Is there a doctor in the house???

So why are there so few decent DL doctoral programs available (by decent I mean a) have "no questions asked" credibility b) have very flexible / no residency delivery c) are affordable). Such programs exist at the undergrad level in almost anything and they exist at the masters level in many, many areas... however, for doctorates you only have these flakey Union programs, the over-priced Novas or the European / Australian programs which can't seem to clearly articulate whether they really are available via DL or not! Where are the options people!!!

 

Lewchuk,

I agree. I went through the same process and decided on a program at a state approved university. The residency and cost were the biggest factors for me.

Colleen

 

There may never be a "no questions asked" option for doctoral study. Why? Because doctoral study is typically viewed as a rite of passage. If you haven't lived on a graduate school assistantship for five years with daily faculty interaction - you won't, in the minds of many, have earned a first class doctoral degree.

Frankly, none of the DL program we talk about here are truly of the caliber of a quality full-time program. When folks tell me that they can complete a DL doctorate in 3-4 years working part-time at a distance, I have to chuckle. Yes, the work may be doctoral level. But don't kid yourself - a DL doctorate from Union, NSU, Capella, Walden, Sarasota, TUI, etc. is a different thing than a residential doctorate from a full-time program that takes 4-5 years of study. The level of faculty interaction is almost certainly much lower and less involved - no one can expect an adjunct teaching for one of the DL institutions to devote the time and energy to students that a full-time faculty member at a traditional school does.

Should one pursue a DL doctorate? Sure, if it meets your needs. But beware - the letters may be the same, but the experience is something different than a traditional graduate school student receives. And many in the academic world know the difference.

Thanks -Andy

------------------
Andy Borchers, DBA
NSU (1996)

 

While the experience may be different, is it necessarily inferior? And what about outcomes? That is what matters. Are the doctoral dissertations of distance candidates (RA or equivalent foreign schools) generally inferior to those of traditionally schooled candidates? I'd love to see any credible evidence of this.

And if there is no credible evidence demonstrating the superiority, in terms of outcomes, of the traditional system of preparing Ph.D. candidates, on what basis can the charge of DL inferiority be made?

Given the lack of empirical data, aren't those who proffer such prejudice, simply talking through the hole in their rear end?

 

I have to agree with Lawrie. The Ph.D. culminates with the dissertation, or passing it by the committee. If distance dissertations are comparable to full-time residential dissertations then what can be said? If both compare well then the academic world does not seem to place as high a regard on the dissertation as they do the suffering and starving of a full-time student(and i'm not saying they should do any different). Sort of like an MD with their internship/residency. It's not enough to have the degree. You have to go sleepless and suffer. Yet, the residency is where a doctor learns to medicine. The Ph.D. is where one becomes an expert on a subject(or at least documents it). Only then will your supervisors deem you worthy.

I have known a great number of doctoral candidates at highly regarded RA, residential, schools here in the U.S. Many are not quite the starving and suffering students imagined.

One Purdue Phder took his courses on campus but then moved away and just worked on his dissertation for the next two years, with just e-mails and phone calls with his supervisor. During those two years, he took a job as an IT consultant. He was definitely not suffering or starving.

With all of this said about the Ph.D., what is then thought of regarding the DBA? It appears most do not even count it as an academic degree yet many holders are professors at numerous schools. And, there are many differences from one school to the next regarding the DBA. One school may require a full-blown dissertation while others require more courses and much less writing(more of a case study).

Bing

 

Frankly, none of the DL program we talk about here are truly of the caliber of a quality full-time program. When folks tell me that they can complete a DL doctorate in 3-4 years working part-time at a distance, I have to chuckle. Yes, the work may be doctoral level. But don't kid yourself - a DL doctorate from Union, NSU, Capella, Walden, Sarasota, TUI, etc. is a different thing than a residential doctorate from a full-time program that takes 4-5 years of study.
-They are different. When I started the EdD at NSU I expected something significantly different. The two are not parallel experiences, they are divergent experiences. But one is not necessarily inferior or superior to the other.

My belief is that the DL programs tend to be more"practical" in nature, suited to the "practical" individual. Practical people are often mid-career individuals(as I was) who don't see the benefit of giving up what they've accomplished for the joy of on-campus life.

 

Wow Lawrie! You certainly have a way with words.

Russell

 

But what is measured, input or output? DL students are, as a group, older, more experienced, more mature, and better-equipped to take on the complexities and rigors of doctoral study. Also, they're normally in a better position to make their doctoral studies much more pragmatic, relevant, and career-related.

Having been a full-time professor on a traditional campus (San Diego State University), I can directly attest to the differences between the full-time, on-campus student and the working professional going for his/her degree part-time. The working professionals are simply more capable; they don't need to go through a lot of the extras inexperienced students require.

As noted by an earlier post in this thread, it is the outcome that is most important. Taking a stats class with 150 others at 7 in the morning may seem rigorous to some, but it seems superfluous to the experienced student who already knows his/her stuff.

Yes, a DL doctorate from Walden, Fielding, et.al. is different. Rightly so.

Rich Douglas

 

Regardless what the readers of this NG may want to think, the relative quality of DL doctorates is evident from the placement record of their holders. Indeed, placement is the ultimate outcome assessment.

Look at the faculty credentials of top rated universities (Harvard, Stanford, Chicago, Princeton, UCLA, Yale, Michigan, etc.) in any field you care to consider. I challenge you to show me more than one or two DL doctorates at any (or all!) of these schools. You won't find them. Go a step lower and look at the 350 or so schools that are AACSB accredited. How many DL doctorates will you find on their faculties? Very few. Why? You might argue that this is academic arrogance. I suspect it has something to do with the quality of DL doctorates and their dissertation (and subsequent) research. Indeed, when it comes to academic publications the process of blind reviewing helds ensure that quality is measured without noting where a person went to school.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying DL doctorates have no place. Indeed, I'm a graduate of a DL program and have used this credential to enter the academic world. Such programs fit the bill for many mid-career folks like myself that choose to teach or work in industry.

But I have some sense of my place in the world. In particular, I have no place at the table of top schools - I fit just fine teaching mid-career folks in a teaching oriented institution. I publish - but not in the top rated journals or conferences. Why? Because the caliber of my work isn't good enough. Teaching a full load at a teaching focused school that doesn't support academic research precludes world class research. The preparation I received in a DL doctorate was good, but it isn't the same as I would have received from 4-5 years of full-time study under high caliber full-time faculty.

Since graduating I've been involved in several DL dissertations (besides by own). I've also seen dissertations from folks in 3rd and 4th tier universities. There isn't a whole lot of difference. Both are worthy of being called doctoral dissertations. But DL dissertations (and subsequent research) I see aren't anywhere close to what I see from folks out of first tier schools. The level or originality and theory development just isn't there.

Thanks - Andy

------------------
Andy Borchers, DBA
NSU (1996)

 

I'm sorry, Andy, but placement outcome is a measure of a degree's utility, not its academic quality.

Where it pertains to faculty positions, I would certainly agree that most traditionally earned doctorates have greater utility than doctorates earned by distance learning. However, this is a reflection of the prejudices and preferences to be found in academia, and says naught about the academic competence of individuals who have earned their Ph.D. nontraditionally.

 

Yet, need every distance learning Ph.D., Ed.D., or DBA, aspire to mediocrity because you have chosen to do so? Does it follow that others will necessarily share your perceived inadequacies? And if they do indeed mirror your deficiencies, should they, like you, abandon themselves to those short-comings rather than overcome them?

It does seem you believe yourself second class, and that like you, others of your class (DL graduates), should know their place.

Have you ever thought of living in the UK, Andy?

 

Then it does seem to me that you have provided yourself the ideal opportunity to cast mediocrity aside, Andy, and do some original research that demonstrates the inherent inferiority of dissertations presented by DL doctoral candidates. I'm sure many dyed in the wool traditionalists will love you for it. Many here would profit too. If it is indeed the case that DL doctoral programs are measurably inferior to traditional programs in terms of outcomes, let's get that fact out there.

Here's your chance to shine, Andy.


[However, it does seem you are saying the DL students dissertations were the equal of those presented by students from 3rd and 4th tier traditional programs. If so, then the issue is not DL versus traditional, but rather variance in quality among RA doctoral programs and between RA doctoral students, regardless of study/teaching vehicle used (trad/nontrad institution and program)]

 

I don't see any evidence that Andy has "perceived inadequacies". Nor have I seen anything to indicate that Andy would "aspire to mediocrity".

Just curious Lawrie...what school awarded your RA/GAAP doctorate, and when was it awarded?

Bruce

 

Andy suggests that we would find very few people with distance doctorates on traditional university faculties. That would indeed be useful research to do. My hypothesis is that we'd find significantly more than the statistical proportion.

There were 41,140 doctorates awarded by GAAP accredited schools in the US last year. As a rough (but not wild) guess, well under 1% of these came from the 'big six' in distance doctorates: Union, Walden, Sarasota/Argosy, Capells, Touro, and Nova Southeastern.

Would we find, among faculty with doctorates awarded in the past five years, more than one percent with these degrees? I don't know, nor, I suspect, does anyone else, but it wouldn't surprise me.

A reminder how much research there remains to be done in this field.

 

Well, I'm do not know what you may be reading, Bruce, certainly not this thread, judging by your response. To help you, I quote Andy's prior statements below.


Originally posted by Andy Borchers:
"
But I have some sense of my place in the world. In particular, I have no place at the table of top schools - "

"I publish - but not in the top rated journals or conferences. Why? Because the caliber of my work isn't good enough."

Thus Andy perceives himself as mediocre, relative to his peers - that is, to quote the Collegiate Dictionary definition of the word:

"of moderate or low quality, value, ability, or performance"


Now, as you would, and often have stated, in response to others under such circumstances, "what is it about that that you don't understand?"

Give me a break. Why would that be relevant to the topic? Are you saying that because I have no RA doctorate I should have no opinion on Andy's comments? Or is it that I should express no opinion until I have an RA doctorate? Just what is your point? Is there one? Hmmm, I thought not. It appears that in your haste to deliver the put-down, you failed to heed context of the original post.

 

Not only are there relatively few DL doctorates granted in proportion to all doctorates, but the DL doctorates seem weighted towards in-service professional advancement in particular fields like business or school administration rather than in research or scholarship in the more traditional academic subjects. Nova, Sarasota, Walden, Capella and Touro are examples. Other places with DL Ph.D.s, such as Union or CIIS are self-consciously "alternative" and offer avant-garde interdisciplinary degrees with an activist tone.

There really aren't very many explicitly distance education doctorates with anything like a scholarly orientation.

 

Hi, Andy. While I don't really disagree with most of what you say, I do think that you are overstating your case.

For one thing, some doctorates may not be intended for university teaching or scholarly research. It seems to me that many of the distance ed doctorates are things of that sort.

Distance education doctoral programs don't even really exist in most fields. So you would expect to find 0% DL in physics, molecular biology, art history and so on. In those fields where distance doctorates do exist, most programs are not scholarly/research/teaching oriented. Instead they tilt more toward the in-service Ed.D.s or things like Touro's business Ph.D.

I think that there is an element of both. In most academic fields there are more applicants than openings. So early-career positions go to people with connections, that come recommended by names in the field.

Later in a career, I guess there is more weight on your accomplishments. In scholarly fields that may be an extensive publication record. But in an applied subject, it may also be an executive resume or government service or something. I think that a DL doctorate may be best suited for those latter sorts of people that need a doctorate to meet the anal degree requirements for a teaching position, but whose real accomplishments have been outside academia.

That may or may not be realistic in your case. I'm not familiar with your work. But if you are projecting that on your students, I'm troubled. It's like that Groucho Marx line: 'I wouldn't want to be a member of any club that would accept me'. And I have to object strongly if you are suggesting that mediocrity is somehow inherent to the distance education medium itself.

Again that may be realistic, but if you are suggesting that those kind of deficiencies are inherent in the medium, you are overreaching. How much time a student spends is up to the student, whether he or she is on campus or not. And there is no law that top scholars can't teach and mentor students by distance education.

What in the world is a "tier"? I see that term used repeatedly on this group, but I'm not sure how it is relevant to doctoral programs. And I am not sure why distance education is supposed to drain all the quality and originality out of students.

If you had some active researchers involved and some exciting on-going stuff happening, I don't think that it would matter much if you tapped into it from a distance or whether you visited a faculty member's campus office. The social aspect might be hurt a little, but that could be counteracted by having research teams distributed all around the world. I can imagine a classical archaeology project with students in Greece, Rome, London, Paris, New York etc, all ready and able to hit the libraries, museums and archives, then report back to the team. You could turn distance education into an advantage if you wanted to.

 

You address several issues:

First, the acceptabiliy of DL degrees. Unfortunately I agree that there is still some bias towards DL degrees (even more so at the doctoral level) but hopefully this is changing for the better.

Second, the quality of the DL degree. Again, I unfortunately agree that the majority of the programs we talk about (at all levels) are simply not equal to the full-time programs offered at traditional universities. There are some notable exceptions, those being the programs that are the full-time programs offered from traditional universities' via DL.

Should a person pursue a DL doctorate? If you can get a traditional program from a traditional school via alternative delivery, I would say yes. The program and institutional will help you mitigate the issues regarding delivery. However, if you have to deal with an "alternative program" from an "alternative school" via "alternative delivery"... buyer beware?

 

There is a great difference between earning a Phd non-traditionally and earning a non-traditional Phd.