CSU's Doctorate Tuition Dropped...

I had to make this decision a year ago, NA DBA or RA DBA. I’m an NA shill. I elected for an RA DBA.

 

Understood. If the RA DBA meets your budget and desired modality, then that sounds like the right decision. From memory, you're in the NoCentral U DBA program and that will qualify you for doctoral level pay at an RA school. What if the NA DBA is just as difficult to obtain as your RA DBA, yet doesn't enable one to be paid at the higher level? You made the best choice, I think. I just don't "get" the economic utility of the NA doctorates.

Dave

 

The only way an NA DBA could have higher utility is if it was easier to complete, but there is no way to know that with a brand new program (CSU), and my fear was that being a brand new program they would be extra rigorous, not extra easy.

The NCU program is excellent so far; although I’m doing comps now so to date I’ve just been taking regular graduate level classes with a couple research classes. I’ve attended a few conference calls on the dissertation process, which were excellent; but make it sound very rigorous.

 

Have you thought about a dissertation topic? It's never too early to start vetting some solid ideas.

Dave

 

What are "upcoming DETC doctorates"? I don't know what that phrase means.

I've heard talk about "professional doctorates", but I'm not sure what that means either. (Are there amateur doctorates?) More seriously, whatever these degrees turn out to be, their uses will probably be specific to their profession. In other words, a D.Min's utility will probably depend on one's denomination. Health related degrees will depend on state licensing laws. (That's usually a function of specialized accreditations.) I expect that DETC Ed.D.s might be quite valuable for aspiring K-12 administrators.

If Ph.D.s (and what else?) are still being excluded from DETC's scope, then I'd guess that these new DETC doctorates aren't primarily intended for scientists, research scholars or for university teaching. Presumably they are more practitioner-oriented.

If a university wants to hire an experienced practitioner to teach an applied subject, then they would be putting most of their emphasis on the experience. I assume that a DETC doctorate would probably count in the stats if a school is just trying to boost the percentage of its faculty with terminal degrees.

In other words, if a university really wants to hire somebody because of their experience and accomplishments, then I doubt if a DETC doctorate would sour the deal. But if they don't want to hire the applicant, then an RA doctorate from some university that the employer has never heard of probably won't change their minds.

 

I firmly believe the doctorate has value in many non-academic settings. I also believe doctorates issued by DETC-accredited schools will share in that value. Because....

Let's look at the unaccredited/mill market. (Unaccredited schools and mills are different, but their degrees function in the same way.) We see many people purchasing/pursuing such degrees, very often at the doctoral level. Why? Is it all for personal/vanity purposes? I can't believe that. There's too many of them. I have to believe--and it's a tough market to survey--that many of them are using their degrees to further their professional interests. (When I did a survey of graduates of six distance schools--four unaccredited--in the early 1990's, the graduates largely pursued their degrees for professional reasons. But they were master's graduates, and it was a long time ago...)

 

My ambigious phrasing of the current situation in which two DETC schools have new programs but no graduates.

Dave

 

I doubt the DETC DBA will ever be found to be illegal for use in certain states like some unaccredited degrees are. Still, the cost per credit seems to be a little in the high side.

Just my opinion

 

Oh yes, I’m going to put NCU on the map when it comes to academic applied contribution to the field. I’m not boiling the ocean or anything, but have a very unique topic that should become the preeminent referenced source in the field for the next ten years.

I have also lined up an all star external reviewer and am talking to two publishers to turn the dissertation into a book after the degree is earned.

 

This is an interesting perspective, and quite right I think as a way to validate the legitimate niche for NA Doctorates. BUT, the associated costs invalidate the product comparison, since NA and RA Doctorates cost the same but they are not exchangeable goods. Utility for NA Doctorates needs to come either from reduced costs or increased accessibility (meaning all our NA heads will pop off if they become the ‘easier’ way to a DBA (note the rhyme)).

This makes them a continued quandary for me (even though I am rooting for them for sure).

 

Frankly, I can't decide whether you're completely right about this... There is an issue of expected economic utility versus actual economic utility.

While I want to believe that all doctorates have economic utility, there seems to be a continuum of economic utility. The seeker / holder of the degree perceives expected utility of the degree along this continuum.

For example, the person who buys a diploma off the Web must think the economic utility of the degree exceeds the purchase price but the diploma has no value separated from their other qualifications. Perhaps such a "qualification" has only novelty value. (In fact, the diploma representing a fake qualification may negate some of economic utility of the holder's other qualifications.) Still, on the other end of the spectrum, the person who spends several years and tens of thousands of dollars earning an RA doctorate perceives it has economic utility as well.

In sum, the RA doctorate has clear economic utility separate and apart from the graduate's other qualifications; however, the economic utility of other levels of education that could approach (or exceed) the RA doctorate do not so easily cleave from other qualifications. For example, there are unaccredited or state approved doctorates (if legitimate) that do/did require substantial work beyond the masters level, but these have little economic utility beyond the graduate's other qualifications.

Now, to the point, which was long in coming... Yes, one could expect that NA schools will scoop up DETC doctoral graduates to help with their accreditation, but this is not known. Yes, there was an argument put forth by John Bear that CA community colleges would / could / should make no distinction between a NA and RA masters qualification. Yes, the holder of the DETC doctorate can make the claim that their degree is "accredited", but this is not accepted by the RA educational system. Moreover, The DETC doctorate seems to be in this no man's (person's) land between the legitimate unaccredited / state-approved doctorates and the RA doctorate: The DETC doctorate has little or no actual economic utility at this point when considered separately from the graduate's other qualifications.

Therefore, let a thousand flowers bloom, but are we really going to recommend that people pursue the DETC doctorate over the RA equivalent just on tuition and fee differences, assuming they can gain entry into both educational systems?

Dave

 

I agree. But....

....this could be said for ALL degrees from DETC-accredited schools. I've yet to hear the generalizable advantage(s) of pursuing such degrees that negates the demonstrated limitations.

 

The comparision to unaccredited schools was to make a point: that most employers don't know what they're looking at. That's why I feel a doctorate from a DETC-accredited school will suffice in many situations. It will suffice in many more because DETC is a recognized accreditor--let's not leave that out.

 

But it's not just about economic utility. The purchaser of a milled or less-than-wonderful degree also skips out on having to do the work.

I really don't agree, and the proof is there to see. If these schools (and their degrees) didn't have significant value, they wouldn't have customers. Now, the reason WHY they have value is open to much argument--and was a central theme of my dissertation.

I agree regarding academe, but totally disagree regarding non-academic employment, where such degrees will most certainly suffice in many situations. (But it is difficult, in many cases, to predict where.)

I wouldn't, without seeing a real advantage that overcomes the inherent disadvantages. Cost? Nope, try NCU or a foreign school. Residency? Nope, ditto (plus Touro). Ease of admission? Doubtful that there's a difference. Content? If there's a unique doctoral program at a DETC-accredited school, perhaps. But that is a narrow recommendation, not one generalizable to the population. Time-in-program? No. Learning methodology? No way.

So, what is there? If not cost, residency, admissions, time, etc., why do it?

 

I think you've hit on one very legitimate reason: content. It is possible that the DETC schools could develop some very unique content or research expertise in a discipline that would allow their doctoral graduates to become employed in the RA system. It is reasonable to assume that the economic value of the DETC doctorate outside of teaching will most likely vary from discipline to discipline. The economic value that ultimately drives the reason to choose the DETC doctorate seems so hard to quantify.

I'm certainly open to alternative approaches and reasons for doctoral training, but these RA pure DL doctoral initiatives seem to be sucking the oxygen out of the room; the issue of modality has been taken off the table, so if a person really wants to work hard for a meaningful doctoral qualification with understandable economic value, it is available to them.

Still, I want to believe in DETC doctorates... I can't decide on a general rule other than that everybody should look at all the options reasonably open to them.

Dave

 

I think the difference for me when I selected an NA school for my MBA was that it was the least expensive I could find (at the time) with the flexible course schedule. The flexible schedule made it easy for me, I’ve taken enough courses to know that the rigor was about the same, but the fact that I could work at my own schedule over a date range and manage the work was the key. Also, I didn’t get a Masters with any care at all about teaching. Since then I’ve found NCU which has the same open way of managing course work (but is not price competitive at all compared to some NA schools at the Masters level).

With the DBA I’m working on (NCU), given the amount of work, it would be silly to close the door that RA opens. Also, let’s not kid ourselves, the amount of work for a Masters and the amount of work for a Doctorate are night and day, so you have to try and leverage the work for all possible futures.

I think the big difference is that while the DBA is a professional credential, it still needs to have an academic foundation in legitimacy. An MBA or other Masters can yield all complete utility solely as a professional credential, making the level of accreditation (NA or RA) moot, IMHO.

 

I go back to price; it is the only viable competitive advantage I can figure out. If DETC Doctorates were say half the price of the next best option, I could say I totally get it.

Or I supposed if the DETC made some deal with individual RA schools or RA accreditors to specifically accept DETC Doctorates as comparable academic credentials.

I see the Doctorate degree as a completely different animal than Masters and undergraduate degrees.

 

But they're not.

 

I have absolutely no doubts about that Dave. I am glad to call you a friend, and a genius to boot. I have no idea how you are doing all the coursework you are doing, while doing a DBA. Shit! I like your sig line, and I agree with the "all around nice guy" bullet as well.

Take care bro,

Abner

 

I agree 100%. Good points.