Telephone Interview with Dan Rubin Tuesday July 2, 1996 4:30 pm

1. Based on your experience and familiarity with the Pew program, what did the fellowship really accomplish? What were the most important contributions?

At the Pew program breakfast during the Association for Health Services Research Conference, I thought about the Pew program as a whole. I hadn't thought about that for awhile; it was sort of fun. I think probably that the contribution to interdisciplinary doctoral education in the health policy field rather than the specific training of some number of people is the biggest accomplishment. Because of the prestige of the schools that were involved, it speeded up and added prestige to the field of health policy education. At the breakfast I realized that I had probably underestimated how big a change it was for doctoral health policy studies to move toward a policy analytic framework. My own background is in policy analysis. I have a master's from Berkeley in public policy from 1976 and that was always very interdisciplinary. At that point it was very new to have professionally excellent policy analysis training at the graduate level. I think the first programs started in the late 1960s and Berkeley was one of the first. Frankly, I think there is more interdisciplinary work at the master's level than at the doctoral level. I knew that the Berkeley program went on to doctoral studies. At the time I was there there was no health concentration. Later on a dual program with the school of public health was developed. I probably would have continued if it had existed when I was there. When I was there, there was a joint program with the law school, but that was intensifying the legal tools, not focusing on the substantive areas like health. The core curriculum was philosophically very similar to what you or I had, in that it took some rigor in thinking about major political events. Thus, I kind of have a blind spot as to whether or not this was innovative in the Pew program. I heard about the Pew program in the mid-1980s and seriously considered the Brandeis program but I wound up not being able to apply. Things were happening in my job and I found myself at a point in my career where it seemed less realistic to leave for 2 or more years to get the doctorate.

And then you wound up at Michigan. How?

Several years later I looked again, and the Michigan program at that point looked exciting.

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement