It is interesting and depressing to see the heat that this posting
generated. Cries of bigotry and KKK seem a bit of an over-reaction to the
attitudes expressed, even though some of the replies were pretty
condescending.
The years that I taught in universities I was still in physics, not ecology,
but I was frequently involved in canvassing for new faculty and never heard
of applicants with an EdD. I suspect that it is not a common degree, and
that could be a problem. In any case, although the EdD might be a good
qualification for teaching at a two- or four-year college, it seems unlikely
that a university with graduate programs would settle for anything other
than a PhD. If I were on an ecology faculty I would question the
advisability of having graduate courses taught by someone without a PhD, and
I suspect that an EdD would end up teaching only undergraduate courses --
which is fine if that is your career objective, but many departments expect
the faculty to teach both graduate and undergraduate courses.
I do think that more attention to teaching, and to communication in general,
is needed in all programs. I recall many painful episodes when a job
candidate would start a seminar by looking around anxiously like a deer in
headlights and call for the first slide without even telling us what he was
going to talk about. Fortunately my thesis advisor required us to give
regular seminars, one every week, and my university made sure its teaching
assistants could teach. When I went on the job market one university
required me to come for a week and teach some of their regular classes,
which I think is a great idea.
My personal advice to Jay and others like him would be to go for the PhD,
but make sure you get some teaching experience. Interact with the best
teachers in your department. Perhaps take some education courses. And if you
opt for the EdD program, make sure that you ask about placement and find out
what your job prospects are going to be, and whether they match your career
objectives.
Bill Silvert
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Beugly" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 3:50 PM
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
I have indeed decided to pursue a PhD, but I thought that I would take this
opportunity to inform ECOLOG subscribers about some of the misconceptions
with an EdD.
The university that I am currently enrolled in has two EdD options. The
most
common option is a doctorate of education in science education. The
science
education option is designed for individuals interested in K-12 education
(Not me).
The second option is a doctorate of education in science. It is designed
for
students who have interest in research but are more interested in teaching
at the university level. The second option requires a research project
that
provides a significant contribution to your research area (fish ecology in
my case) and 4 courses specifically designed for teaching at the
university
level. Based on the responses I have received it seems unlikely that I
would
be granted an interview if my vitae included EdD and not a PhD.
Jay Beugly
[email protected]
This is a quick review of some of the responses I have received for those
of
you who are interested.
EdD won't qualify you to teach in a university's biology department
EdD is a BS with makeup
EdD qualifies you to teach high school only
Multiple respondents had never heard of an EdD
NSF identifies an EdD as a research doctorate equivalent to a PhD
Many, but not all, respondents with a PhD viewed the EdD very negatively.
It
appears that earning an EdD make working with or amongst PhDs more
difficult
due to some lack of respect
