D.Sc. degree

How common is a D.Sc. degree as a first doctorate? Is it commonly accepted as a qualification for teaching at the university level? Is it "unusual?"

The qualifications for the degree seem to vary greatly around the world from being a pre-Ph.D. degree requiring original work, a sort of post-Ph.D. super degree, or an honorary degree signifying a large body of academic work but requiring no new work other than a summary of previous work.

Do anyone have any experience or other guidance on this? Thanks.

Bill Highsmith, D.Pr. (thirsty, needing a Dr. Pepper)

 

I *think* but am not certain that a D.Sc. is often (and possibly usually) given as an honorary degree. I can think of several people who have D.Sc degrees, all of which are honorary, and I can't offhand think of someone with an earned D.Sc.

But others with more knowledge of such things might know better.

 

The other example that I've seen in my web searches is that the degree is another flavor of doctoral degree, requiring a dissertation, and seeming similar in status to a D.Th. [Grammatical correction on first post: "Does anyone...."]

 

The D.Sc. or Sc.D. in America, when not honorary, is equivalent to the Ph.D. in the same field. A minority of the schools in the U.S. like MIT offers their science and engineering doctoral students the option of the Sc.D. or Ph.D. upon graduation. Though most opt for the more recognizable Ph.D., some choose the Sc.D. It should not matter how they are titled here in the U.S.

Other countries like England and Russia may regard their Sc.D.'s as a higher doctorate but for all practical purposes, U.S. scientists, scholars, and practitioners with U.S. doctoral degrees are equivalent (and sometimes more coveted--this of course depends on the school) to any other country's doctorate--regardless of terminology.

EsqPhD

 

The only person that I know who has a D.Sc. degree first earned a PhD in Psychology. The D.Sc. was in Cognitive Science or something closely related to his original doctorate in Clinical Psych.
Jack

 

When I was working on Get Your IT Degree and Get Ahead, I ran across some schools that offer the option of an earned Sc.D. (MIT comes to mind). The description on the program on page 71 reads:

Doctor of Science (Sc.D.; also D.Sc. or D.S.)
Some students consider the Ph.D. to be a little too broad, theory-oriented, and academic. The Sc.D. aims to remedy this by focusing slightly more on applied aspects of the field of study. Some Sc.D. programs may permit students to undertake a project rather than a dissertation.

Seems like every time I run across something I wrote more than six months ago, I'm a little embarrassed by its unparalleled literary magnitude. At any rate, the description does seem to fit my general impression of the doctorate.

One particularly interesting case of an earned Doctor of Science: Spertus College, which offers a low-residency version of same in Jewish studies (as an alternative to the Doctor of Jewish Studies). I don't know of any other DL-based Sc.D. programs off the top of my head.


Peace,

------------------
Tom Head
www.tomhead.net

 

Description of the Sc.D. in general, that is -- not MIT's in particular (which is actually more-or-less identical to the Ph.D. in the same field; both require a dissertation, though the course distribution requirements do differ a tad).


Peace,

------------------
Tom Head
www.tomhead.net

 

The University of Massachusetts-Lowell awards the Sc.D. in some highly technical fields like polymer science and plastics engineering. It is most definitely an earned degree, and valid for teaching in the same field.

Bruce

 

Thanks to all for the insights. In a situation that I'm considering, the D.Sc. designation was applied by the university to my interdisciplinary proposal. In one discipline, educational technology/DL, I (imagine myself to) have sufficient background to persue doctoral-level research; in the other, theology curricula + accreditation, I am scurrying to fill in gapping holes. It is project-oriented, so it fits Tom's profile. There would be faculty advisors from the computer science department and the theology department.

This interdisciplinary program would be a first for the theology department and perhaps for the university, so the journey would be interesting.

So...in this somewhat sketchy scenario, do you think that the D.Sc. is appropriate? BTW, it is a non-US university.

 

As Da Bear might say, I have a constitutional requirement to misspell misspell "pursue."

 

Dear EsqPhD,

Greetings!

I think that this depends on the subject. As I have said before, it is very hard to find a PhD program in Economic History here in the United States, and in the very few instances that it is possible to study this, you get a PhD in Economics with a concentration in Economic History but not a PhD in Economic History per se.

Best wishes,


Karlos Albert Lacaye
[email protected]

 

Nova initially awarded the D.A. (Doctor of Arts) and later switched over the the D.Sc. in their computer school. This was later changed to the Ph.D. in 1994. I started out in the D.Sc. program at Nova. In 1994, for those of us graduating, were given an option to select the Ph.D. or the D.Sc.

One doesn't see the D.A. degree offered by distance -- at least as far as I can tell. The Nova program seems to have been an exception. I have seen this award offered in music, English, chemistry, and biology (undoubtedly other fields too) and is geared towards teachers who want to teach at post-secondary institutions -- typically 2 and 4 year schools.

John

 

Greetings. I know that the University of Chicago, U.C. Berkeley, and UCLA (among several others) have good economics program at the Ph.D. level.

Please do differentiate what is the difference between a Ph.D. in Economic History and a Ph.D. in Economics with a concentration in Economic History? It would seem at first glance that since the Ph.D. is a research degree, the dissertation research and writing shouldn't matter as long as it focussed on an aspect of Economic History.

EsqPhD

 

It depends on the field. In some science disciplines US-awarded D.Sc. degrees are invariably honorary, but in other disciplines the D.Sc. appears to be a common alternative to the Ph.D. as a first doctorate. Several of the best public health schools in the country offer the D.Sc. (or Sc.D.) in various fields of public health. These schools include Harvard, Johns Hopkins, and Tulane. As far as I can tell, the degree requirements are the same or almost the same as for a Ph.D.

I do not know why some disciplines commonly use the D.Sc. alternative and others do not. Can anyone shed some light on this?

I wouldn't avoid a program just because it offers the D.Sc. instead of the Ph.D. If you list your dissertation title along with your D.Sc. degree, it should be clear enough to anyone that your degree was earned.

Alex

 

IMO, you made a wise choice in selecting the Ph.D., John. I would have chosen the same. Even if the two degrees were identical in requirements/content, the Ph.D. will no doubt have broader recognition/utility. The Ph.D, at least in the US, appears to have a greater level of acceptance. One reason I chose Potchefstroom over Unisa is that Unisa offered the Th.D., while PU offered both. And of the two, I wanted the Ph.D.

Russell

 

I agree. At graduation I remember all but two students chose the Sc.D. instead of the Ph.D. Persons who had previously graduated with the Sc.D. also were given the opportunity to have their degrees retrofitted to the Ph.D.

John

 

I know two faculty at a RA/ATS seminary who had earned Ed.D.'s at another RA/ATS school. About three years after they graduated their alma mater did the same thing. The Ed.D. program was integrated into a Ph.D. program, and all previous graduates were given the option of being retrofitted with the Ph.D., which these two gladly did.

Russell

 

Hello, EsqPhD!

I appreciate your response.

Well, one of the differences with a PhD in Economics (with a concentration in Economic History or any other concentration like International Economics, Econometrics, etc.) and a PhD in Economic History is that with the former, a student needs to have some background or some classes in economics. Another difference, at least in the instances when economic history is in the Department of History and probably in other cases as well, is that a student can undertake a research degree in economic history with a general Master's degree in History. Still another difference is that the respective physical diplomas will read "PhD in Economics" and "PhD in Economic History".

EsqPhD, let me tell you that I know that some people don't care about these "minor differences", as they call them. Still there are some other people that don't even care when the word "external" appears on physical diplomas like those of the University of London. By contrast, there are some people that do care about this. For example, and Dr. John Bear can document this, there was a case of a student who wanted a Master of Arts in Architecture, and he was conferred a Master of Architecture instead. In short, I do care about these minor differences, and that is why I always ask any prospective institution before enrolling.

My best regards,


Karlos Alberto Lacaye
[email protected]

 

Yes, and here and at Nova they did not have to pay $750.00 and write a 15 page paper.

John

 

Thanks for the clarification. From what you have described, the differences aren't minor at all. The Ph.D. in Economics with a concentration in Economic History is an Economics degree, while the Ph.D. in Economic History is actually a History degree with a concentration in the history of Economics.

EsqPhD