Independently of your title (PhD, EdD, or just "Mr" and "Mrs"), you may
demonstrate two things in the life: (1) That you are a good researcher, able to
move the borders of your discipline forward by means of publishing in peer
journals. And also (2) that you are good for TEACHING, otherwise you die
without a substantially high contribution to the new generations to do the same
than you: Science. Very few people will read what you published in a peer
journal, but much more will take advantage if you transmit the results of your
research and the way of making science by teaching, looking into the eyes of
the youth. That is exactly what others did for you when you went to elementary
School and even Post Doc. Another reason: your published paper will be
forgotten few years after being published, your 20y-old student of today will
have at least other 50 years being active.
In many mexican institutions, whoever makes research MUST also teach. In Costa
Rica there are University Professors having no-title: they were discovered to
have a very large experience as naturalists and hold a rare, natural talent for
transmiting ideas. Non-combining such rare people with formal academics with
PhD or PostDocs would be just a waste of human resources in a country that
wants to contribute to its people to make Science. A more extreme example:
during my PhD studies in Tropical Ecology I have met in rural Latinamerica many
natives who do not know reading and writing, but understand the forest better
than many Post-Docs. Such natives also have the talent of teaching while
walking with you into the forest; why not to invite and pay them to give
lectures in the same way they are sometimes invited to field courses? Gabriel
García Márquez is not a PhD on Linguistics or Literature, but he has given a
hughe contribution to the development of Spanish language.
If I would be a job giver, I would check into your CV and ask myself: Do you
have publications in peer journals? Are they relevant? Do you have experience
teaching? Then, if you are an EdD, but better than the best Post-Doc of the
world, I contract you, because I just want the best quality.
To me it seems that decission makers introduced EdD because they realized that
there are many excellent researchers but a comparatively lower number of
excellent teachers. Excellent teachers are needed to produce new generations of
excellent researchers. It is feedback, not contradiction. We should try PhD and
EdD to become the same thing with different names, or at least to work friendly
together. Meanwhile, each EdD should be assumed to be as smart as each PhD.
Edgardo I. Garrido-Pérez
Goettingen University, Germany
"Lo doctor no quita lo Pendejo"
Academic-mexican proverb
> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 20:10:01 -0600
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: [ECOLOG-L] Phd vs EdD
> To: [email protected]
>
> This discussion is moot. I cant believe the arrogance I'm hearing here.
>
> If people do a project that is dear to their heart, that is align with
> their career goals, and they do it well, then it won't matter to the
> employer what the 'letter' of the degree was. Rather, it is the
> quality of the work completed that is the basis for assessing
> suitability in a prospective employee.
>
> Check the egos at the door ivory tower dwellers, and learn to live among us!
>
>
> Adam T. Ford
> Wildlife Research Associate
> Banff Wildlife Crossings Project
> Western Transportation Institute-MSU Bozeman
> Banff National Park
> PO Box 900
> Banff, AB
> T1L 1K2
> Canada
>
> ph. 403-760-1371
_________________________________________________________________
Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live Spaces.
It's easy!
http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us
