Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by Tarbuza, Dec 27, 2008.
Dr or D.O
If I am not wrong, Dr refers to the medical doctor and D.O refers to academic doctors
Friend, try this link...
I think you made Ted laugh so hard he didn't get around to sending it.
Actually, when the above poster wrote that part about academic doctors being DOs, Ted got a bit confused as to, betwixt and between DOs and ODs, which are Doctors of Optometry and which are Doctors of Osteopathy (both of which are medically-related first professional degrees with the doctoral title and not academic doctorates).
Oh no he didn't......
Not exactly. Doctors of Osteopathy are not considered "academic" (non-medical) doctors.
I am currently doing a research project with some business professors comparing the D.B.A. with the Ph.D. in buisiness. We are looking at the requirements and specifications from the regional accrediting bodies, the specialized business accreditors (AACSB, IACBE and ACBSP) and from the graduate business programs themselves. So far, there does not seem to be much difference at all between the two degrees (reminds me of the Ed.D. vs. Ph.D. in education or the D.D.S. vs. D.M.D. in dentistry).
So, the holder of a D.B.A. should be able to use the title "doctor" in the same situations that a Ph.D. in business can.
Not so sure about this ...
While I cannot speak with authority about the difference between the DDS and DMD, I'm pretty sure people would take some issue with comparing the EdD with the PhD, as the EdD has long been considered a "doctorate-lite".
But back to the original question, regardless of how one earns it (or anyone's opinion of it) -- at least in the United States -- having earned a doctorate entitles one to be called "Doctor".
Is that so? By whom? I have in my possession virtually every published study comparing the Ed.D. to the Ph.D. in education and no researcher has come up with any substantive difference between the two degrees. Is there any evidence (other than someone's unsupported opinion) that could be used to classify the Ed.D. as a "doctorate-lite"?
I highly doubt that there is any published research that concludes the Ed.D. as a "doctorate lite" compared to the Ph.D. However... I have overheard and been part of conversations where people considered the Ed.D. a less serious degree than the Ph.D. in Education. I have no idea if this is true or not, but I have known people to opt for M.A.'s in Education over M.Ed.'s for this same reason.
I think Dr. Pina is merely stating that he has concrete evidence, as opposed to supposition or opinion. I have read Dr. Pina's arguments on this topic in the past, and I am inclined to side with him.
Have a good one,
I have no research, but totally agree with this - not by my personal knowledge, but by my colleagues. We have a degree of Ed.D where the business faculty have to teach one term..... all know to "dumb it down", as virtually no student would pass otherwise. sad, but true.
And why are business faculty teaching in an EdD program? And who is we?
Wow ... self-justification bias reigns
"Virtually every published study"?
Are you serious?
I am curious who would undertake such a "study" in the first place?
What would be the purpose?
My statement is culled from reading many articles and commentaries in the professional literature.
The basis stated usually is rooted in the fact that the PhD requires a unique research study (dissertation) whereas the EdD's capstone project is usually a "literature review". (My favorite example was an EdD in physical education awarded on the basis of an analysis of the 3-point rule in basketball.) Most anyone with experience with a dissertation knows that a literature review is the foundation of a dissertation, not the sum total of it.
I have no interested in engaging in a back-and-forth with you trying to validate your choice of doctoral program.
Good Morning, PsychPhD,
I'd be interested in reading the articles and commentaries you alluded to support your position. If you have any citations or web-links pointing to the literature, please post them here.
A champion of empiricism
While I regularly look to empirical data upon which to base judgments and opinions, it is important to also recognize that not every single statement comes with a literature review.
As someone who has been in and around education for 15+ years, I haven't compiled a citation list for every concept I have encountered. Sometimes one is simply aware of the zeitgeist.
There was a New York Times "Room for Debate" piece regarding education degrees about a month ago which had many interesting perspectives.
The EdD for an analysis of the 3-point rule in basketball came from a Chronicle of Higher Education article years ago.
But, given your interest, I'll keep an eye out for articles and pass them along.
ADDENDUM: Gotta love Google -- "EdD value" brought back a current debate going on the Chronicle's discussion board: http://chronicle.com/forums/index.php/topic,37397.0.html
(And, yes, I know this is not an empirical source, but does add to the aforementioned zeitgeist.)
And more from the great god Google:
The three-point rule citation actually came from a book "Dumbing Down Our Kids" by Charles Sykes.
Leaving the rest to you
Still more from the great god Google:
The benchmark report, "Educating School Leaders" by Arthur Levine
I now leave you to do your own homework.
Interesting that a doctoral holder (from a soft science and from a school without relevant program accreditation) casts aspersions at those either aspiring or currently holding doctorates in other fields. It's also notable that this individual would demean other's research abilities and yet fails to use Google Scholar, the simplest of tools, when trying to be condescending.
It's "A shame that on a forum ostensibly devoted to education that honest discussions and exploration get regularly hijacked by 'tude."
On topic, any legitimate doctorate entitles the individual to utilize the title. However, the individual would ostensibly use some common sense in the setting for its use.
Separate names with a comma.