DETC Doctorate

The Ph.D. is the entree into the academy. Until the academy considers DETC to be a member, degrees issued by its accredited schools will continue to be relegated to second class status.

The key isn't to find niches where such a second-class degree will be acceptable. The key is to elevate the DETC to acceptance at a level comparable with the RA's. And that will come only when DETC establishes its mark on distance learning not just as an accreditor, but as a recognized leader in that delivery method. The DETC has to get so good the RA's turn to DETC for its expertise. The climate is ripe for this: many RA schools have failed or had middling successes with DL. But if the RA's get it right, if they deliver DL effectively and profitably, the DETC and its accreditation will become irrelevant and remain second class--or worse. Superior DETC-accredited schools will move to RA--like APUS is doing. New, superior schools will bypass the DETC and go directly to RA--like Jones International. Inferior schools will be the only ones to stay--and the only ones to enter.

This could be a defining time for DETC. Or it could be the beginning of the end--a slow slide to irrelevance. These issues need to be addressed before they launch into an area that most defines what it is to be a university: the creation of doctors.

 

Awesome Subject

All,

When I started this string I was so excited by the prospect that DETC schools will possibly start a PH.D programs. After reading what folks have been conversing about it excites me even more. I hope there is a decision before I finish my master’s degree next May. I don’t necessarily want a Doctorate for teaching but to move further up in the government workforce or private sector. I’m also in Japan and need a school that does not require a great deal of residency.

S/

 

If the RA accreditors will get off the lack of an institution not having classes on site I believe more DETC schools would pursue RA status. Therefore to maintain a competitive edge I believe the DETC schools will be very price competitive and that will maintain their niche. As for credibility, I find Rich's comment interesting in light of the fact that I never had a professor that did not have RA degrees (including PhDs) while pursuing a DETC degree. I always believed that the professor would ensure I recieved the best education he/she could deliver and test me in the same manner as an on ground student at any school, regardless of accreditation. I personally believe the issue is that DETC does not confine itself to a particular region and that the regional accreditors don't like the competition.

"Inferior schools will be the only ones to stay--and the only ones to enter." I would agree with this comment if the regional accreditors will accredit a virtual only school. SACS will not. To truly test the inferiority of the school what would be the measure? Meeting accreditation standards? Could you elaborate on what determines an inferior school?

In my opinion DETC needs to do a better job of meeting with the regional accreditors, discussing the differences of acceptance, and set about resolving these differences.

 

I pretty much agree.

An innovation is going to be most readily accepted if it offers something that isn't available elsewhere. But frankly, I don't understand what unmet need DETC Ph.D. programs would be satisfying.

That could result in DETC being seen as a producer of second-best degrees. And that perception might very well be true.

Perhaps DETC has its cart before its horse here. Instead of rushing into doctoral programs as if it's simply their right as an accreditor, perhaps some attention should be directed at promoting original scholarship and research activity at DETC schools.

That's probably going to be what ultimately speaks to RFValve's point. DETC Ph.D.s won't be hired for competitive positions unless they are seen as the best man/woman for the job. If the position is one that requires scholarship, which is implied if the employer is seeking a Ph.D., then the successful candidate probably needs to have a record of scholarship in whatever specialties the employer is seeking.

Many posts here on Degreeinfo seem to treat doctoral degrees as commodities, with the only significant variable being their accreditation. Maybe there are applications out there where that's true, such as qualifying one for educational incentive pay. (But wouldn't that be a waste of money if it's simply paying for unneeded diplomas?)

But if DETC doctorates turn out to be nothing more than commodities, then the RA world will probably be justified in considering them inferior. But becoming something more than inferior commodities isn't really a matter of accreditation at all. It's a matter of playing the research-university game. It's publish or perish.

 

Those normally in academe, normally hold RA degrees and would use the DETC PhD just for a pay increase or to better themselves. However, let's take the case of a student that finished a DETC bachelors followed by DETC MBA, what are the real chances of this student with a DETC doctorate? If a DETC doctorate is going to be some sort of super master's with not much research involved, What is going to be the point of a DETC doctorate?. Do we really need so many PhDs in the market?

 

Has anyone, other than you, said this???

 

Your reasoning and rational is appropriate for the premise. I believe the premise, like many paradigms, is no longer as clear cut as it used to be. I am convinced that new doctoral degree seekers will soon change the whole paradigm. When a paradigm shifts, the old rules no longer apply with the same degree of clarity or certainty.

There simply is no compelling reason for a k-12 teacher or administrator to look for anything greater than that which fits their need. I believe doctoral degrees in teh futurew will become the masters degrees of the past. Under that premise, the rules and assumptions are very different. When the BS became commonplace, the MS became the new standard for distinction. As the MS becomes more commonplace, the PhD will become more sought after – not as an entrance card to academe, but for many, a stepping stone to more money or more distinction within their own existing field. Yhis could easily include academe, not necessarily higher academe.

There is no reason for DETC schools to see their doctoral market as only those seeking tenured positions in traditional RA institutions. The pie is much bigger than that.

 

1. I don't think a PhD will be a super masters anymore than a masters is a super bachelors. A masters remains what it is but it is so much more commonplace and in much greater demand from both sides of the market. To think this will not extend inot the next academic level would be counter to the trend.

2. I don't see any reason to think a DETC doctoral program will not require the same level of research as is currently required by any number of primarily distanced based RA programs. I don’t know why this would be in the assumption mix.

3. Keep in mind that it doesn't matter if we think there is a need for a lot more folks with PhDs or not.. If I were a betting man, I would place significant money on the notion that the PhD market will continue to grow at a relatively fast pace. The market will be here whether or not we want it to or think it should be.

 

Or maybe they should forget about accrediting Ph.D. programs and start by accrediting only professional doctorates (Psy.D. Ed.D. etc.). This would seem to be more in line with their history. Professional doctorates entirely by distance and at low cost would provide a unique niche.

 

Accrediting an Ed.D. program would be no different than accrediting a Ph.D. program in education, since, with few exceptions, the requirements are the same.

Tony Pina
Faculty, Cal State U. San Bernardino

 

I agree with Anthony. In my opinion, distance learning is the future and a full range of doctorates has to be a part of that mix of options for students. I think the overarching challenges are quality, accountability and a consensus on standards. Afterall, Ph.D's are research based degrees that, via dissertations, make an academic contribution to the respective subject matter. DBA's are more along the line of practical application of existing knowledge. We need both and there will never be a limited need for innovative research.... the former.

Just my opinion

Oscar

 

I think that Rich has pretty much hit the nail on the head. It needs to be established whether DETC accreditation of a distance learning program or virtual university would add value over and above RA accreditation. Would there be any benefit for Capella, Jones International, Walden, etc. to seek DETC if they already have RA accreditation. If not, then what is the value of DETC? If DETC is just a "faster, cheaper" accreditation, then, as Rich pointed out, it will not rise above "second class" status and will not be accepted by RA institutions.

In my opinion, in order for the concept of DETC doctorates to achieve success the following would need to happen:

1. The USDOE and CHEA would need to recognize DETC accreditation as equal to RA accreditation. One way to accomplish this would be to tie future USDOE/CHEA recognition of the regional accrediting bodies to their acceptance of DETC degrees. In other words, the USDOE and CHEA would have to mandate the levelling of the playing field.

OR

2. The focus of DETC would change from trying to duplicate what the RAs do to becoming the professional accreditor of distance learning programs, as the APA does with psychology programs, the AALE does with liberal education, etc. If the distance ed program of a regionally accredited institution received its own separate accreditation by DETC, it could offer another degree of legitimacy for DETC. Of course, it would need to be shown that DETC was able to justify the added expense and hassle of additional accreditation by showing that it could provide something that the regionals could not.

Now, some of you might say, "Piña, you're on the wrong track...DETC should be an alternative to, not an addition to RA accreditation". Good point. I'm all for finding an alternative to regional accreditation, which, as we know, is far from perfect. So, besides being possibly cheaper and faster, what can DETC offer that the regionals don't?

Tony Pina
Faculty, Cal State U. San Bernardino

 

Well Tony, I can't imagine number one happening since they don't even do that for RA credits or degrees between schools.

 

That speaks to the point that Alan Contreras has been making about overemphasis on academic credentials.

Personally, if I were making hiring decisions, I would expect whatever educational background was necessary for a position. Then, if I wanted to identify those applicants with additional distinction, I would look for relevant experience and accomplishments.

I don't see very much cost-benefit value in organizing pay scales to reward people for unnecessary or inappropriate education. All that would do is raise labor costs with little or no increase in job effectiveness.

 

Good point, Bill. At this time, I really don't see either #1 or #2 happening.

Tony

 

PaulC: "Your reasoning and rational is appropriate for the premise. I believe the premise, like many paradigms, is no longer as clear cut as it used to be. I am convinced that new doctoral degree seekers will soon change the whole paradigm. When a paradigm shifts, the old rules no longer apply with the same degree of clarity or certainty."


Cehi: Well said. I agree with you. Actually, I think the paradigm has been shifting many years back. It is now that people are noticing the shifts. My view is that it depend on what you want to use the Ph.D. for. Not all Ph.D holders want to teach at RA facilities or at any university. On a personal note, my Ph.D in Management (Dissertation was in Safety Engineering Approaches....) was from University of Texas (Always a longHorn, and forever will be!!!).

I am not teaching academically and never will. I like the private business world. I got a Ph.D. because: 1) I had nothing to do after my Masters. Actually, my folks wanted me to be a medical doctor. I don't like medicine....I can't stand blood, but I know I will be called a doctor after a Ph.D. degree, 2) I can handle it and 3) above all, it cost me nothing (except, time) because someone was willing to pay for it.

Currently, I work for a teaching hospital managing/overseeing institutional safety programs compliance for biological and rDna, environmental issues, chemical/hazardous waste, laboratory, training, industrial hygiene, ergonomics, fire and life safety, occupational, Noise, indoor air quality, and risk management. Note, I could do all the above functions without a Ph.D. degree, but I make very good money with a Ph.D. degree managing the functions.

Now, if a DETC institution was offering an accredited DBA or Ph.D. degree program, I would have considered it rather than an RA, because it would have probably been a program completed independently and it would have been cheaper as well. I have no ambition to teach academic courses in any university or publish any article.

The Ph.D. degree allowed me to make very good money, and I like it. I suspect there are lots of people in situations like mine that have a Ph.D. degree and don't teach nor publish. So, the old rules are now changing. Thank you.

 

Bill,

How do you feel about rewarding for appropriate education?

K-12 teachers and community college faculty are two professions whose pay scale is normally set according to their level of education. Those with doctorates are on a different scale than those with masters or bachelors. Certainly, there are those that pursue "unnecessary or inappropriate education" (i.e. take courses unrelated to their jobs) for the sole purpose of moving up the pay scale. In these cases, I would agree with you.

On the other hand, if a teacher pursues graduate study in how to apply new technologies to teaching, how to perform more varied and meaningful assessment, how to better teach those with disabilities or other study above and beyond the minimum education requirements for the position, I have no problem at all rewarding that person for the extra efforts to upgrade knowledge and skills.

When I was a member of the faculty at a community college, a few years back, I was required to apply for professional advancement. I had to list the courses that I was going to take and had to describe how they related to my position and job duties and why my job performance would be enhanced by my pursuing further study. My petition could be either accepted or rejected (mine was accepted). If accepted, my units would count toward "bumping me up" on the pay scale. If rejected, I could still take the classes, but they would not affect my pay.

Tony Pina
Faculty, Cal State U. San Bernardino

 

What needs to happen different, with regards to USDOE and CHEA, in order to satisfy what you are suggesting? What are the ways that USDOE and CHEA do not already see them as equal?

 

I like it, as long as it makes sense on a cost-benefit basis.

I'm just saying that at some point somebody needs to say "enough" to the credential-inflation that PaulC referred to in his post. He described a situation where bachelors degrees become common, so masters degrees become the the mark of distinction. And when masters degrees become common, doctorates become the new distinction.

If that kind of doctoral overkill ever becomes common among high-school teachers, then labor costs would rise considerably. (These teachers would all want pay commensurate with other Ph.D.s, bet on it.) It would also make high school teaching posts even harder to fill.

And if doctorates ever become common and routine, then the logic of credential-inflation tells us that these diplomas would no longer be marks of distinction and we would need even "higher" super-doctor degrees to distinguish our K-12 elite.

I think that if a high school biology teacher is searching for additional distinction, then earning a Ph.D. in molecular genetics might be overkill. He or she might be better advised to accumulate some accomplishments in high school science teaching.

That's how it's done in science. Most physicists have Ph.D.s. That academic degree is "common" to all of them. What sets elite physicists apart isn't their earning another even more stratospheric degree, but rather the production of significant professional work.

Obviously, some high-school teachers might transition to becoming educational researchers, theorists or scholars specializing in high school teaching, and for them a doctorate in education might be entirely appropriate. But that's not really credential-inflation.

 

I agree with PaulC. An MBA was a respectful degree 20 years ago while it is a little more than a Microsoft certification nowadays. The inflation of credentials push regular professionals to look for PhDs just to be competitive. The other issue is that degrees are becoming commercial products and are marketed as such. Universities also have to survive and are forced to lower standards to keep students coming. Not only in DL but in regular on ground programs too. My bet is that university credentials will become the high school of the past and companies will need to do a lot of screening to differentiate the good candidates since degrees won't be longer a differentiator.