Skip to main content

Ed. D vs. Ph.D. - Do the letters really matter?




I have had a bad week and was feeling a little uninspired.  I even missed my weekly #edchat, so feel disconnected from my PLN.  Which perhaps explains my very negative reaction to the article from Education Week entitled "The Ed.D. Dilemma: Why Harvard's Decision Could Harm the Quest for Teacher Professionalism".  And actually, it's not the article, it's Harvard's decision and the implication that an Ed.D. is not as worthy as a Ph.D.

My thoughts - well, my thoughts are not appropriate so I will keep them to myself.

Here is the line that got my ire up: "Within the field of education, Ed.D. programs had for a long time been assumed to be inferior to Ph.D. programs, and only marginally useful to the improvement of educational practice, policy, and administration."  Now, granted, past tense is used here and Ted Purinton was just stating a fact that is unfortunately, quite true. From my own personal experience, when I tell people I am getting my Ed.D., I do actually get a rather negative reaction because it's NOT a Ph.D. Which is ridiculous, as I am working just as hard, took all the same courses, had to take the exact same comprehensive exams, have to do the exact same dissertation process and research. The main difference - research vs. practice in the field.

When I went into my doctoral program years ago, I had the choice to take the Ph.D. path or the Ed.D. path.  When I asked what the difference was, besides a 12 hour difference in credits required, I was told, if you want to do research, it's probably better to do the Ph.D. path, but if you want to be out in the field, practicing and doing what you learned, then Ed.D. is more appropriate. Naturally - I chose Ed.D. That's where I want to be - out doing, not researching.

But does that mean my program is less rigorous or less worthy or less useful?  No.  In fact, from my personal point of view, I think it is MORE useful and worthy because I am putting into practice what I have learned to help improve education. I am helping those teachers and administrators and schools take research proven practices and learn to actually implement them. Is my program less rigorous? No - in fact, looking at the two programs side by side, the main difference is a few more required dissertation hours (9 vs. 6)(though I will end up with 9 myself), and then a few more required credits for course work focused on research practices.  That's it. So..really, neck in neck, pretty much the same.  I had to take all the same qualitative and quantitative research and statistical courses, same leadership courses, same technology courses, etc.....I am simply NOT going to become a researcher. I have no desire to spend my time writing and doing studies and analyzing - I want to be out there, with teachers, with schools, with students, helping to improve and change education technology practices.

Does this mean I will be less of a 'expert' than someone with a Ph.D.? I certainly don't think so - I have worked myself to death for a long time, reading, researching, writing, learning, practicing, implementing, connecting with others in the field, trying to use what I have learned to help others and improve student learning. I just have a different end goal in mind.

I am completely insulted by Harvard's decision, but I think it just exemplifies the rather elitist attitude of many schools and Ph.D. holders - that somehow they are more worthy or they worked harder than those of us who have or will have soon, an Ed.D. I for one beg to differ with this belief - I have held down a full-time job the entire time I have been pursuing my Ed.D., and have had the distinct advantage of being able to directly apply everything I have learned and researched directly into my work.  Helping schools, helping teachers, helping students. My studies and my work have complemented each other, making my learning, my 'degree' applicable, practical, and HELPFUL to the educational community at large.

Ted Purinton, in his article, ends with a challenge to colleges & universities to take Harvard's decision not as a mandate that Ed.D. programs should be stopped, but rather to use this as "an invitation to bolster the reputation of educational practice—through Ed.D. programs, as well as through many other measures—rather than to shy away from it in fear that educational practice (and a degree that seeks to signify such expertise) continues to maintain its low status, not only among other professions, but within the field of education itself . I certainly hope this is the case and that more schools don't decide to drop their Ed.D. programs. It's not really a question of which degree is better, but really a matter of purpose - each has a different purpose and focus, and anyone who has earned an Ed.D. or a Ph.D. has worked equally hard in their field of study to become an expert.  The letters shouldn't matter - what we do with the letters and why we do it should be what matters.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Implementation Dip - It's Not Just Test Scores, It's Any Change

I read this article yesterday by Andrew Ujifusa entitled New Tests Put States on Hot Seat as Scores Plunge . Basically, states that have implemented new standardized tests to address revised academic standards, such as the Common Core State Standards, have seen a drop in student scores, so panic has ensued. What I want to know is: has no one ever heard about the implementation dip? Whenever you try to implement something new, there is going to be a period of adjustment, scores will go down if we are talking tests, classroom behaviors will change and achievement will go down if new teaching strategies are being implemented - in short, any time you try something new, it is NOT going to go exactly as planned!  Mistakes will happen, things will be bad before they get better - it's part of the whole change process.  Which is why we need to be implementing changes slowly, early, and over time so that things that go wrong can be adjusted. Image from images.google.com What is th

Social Media's Impact on Personal Life - Personal Reflections

The question - does social media impact personal life? The answer - yes.  Is that a good thing or a bad thing? The answer - it depends. I have been on vacation the past week or so and am currently on personal leave to finish writing my dissertation proposal (which, as you can see, I am procrastinating!) During my vacation, I swore I would take a break from blogging, Twitter, email, and all things electronic. I lied. I admit - I did honestly make the attempt and in fact, did not turn on my computer one time.  However, the iPad is a constant companion, especially since the books I am reading (currently, the Game of Thrones series) are on there, so I had the iPad with me a lot - even on the beach.  It was very easy to check if I had emails, to check out my Facebook or to send a Twitter or two.  Long story short, I failed miserably at the disconnecting aspect. View from chair and under canopy! Which brings me back to the question of does social media impact personal life? The o

Lecture, Direct-Instruction or Talk - There's the Confusion!

In yesterday's weekly #edchat Twitter collaboration the discussion focused on the flipped classroom, where, naturally, there was quite a bit of debate around the idea of video lectures. What became apparent was the many different interpretations of the term 'lecture'. This came to the forefront for me when I offered up the idea of TED Talks as one option for learning rather than a teacher's video lecture, and someone said "TED talks are just lectures, so how is that better?" This stumped me as I have never thought of a TED talk as a lecture, which is funny, because now, forced to think about it, I guess they could be construed as lectures, depending on your definition. Which of course has led me to this post!  Obviously, my perception of a lecture is not the same as others. What is MY definition of a lecture? Perhaps it's my many years of being both a student and a teacher, but for me a 'lecture' has rather negative connotations, as I envisio