Ed.D. vs Ph.D.

I was told an Ed.D candidate was/is not required to do a dissertation. I was told that was difference between an Ed.D. and Ph.D.

Thanks!

Todd Justin Smith or
Tiff Buffet
[email protected] http://www.geocities.com/toddsmith1981/
--

 

You were told erroneously. At some schools, the EdD and PhD are virtually the same. Others draw a distinction between the two degrees, with the EdD having a more practical approach to the dissertation and the PhD a more theoretical one. But either should represent an original and significant contribution to the field of education.

So, where there is a difference, it isn't much. And it certainly doesn't exclude the dissertation from the EdD. A doctoral program (except first professional degrees, of course) without a dissertation or similar doctoral project isn't a doctorate.

Rich Douglas

 

Todd Justin Smith writes:

Thanks Rich,

I also heard the Ed.D. does not have the Philosophy emphasis that a Doctor of Philosophy would have. But many PhD's today are not in philosophy but rather science or computer science.

Todd Justin Smith or
Tiff Buffet
[email protected] http://www.geocities.com/toddsmith1981/
--

 

A doctoral program (except first professional degrees, of course) without a dissertation or similar doctoral project isn't a doctorate.

Rich Douglas

[/B][/QUOTE]

That's your opinion Rich! You however state your opinion as though it is FACT and it is not!

The degree is the title on the diploma, with or without a dissertation.

Regards, Wes

 

Until someone asks for your dissertation, expecting you to have done one. Whoops!

You can call a duck an eagle. But it is still a duck.

And considering the vast majority of EdD and PhD programs require a dissertation--it is only a couple of unaccredited ones that do not--it is hardly my "opinion." Now, I'd be willing to change my "opinion" if shown differently. Say, a list of accredited PhD and EdD programs that had no doctoral project, where the degrees could be earned by coursework alone.

Wes is quite right that the diploma says a lot. But show me accredited schools that will award that diploma without the student having to do a doctoral project.

Rich Douglas

 

A first professional degree given at the doctorate level is a interesting creature. It was started to be given in mass during the 1800's by American medical schools (M.D.) at then after 2 years of medical studies. I wondered if they knew what they were doing? In the 1900's, the legal profession (J.D.) then pharmacy profession (Pharm.D.) in America followed suit.

These are major professions and organizations--but they are taking the novel approach to doctoral level based on the number of years studied (all together--undergraduate and graduate) for the conferring of a doctoral level diploma. Though they do not claim that these degrees are research degrees, nevertheless, they hold them out as doctorates in the professional sense. Remember that all these first professional doctorates are accredited not only by their professional organizations, but also by regional accreditation agencies.

I just wonder if this trend will spread?

EsqPhD

 

I have never heard a satisfactory explanation for the universal switch from LLB to JD in American law schools. Everywhere else in the common law world, England, English speaking Canada, Australia, New Zealand, even Singapore and Bermuda, the professional degree for law is the LLB.
In Canada, for one, the LLB requires three years of post-BA study in an accredited Canadian law school so it even LOOKS like a JD but it's an LLB.
No lawyer or law school professor I've ever met calls him/her self "Doctor". I do know some older lawyers who refused to "upgrade" their LLBs into JDs.
It always seemed to me that the law degree is "sui generis". An LLB is an LLB is an LLB and there's really no other degree like it.
End of Rant.

Joybaum

 

I don't know if any explanation is satisfactory. If you look at the medical program in England and Australia (M.B.), it looks identical to the one in the U.S. also. The only difference (outside of residency) is that the U.S. typically requires an undergraduate degree.

Some have said that the prerequisites are the key. I don't know when the last time my brother (an M.D.) used Calculus or Calculus based Physics in his treatment. As for most of the other prerequisites, my brother tells me that most of it is re-taught in the first 2 years of med. school anyway.

I don't know where I stand with the American novelty of granting M.D.'s, J.D.'s and Pharm.D.'s as first professional degrees. I just know that I would rather receive an M.D. or a J.D. than an M.B. or LL.B. if I had the choice. I wouldn't run off to my alma mater and demand that they convert it down.

As for the Canadian LL.B.'s, I recall when studying at the University of Alberta that the LL.B. did not require an undergraduate--only 2 years of university. I'm quite certain that this is the case in many or most of the Canadian universities.

Regarding your comment on never hearing a law professor or attorney colleague using the title of "Doctor." I agree in most cases. I think that this has to do with the culture of the profession more so than the degrees held. It reminds of British surgeons who do not use the title of "Doctor" even though they technically could. I know many attorneys with Ph.D.'s and J.D.'s but culturally, they tend not to use their doctoral title--especially in court. Could they? I suppose that they could--but I guess they choose not to in a similar way that British surgeons don't.

I know some physicians and dentists that are also attorneys prefer to use "Doctor" even when practicing as attorneys (I'm not sure if they use it in court though--probably not). As an Episcopal priest with a doctorate in theology, I sometimes use "Doctor" but more often by my clerical title. However, when I introduce myself for practice purposes as an attorney (even though I practice very part time), I cannot help being torn with what title to use. I fluctuate back and forth depending on where I know the client from. I guess I am torn because I don't want to go by casual first name, yet feel odd if I allow myself to be referred to or introduced with the "Mr." title when most of the time, I am not referred to as "Mr."

Any suggestions?

EsqPhD

 

No, I suspect that few of us would voluntarily "downgrade" our J.D.s. I'd do it, but only because I am a contrarian by nature. Hence criminal defense! Ever notice, BTW, that lawyers almost NEVER use the expression "my J.D."? We refer instead to our "law degree". You are right about the culture. We don't say "Doctor" because we'd be laughed at by our peers! As to your situation, you need a nice military title to override all the others, say, "Colonel" or "Major" or even "Commander". How about that??
Joybaum

 

Esq,

Do you serve in a parish as well?

Also, from which school did you earn the Ph.D. in theology?

Russell,
A fellow servant!

 

Parish life was too stressful for me so I presently serve as a chaplain--for university students mainly.

The Ph.D. from the University of Alberta (Canada) was in comparative religion though focused on historical theology. It is easier for me to say my studies was in theology since that was the focus of my dissertation--but technically the University of Alberta only confers the Ph.D. in comparative religion/literature--due to their more secular focus.

EsqPhD

 

I should have stayed in the Army a little longer. Growing up I always wanted a military career--went through ROTC--became an infantry officer (11 Bravo--HUAAA!), but alas, the call to serve in another army was too great.

Do you think a retired U.S. Army Colonel could use that title in the court room if he was also a lawyer?

EsqPhD

 

Certainly a valid ministry, one with great potential. All the best!

Russell

 

Well, in "Inherit the Wind" about the Scopes trial, didn't William Jennings Bryan's charactor use "Colonel"? I seem to remember that the Clarence Darrow charactor demanded a temporary for-this-trial-only honorific as well...Red Barber called Bob Edwards "Colonel"...
Probably not.
I saw a business card once that identified the holder as "Warrior Princess". Would that fly?
The Germans, I guess, use ALL available titles.
Commander Dr. Joybaum, Esquire

 

Making people Honorary Colonels in the state militia is an old Southern tradition. Of course, the title had no more military meaning than an honorary doctorate has academic meaning. But the titles are bestowed upon the recipient and can certainly be used.

The use of the title "doctor" as a result of an honorary doctorate is common in the evangelistic arena. It's amazing how many of them trot around calling themselved "doctor" on that basis. (And often with an honorary doctorate from an unaccredited bible school to boot!)

Rich Douglas

 

As an evangelical who posts regularly on degreeinfo, I must respond to Rich's comment. I totally agree with the observation, but it is the latter which disturbs me the most.

Numerous unaccredited, less-than-wonderful and blatant degree mills exist within the religious community. Steve Levicoff's book, NIFI, reveals the facts on scores of them. Some, of course, are legitimate attempts at providing educational opportunities for ministers, while others are only interested in making a buck. Many of these hand out honorary doctorates like candy. I recently noted an advertisement where honorary doctorates were being offered for $300 (a $50 application fee, and $300 if accepted).

So, one finds a "Dr." who can hardly form a sentence which is grammatically correct. Of course, one finds the same thing in the secular community as well. Nevertheless, Rich's observation is noted and confirmed, and I for one do not approve of such practice.

Russell

 

The use of the title "doctor" as a result of an honorary doctorate is common in the evangelistic arena. It's amazing how many of them trot around calling themselved "doctor" on that basis. (And often with an honorary doctorate from an unaccredited bible school to boot!)

Todd Justin Smith writes:

Rich Douglas,

This is for biblical purposes, as Mr. Leficoff would agree. The Latin word for Teacher derives to Doctor. Learned people of biblical times were referred to as Doctor. Hence so many Bible/ Spiritual teacher wish to use the solutation of Dr.

Todd Justin Smith or
Tiff Buffet
[email protected] http://www.geocities.com/toddsmith1981/
--

 

Learned people in biblical times were also referred to as Teacher, Rabbi, Master, etc. One reason so many wish to use the title today (those who have honorary doctorates) is that in the perception of the general public it appears to lend credence to their position, being referred to as Dr. *********!

Russell

 

The best test whether EdD is same as PhD is to ask the University if they wld employ EdD as their professor.