Ph.D. or Ed.D. Program- Need Some Advice

Here is my dilemma-

My research interest involves how individuals acquire ethical values and their application in enforcement discretion by law enforcement officers. I have 15 years of law enforcement experience and a master's degree in CJ from a Tier 1/ Top 50 nationally ranked graduate school. I currently teach as an adjunct at the community college level and on-line. My goal is to transition to full time teaching upon retirement. I realize a R1 or R2 is out of reach and I have no desire to be exclusively devoted to research.

I narrowed my program choices to the following:

(1) Ph.D. in Human Development from Fielding Graduate University

(2) Ed.D. in Organization Leadership/Communication from Northeastern University

Both programs are regionally accredited and offer the ability to focus on my particular interests. My concerns are twofold: (1) Perception of the Ed.D versus the Ph.D. and (2) Perceived "value" of Northeastern versus Fielding.

I know there is a long debate between the quality of the Ed.D versus the Ph.D. IMHO, the distinction is very finite and in most cases moot. In my chosen field, Criminal Justice, there are professors at all levels holding both types of doctorates. However, perception is reality.

I realize the "quality" of either program is subjective as well. Northeastern is ranked 80 in the U.S. (News and World Report-2010) and its Law School is Tier 2. It certainly has a higher profile than Fielding. Fielding is "unranked", but has a distinguished history in the distance learning arena.

So, I can go for an Ed.D. from a nationally ranked school that may be seen as a lesser doctorate or I can attend an unranked school for the Ph.D. Your comments and insight would be greatly appreciated.

TL007

 

All things being equal, I'd take the degree from Northeastern. But they're not all equal, are they? In other words, if I was offered one degree over the other, I'd take Northeastern's. But you gotta earn 'em, which means you gotta fit the degree program into everything else going on in your life. And you gotta look at the degree programs themselves to see how they fit into your learning style, as well as your learning and professional goals.

Fielding is a terrific school with a solid reputation, by the way.

Don't sweat the Ed.D. vs. Ph.D. thing too much.

 

I am scheduled to start the EdD at Northeastern in January. I have also looked into Fielding's PhD. I could have sworn that Northeastern was quite a bit cheaper, and seemed to take less time. I know that Northeastern's EdD is set up to last three years (two classes per semester is full time). You also take one 7-day condensed class during each summer as your residency.


Perhaps I am biased since I went with Northeastern. But, if you can get passed the EdD vs. PhD thing (I too worried about that since "PhD" looks so much better than "EdD" at the top of a resume), I honestly think Northeastern is the best route.

I was also a bit turned off by the "human development" title of Union's PhD. PM me if you have any questions about NEU. Not sure how much I can answer since I haven't even started my first course yet.

 

Northeastern will be the more prestigious degree, particularly if your goal is to teach.

I would not worry about the Ed.D. versus Ph.D. While it is true that many are of the opinion that a Ph.D. is, somehow, a "lesser" degree, there is no empirical data to back up this opinion (of course, many people do not wish to be encumbered by silly things like data). Many "seasoned" Degreeinfo members know that I have written pretty extensively on this topic

If your goal is to be a full-time member of the faculty, please be aware that having a doctorate is only one peice of the puzzle. To be competitive, you must have a record of published scholarship, presentations and service in professional associations and in the community.

 

Northeastern all the way. As a Tier 1 National University you can't go wrong, regardless of the degree name.

 

Select the doctoral program with the fewest narcissists, as best you can tell... My guess: Fielding.

 

I like the Ed.D. in Organization Leadership/Communication from Northeastern University too; especially the price. However, after talking to an admissions rep I am not sure. They told me that although the concentration is in Org Leadership they would require my dissertation to focus on solving an organizational or policy problem within education or an educational institution.

Other Ed.D programs in this area leave the dissertation topic fairly broad. Since I am a government administrator, I would likely focus my research in organizational/leadership issues facing governement. So, I am not sure.

 

If I may ask you a few career guidance questions... what do you plan to do with the doctorate? (You don't have much need for it in government...) How old are you? Will your employer pay the tuition and fees?

 

Jay,

With all due respect, what does the admissions rep know about dissertations without seeing a prospectus at least? Does the admissions rep sit on dissertation committees? (My guess - probably not.)

You have an idea of what you research interest is in. Look at some faculty bios and contact the faculty directly about your interest. After all, it's going to be a faculty member, not an admissions rep, deciding on the appropriateness of your dissertation topic.

Just my 2 cents - keep doing your homework on your best option.

Shawn

 

I'm not sure how this conclusion was determined. My experience with the federal government (23 years in various capacities) is that the doctorate is a terrific distinguishing accomplishment. Combined with a few years of experience, it makes getting GS-13 positions relatively straight-forward. True, there are some jobs that require it, while most do not. But don't think for a minute that it doesn't distinguish the applicant; it does.

 

Employer will not pay tuition so I will pay out of pocket and take out a few student loans. I have a desire to learn about leadership and organizations at a deeper level and hope to use my doctorate as many others here do; teaching, consulting and overall learning.

Do I need a doctorate? Probably not but I figure it is not a bad thing. I assume a doctorate will also distinguish me above my peers hopefully open more doors for opportunities in the future? Do I realize it takes a commitment and is not easy? Sure, I do. I also realize it is a significant investment but it is an investment in myself. I am 36 years old with 17 years of government service and pretty much at the top of my career path as a deputy director of a department.

I plan to retire early (age 50) and would like a second career (possibly) in teaching and/or consulting. So my thought is get the degree now while I have energy and money.

 

In the academic world, the EdD is almost always considered inferior to the PhD.

First, many EdDs do not require a real dissertation, only a proposal or a mini-d.

Second, an EdD is awarded usually by the school of education at a university. Universallly, education schools are the dustbin of a university with the poorest student and faculty. Anyone would has taken courses for teacher credentials knows that almost all that is taught in these classes is low level and practically useless. Teaching this rubbish is what most EdDs do.

Finally, the admisssions standards for EdDs are notoriously low. I've known students admitted for the Harvard EdD that couldn't get into a third-rate PhD program.

There's only one reason the EdD exists; because it's easier than a PhD.

 

Do you have examples of the schools that only require a proposal? I never knew that.

 

Since you don't need a doctorate and you're pretty old to begin the process, I would recommend that you pursue a second master's degree (possibly thesis-based) and write a book. You need to understand that you may do all the work for the doctorate and be blocked by narcissists or non-specialists who are insufficiently trained to function at their desired position. Don't waste your time. On the other hand, if you needed a doctorate (which is for college teaching and research) and you were a little younger, then I would advise you to cautiously move forward in selecting a doctoral program.

 

Ridiculous. And we are all stupider for having had to read this... ;-)

 

Why is it ridiculous? Sometimes things are just true, with no ulterior motive. I don't know much about the Ed.D., but I certainly can attest to the drivel that comes out of faculties and schools of education.

Check out the following website. It's more oriented towards K-12 education, but the same drivel comes out of M.Ed.'s and Ed.D.'s.

http://www.illinoisloop.org/buzzwords.html

I always get a good laugh reading it.

 

Amazing - not only do you think many people don't have a good reason to pursue a doctorate (based on your former responses) but not you slap an age limit on it! I was 37 when I started the PhD program. Why on earth would anyone be too old to start?

You are asking for advice, here is mine: Don't let others limit your thinking and drive.

 

This post makes a lot of sense and it's the advice that several of my peers holding PhDs from top schools gave me as I started looking at doctoral programs.

The funny thing is that the advice I received from peers that were not on admissions committees was vastly different than the advice I received from the members of faculty of the institutions I was considering.

Here are some points I'd like to add to the discussion as I feel they will help the decision process for you on some level.

1. Before getting involved in the EdD or PhD discussion figure out what you're passionate about and curious about researching. Many people don't have anything they feel this way about. Those are not the PhD people. PhD people are driven to find answers. You'll need this drive as the PhD isn't the goal, full time employment is and tenure is a part of that like it or not.

Point: The PhD is not the goal, employment is. If you start a PhD it's not a 5 year process and you're done. It's at least a 10 year process of living and breathing your research and topic. (5 for the PhD, 1 or 2 for post doc and/or 1-5 for your first track contract). If you don't like what you're doing or are doing it as a hobby, you're going to hate the things you give up to accomplish something half way.

2. Once you find out what you're passionate about, start looking at the top level journals and become familiar with what people are researching in the field most relevant to your slant. (Sometimes research interests cross fields... Engineering and Psychology often mesh. Math and Engineering often mesh.. Business, Strategy and Leadership mesh all the time.)

Point: You need to know the names in your chosen field and know what your slant is going to be on what you're researching so you can find the right advisors, schools and program. It sucks eggs to have to change advisors or programs mid-stream and at our age (I'm older than you are by a year) it's fatal to your goal. You need to know what you're doing before you apply.

3. Once you find those names and schools, it's time to reach out informally and talk to some people. Find out if your age disqualifies you as an ideal candidate as opposed to the average student (none will say it does but it's good effort to find out if there are any other students in your age group that have successfully completed the program recently). Find out what the research goals are for your department of choice and what the advisors do to get you published before you graduate.

Point: If you're not published at least in one mid level journal before you graduate at our age, you're done in the job market. This statement is made assuming you're not targeting adjunct jobs but full time tenure track positions. One publication in a top journal prior to conferral will pretty much get you an interview in a lot of places. Ideally, your dissertation should be built such that it supports multiple opportunities to publish in multiple journals while you have your advisor able to help with responses during the peer review process. (that process can take years).

4. Reality check: The point of a PhD is not to be a practitioner. It's to be a researcher first, a developer and mentor to new PhD's second. There's a trend to turn doctoral degrees into a commodity which is all well and good, but you don't need a doctoral degree to become an adjunct professor (as you likely know) but you're aiming to be a full time academic. Full time academics, are academic. They research.

Point: Know what you're on the track to do and don't sell yourself short by doing something else or different. If you put "I want a PhD so I can teach" on your statement of intent letter, you'll be dropped into a Masters program and told there isn't enough funding to support you, but thanks anyway we'll talk to you in the fall if you matriculate."

Now granted this is a forum about distance PhD programs and distance programs in general so a lot of this when taken into context with schools that offer online doctorates is not necessarily accurate. I'm sure that if I applied to Capella or Nova I'd get in even if I told them I wanted to teach circus midgets about business leadership on weekends so long as my CV and academic credentials met muster.

However, there are differences between programs that get you employed at good research school and the online programs and those differences are at the core of the arguments that arise between academics about the quality of online programs versus brick and mortar. Neither side at its extreme is accurate/right but both have their solid points. I'd not buy into the argument that there are more PhD's coming out of online programs so by default top schools or good schools will start accepting online candidates wholesale. The ones I do know of from a Capella that got into good schools had incredibly solid research published before getting their opportunity.

If you prepare as if you're going into a T1 Research program, you'll do very well at an online program and afterwards If you prepare as if you're going into an online program, you may just get what you prepped for. If you do go for that online PhD do the work, but it'll be far more important for you to publish and go to conferences in your field on your own.

Nuff said, I do think I rambled horribly.

A

 

This is an issue in the current Ed.D program that I am in at Capella. There are several students who were admitted to the program and who do not have an educational research site to conduct research and many do not have an educational background, yet interestingly enough they all want education doctorates. In fact my current professor told the class recently, after one student complained that they do not work in an educational setting, so they had little or any knowledge that goes on in any educational setting,to remember that "you are in an educational doctorate program, what did you think the course topics would focus on?!"

You could take shape your dissertation so that it focus on government issues that relate to education, trust me there are plenty, from No Child Left Behind, to funding, not to mention recent Supreme Court Cases that influence education, I am sure you could find something to write about.

 

Jay,

If you work for the federal government you must meet minimum retirement age as well as the required years. If you are law enforcement then you could retire at age 50 otherwise your minimum age is higher.

For a research topic that fits both education and government you might take a look at how the federal sector will address both the training and continuing training/education requirement for a number of fields (notably in acquisition or program management).

Best wishes,