Benefits and risks of obtaining a DETC Psy.D?

The issue here is if DETC are degrees are valid under law. If they are valid, then they should be recognized. If they aren't valid, then they should not. It's a no brainer. Based on simon's scenario, if a class of people are being harmed as a result of their DETC degrees being invalidated, then I agree that it will likely end up in litigation. Believe what you want.

 

The DL law schools do turn out a small number of successful graduates -- with the operative word being “small”. In 2009, for example, a total of 6,259 people passed the General Bar exam in California. Of these, 98 (or 1.6 %) graduated from DL/correspondence law schools (including both DETC and non-DETC schools).

The problem is that such successes are not the typical outcome at DL law programs. Such programs normally take four years. The stats from 2005 show that 603 DL students enrolled for the First-Year Law Student’s Examination (FYLSE), which is the first step in the licensing process. But only 98 (or about 16.3 %) emerged from the process as licensed attorneys in 2009. These numbers imply attrition rates in the 80-90 % range.

So while DL law schools clearly do work for some people, they just as clearly do not work for a much larger group of people -- who presumably lose time and money in the process. It’s not realistic to focus exclusively on the benefits to the few, without also considering the costs to the many. It's unfortunate, but true, that the typical outcome for DL law students is failure to become a practicing attorney.

 

Unfortunately, it's not a no-brainer, because the same degree can be perfectly valid under one law, yet completely invalid under a different law. Of course, such inconsistencies affect all kinds of degrees, not just DETC degrees.

For example, no one doubts that a Concord JD degree is legally issued by an institution with valid state recognition and USDoE-recognized accreditation (both DETC and RA, in fact).

So is it "valid under law"? In that sense, yes.

But does that necessarily make the same degree valid for legal practice in New York? No.

 

But again, recognized by whom? Are you going to sue everyone? And when you do, you're going to prove that the lack of acceptance of the candidate is due solely to the dodgey DETC degree?

Believe what you want but in a country in which agism, sexism and other real 'isms' exist, I find your confidence that DETC degrees will be protected based on some fictional Perry Mason who takes up the cause to be goofy at best.

You should write a short story entitled 'The DETC and Daniel Webster'

 

And valid means what? That the person should be legally guaranteed the same opportunities with private and/or public companies?

Why wouldn't this class action lawsuit focus on the graduates of an established RA university if such a thing were possible...

It's just goofy to think a group of DETC people are going to sue their way into ivory towers across America based on degrees from places like World University and Grantham Electronics Institute.

 

You're hilarious. Someone has to prove using your metrics to boot that a Ph.D. from a DETC university is inferior to one from a RA university when you, yourself, can't point to any substantive research component of a DETC university.

And you know and admit that doctoral degrees are about research more than anything else.

Spare me the 4-page rebuttal. If DETC universities worked as hard at developing research as you do at would-be fillibuster arguments on the Internet, they'd all be Carnegie I institutions.

 

No argument there.

While the number 98 may appear small, it is nonetheless larger than life to those graduates that successfully passed the bar exam and are now practicing law.

In otherwords, in 2009, 98 licensed attorneys emerged as productive members of society and will be delivering legal services. That's terrific and calls for a celebration, since they would not have had that opportunity to do so through a traditional route. That is why I am all for it.

Because the DL law school route may not work for a larger group of people is no good reason to prevent a smaller group of people from pursuing a different method of study. To adopt your line of thinking would in effect remove those 98 lawyers from the legal profession and deprive them of their economic livelyhood.

In the end it boils down into a law school graduate passing the bar exam. It makes no diiference where they earned their degree. If they pass, they are entitled to practice law.

 

I think simon has made some pretty valid and interesting points, otherwise you wouldn't be here. Try Barnum & Bailey. It's right up your alley.

 

I normally do not get into this discussions, but why the snarkiness? I am just curious.

 

I'm curious as to when you think it began? Seems to me it has been around since Page 2 of this thread.

 

I was just saying ( and I do not know when it began) and not flaming anyone. I do not know enough to make a comment either way...maybe you are right about page 2.

 

One can get an education from many sources in many contexts. But one goes to a university (or equivalent) to get a degree. I've had very little to say over the years about the efficacy of DETC-accredited schools' processes. I've had very little insight into them, and no direct experience. But the utility of such degrees is an entirely different matter. There is substantial evidence that continues to point to their diminished utility. This may or may not be fair, but it remains true. There is no reason to think it will somehow change for the better with the addition of academic doctorates to the mix.

One might get a mighty education in a doctoral program at a DETC-accredited school. But one will certainly receive an under-performing degree. That may not be fair--and it may someday change--but it is very true today. Sorry.

 

Great post.

 

When I lived in the UK I became an Associate Member of the Institution of Engineering Designers.
This institution was not as prestigious as better known institions (like IMechE or IEE) so I dropped my membership.
If I had retained membership I would now be a Chartered Engineer (the UK equiv of the USA Professional Engineer).

I relate this tale to show that one can not predict what the value of any DETC (or other NA) doctorate will be in the future. So earn a DETC doctorate if it suits your current needs knowing that its acceptability may, or may not, incease over time.

 

SIMON: My jocular friend, it is obvious that you have either not read the content of my posts or are misinterpreting them because I clearly indicated throughout this thread that it is not possible to draw any conclusions regarding the scholastic academic rigor of DETC doctoral programs or the rigor of their research component at this time because they are relatively new programs and haven't produced any (or perhaps few) graduates and/or doctoral dissertations for our review. And the point being is that there is no substantive data available to make any comparisons with RA doctoral programs and that any poster who makes disparaging remarks regarding DETC doctorates at this time has absolutely no basis for doing so, except for expressing personal bias against DETC doctoral programs. However, what we do know at this time is that some of the online RA distance doctoral programs do not exemplify scholarly academic excellence and their admission policies are quite liberal. Just a point to keep in mind when we are discussing the purported lack of substance of DETC doctoral programs.

 

Ian, your succinct point above clearly summarizes the bottomline of this entire thread. If the DETC doctorate meets a prospective student's professional and personal needs and objectives, understanding its potential strengths and limitations, then that is the route to take.

 

Just as "great" as your input in this thread (LMAO)

 

Thanks for summing this up so well.

 

I could understand if DETC-accredited doctoral programs have been around for several or more years, produced a number of graduates and provided us with an opportunity to review and assess the quality and scholastic productivity of their graduates. In such a scenario we would also have a better understanding how graduates of these programs were benefited or hindered in diverse work contexts by their doctorates. However, these doctoral programs are new and there are no or few dissertations to review and a lack of significant numbers of graduates who can inform us as to whether their DETC doctorates assisted them in their professions and careers or were of limited utility.

So the naysayers who prematurely conclude, without any substantive data, that these doctorates will not be of benefit to graduates, need to be looked upon as merely resisting change. No more, no less.