Which degree would best suit my future?

Again, part of the story.

One goes to a university to get and education and to get a degree. That second element cannot be ignored. For the purposes described by the OP, a degree from Harrison-Middleton would not be useful, regardless which curriculum one found superior (or more suited).

 

Actually, it is its rareness that demonstrates its lack of utility.

There has been a lot of research into the Doctor of Arts degree. The consensus is that the lack of utility of the DA vs the PhD is exactly why the DA didn't spread, and why most of the programs that were started either terminated or were converted to...wait for it...PhD programs.

 

It wasn't clear to me whether the OP had an outlined path that he wanted to take to a known destination. It now appears that he wants to teach at a college level. Are you positively sure that the low-ranked Kentucky university (having several negative ROI ratings on its degrees) is so evidently superior to a solid DEAC school in terms of getting an academic position? I've seen plenty of profs with DEAC degrees, although I will agree that this is a small minority within academia. Then again, DEAC schools are a minority among universities in the U.S., so maybe the number of profs corresponds to that reality. Any thoughts?

 

This was discussed on this board years ago. Yes, you can find people with doctorates from DEAC-accredited schools teaching at RA schools. But no one could come up with examples of people who were in positions that required a doctorate, thus making the degree a qualifying factor

I see no reason to think that has changed. And even if anecdotes could be identified, it still isn't a thing.

And yes, I think an outstanding candidate from such an RA school might be competitive for academic jobs.

Besides accreditation and recognition, there's the degree itself. DEAC-accredited schools are allowed to award degrees up to and including professional doctorates. These are not suited for scholarly work as they do not have the student develop or test theory, the basis for scholarly contribution. As we know, however, some people are able to pursue academic careers with a professional doctorate, so this isn't automatically disqualifying.

IMO, earning a scholarly PhD from an RA school no one's ever heard of is immensely more qualifying than would be a professional doctorate from a DEAC-accredited school no one's ever heard of. (Which would be all of them.) And while having a PhD from an RA school where I specialized in this subject doesn't automatically make my opinion the right one, I might know a thing or two about this.

 

Rich,

In one of your earlier forum posts on DEAC, you’ve stated the following:

“What about the downside, the lower level of recognition and acceptance of degrees from DEAC-accredited schools? Well, as we know, that's changing (although the magnitude of that change has not been measured). Also, it matters less later in your career, which is where I'm really suggesting a DEAC-accredited professional doctorate can so some good. Finally, it is doubtful the doctorate will be the minimum qualification anyway--it can be a helpful add-on in some situations.”

I think that we can generally agree on the fact that DEAC doctorates can still be useful career-wise under certain circumstances. However, you seem to be particularly skeptical of their value when it comes to academic job-seeking. You cite the lack of scholarly contribution and professional orientation as some of the more obvious obstacles to wider academic recognition. Those are good points. But as you also mentioned elsewhere, you can make similar comments about any professional doctorate, regardless of the accreditation body. There are three points that I would make in response to the issues that you’ve raised here.


1) It is possible to divide academic jobs into casual academic work and the traditional academic pipeline. I would say that there is no indication that DEAC doctorates are doing well on the academic pipeline in the U.S. We would expect to see non-anecdotal evidence of DEAC educated assistant (tenure-track) professors in positions that specifically demand a doctorate, if the DEAC academic pipeline worked well. We don’t see that. Agreed.

2) There is no indication that Murray State is training future tenure-track professors and actually delivers on the promise of the academic pipeline. To establish its superiority (or to even place it in another category altogether in comparison with DEAC schools), we would need to see substantial evidence of Murray State doctorate graduates moving into prestigious positions of academic stability and tenure. We don’t see that. We do see current evidence of low ROI ratings on many of its degree offerings.

3) At the same time, the traditional academic pipeline system is broken. There is no reliable way of going from a regionally accredited (or foreign equivalent) doctorate (academic or professional) to a stable position in academia. It pretty much comes down to luck, as many tenured professors now readily admit. Under this new dispensation, the DEAC schools are not really in another category than low-ranked and non-elite institutions. They are in the very same category of schools when it comes to the lack of delivery on the academic pipeline system. The lack of delivery isn’t a matter of lacking the approval of a specified accreditation body. It simply has to do with the inability to deliver on the most basic promise of eventually moving up the ladder in academia and securing stable, tenure-track employment.

I am assuming the painful reality of point 3. Since the dream of becoming a well-paid and securely established university professor is in the realm of make believe and luck (particularly in non-STEM fields), you might as well get a doctorate that, at least, helps you to rationalize the decision to invest thousands of dollars in a Doctor of Arts program (or its equivalent) and valuable content can alleviate some of the inevitable regret. This is why I would go with the DEAC doctorate literary feast over the Kansas-focused curriculum builder, especially if money weren’t an obstacle. This appears to be the case with the OP.

Lastly, the casual academic job market will still likely remain open to DEAC doctorate graduates, particularly mid-career professionals with extensive experience. That said, I am not really in the business of giving advice, so treat it with a grain of salt.

 

I think earning a doctorate in The Great Books would be boring and not something I'd like to do at the doctoral level because I already read many of those books in high school, but my personal tastes do not matter.

 

Did the OP express interest in a tenure-track position? The OP did express interest in teaching future educators, and someone who studied pedagogy would be more competitive than someone who didn't study anything related to education. The vast majority of PhDs, including those at top 100 schools, are not competitive for tenure-track positions. If someone can land a tenure-track position, they're lucky. Otherwise, they might have to settle for a non-tenure-track, full-time position, but many doctoral degree holders can't even land full-time teaching jobs. Being in the humanities, one's job prospects are already terrible no matter where the doctorate was earned. If a college or university requires regional accreditation, Murray State University checks the box and HMU does not.

 

That was in reference to the general utility of such degrees and I stand by it. But now we're talking about a specific application where the conditions do not favor them.

 

I want to make the following points:

I don't recommend doing a professional doctorate from a DEAC-accredited school as a means to enter academia.
Ditto for professional doctorates from RA schools.
Ditto for any doctorate from a distance learning school.
Ditto for any doctorate earned nontraditionally, even from a traditional school.

It doesn't mean you can't do it. It's been done, I'm sure (except, perhaps, that first one). And I'm not talking about people in academia who upgrade their credentials to a doctorate. (In fact, one of my clients is a dean at a university who earned his PhD from a distance learning RA school. But he had worked at the school for 15 years prior to that. They wanted to promote him and the lack of a doctorate blocked that.) But it is the height of naivete to think trying to enter academia cold, without being in it already, with anything but a traditional doctorate earned in a traditional manner is a good idea. It is not.

 

I figured by now, all the thoughts shared on your numerous threads about the same topic would assist you with your decision. Maybe you should seriously think about what it is that you want (degree and career-wise). None of us on here can tell you what to do. Maybe shelve the idea for a while, then go back to the drawing board.

 

Any competent authority in this matter will equally perceive it as a doctorate.

 

Your reply is only marginally relevant to the OP. First, the OP can. Second, the OP is already academe. Third, the OP is interested in and is not all over the place with his love of literature. Fourth, they come with a master's degree. There is a very high probability that it will work out with no problem.

 

That wasn't my first reply.

As for the likelihood of success--putting to work in academia a doctorate from a DEAC-accredited school where a doctorate is required, good luck.

 

Hey, everyone! Please forgive me for not responding. I have been so crazy busy these past few days. Happy holidays! Did anyone finish their Christmas shopping yet?

I guess I'm in a bit of a pickle. I know for a fact that I want to go back to school, but I want to make sure I pick the right degree. I love literature and am a literature enthusiast, but I know I can do that on my own time. I would love to someday teach at the college level, but I wasn't sure if I could do that with an Ed.D.

I feel that a second master's degree would be overkill at this point. I already have an MA. Please let me know your thoughts!

 

https://www.tc.columbia.edu/arts-and-humanities/english-education/degrees--requirements/teaching-of-english-edd/

This is the program I am most interested in. It sounds like it's very much a literature degree, but it can help me enhance my pedagogy. At the same time, maybe this Ed.D. can help me someday move up to be a professor? Of course, those chances are very slim, but it's just something to think about. What do you think?

 

Have you no option or desire of rejoining your ODU program? Have you had any conversations with your ODU colleagues regarding your goals?

 

Thank you so much for your reply! I thought about it so very much. I talked with my academic advisor, and she mentioned that the program is not very literature heavy. It’s more geared towards game studies and technology. I guess I'm more of a traditionalist when it comes to literature.

I also spoke with a few of my colleagues from ODU. They are so wonderful. They actually have no interest in literature, but they want to pursue game studies or computer science with the English Department.

I guess I want a program that will help me to become a stronger educator and will allow me to move up the ranks someday, if possible. I loved Columbia's curriculum, but I know it's a bit of a reach. What do you think?

 

Despite my current disillusions of being a public intellectual, I must admit - I have no idea. My one constant is Network! Network! Network! With the the added proviso - Don't burn bridges. Praying for the very best for you.

 

You’re too kind! Thank you so much, dear friend!

 

This is extremely valuable advice. Your (LittleShakespeare90) situation is highly complex and cannot be sufficiently solved with a few sentences from a few posters on this (or any other) site. Talk to people. Talk to people doing what you want to do. Talk to schools. Talk to whomever will provide you good information.

I continue to be amazed at the generosity of people to help you if you make explicit requests of them. When in doubt, ask!