Getting a DEAC-Accredited Doctorate

Being an expert in the field and having a Doctorate in the subject can be beneficial in publishing
papers, or a book by Dr, XYZ.
An expert guest on actuality shows?

 

Man, that Northeastern online school is super expensive. They start at some $30k+ for any online degree.

 

There's an old Yiddish joke about the rich guy who buys a yacht and goes about wearing a Captain's hat. His mama says, "Yoysele, to YOU you're a Captain. To ME you're a captain. But to a CAPTAIN are you a captain?" The answer implied, of course, is "No."

A DEAC doctorate is unquestionably a valid degree but once again, it's a "degree requiring an explanation." Maybe it shouldn't. But it does.

 

This assumes a whole lot. Most employers don't care. We've seen people working as faculty with unaccredited degrees. Why? Because they are doing the same thing the rest of industry is doing.

I don't think having a DEAC doctorate is holding anyone back from respectability. I think it's just that the people who tend to seek out DEAC degrees are not usually interested in intense scholarly research beyond the dissertation or project. They tend to not be interested in academic positions. They're people working in an industry who want a doctorate to add to their resume but who, ultimately, could wrap up an entire career without said doctorate.

I don't think it's so much an issue of anyone else questioning it. I really don't. Though I would say it is quite a question of why the person is enrolling in the first place, in many instances.

 

For the 20 or so years I've been reading and writing on this board and its predecessor, I've seen a maniacal obsession with the degree and almost nothing on the learning. (Both process and outcomes.)

My post is about the latter. People are certainly free to take this or any other thread in any direction they see fit. But I just wanted to toss out that reminder, that there's more to the question than the utility of the degree, that the process and the learning outcomes are important.

 

Well-said, Rich!

 

Exactly.

 

Thinking about the issue, that's why I wish the law schools hadn't renamed their professional degree. Bachelor of Laws is what it really is and pretending that the J.D. is a doctorate merely makes us all look silly. My highest degree is a Masters. Unfortunately, it's a "Masters requiring explanation."

 

My father was once a tenure-track professor in the economics and public policy department in the business school at a flagship research university.

There were people doing broadly similar work in the ‘main’ economics department which was situated outside the business school, as well as in the ‘main’ political science department which was also situated outside the business school.

Relations between these departments were not entirely close, and my father attributed interdepartmental rivalry among thematically close departments at the same university as a contributing reason to why he didn’t get tenure and had to find another job. For a conspicuously long time, every tenure application put forward for a professor in his department was rejected.

 

Nope. Silly is the only word.

 

Getting NA DBA or an EdD degree is not stopping anybody in the future earning a Ph.D. from well respected RA university.
There are people who hold multiple terminal degrees.
The Applied Doctorate makes one an expert, its not "Yosale the yacht captain" who is more like ASS degree holder .
The program stands on its own merit. One may not see a difference between CCU EdD and Capellas EdD but Harvards Ed.D will be viewed as superior.
So this is inaccurate to compare the view and expertise of NA DBA vs UoP DBA both may be or MIT DBA.

 

But why do the work and expend the money twice? And wouldn't doing it twice be taken as an admission that the NA doctorate is actually inferior? I disagree with the statement that the degrees should not be compared. Each claims to carry the title "Doctor". The purpose of acquiring an NA doctorate is to became a "doctor" in the field of study. The very point I'm making is that they WILL be compared and probably SHOULD be compared. Unless, of course, one is content with a "degree with an explanation".

 

"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work." Thomas A. Edison - Self educated.

 

I seriously do not see how an online Master's, in 2020, "requires explanation", even if it's LLM. It's a Master's degree. It's online. Everyone's state flagship probably offers at least one of those. My school, essentially a Compass Point State, lists a MSN in Family Nurse Practitioner as an online degree. Compared to that, what's so unusual in online LLM Tax?

 

I think the rest of the world has gotten over the wearing of medieval garb/regalia and burning the gifted at the stake for heresy except perhaps...DI.

 

The question that always pops up in my mind is, "what are we comparing?" I think that brings it back to the point Rich made about the learning aspect and how it's pretty much never brought into the equation. The comparisons are almost always about the name brand/prestige of schools rather than the quality and depth of learning. RFValve talked about how he earned one degree from a school with a great reputation and a brand name, but he received better quality learning from a virtually unknown (I believe online) school. I have had similar experiences.

It's just a matter of the comparisons focusing on things that mostly have no educational value, and with that being the case, well, that speaks to a serious problem that almost no one seems to be noticing.

 

I think some of the idea that any of it requires explanation is overblown. The reality is:

- Much of the public has little idea about differences between doctorates and calls everything a "PhD".
- If they do they often either see the PhD as higher (even in relation to EdDs) or think only MDs should be called "Dr." and believe them to be higher.
- Much of the public has little idea about the alleged differences between accreditation and would probably raise their eyes more at someone with a PhD from Capella, Trident, or U of Phoenix than a doctorate from a relatively obscure but nicely named DEAC accredited school.
- I have lost track of the number of JDs I have met (and members of the public) who see their JDs as PhD equivalents.
- Beyond PhD, EdD or MD don't know what 3/4 of the alphabet soup after peoples names is.
- Significant numbers of people have no idea what a DO is and if they do, they occassionally have no idea it parallels MD training. I recall someone being warned by a friend to go see a "real doctor".

 

What I find interesting about Lynn is that she got a MSW from...UCLA. The University of California-Los Angeles. The she goes and gets a PhD at Sedona? What in the world?