PHDA courses. I took this course last because of my time frame for completing four courses. It would probably have been better to take this course earlier on.  The Population Health and GIS (PHDA 03) course was the most interesting course I took. The labs were easy to follow and I enjoyed the final project.  When I first enrolled in the program, I thought that PHDA 01 and PHDA 03 would be the most valuable courses for my skill development but in the end it was the Health Evaluation and Program Monitoring (PHDA 06) course that really helped me land a job after graduation. PHDA 06 was different from the other PHDA courses. It felt a bit like a satellite course in the program as it included a health evaluation project rather than data analysis lab work. I learned a lot from the peer review process we used.

I just started working after graduation, but so far, I have applied evaluation skills that I learned from the Health Evaluation and Program Monitoring (PHDA 06), including logic models, evaluation methodology, gantt charts and interview guides. My current role, as an Evaluation Lead, will also include some data analysis, so the Working with Administrative Data (PHDA 01) and Epidemiological Statistics (PHDA 02) courses will be helpful for that too.

I think the BC-specific focus is the main strength. I came out understanding more about the data available to help with BC-specific health policy. Perhaps, this doesn’t help attracting students outside of BC, but is great for our province’s capacity for good health decision making.

I have recommended this program to others. However, I also warned them that it was a lot of work – especially Epidemiological Statistics (PHDA 02). I think my estimated hours per week for this course were at least 15.  I also found the group work in PHDA 02 more time consuming than the other PHDA courses.  The work in the Secure Research Training Lab (SRTL) can also increase the amount of time you need to spend on the courses depending on group work or your knowledge of the subject matter.

I saw a poster for the programme advertised on my campus, and found the course selection to be highly relevant to my doctoral studies.

The variety of courses provided learning opportunities for various software programmes, e.g., SAS and ArcGIS, while also teaching fundamentals of epidemiological statistics and other relevant bases for public health research. The use of geographical information systems in two courses was also of immense benefit. 

The skills learned in this programme are highly and directly relevant to my doctoral research, and are being used on a near-daily basis. For example, I use both SAS and GIS to analyse various administrative datasets, and have found that the statistical background gleaned from this programmes has enabled me to read more critically and use more sophisticated analyses in my own work.

The diversity of courses is an immediate strength, as is the online format. Every instructor was highly engaged and enthusiastic, and was happy to have discussions about course material and further topics via e-mail.

I would (and already have) recommended the PHDA programme to colleagues and young researchers. However, I would emphasise setting aside time to do the readings and work carefully through code. Also take the opportunity to learn as much from the instructors as possible. The papers and lessons are useful references for the future as well. I wish I had kept them on paper!

No, but I want to thank the administrative staff for managing such an excellent programme. Also, I am very happy that they offer a graduate student rate! Many thanks!

I learned about the program from observing LinkedIn profiles of people working in health research, public health, and at health authorities. At the time, I only had some work experience somewhat related to health but no health degrees and was experiencing difficulty ‘getting my foot in the door’ without the latter. The University of Victoria and this program were not familiar to me aside from the LinkedIn exposure, since I was not familiar with the offerings on the West Coast.

For online and greatly asynchronous courses, the course experiences were good, overall. The content, readings, and assignments/practice were very interesting. I look forward to referencing them and returning to them for refreshers. There are many optional resources I look forward to viewing.

However, it did feel like there was quite a lot of work in each course, from readings to forum posts to assignments. I was working full-time and was glad I only took one course at a time … since each semester was a lot of work! I am happy I chose a diverse set of courses, which were on topics I am very interested in. One course focussed on GIS skills, another on administrative data analysis skills, another focussed on epidemiological quantitative data analysis, and yet another included health program evaluation skills. These courses and their lessons were very memorable. While some specifics with SAS or ArcGIS will need to be refreshed the next time I work with them, overall principles, some common procedures, and where to find helpful guides were retained.

It is difficult to say which course provided the greatest benefit. Unfortunately, although mapping and spatial analysis are interests of mine, they are not usually relevant or appropriate for the full-time work I do. The administrative data, epidemiological statistics, and evaluation courses were great introductions to those disciplines and methods.

For my personal research and projects, I would like to use all the new skills I learned during this certificate. For my current job role, the evaluation course reinforced work planning, stakeholder engagement planning, and reporting planning skills -- their corresponding activities are prevalent at my job. The quantitative analysis and administrative data skills will be relevant to my professional and personal work.

The strengths of the program are the course offerings (which are attractive at first glance), the instructors, the practical work/applications, and the support/information network of peers. The work with PopData BC data was very engaging and a privilege – I hope that continues to be offered -- despite remote connections being a hassle sometimes.

The peer reviews were always very helpful and so were the activities/peer community in the course forums. I appreciated that one class only required a number of weekly posts for full participation grades. I personally found it daunting to participate through forum posts/responses, and usually dreaded writing mine addressing specific discussion questions.

I would completely recommend this program to others. I have already recommended it to a close colleague who asked about it.

I would also strongly recommend it to someone who wishes to transition into epidemiology or public health-related professions before they pursue graduate level studies. These courses may offer the training they need.

I would suggest that they take only one PHDA course and devote all their educational time to that one course (i.e., no other courses from elsewhere). I would also recommend they try to keep up as much as possible with the pace of the courses and to really consider the timing of various milestones in the courses – as the courses vary in intensity at different points. If their course involves remote connections to analysis software and PopData BC data, they should expect to spend a lot of time practicing and completing those assignments.

This is an incredible certificate program. It can be labour intensive and sometimes grueling/exhausting, but everything feels earned. I am amazed at how much I have learned and applied in only four courses (all on different and almost exclusive topics). Prior to this certificate, I thought I would need to pursue a degree in health to make a career transition. I feel confident that I have the necessary skills or at least the foundations for these skills -- and that pursuing another master’s or a committing to a PhD are not the only ways to acquire such skills.

I learned of the Professional Specialization Certificate in Pop Health Data Analysis through a couple of sources, including the Canadian Evaluation Society and the BC Centre for Excellence in Women’s Health. One of the program postings included information about a CIHR funding opportunity for eligible students. After looking into the program details as well as the CIHR funding, I decided that it would be a good program for my professional development. I have a master’s in Public Health, and while taking the program, I worked for a non-profit social and health policy research organization where I could apply the skills I learned. One of the areas which I felt I could build on was the use of quantitative and administrative health data; this program was a perfect fit.

The courses which provided the greatest benefit were also the ones where I developed my skills the most. Population Health and GIS (PHDA 03) and Epidemiological Statistics (PHDA 02) were both challenging courses but very informative. Prior to taking the program, I had zero knowledge or experience with GIS. The PHDA 03 course involved a steep learning curve and required a significant amount of time investment. However, by the end of the course, I found I had a basic understanding of how public health and geography intersect and the benefits of GIS applications to public health issues. I also have a basic understanding and use of the GIS software program ArcGIS, which I found very valuable.  In addition, the PHDA 02 course was a great refresher for advanced statistics using sample data sets and applied examples.

At the time of starting the certificate program, I had intended to apply the skills and knowledge I learned to my work on an evaluation of a health program in BC. However, I have recently re-located to Nova Scotia with my family. While I am not currently using the skills and knowledge I gained, I expect that I will use them in my future work.

For a program that is delivered completely online, each course was organized and delivered very well. Most of the instructors were very quick with their replies to questions from students. All of the courses used practical examples to explain the material which I found really helpful for understanding how to apply the concepts in practice. In the Working with Administrative Data (PHDA 01) course, the instructors were extremely helpful, and I found the 15 minute phone meeting near the start of the course really nice. It was so much easier to go through several questions/concerns at once on the phone with person rather than through several online posts.

The PHDA 03 course involved a lot of work, but was structured in a way that it was easy to work through each module. The instructor provided step by step instructions for each module about how to use ArcGIS. By the end of the course, I went from someone with zero experience in GIS to someone who can understand how to interpret maps, basic tools in ArcGIS, and how to apply GIS to public health issues.

I went into the program with few expectations, and wasn’t sure how challenging the courses would be. I was initially surprised, but then thankful, that all of the courses were very comparable to graduate level studies. Even though each course required a bit more work and time commitment than I initially planned for, I felt each of them challenged me and taught me new concepts and skills that I can take away and use immediately in my work.

I would recommend this program to anyone working in the public health field and handling or interpreting data that is looking to update or acquire new skills. The students in my classes had various backgrounds, some with prior education or experience in public health, and some with limited education or experience but who are now working in the field. Even with the various student backgrounds, I felt the courses were appropriate for anyone at an introductory or intermediate level. The courses were of high quality and good value. For anyone planning to enroll in the program, while working full time, I would recommend taking only one course per semester. On average, I spent 10-12 hours each week on course readings, activities, online forums and assignments each week. The CIHR funding was also a significant factor in my decision to enroll and a great benefit to me. Without this funding I would have likely chosen a few of the courses I felt I needed and completed them over a longer period of time.

Overall I felt taking the courses and the certificate were worth it and I am confident that I will be able to use the skills and knowledge I learned in my work in the future.

Overall I enjoyed the courses I took (PHDA01, 02, 03 and 06). For the most part the instructors structured the course work and modules well.

I learned about the program through emails from PopDataBC. I have been following PopDataBC since the organization was introduced to me during my MPH degree at UBC. I was motivated to enroll in the PHDA courses that I chose, because I was not offered the opportunity to take such courses during my MPH. I had a lot of background in epidemiological and statistical theory, with some coding experience introduced through my statistics courses, but not as much practical application of the theory as I would have liked or that I needed for my job.

The courses I have taken so far are Population Health and GIS (PHDA03) and Spatial Epidemiology (PHDA04). Both have made me confident working in ArcGIS, and applying principles of GIS/mapping to population health data and working on spatial analyses. In particular, what has been most helpful about these courses is applying the background theory to surveillance and research questions and walking through the analysis from start to finish, including interpretation of results.

There are two areas that I hope to apply these skills in my work: one is improved visualization of population health data where a geographic component is present and relevant, and another is utilizing methodologies where unstable rates can be smoothed by drawing from the rates of neighbouring geographic areas. Where I work, small numbers are consistently an issue in producing stable and comparable rates.

Strengths included hands-on application of concepts (through the labs), responsive and supportive instructors, and reading materials that helped with learning the concepts. For example, the final projects allowed us to develop a practical research question, clean and analyze the required datasets, produce maps and analyses, and interpret results, which would mirror a typical project in the workplace.

Yes, I would definitely recommend PHDA courses to others. I would suggest ensuring there is ample time outside of your regular job to complete the coursework, as I found the readings were quite time consuming (although very interesting).