I second David's comment.
I love this listserv when it reaches for the highest in us. Thank you,
David, and others, for invoking our conscience.
Teresa
Teresa M. Woods, M.S.
Ph.D. Candidate, Curriculum and Instruction
Kansas State University
Teresa Woods, LLC
Consulting Office
5000 Clinton Parkway #208
Lawrence, KS 66047
913-269-8512
785-532-9834
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
PlantingScience: http://www.plantingscience.org
<http://www.plantingscience.org/>
David M. Lawrence wrote:
I grew up mixed race in Jim Crow Louisiana, and when I hear someone
say give up and accommodate prejudice -- even in something like this
-- it turns my stomach. The prejudice is the problem, not the
perceived weakness of the Ed.d. versus the alleged strength of the Ph.D.
The requirements for a Ed.D. degree is largely the same as that for a
Ph.D. A dissertation for an Ed.D. is essentially applied research
toward improving the quality of teaching in our schools and colleges.
Given some of the garbage I've seen disparaging the Ed.D. here, I
assume improving teaching is not a priority for many of you.
So, do any of you critics want to go on record saying that improving
education is not a priority? I WANT YOUR NAMES -- ON THIS LIST. If
you don't feel comfortable going on the record, maybe you shouldn'ter
be so dismissive of those who explicitly make improving education a
priority.
Dave
Judith S. Weis wrote:
What Dave says is true, but since there is this prejudice, Jay would do
better getting a Ph.D. and avoiding the issue.
It seems the prejudice against the EdD, like most prejudices, is based
on little evidence. Unfortunately, such prejudice is fairly common in
the supposedly rational confines of academia. In other words, it's a
turf thing.
The PhDs would do well to broaden their awareness of the empirical
world.
Dave
