Mark Tupper just stated much more eloquently what I was stating.  this is about
perception, regardless of whether it may or may not be deserved.  However,
being that there are Ed.D. programs at many many more universities than there
are Ph.D. programs, I think that problem isn't that people don't
understand what they
are, but rather that they do understand that there is MUCH more
variation in the
quality of Ed.D. programs than Ph.D.s.  Quality of Ed.D.s ranges from
essentially
a Ph.D. in education from Harvard to a 57 sem hour program at National
Louis in which
you ultimately only take 24 hrs in courses.  There are ACCREDITED
Ed.D.s with even smaller requirements, but I lack the time to search
them out.  Still, these are degrees for people
studying EDUCATION not SCIENCE, except apparently at a very small
number of schools.
Although a few folks got their Ph.D.s in 3 years decades ago,
virtually no-one takes less
than 4 years past the MS today (and that usually requires an alignment
of stars and planets).
the reason for the longer time periods has to do with both the rigor
of the courses, (who can
handle 15 hrs of courses in addition to phd research?), and the deep
intensive study of
the research matter.  Most Ph.D. students are given 0.5-2 years just
to get their Ph.D. dissertation
proposal submitted, then it takes them another several years to
complete the research after its
approval.  A few get the proposal in early, but then change direction.
 So, many Ph.D. students will
be just getting approval of the their dissertation research in the
same time as some of the least
stringent Ed.D. students are graduating.  The Ph.D. is a huge time
investment demonstrating
intense dedication and focus on an area of study.  Most Ed.D.s simply
do not encapsulate this
kind of rigor, time investment, or expectations.

Having said that, if someone graduated with an Ed.D. and published a
pile of papers prior to graduation, maybe landing some in Ecology or
other premier journals, and obtained a postdoc where they did
exemplary work, demonstrating that their ed.D. was in fact the
equivalent of a biology Ph.D., SOME
programs may hire that graduate.  If that person landed some solid
grants it would be all the better!  The proof is in the pudding as
they say.  But, taking the Ed.D. route to obtain a biology faculty job
is taking the road less traveled and it will require that individual
to do a lot of defending and proving that they have
done equivalent work.

So, while getting an Ed.D. MAY in rare cases be equivalent to a Ph.D.
in biology, it would be HIGHLY advisable to go the Ph.D. route and
save yourself the heartache of continually defending your degree.

Again, if you are interested in outreach education, extension, or
administration, the Ed.D is probably the
ideal degree for that, providing that you actually have an Ed.D. that
focuses on extension for example.  it
does no good to get an Ed.D. in curriculum and instruction if you
intend to be a school administrator, no good to get an Ed.D. in ed
admin if you want to be an extension agent, and it does no good
getting an ed.D. in extension if you want to be a biology professor.
The lock and key must match as best as is possible.  Of course, a
master locksmith can make any key fit any lock! :)

On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 2:13 AM, Tupper, Mark (WorldFish)
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Actually my comment has nothing to do with ignorance or higher than thou
> views. It was purely pragmatic and based on the experiences of 4 of my
> colleagues with EdDs.  Only 1 of them found a job in aquatic science, as
> an extension agent. The reason? Most prospective employers have no real
> idea what an EdD is and would therefore prefer a candidate who might be
> less skilled but has the more familiar Ph.D. degree. The problem is that
> the unfamiliarity with the EdD degree leads many employers to consider
> it "inferior" to a PhD.
>
> What happened to my other 3 colleagues with EdD degrees? One went back
> and got a PhD and now has a good job as a fisheries biologist. The other
> 2 are now a bartender and a real estate agent - hence my comment. Wrong
> as it may be, there is a public perception that a PhD is the "be-all and
> end-all" degree, and that an EdD is something less. If Jay specifically
> wanted a job in aquatic science extension or outreach, an EdD may serve
> him well, but if he wants to be a professional aquatic biologist and do
> original research, I think his chances are probably quite a bit higher
> with a PhD. If I was a young scientist looking for employment,
> especially if a had a family to feed, I would go for the PhD. Scientists
> love to be idealists, but we have bills to pay like everyone else.
>
> Mark Tupper
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Voisine, Matthew NAN02 [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:49 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: Tupper, Mark (WorldFish)
> Subject: RE: EdD vs PhD
>
> WOW.  For people with advanced degrees you sure have an uneducated and
> higher
> than thou do view of EdDs.
>
> Matthew Voisine
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tupper, Mark (WorldFish) [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 8:42 PM
> Subject: Re: EdD vs PhD
>
> I'd beg to differ with that. If you want "opportunities" and "placement"
> in aquatic biology and fisheries (i.e. a real job after university), get
> a Ph.D.
>
> Get an Ed.D. if you want to be a bartender or make money in real estate.
>
> Mark Tupper
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Wayne Tyson
> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 6:07 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
>
> EdD is a BS degree in makeup, and is for those who want "opportunities"
> and
> "placement." PhD is for the passionate.
>
> WT
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jay Beugly" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 11:18 AM
> Subject: [ECOLOG-L] EdD vs PhD
>
>
>> My name is Jayson Beugly. I am currently pursuing an EdD in science
>> (aquatic
>> biology and fisheries)and an opportunity to switch to a PhD has come
> up. I
>> am searching for advice on the pros and cons of the PhD vs EdD. There
>> seems
>> to be a bit of confusion regarding place and opportunities available
> for
>> recipients of these respective degrees.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank You
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.10/1995 - Release Date:
> 03/11/09
> 08:28:00
>



-- 
Malcolm L. McCallum
Associate Professor of Biology
Texas A&M University-Texarkana
Editor, Herpetological Conservation and Biology
http://www.herpconbio.org

Fall Teaching Schedule & Office Hours:
Ecology: M,W 1-2:40 pm
Cell Biology: M 6-9:40 pm (don't ask!)
Forensic Science: T,R 10-11:40am
Office Hours:  MW 12-1, 5-6, TR 11:40-12:30,

1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea"   W.S. Gilbert
1990's:  Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss,
        and pollution.
2000:  Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction
        MAY help restore populations.
2022: Soylent Green is People!

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information.  Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not
the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy all copies of the original message.

Reply via email to