NA doctorate after RA doctorate?

Let me explain:

I have a clinical doctorate in Physical Therapy. I am a practitioner by trade who migrated into healthcare education/educational admin. I love being in education and hope to stay here. I'd like more formal training in an academic doctoral program that will "train/teach" me how to be a better educator/teacher/administrator. My DPT is from an RA institution, so for hiring purposes most schools that I'd be interested in working for (community colleges or low-level, research-light universities), the RA DPT would suffice to meet their RA faculty credential requirements. I have no interest in ever working at big name universities doing tons of research. I simply want to be a better teacher/assessor, and be able to teach the faculty I oversee how to improve at being teachers/assessors.

My question is this: Since I have the RA Doctorate, would there be a "knock" against me for going NA on the academic doctorate? I ask solely for cost purposes (although some of the self-paced NA ones look appealing). I started with ACE in the EdD program, but really was disenchanted with it and had poor response times from the instructors, so I left. I have looked at Taft, Aspen, CalCoast, as well as Liberty, UL-Monroe. (I also looked at Cumberlands, but their courses are synchronous, which I can't do while at home with 4 little children, wife and another on the way. I need asynchronous).

Will the NA doctorate help me appropriately? If so, what are your recommendations? It may be worth noting, also, that to teach in PT/PTA the accreditor makes no distinction of NA vs RA for faculty that teach in those programs.

Thanks,
Cody

 

My first reaction is to say that you don't need to get another PhD in order to be a better teacher and that it's entirely possible that an added PhD (NA or RA) wouldn't necessarily make you a better teacher even if you earned one. If you feel the need to add a credential then an MEd would be more than enough (IMHO) and some sort of Postgrad Diploma/Certificate might be sufficient to fill in the gaps. I believe there are some sort of short cert-type programs for teaching in higher ed.

 

Yes and no – in that order.

You already have the terminal degree in the field in which you teach. And there are lots of assholes like me who would hold any non-RA degree against you. Yep, I’m one of those “RA or the highway” guys. Someone who earns an NA degree and then cleans up his or her act by earning a higher RA degree has, IMO, eventually gone in the right direction. Someone who does the opposite immediately raises a question as to why.

One of the questions that is virtually never addressed in these forums is the intrinsic, essential question, “Can you teach?” In other words, do you have good pedagogical skills, do you have good communication skills, are you an interesting speaker avoids the “um, uh, duh” syndrome? Can you communicate the ins-and-outs of P.T. so your students/graduates will know what they are supposed to knowwhen working with their patients and clients?

To be a great teacher, you either have it or you don’t. In other words, you’re either a good teacher now, or you’re not. And a graduate degree in education, whether NA or RA, will not make you a great teacher. But a NA degree on top of what you already have will raise a negative question on your total credentials.

So, what can you do to improve your teaching skills? Well, when I learned to teach umpteen hundred years ago, I discovered that one of the best techniques was to watch infomercials. I kid you not. Don’t watch them for product knowledge (in fact, anyone who uses the word product in their presentation is the spawn of Satan), but do watch them for their presentation techniques. And avoid studying anyone’s technique if you ever hear them say, “Uh…” And learn to practice the subtleties: if you gesture with your hands, keep your fingers together so people in the back row can see your hands. And if you sit while you speak (common when you’re interviewed on TV), never sit with your legs apart (a “crotch shot”).

Finally, if you’re ever called to serve as an expert witness in a court case and you have an NA degree on top of your RA degree, realize that you’ll be toast. If you think I’m being hard on you regarding the notion of an RA cake with NA icing, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet compared to what an opposing counsel will do to you.

 

Mistakenly thought that UM-Flint's bridge program from DPT to Ph.D. was online, deleted post.

 

Kizmet, thanks for the idea. I had thought of something similar to that before, but its good to hear the thought from someone else's mind.

Dr Levicoff, I appreciate your opinions. And I get your points. I think my motivations are different than what you are viewing from your seat/experience, though. First, since you called yourself an a-hole (not me), it is highly unlikely that I would ever work with people (who ever knew or cared about the difference, given that I already have the RA doctorate) like yourself, so I don't know that I would care what other people may think re: where my degree's came from. It would not affect my ability to get tenure at places I care to work. It would provide me a credential/title (basically, three letters behind my name) that says something to the affect of "Master Educator", as opposed to "Master researcher" or anything else. Since my goals are to teach more effectively, and TRAIN OTHERS to teach, I would put that in the hands of a degree/credential because (like it or not), people DO look at those three letters in academia to define you in some way as to what your specialty is. I honestly think the people I would be speaking to would think more about having "two doctorates" than whether or not I got one from an NA institution. And I believe this would be true in your legal analogy as well.

I think of it this way: if I was ever introduced to speak at a workshop of faculty/students/post-professionals, or to guest speak at a church, I know the person introducing me (even if it was me!) would describe my credentials and I would rather that be something that spoke about me "This guy must know what he's talking about when it comes to teaching/education". Right now, I have a ton of good feedback (in writing and verbally) from past students and faculty-trainees on how much they enjoy my classes. But this is where I think there may be a misunderstanding. I'm not looking for a degree to tell me how to be a better public speaker. I believe I'm already pretty good at that (not perfect, but good). That, to me, is a big part of teaching, but not even close to all of it. What I have NO FORMAL TRAINING in, is curriculum development, course development, learning theory (although I'm learning some through OJT), methodology, use of IT in the classroom, assessments, etc (since these all play into delivery of whatever you're teaching). As I stated, I'm getting this slowly through On the Job Training, but if I want to teach others how to do this (since the terms "assessment" and "student learning outcomes" are Greek to healthcare folks like myself who come out of clinic to teach). I feel I should have some formal training that helps structure it in a way where I could both apply and re-teach. Public speaking comes through practice, not a degree. And to Kizmet's point, I think we could all recall folks we know who have PhDs in whatever who were like talking/listening to a wall (and I can say that because my dad has a PhD in Microbiology and taught in a Vet school, but has zero people skills).

Does that give some perspective?

Having said all of this, I do believe I will go the RA route because I am now finding programs (like UNG and ULM) that are cost effective and the cost would be enough to swallow to know my degree came from a historically good-to-very good school. I saw Steve's post about UNG late yesterday.

 

I think most people here would agree that the only time you'd want to avoid an NA degree entirely is if you work in education.... so I understand that your first degree would be your application credential, but that makes the second doctorate moot. I have no idea if your first doctorate required a research dissertation/thesis, but I can't imagine anyone signing up to do YEARS of work like that TWICE for a degree that won't "count" in their job. So, imo, if you want a second doctorate, get an RA one and call it done.

EDIT to add: I read your comments about gaining the respect of others by completing a second doctorate. That's a fool's errand.

 

Point taken and well made about the time required for an NA degree. But to think it foolish to pursue a certain degree for approval of an academic audience, is foolish IMO. We all know that in academia, people don't take other seriously unless that have certain letters behind their name. I don't think it should be that way, but it is. My pursuit would not be for approval, overall, but so people would take what I teach/provide/deliver and take it seriously. Perception affects the learner (cognitive and affective), whether we think so or not. Plus, those letters behind the name open many doors.......again, like it or not.

 

I am always happy to beat a dead horse so I'll say this: It's not clear from what you've written that you don't already have the respect and approval that you're seeking. After all, you've already got the job. Maybe you're just feeling insecure and think that somehow adding another degree will make you unassailable. But it's not clear that anyone is actually thinking badly of you. Maybe it's just you that is thinking badly of you. If that's the case then the second degree won't work either. In any case, good luck in all you do.

 

Where should we send them?

 

Hilarious!

Kizmet, you actually aren't far off with your comments, but it is only a small piece of the puzzle. Self-esteem issues aside, I work for a state dept of education in which the work environment is historically volatile, political and hostile (I know, amazing those three would go together, right?). People are historically fired for a lack of reason at all other than a certain politician threatening to pull funding if a move isn't made of someone they don't like (or if a friend of theirs isn't hired), or other reasons I shouldn't list here. I love what I do, but know that at any moment I could be cut. My current degree (DPT) is very specific to an industry (PT). Though my experience in teaching speaks a little, I was hoping that the additional degree would add: 1) improved writing skills (since my DPT program did nothing with writing), 2) curriculum development/program development skills, 3) an improved ability to do (small amounts) and comprehend/implement research. There are other things, also, but these three are the high notes.

While really strong points are being made about RA degree vs NA, it is interesting to note that some of the actual standards are not that different between an RA like HLC or SACSCOC and an NA like DEAC. I just read an article where the Fed is actually calling DEAC and SACS to the carpet because of either low graduation standards or lack of grad rate standards. SACS is my RA here where I live, and no doubt they have refused to set a grad rate because the South is historically "uneducated", therefore no school would be able to stay SACS accredited with historically low college completion rates. DEAC actually has a grad rate minimum, though pretty low ~32%). Another thing that is interesting, since NA takes a bashing (and sometimes rightfully so), is that when looking at HLC and SACS for faculty credentialing, it only mentions level of degree and hours in the field when hiring faculty for a subject. It does NOT mention if the degree has to be NA or RA. (I DO know that schools would likely favor an RA candidate over NA, though).

Just interesting thoughts, but I digress. My point in this conversation is this: should I pursue an additional degree, if so, from what and where? Given time, cost, etc. Also a thought: It seems that even an RA online school isn't always great (ACE, Walden, etc) in the eyes of many academic employers. So where should said degree come from? Is all of this really just beauty in the eye of the beholder? If someone goes through the NA degree and works for years for the Feds, or for the military (since they make no bones about NA degrees), does that experience + degree = career options, regardless of this crazy NA/RA debate?

I'm done for now.......

 

One of the topics that comes up around here is the question of return on investment for any degree but especially for doctoral degrees. The general idea is "Given the cost (time + money + stress + opportunity cost) of a specific degree, can I reasonably expect to make that back (revenue + job opportunity + job satisfaction + bragging rights + warm fuzzy feeling) within a reasonable time, or ever for that matter. I always make a point of including the intangibles in that equation because one thing we know is that some people earn doctoral degrees almost exclusively for the intangibles. We know that people are motivated by all sorts of different things and that's fine. My only concern is the question of whether people 1) are aware of their motivations and 2) have a reasonable chance of being satisfied with the results - will the degree actually do what you want it to do. Personally I am gradually working toward my own doctoral degree (I'm not even currently enrolled in a "program" but I'm taking random courses from selected schools in a way that simulates a Masters degree) and even if I actually earn that doctoral degree someday I fully expect that it will be little more than a curiosity on my resume. So with all that said I'll only add that your plan seems viable and I hope it works the way you want it to work.

 

Ohhhhh I think I just realized something. You're equating an RA online degree with the for-profit industry. I see now. Seriously, whatever state you're in, your local university probably already offers the degree you want online. Gone are the days of having to seek out an "online school." Close to 98% of all public colleges and universities offer online degrees. The world is your oyster.

 

Thanks. Been there and done that, but sadly my state is behind the times with our universities jumping on that bandwagon. I have to cross virtual state lines to find a program that is even remotely cost-effective, applicable, or fits my schedule. The few programs we have in our state are either really pricey (executive format), or require some residency component (which I can't do with FT job, wife, 4 little girls and another on the way). Gotta have something more flexible......

I was just saying that it didn't seem like it would matter if I had a PhD from Capella or Walden, or an Ed.D from ACE........those may be laughed at as equally by some places as an NA degree......

 

I love your honesty, Steve... Keepin' it real.

 

are you going to learn something different with this degree? i would only do it if my employer would pay for it and you see it as continuing education. I have seen people doing this if the second doctorate gives you a more marketable designation (PhD EdD DBA).

 

If all you want is a more academic designation such as a PhD for low cost, I would consider the foreign route such as Universidad de Central Nicaragua or similar. People have been able to get it evaluated as RA equivalent.
I recalled some people at some RA schools teaching with a PhD from UCN.

 

These degrees are perfectly fine for those wanting to be adjuncts, work as community college or small 4 years college instructors or work in industry. Why would someone laugh to someone that wants to improve him or her self? I have a friend that is handicap that is working hard towards her PhD at Capella so she can adjunct online.

These degrees are not meant for those looking for academic careers at research institutions.

From the effort perspective, you might be right that the NA doctorate might require the same amount of effort than those from online RA schools but the reality is that a NA Doctorate does not make you eligible to work at a RA school when the RA doctorate is required.
Again, if cost is an issue, I think the foreign route is valid for adjuncts. I have seen few people working at Walden and other schools with degrees from Nicaragua, Costa Rica, etc and clearly are not native of those countries as their previous degrees are from American schools so these degrees seem to work for some as they can be evaluated as the equivalent to RA. As long as you get an RA equivalent report, you are eligible to teach at a RA school and other factors such as skills, experience, etc would be more important than the prestige of the school.

 

Having an US RA doctorate is a big deal. Paying $60k+ for it just to adjunct is foolish, even if an employer is paying for it. There are many solid foreign doctorates for less than $20k. RF, your friend should have seek your advice.

 

Most people will not consider a PhD from a school like Central Nicaragua or South Africa mainly because they prefer an American school in their CV.
In any case, I agree that 60K might be too much for the 2 to 3K per gig that you get as an adjunct but there is also the opportunity cost. Many people doing PhDs at Capella complete in 3 to 4 years part time while a traditional PhD might take at least 5 years part time. Capella and Walden courses run every 8 weeks so they can be completed faster so if you teach 20 courses per year you might be able to make your money back in a year.
The NA Doctorate might cost 20K but it is still too much just for the right to put a PhD in a resume. I recall few people that completed the Sedona PhD in Business Metaphysics and use them in their faculty web sites, like the ones below:

https://www.csudh.edu/social-work/facultystaff/lynn-harris

https://www.linkedin.com/in/reid-friedson-phd-571a7313/

A Sedona PhD gives you the same right to call yourself PhD but at much lower price than a NA doctorate. If ego is the main reason, the University of Sedona is a perfect legal way to put a PhD in a resume.