I am just finishing up a Master's in Education with a concentration in online teaching and learning at California State University-Hayward (WONDERFUL PROGRAM!) and am looking for doctoral programs. The one that catches my eye is a private, U.S. University and is, therefore, expensive. I have been very interested in discussions relating to U.S. vs. Non-U.S. degrees. Any one out there have some hard advice on the subject? I'm all ears.
I haven't got any novel ideas on the subject but I'll share nonetheless. My first thought is, if you don't have the money for the expensive school then your question is irrelevant. If you can get the money (loans, etc.) then you have to do the whole cost/benefit calculation. If you spend say, 50K on a PhD, is there a realistic chance that the job you'll get afterwards will allow you to earn it all back within a reasonably short period of time? Then you have to do the same calculation for the foreign degree except this time you have to estimate the liklihood that your non-US PhD will be found to be sufficiently acceptable to get that job you want at the doctoral level. The calculations are difficult at points but not impossible (if you're willing to live with estimates and use the experience/opinions of others in the equations. In either case, good luck. Jack
Thanks Jack. You are right, of course. There are some caluculations which are on a very personal level in many ways. For me, I would have to do loans. If that were not an issue, I would go for the most prestigious university who would take me. Am I a snpb? Maybe, but that is what I would do. Since I will be putting myself into dept in the range of $ 40-50,000, I just want to hear a couple opinions. Honestly, I think my mind is made up. Today was the last day of classes for me at the Master's level. I celebrated my "freedom" by just shopping around town for my son's Christmas presents. Since I am such a talker and extrovert, I ended up in many conversations about graduation, future work, degrees, etc. More than once it struck me that it felt good to not have to defend where I earned my degree. For whatever it's worth, that's what I felt. I appreciate and value your input. Thank you.
You make a good point that I think a lot of people fail to take into account when they are considering schools to attend. You have to live with your choice of schools forever. I think people imagine being able to say, "I have an MBA." or "I'm Dr. So-and-so." What they fail to consider is what they will have to say when someone replies, "Oh, where did you go to school?" Um...err...well...
I have had people joke with me that I got my undergraduate degree from the back of a matchbook cover. I hate that. I won't get that same reaction with the graduate degree that I'm seeking because it is from a state university.
I'd bet that most people feel the same way. As for me, a doctoral degree in my area of interest is not going to substantially increase my earning power (that's depressing, isn't it?), and so I'd have to do it cheap (that's spelled s-o-u-t-h-a-f-r-i-c-a). I've resigned myself to the fact that I'll have to do some explaining although I really don't believe I'll have to do any defending (I think the diference is in the attitude you've got.) Good luck with all your future endeavors. Jack
Hi Mariel -- I graduated from the CSUH program a couple of years ago and taught two courses in the CSUH OTL program last summer. Do you have access to the alumni website? There is a discussion there regarding DL doctoral programs. If you'd like some personal experience info regarding a couple of US programs, send me a private message or an email. I've had some extensive experience with several US programs and opted out of all of them for various reasons. I even had trouble with one returning my loan $$ -- I was NOT a happy camper for a few months over that. Another lost my application AND enrollment fee and refused to process my app until I sent another check. I finally sent them a copy of the cancelled check and they still insisted they never got it. I dropped them like a hot potato. There were various other snafus along the way. I was most impressed with two AU programs -- the one at Deakin and the one at Charles Sturt Uni but I'm not a long-distance traveller so I won't go that route either unless I can negotiate a waiver for on-campus time. I still have a few options I'm currently looking into but I may give it up altogether for a while. I have an opportunity to create a nationwide pilot program for schools that will involve 2-3 years of research (I'm not at liberty to say what exactly that is at the moment) and that might end up being the basis for a research degree or maybe even a doctorate by publication. Time will tell. At least it allows me to research something that I've been involved in for quite a few years and finally have the opportunity to take it to another level - with or without the doctorate Bottom line -- you're gonna have to play politics in any doctoral program and you're gonna get the runaround in most. I'm curious about which uni you've chosen. If you're interested in a low-cost program with a decent rep, I hear that UNL program in administration is good. I opted not to go that route (even though I loved the price) because I refuse to take the GRE and I'm not really interested in administration. But I know someone in the program and it's pretty good so far. Drop me a line if you want to "chat" Leslie
While Leslie hasn't stated this explicitly, my impression is that the above statement is true regardless of whether it's DL or in-class. Of course this will be more or less true in any specific program but as a rule graduate education can be as political/bureaucratic as any other industry. Jack
You got that right. My former regional phd advisor informed me that it's game-playing all the way, whether DL or on-campus. I highly respect his views and advice and after much discussion back and forth, "we" finally decided that I should hang it up for a while because I have no patience for games. It was suggested that I might be better off just doing the research and writing and then submitting for a publication degree. That's still a few years out -- but I'm doing the work regardless. This way I'm just not having to pay as I go Leslie
I think there are diffierent definitions of politics and game playing too. I don't consider having to take the GRE or the MAT either one. While I don't relish the test (I take it a week from tomorrow), I do understand that it is part of the admission process and serves a purpose. Call me old fashioned, but there are certain hoops to jump in most everything we do and those needed for an advanced degree won't stand in my way if I want it bad enough. I wasn't thrilled about paying for and taking a writing test for CSUH either, especially since I taught writing for many years. But, I did it and checked it off my to do list.
Game Playing I have heard many, many anecdotal stories of game playing in a doctoral program. I can add my own to that list... I had it after six years and left to join the U.S. Army payroll. I'm back in academia, but do not regret NOT finishing the doctorate. I had my entire committee leave during the summer... that was fun. Let's see? I had a man-hater put on my committee by my chair. Also not fun. He also tried to stick a specialist in "Marxist interpretation of literature" on my committee (what the heck that had to do with adult learning is beyond my non-Ph.D. grasp). I was told by one member that I would be nothing more than a community college teacher... at that point, I asked "Which one?" The answer was that I lacked the "proper attitude" whatever the he#@ that means. The good news is I ended up with three grad degrees (M.A., Ed.S., and MBA) and a great community college faculty job paying much, much more than most university faculty slots with much much LESS bravo sierra! I won after all! By the way, community college teaching is one of the great hidden gems. So many people think university faculty status is a dream... wait 'til you get there and it won't be so much fun. I know from experience. One thing I think we do way too much of in this country is encourage so many people to do a doctorate. I wish I hadn't wasted time on that. And if you are in to titles, go buy one. I got one for free from Universal Life Church... Call me "Reverend Jim." In fact, that is the one thing I have hanging in my office, not my other legitimate degrees... more to do with who I am than anything else.
Hi Mariel, I just finished CSUH last week as well! I'm doing it from Korea and paying out of my pocket. I'm doing the EdS in Ed Technology at Mizzou Columbia. I can't afford $25,000+ in tuition. Congratulations on graduation, I wish I knew what the job market back home is for this type of education. Anyone have any news?
Another horror story... An old early teen friend had this story of grad school to tell when I last bumped into him. After working the late 80s and early 90s in high tech, he fellin love with geography. Deciding on th only Big Ten school in a major city, he was pleasantly surprised that calculus was actually useful--cartography! The next time I ran into him, about 18 to 24 months later, he'd droped out--no degree. Why? Politics. His best friend in the department, a woman, had had this boffo doctoral topic. The prof she'd proposed it to stonewalled on approving it until her qualifying coursework and exams were completed. Then the same prof published her dissertation topic as his own. Then he moved on to Wisconsin's geography department. Soured on this experience, my old friend dropped out. --Orson
Steve puts this in an interesting light, one that I have often considered over the years. People never ask, "Where did you earn your degre?" Rather, it's, "Where did you go to school" And people who have earned a degree in the traditional way, never say, "I earned my degree from . . ." Rather, it's, "I went to . . ." Okay, we're talking semantics. But one thing you will never be able to say if you go for say, an Australian or South African degree, is, "I went to . . ." Unless, of course, you actually did go there. All of my degrees were earned nontraditionally. But I can actually say, "I went to [Edison/Norwich/Union]" because I did so. (You can earn a degree from Edison without ever showing up, but I actually did show up, for things ranging from advisement sessions to exams to my Pre-Grad conference (a comprehensive culminating oral exam which, I believe, TESC no longer requires). I never had to go through the tap dance, "Well, ya see, I didn't actually go there . . ." and never had to do the "correspondence degree" riff. So while it's a minor consideration, especially since some very credible U.S. schools (credible, of course, meaning regionally accredited) have totally external programs. But for those who don't want to have to tap dance their way through semantic B.S., it is a consideration. There is one other factor: With very few exceptions, non-U.S. schools are not regionally accredited. That, in itself is not bad, since other countries use a different standard. Nonetheless, even considering that some schools here will take transfer credit only from RA schools (TESC is an example) without making you go through hoops, RA is still the ultimate credibility standard in the States. Every school has some level of administrative incompetence, bar none. But from a practical perspective, an RA degree - especially at the doctoral level, will always hold more water than a non-RA degree, even one from a credible foreign institution.
One other useful phrase (picked up from physicists) is "took ... from." e.g., "I took my M.A. from California State University, Dominguez Hills." Generally used only in referring to graduate degrees. I do think that nonresident students should feel free to respond to a "went to" without further elaboration (e.g., "Where did you go for your bachelor's?" "Regents.") because it's an understood colloquialism. Where would I "go for my bachelor's" if I completed it through the Meridian site of Mississippi State University? Mississippi State, even if I never visited the campus in Starkville. Cheers,
OK, so let's do a bit more of semantics. I expect that if I ever get a PhD it will be from South Africa because that's all I'm going to be able to afford. That's a decision I've made based on the realities of my life. I'm fully aware that such a degree will not be well received in some quarters. I'll be faced with some situations where, as Ricky said to Lucy, "...you've got some 'spaining to do." My point is this. I may have to EXPLAIN my degree but I will not have to DEFEND my degree. The difference is found in MY OWN attitude about the degree. You only have to defend when you're feeling defensive. If you're feeling defensive it's because there's a part of you that, at least, wonders if the criticism is accurate. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. If you can't explain the degree... Jack
Hmmm.... Tom: I haven't noticed the locution "he took his PhD at..." coming from physicists--but from Brits, as in "he took firsts in English...." Hence, I notice the non-customary reference to university degrees in the humanities and social scientists, too. But mostly among non-American anglophones. Of course, the second example of of 'taken,' "took firsts," refers to class of degree, whereas the first, cleary, to graduate (i.e., post-graduate) degree. I'm wondering if linguists can help us out: did the second locution follow from the first?--and does this pattern of divergently established usage explain the divergent extention? Whatever the case, it often casts a comfortable inevitability to grad accomplishment in the brief biographies one hears or reads that stands in marked contrast to typical American academic bios. --Orson
