JD, EJD, PhD - Thoughts on My Set of Circumstances

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by Pugbelly2, Nov 4, 2012.

Loading...
  1. Pugbelly2

    Pugbelly2 Member

    Ok Everyone,

    Let me first start by requesting that this discussion not digress into a debate between the value of NA vs RA accreditation. Secondly, I would request that this conversation not digress into the question of, "Why would someone want a law degree without wanting/being able to practice law?" I'll explain that.

    My Set of Circumstances: I am 44 years old, the Executive VP of a successful management firm, and will likely be a part owner sometime next year. Looking ahead to the future, part of my job, in addition to leading/managing the company, will be to attract new clients (investment partners for purchasing assets and existing property owners looking for management). I have a love for education and intend to pursue a doctorate, primarily for personal enrichment, but also as a "feather in my cap" for the company bio. I would also like to pick up an adjunct gig at some point and perhaps do a little writing, but any monies earned from those activities are not of interest to me. They would be hobbies and/or passions. Yes, I understand that a NA doctorate will be limiting in the context of teaching options, but the RA graduate degree and an extensive, successful career should keep some doors open in that arena.

    The Options -

    Bellevue University (PhD Human Capital Management) At $40k or so, it's affordable compared to most other RA options. I am familiar with the school as I have done the BA (and soon the MS) with them, but I look at this as a potential negative as well. Though of interest to me, it is my least favorite subject matter of the degrees I am considering.

    Tennessee Temple University (PhD in Leadership)
    I have followed this school for a long time and like them quite a bit. I also like the Christian aspect to their instruction. They are NA through TRACS and have plans, but no guarantees, to pursue RA through SACS in June 2014. They offer a Business Track to the PhD. At $18,000 it is extremely affordable.

    Johnson University (PhD in Leadership Studies)
    At $24,000 this school is essentially a RA version of Tennessee Temple. They even offer a Business Track. However, the course work does not look quite as appealing to me and for whatever reason, I just feel "warm and fuzzy" with them the way I do with TTU. Still, JU has to be up there on my list.

    American Heritage or Oak Bridge Law, (JD)

    Yes, I know these schools are DETC. I know the limitations of only being able to practice in CA, if I can pass the "Baby BAR" and "BAR." I have no intentions of ever practicing law, EVER. I love the law, but my career is already set. To me, the JD would allow me to study a subject that I really like, would look solid on the company bio, and would allow me to deal more effectively with the many legal aspects of my profession. I have no problem telling anyone who inquired, "No, I never took the BAR so I am not licensed to practice law. The degree path was intended solely as a supplement to my BA, MS, and career experience." At $16,000 per school these options are also extremely affordable.

    Taft Law (Executive JD)

    Again, yes, I know the school is DETC. I also understand that the EJD is, to a large degree, reviled on boards like this because of its lack of utility. As you all know, the EJD does not qualify you to sit for the BAR, even in California. However, for my purposes which were explained above, if I was going to study law, this is the option actually makes more sense to me than the JD. This degree option, to me, much more so than the JD, is designed to be a supplement to someone who is already very established in his/her business career. Plus, it is a 3 year program compared to the 4 year JD. At roughly $24,000 it is more expensive than the straight JD options through American or Oak Bridge, but still very affordable and, perhaps more applicable to my career and personal aspirations.

    So, there is the history, circumstances, and options. The question is, "Given my scenario, what makes the most sense?" I think I'm too close to the situation and may have come down with a bit of analysis paralysis.

    Many thanks,
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 4, 2012
  2. me again

    me again Well-Known Member

    If you don't want to be a practicing lawyer and if teaching at an RA school is moot to you, then simply enroll in the program with the lowest attrition rate. Good luck on getting the schools to disclose their attrition rates.
     
  3. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    From what you've written, it seems not so much like you're still deciding among these options as you are making sure there's no reason not to go with Tennessee Temple University. The drawback with them is that it will be harder to teach on the side, but you've said that's a secondary motivation for you.

    So, if you can let go of the teaching criterion altogether, then it sounds like that's where you want to go. If not, though, I say to keep looking, since you don't really want to do either Bellevue's or Johnson's program, and the JDs won't meet that criterion either.
     
  4. joel66

    joel66 New Member

    If you have no interest in practicing law, I would not recommend you investing four years part-time on a JD. This is overkill because you would be in a better position to obtain a 30-36 unit Master's in Legal Studies, which are designed for people who want to have a good understanding of law without wanting to practice law.
     
  5. Koolcypher

    Koolcypher Member

    Champlain College, a small liberal arts college in Vermont, has such a program: The Master of Science in Law. This program can be completed entirely online.
     
  6. Here's my two cents...

    Between the two JD programs I would choose American Heritage or Oak Bridge Law.

    I was first thrown off by the title EJD. If the degree is really listed as a EJD, I think that will we make some clients might think, "hmmm what's that". Good be good or bad. If you hadn't stated that you where thinking about the company bio then this would be a non factor. I'm not so sure why the specifically call it a EJD because the curriculum doesn't seem to back that up. When I compare the curriculum at Taft with the curriculum at Oak Bridge they look almost the same. It actually appeared as if Oak Bridge had more classes to offer than Taft.
     
  7. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Indeed, although for the self-marketing value he wants a degree whose level starts with the letter D, so even though a Master's in legal studies would be a good idea for many people, for him I don't think it's fit for purpose.
     
  8. Delta

    Delta Active Member


    Are you sure these schools are DETC accredited?
     
  9. Pugbelly2

    Pugbelly2 Member

    Great catch! No, Oak Brook (I incorrectly referenced it as Oak Bridge) and American Heritage are NOT accredited. That changes the thought process for me as I must now rule out both of these schools. If I go the route of law, it must be Taft, which is in fact accredited by the DETC.
     
  10. Pugbelly2

    Pugbelly2 Member

    Yes, you are correct. A Masters in Law or Legal Studies would be a step in the right direction for me, but it wouldn't quite fit the bill. For starters, the Masters is likely a two-year, 36 hour program. The EJD is a 3-year, 75 hour program, so the depth of learning is quite different between the two. Secondly, yes, for marketing purposes, I would prefer the "D" in the nomenclature, whether it be a PhD or a EJD.
     
  11. Pugbelly2

    Pugbelly2 Member

    No, not really. All of these options are still very much on the table (except Oak Brok and American Heritage). I've just looked at this so much I thought some outside thought would be helpful.
     
  12. Pugbelly2

    Pugbelly2 Member

    Your being thrown off by the EJD issue bring up a good question. Taft Law has offers two JD options - Attorney Track and Executive Track. It never actually refers to the executive option as an EJD. I picked up the EJD from Concord, where the EJD is actually marketed as such. Taft may just issue a JD that does not qualify one to sit for the bar. This, I suppose, would be similar to graduate or postgraduate degrees in psychology that do not lead to licensure, but are intended to provide a research and academic perspective on the material.

    I'll have to check with Taft to see if the degree is actually conferred as a JD.
     
  13. Jonathan Whatley

    Jonathan Whatley Well-Known Member

  14. Pugbelly2

    Pugbelly2 Member

    Thanks, but I don't intend to practice law or take the BAR, so it really comes down to tuition and degree type if I go that route. The only two schools that offer the 3-year executive track, to the best of my knowledge, are Concord and Taft, and Taft is way less expensive. I think I have rued out the 4 year option if I am really not going to sit for the BAR.

    Thanks again. I think it's coming down to Taft if I go the law route, and Johnson or TTU if I go PhD...just not sure. All three are of great interest to me.
     
  15. Psydoc

    Psydoc New Member

    Why, in the name of little green apples, do you not just go to Johnson and get a real RA PhD? It will do everything you want it to - and more. Plus, you will not have to explain to anyone anything like: why can you not practice law - why can you not teach - what is DETC, and EJD? For the difference in price, the real PhD is worth it.
     
  16. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    DETC is the Distance Education and Training Council, a national accreditation agency.
     
  17. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    EJD is Executive Juris Doctorate, a 72 hour law degree for people who want a familiarization with the law but have no intention of actually practicing law.
     
  18. CalDog

    CalDog New Member

    One thing to note about non-Bar JD programs is that such programs are not well known outside of California, and may not be well accepted outside of California. The American Bar Association dislikes non-Bar JD programs, and (as far as I know) does not allow ABA law schools to offer them. Since most states require law schools to get ABA approval, non-Bar JD degrees are non-existent in most US states; in fact many lawyers in other parts of the country have never even heard of such degrees. To my knowledge, the only law schools that offer the non-Bar JD degree are based in California, where ABA approval is not required.

    If you are located outside of California, you might want to check the professional regulations of your state regarding the legal use of the "Juris Doctor" title. Your state bar association may have concerns about the use of the "JD" title by someone who is not a member of the state bar, and is not even eligible to sit for the state bar exam, and whose claim to the "JD" title is based on an out-of-state degree that does not comply with ABA or in-state standards.

    Sorry if this sounds "legalistic", but this is exactly the sort of nit-picky legal issue that lawyers worry about.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 5, 2012
  19. Pugbelly2

    Pugbelly2 Member

    That actually made me chuckle out loud. In the name of apples? I have never heard that one! To answer your question, the reason I don't think the answer is that simple is because this degree, regardless of which one I elect to pursue, is going to monopolize at least three years of my life. I think it's extremely important to love the degree path, the school, the curriculum, etc. I see countless debates on this board about NA vs. RA. Yes, it's important, but far more so at the undergraduate level. 3+ years and a couple thousand hours spent on this degree should be about more than RA. It should be about pursuing a passion that you feel great about.

    I can appreciate your perspective and I thank you for taking the time to weigh in. Incidentally, why do so many people seem to have a problem explaining the "Why can't you practice law" question? Is it really that hard just to say, "I don't practice law because I chose an academic approach to the JD, not a practitioner's." Why is that shameful? It wouldn't bother me at all.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 5, 2012
  20. Ted Heiks

    Ted Heiks Moderator and Distinguished Senior Member

    Not just in the name of any apples, but in the name of little green apples (and something about Indianapolis in the summertime, or so the song goes).
     

Share This Page