EdS vs PhD/EdD?

I'm about 1/2 way thru a MA in Ed Technology and looking at possibilities for further education along these lines next year or later. I came across the U of Missouri-Columbia which offers a EdS as a Specialist in Educational Technology. It is a 30 hour program after the Masters Level.

Is this more of a post-grad diploma of some kind or a PhD-lite program? I'm interested and at this phase, basically shopping for information. I've also read that the EdD is sort of looked down on by Ed PhD's. Is this the truth? I don't care if some crusty PhD looks down his nose at me, I'm interested in ED Technology and want to do this for a career. Thanks.

 

There are some who consider career-oriented doctoral degrees (or any non-PhD, for that matter) inferior to the Phd. However, I believe the non-PhD is becoming much more widely accepted, especially the EdD. In fact, there are programs (I believe Nova Southeastern offers one) where either distinction may be granted; the curricula are identical. But in most cases, the EdD represents a more practical approach with a smaller research component (or, at least, one that is focused more on practice than empirical research).

I'm sure you'll do just fine with an EdD.

Rich Douglas, who has neither.

 

The Ed.S. is pretty much the same as the Certficate of Advanced Graduate Study (C.A.G.S.), both require 30-36 semester hours above the Master's degree. If you're definitely going on to the Ed.D. anyway, there isn't much sense in doing the Ed.S., IMO.

Bruce

 

I believe an Ed.S. is an advance specialist degree higher than an initial masters in education. At some institutions, coursework done for the EdS may be applied to the course requirements in the Ed.D. and/or Ph.D. in Education--thereby shortening their length if one desires to pursue such. This is about all I know about the Ed.S.--others may provide more useful information.

The Ed.D. is more professionally and its dissertation more project based oriented while the Ph.D. is more academically and its dissertation more research/theoretically oriented. There are lots of overlap though--so the previous descriptions are just generalities.

From a purely academic view, I suppose the Ph.D. would be more impressive than the Ed.D. On a professional level, it is probably more important to obtain the degree most useful to you.

I don't look down at those with professional verses purely research based doctorates--they're just different. I am perplexed though why people I have met with Ed.D.'s and some other professional doctorates (i.e., D.Min., DBA, etc.) usually skate around their degrees by saying the generic "I have a doctorate"--whereas people with Ph.D.'s, M.D.'s, J.D.'s and equivalent will usually give you the specific title of their degree--i.e., "I have a Ph.D. in Education. I have a medical/law degree...." I think that some of these people must want to give the impression that they have a Ph.D.--perhaps that's why they skate around the issue of specifying their degree and use the generic, "I have a doctorate." The skating around part would be the only thing that I would look down at--because I would perceive it as insulting my intelligence. I think to myself, "Would it be so difficult to say you have a Doctor of Education (or Ed.D.) or a Doctor of Ministry (or D.Min.), rather than saying the generic 'I have a doctorate'--but in what I think to myself?"

EsqPhD

 

.

 

The Ed.S. Degree is a post graduate degree that is closer to a Master's in scope than an Ed.D./Ph.D. Most Ed.S. programs are designed for the K-12 educators rather than the University or College level. I seriously doubt whether having an Ed.S. would give anyone an advantage over a Master's when seeking employment. The only difference that I personally know of is for positions as school psychologist. In my district, all the school psychologists have either Ed.S. or Doctorate degrees.

As noted on a previous post, Ed.S. don't transfer well into doctorate programs. Schools that do allow transfer credits into doctorate programs do not usually transfer any Ed.S. credits beyond their normal 9-12 sh transfer policy. This is one reason why I had my fingers crossed for MIGS.

The only exception to the above that I know of is Liberty University who will grant up to 30Sh for an Ed.S degree. However, it is for their Ed.D. in Leadership and I imagine that the a technology based Ed.S. wouldn't apply but I could be wrong.

The education department at the University of Sarasota has an option available where a student could earn an Ed.S. on their way to pursuing a doctorate. That would be a unique way of doing it. It is a shame that more schools don't incorporate that idea. Also, Nova is offering to accept 18 credits of an Ed.S. degree for their Ed.D. in Organizational Development. The caveat here is that the Ed.S. had to be earned from Nova.

Why did I go for an Ed.S.? Well, when I started the Ed.S. the pay scale in my district was the same for a doctorate or a specialist. Since I could complete the specialist degree in about half the time and at half the expense, it didn't make sense to go for the doctorate. The school board has since changed that but the difference in pay doesn't justify this fifty year old spending 20+ grand on a terminal degree.

Ted

 

Ed.S. Degree

I hold an Ed.S. in instructional technology. It was a rigorous online program from Valdosta State University. Now, I am very curious about Liberty University as the graduate handbook talks about how they will incorporate the Ed.S. as part of an Ed.D. So, I have asked them for clarification. It could substantially REDUCE the hours/time I'd put in a doctorate.

 

Hi Esqphd: You, sir, are a troubler of Israel! I did exactly what you said the other day. This woman in a "Christian" bookstore asked me what I was working on. Normally I just stare at people or pretend not to speak English, but I was tired and not really paying attention. I told her that I hoped to get a DMin from such-and-such a school. She began ranting about Satanism and said I shouldn't joke about such things and that I was a blasphemer. Then she tried to pray with me. So I fled.

None of this would have happened if I had just mumbled something about "a doctorate" or, in the local dialect, "a doctorial degree".

 

Common & Uncommon Acronyms

Almost everyone knows what a PhD is, but not quite everyone. When I told my neighbor that I was going to pursue a PhD, he replied, ”What’s a PhD?” Even fewer people know what a JD is and even fewer know what an EdD is.

To put a faster spin on it, few people know that a PhD is an acronym for doctor of philosophy. Conversely, if you tell someone that you are a doctor of philosophy, then they will look at you like a deer in headlights.

Sometimes it's just easier to say that you have a doctorate. Everybody knows what a doctorate is.

 

Sometimes when somone asks about my Ph.D. they ask what area of philosophy did I study. I would expect this to be common for most Ph.D. recipients or students studying for the Ph.D.

John

 

I know some K-12 people are going for the EdD, mistakenly thinking they can avoid the terrifying dissertation, or the stigma of being ABD. There are some obscure administrative type positions that ask for an EdS, but it makes more sense to go all the way for the EdD or PhD. Its true that some people think an EdS is inferior to a PhD, but then some people are insecure jerks, too. Most people are just content to know you are highly educated.

 

I am aware of the Ed.S. being used in two areas commonly. Many states still allow this credential to qualify in certain areas of public school administration, particularly, the superitendent certificate. It is also used for the school psychologist credential or the psychometrist credential. It appears to me more commonly offered in the midwest and offered more by state colleges that are restricted from offering docs.

This thread really has two issues, however. Should you pursue the Ed. S. and is there some difference in the Ed.D. credibility versus Ph.D. credibility. If the EdS can advance your career, it might be wrth pursuing.

For reference review how many college presidents in this country have Ed.D. degrees. For review,Teachers College at Columbia still offer's an Ed.D (as wel as many oer major universities). Many universities have identical requirements for both. I personally chose an Ed.D. because of its pracitioner focus,however, I have not yet encountered a situation where my credential was diminished because it was not a Ph.D. I think you choose the degree based on your needs, how the school might meet those needs, and when possible, possible professors in a program who might help you in your interests. FYI, I hold a medical school clinical affiliate faculty appoinment with an Ed.D. And yes...I always tell people have an Ed Doc.

 

Bruins grad:

I think that you meant to say "EdD" instead of EdS". The EdS is a lower degree than the Ph.D. or Ed.D. The Ed.S. appears to be more commonly offered in the east than in the west. It is a way for someone to get a "higher" (albeit less known) degree than the masters, without having to tackle a doctoral dissertation.

I possess most of the research done during the past few decades on the Ed.D. vs. the Ph.D. in education. There is no significant difference between the two degrees. Most programs offer one or the other, although a small amount of colleges of education offer a Ph.D. "research" track and an Ed.D. "applied" track. These, however, are the exceptions, rather than the rule and the degree requirements in these programs are far more alike than they are different.

Cheers,

Tony Piña
Faculty, CSU San Bernardino

 

No, I meant EdS. If you browse the classified section of such publications as the UTLA newspaper, you'll see certain posts asking for experience and/or an EdS. These positions seem to be the type funded by grants or federal programs-mostly coordinator-type positions. I can't imagine anyone going for it without following through to their EdD or PhD, but I guess there's a market for everything.





From Anthony: I think that you meant to say "EdD" instead of EdS". The EdS is a lower degree than the Ph.D. or Ed.D. The Ed.S. appears to be more commonly offered in the east than in the west. It is a way for someone to get a "higher" (albeit less known) degree than the masters, without having to tackle a doctoral dissertation.

 

A few of my colleagues have an Ed.S. their last degree. Nearly all of these had been enrolled as doctoral students, but never finished the degree (an Ed.S. in place of a.b.d.) Certainly, this is not the case for all who receive the Ed.S.

At La Sierra University, The Ed.S. program requires 45 units beyond the masters and the Ed.D. program is 42 more units beyond the Ed.S. (or 87 units beyond a masters). The Ed.D., of course, requires a dissertation, whereas the Ed.S. does not.

I was admitted into my Ed.D. program as an "Ed.S." equivalent (due to previously earned post-masters units at another University). Now that I have completed my Ed.D. coursework and am working on my dissertation, I do have the option to stop work on my dissertation and "take the Ed.S. and run".(although I won't--I'm too close now!)

Tony Pina
Faculty, CSU San Berardino
Ed.D. Candidate, La Sierra University

 

I wouldn't worry about getting an Ed.D. instead of a Ph.D. in Educational Technology. I have been in the Ed Tech field for over 15 years and know most of the "big names" in our field. Some of the authors of notable Ed Tech textbooks include David Jonassen, Allison Rossett, Walter Wager, Gary Morrison and James Russell--all of whom have Ed.D.s.

Where are you getting your masters? Will you be attending the AECT Conferrence in Anaheim next month?

Tony Pina
CSU San Bernardino
&
La Sierra University

 

Frankly, all the attention given to what is better or more highly regarded is silly! Of course PhD's want to view their degree as more "respected." Also, the idea that the EdD. is necessarily more practically oriented depends upon the program and school.
The Ed.S is just what its initials represent - the "S" stands for specialist, so it is neither a Doctorate nor a "PhD light." It is an educational specialist credential in school psychology. As for PhD's having a better rep, really, they are what other PhD's require in academic settings to protect their corner on the ivory-towered "research" market. Many EdD's, like the one offered in Educational Psychology at La Sierra University require very demanding stats and research methods courses with a quantitative emphasis and a 12 qtr unit dissertation following these courses. Their higher ed EdD program has slightly less demanding and offers the opportunity to do the dissertation from a qualitative, more practically oriented approach.
USC's higher ed EdD, on the other hand, offers a research component consisting of a group cohort project - go figure! I got accepted to both and I am now at La Sierra doing the EdD in Ed Psychology because it will qualify me to sit for the California Board of Psychology exam if I choose to do that.
The idea that people "skate around" their doctoral degrees by saying "I have a doctorate" is also silly. I have never heard anyone say I have Doctor of Philosophy in..," or "I have a JD in..." or an "MD in..." LOL! In fact, most JD's simply say they have a law degree (which is more honest than pretending otherwise). My physician has never said to me, "I have a Doctor of Medicine." And it is hilarious that PhD's in medicine/medical sciences actually regard their degree as more esteemed than an MD! Each degree bears its mark and the importance it brings to its field. I would much rather an MD than a PhD in medicine diagnose and treat me.
Doctoral degrees of varied types exist because PhD's cannot very often do the practical work required of practicing doctors in their respective fields, e.g. medicine, psychology, ministry, therapy (of many kinds), school/educational psychology - because they are busy crunching stats in their fulltime research roles. Doctoral degrees of a practical nature represent the highest attainable levels of practitioner expertise in their respective fields. They very often make the theoretical practical and accessible to laypeople who are not skilled in the manufacture, creation, testing, and regurgitation of conceptual theory that, quite frankly, more often than not, winds up dying on shelves in "peer-reviewed" journals generated by like-minded associates in "PhD" research that occasionally proves to be practically useful.
Degree levels and initials are political! No doubt about it. In fact, the original doctorate degree was a degree in theology and the "university" was birthed out of the Church and theological study.
Frankly, I think that breaking the myth of the PhD as the gold standard in education would be the best thing we could do for the education system and society. Certainly, medicine, physical, and life sciences deserve the best in research and testing, and I am glad there are folks that do that. But, especially, when humanities, theology and social science PhD's attempt to equate their "PhD's" and themselves with actual hard science, scientific endeavors, it cracks me up! The only thing they have to look down their noses at is the ground they need to plant their feet on! I don't, after all, think they will ever find much regard for mental masturbation vs. the actual courage it takes to work in applied fields without the safety net of their academic "Oops! Let’s look at that research again!"
So, do what you love. Do your best. Get the highest level of education that will enable you to make you best practical application, if that's what you want and what your geared toward, and be glad that what you do is not something done alone in room where only the occasional acts of mental exercise result in actual recognition. Remember, the greatest discoveries were not, after all, made by PhD’s!

 

"Bring out your dead!"

 

I don't DO them. I ASSOCIATE WITH them. D-uh.

(Says the holder of an A.A.)